Produced by PM for Bureau of American Ethnology, Julia Miller, and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This file was produced from images generously made available by the Bibliotheque nationale de France (BnF/Gallica) at http://gallica.bnf.fr)
Transcriber's Note:
This book was originally published as a part of:
Powell, J. W. 1881 First Annual Report of the Bureau of Ethnology to the Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution, 1879-'80. pp. 205-245. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.
The table of contents and index included in this version of the book was extracted from the complete volume.
A number of typographical errors found in the original text have been maintained in this version. They are marked in the text with a [TN-#]. A description of each error is found in the complete list at the end of the text. Original spelling has been maintained. A list of inconsistently spelled words is found at the end of the text.
SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION--BUREAU OF ETHNOLOGY. J. W. POWELL, DIRECTOR.
STUDIES
IN
CENTRAL AMERICAN PICTURE-WRITING.
BY
EDWARD S. HOLDEN, PROFESSOR OF MATHEMATICS, U. S. NAVAL OBSERVATORY.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
List of illustrations 206 Introductory 207 Materials for the present investigation 210 System of nomenclature 211 In what order are the hieroglyphs read? 221 The card catalogue of hieroglyphs 223 Comparison of plates I and IV (Copan) 224 Are the hieroglyphs of Copan and Palenque identical? 227 Huitzilopochtli, Mexican god of war, etc. 229 Tlaloc, or his Maya representative 237 Cukulean or Quetzalcoatl 239 Comparison of the signs of the Maya months 243
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS
Figure 48.--The Palenquean Group of the Cross 221 49.--Statue at Copan 224 50.--Statue at Copan 225 51.--Synonymous Hieroglyphs from Copan and Palenque 227 52.--Yucatec Stone 229 53.--Huitzilopochtli (front) 232 54.--Huitzilopochtli (side) 232 55.--Huitzilopochtli (back) 232 56.--Miclantecutli 232 57.--Adoratorio 233 58.--The Maya War-God 234 59.--The Maya Rain-God 234 60.--Tablet at Palenque 234
STUDIES IN CENTRAL AMERICAN PICTURE-WRITING.
BY EDWARD S. HOLDEN.
I.
Since 1876 I have been familiar with the works of Mr. JOHN L. STEPHENS on the antiquities of Yucatan, and from time to time I have read works on kindred subjects with ever increasing interest and curiosity in regard to the meaning of the hieroglyphic inscriptions on the stones and tablets of Copan, Palenque, and other ruins of Central America. In August, 1880, I determined to see how far the principles which are successful when applied to ordinary cipher-writing would carry one in the inscriptions of Yucatan. The difference between an ordinary cipher-message and these inscriptions is not so marked as might at first sight appear. The underlying principles of deciphering are quite the same in the two cases.
The chief difficulty in the Yucatec inscriptions is our lack of any definite knowledge of the nature of the records of the aborigines. The patient researches of our archaeologists have recovered but very little of their manners and habits, and one has constantly to avoid the tempting suggestions of an imagination which has been formed by modern influences, and to endeavor to keep free from every suggestion not inherent in the stones themselves. I say the stones, for I have only used the Maya manuscripts incidentally. They do not possess, to me, the same interest, and I think it may certainly be said that all of them are younger than the Palenque tablets, and far younger than the inscriptions at Copan.
I therefore determined to apply the ordinary principles of deciphering, without any bias, to the Yucatec inscriptions, and to go as far as I could certainly. Arrived at the point where demonstration ceased, it would be my duty to stop. For, while even the conjectures of a mind perfectly trained in archaeologic research are valuable and may subsequently prove to be quite right, my lack of familiarity with historical works forced me to keep within narrow and safe limits.
My programme at beginning was, first, to see if the inscriptions at Copan and Palenque were written in the same tongue. When I say "to see," I mean to definitely prove the fact, and so in other cases; second, to see how the tablets were to be read. That is, in horizontal lines, are they to be read from right to left, or the reverse? In vertical columns, are they to be read up or down? Third, to see whether they were phonetic characters, or merely ideographic, or a mixture of the two--rebus-like, in fact.
If the characters turned out to be purely phonetic, I had determined to stop at this point, since I had not the time to learn the Maya language, and again because I utterly and totally distrusted the methods which, up to this time, have been applied by BRASSEUR DE BOURBOURG and others who start, and must start, from the misleading and unlucky alphabet handed down by LANDA. I believe that legacy to have been a positive misfortune, and I believe any process of the kind attempted by BRASSEUR DE BOURBOURG (for example, in his essay on the MS. Troano) to be extremely dangerous and difficult in application, and to require a degree of scientific caution almost unique.
Dr. HARRISON ALLEN, in his paper, "The Life Form in Art," in the Transactions of the American Philosophical Society, is the only investigator who has applied this method to Central American remains with success, so it seems to me; and even here errors have occurred.
The process I allude to is something like the following: A set of characters, say the alphabet of LANDA, is taken as a starting point. The variants of these are formed. Then the basis of the investigation is ready. From this, the interpretation follows by identifications of each new character with one of the standard set or with one of its variants. Theoretically, there is no objection to this procedure. Practically, also, there is no objection if the work is done strictly in the order named. In fact, however, the list of variants is filled out not before the work is begun, but during its progress, and in such a way as to satisfy the necessities of the interpreter in carrying out some preconceived idea. With a sufficient latitude in the choice of variants any MS. can receive any interpretation. For example, the MS. Troano, which a casual examination leads me to think is a ritual, and an account of the adventures of several Maya gods, is interpreted by BRASSEUR DE BOURBOURG as a record of mighty geologic changes. It is next to impossible to avoid errors of this nature at least, and in fact they have not been avoided, so far as I know, except by Dr. ALLEN in the paper cited.
I, personally, have chosen the stones and not the manuscripts for study largely because variants do not exist in the same liberal degree in the stone inscriptions as they have been supposed to exist in the manuscripts.
At any one ruin the characters for the same idea are alike, and alike to a marvelous degree. At another ruin the type is just a little different, but the fidelity to this type is equally great. Synonyms exist; that is, the same idea may be given by two or more utterly different signs. But a given sign is made in a fixed and definite way. Finally the MSS. are, I think, later than the stones. Hence the root of the matter is the interpretation of the stones, or not so much their full interpretation as the discovery of a method of interpretation, which shall be sure.
Suppose, for example, that we know the meaning of a dozen characters only, and the way a half dozen of these are joined together in a sentence. The method by which these were obtained will serve to add others to the list, and progress depends in such a case only on our knowledge of the people who wrote, and of the subjects upon which they were writing. Such knowledge and erudition belongs to the archaeologists by profession. A step that might take me a year to accomplish might be made in an instant by one to whom the Maya and Aztec mythology was familiar, if he were proceeding according to a sound method. At the present time we know nothing of the meaning of any of the Maya hieroglyphs.
It will, therefore, be my object to go as far in the subject as I can proceed with certainty, every step being demonstrated so that not only the archaeologist but any intelligent person can follow. As soon as the border-land is reached in which proof disappears and opinion is the only guide, the search must be abandoned except by those whose cultivated and scientific opinions are based on knowledge far more profound and various than I can pretend or hope to have.
If I do not here push my own conclusions to their farthest limit, it must not be assumed that I do not see, at least in some cases, the direction in which they lead. Rather, let this reticence be ascribed to a desire to lay the foundations of a new structure firmly, to prescribe the method of building which my experience has shown to be adequate and necessary, and to leave to those abler than myself the erection of the superstructure. If my methods and conclusions are correct (and I have no doubts on this point, since each one has been reached in various ways and tested by a multiplicity of criteria) there is a great future to these researches. It is not to be forgotten that here we have no Rosetta stone to act at once as key and criterion, and that instead of the accurate descriptions of the Egyptian hieroglyphics which were handed down by the Greek cotemporaries[TN-1] of the sculptors of these inscriptions, we have only the crude and brutal chronicles of an ignorant Spanish soldiery, or the bigoted accounts of an unenlightened priesthood. To CORTEZ and his companions a memorandum that it took one hundred men all day to throw the idols into the sea was all-sufficient. To the Spanish priests the burning of all manuscripts was praiseworthy, since those differing from Holy Writ were noxious and those agreeing with it superfluous. It is only to the patient labor of the Maya sculptor who daily carved the symbols of his belief and creed upon enduring stone, and to the luxuriant growths of semi-tropical forests which concealed even these from the passing Spanish adventurer, that we owe the preservation of the memorials of past beliefs and vanished histories.
Not the least of the pleasures of such researches as these comes from the recollection that they vindicate the patience and skill of forgotten men, and make their efforts not quite useless. It was no rude savage that carved the Palenque cross; and if we can discover what his efforts meant, his labor and his learning have not been all in vain. It will be one more proof that human effort, even misdirected, is not lost, but that it comes, later or earlier, "to forward the general deed of man."
II.
MATERIALS FOR THE PRESENT INVESTIGATION.
My examination of the works of Mr. J. L. STEPHENS has convinced me that in every respect his is the most trustworthy work on the hieroglyphs of Central America. The intrinsic evidence to this effect is very strong, but when I first became familiar with the works of WALDECK I found so many points of difference that my faith was for a time shaken, and I came to the conclusion that while the existing representations might suffice for the study of the general forms of statues, tablets, and buildings, yet they were not sufficiently accurate in detail to serve as a basis for the deciphering I had in mind. I am happy to bear witness, however, that STEPHENS'S work is undoubtedly amply adequate to the purpose, and this fact I have laboriously verified by a comparison of it with various representations, as those of DESAIX and others, and also with a few photographs. The drawings of WALDECK are very beautiful and artistic, but either the artist himself or his lithographers have taken singular liberties in the published designs. STEPHENS'S work is not only accurate, but it contains sufficient material for my purpose (over 1,500 separate hieroglyphs), and, therefore, I have based my study exclusively upon his earliest work, "Incidents of Travel in Central America, Chiapas, and Yucatan," 2 vols., 8vo. New York, 1842 (twelfth edition). I have incidentally consulted the works on the subject contained in the Library of Congress, particularly those of BRASSEUR DE BOURBOURG, KINGSBOROUGH, WALDECK, and others, but, as I have said, the two volumes above named contain all the the[TN-2] material I have been able to utilize, and much more which is still under examination.
* * * * *
One fact which makes the examination of the Central American antiquities easier than it otherwise would be, has not, I think, been sufficiently dwelt upon by former writers. This is the remarkable faithfulness of the artists and sculptors of these statues and inscriptions to a standard. Thus, at Copan, wherever the same kind of hieroglyph is to be represented, it will be found that the human face or other object employed is almost identically the same in expression and character, wherever it is found. The same characters at different parts of a tablet do not differ more than the same letters of the alphabet in two fonts of type.
At Palenque the type (font) changes, but the adherence to this is equally or almost equally rigid. It is to be presumed that in this latter case, where work was done both in stone and stucco, the nature of the material affected the portraiture more or less.
The stone statues at Copan, for example, could not all have been done by the same artist, nor at the same time. I have elsewhere shown that two of these statues are absolutely identical. How was this accomplished? Was one stone taken to the foot of the other and cut by it as a pattern? This is unlikely, especially as in the case mentioned the scale of the two statues is quite different. I think it far more likely that each was cut from a drawing, or series of drawings, which must have been preserved by priestly authority. The work at any one place must have required many years, and could not have been done by a single man; nor is it probable that it was all done in one generation. Separate hieroglyphs must have been preserved in the same way. It is this rigid adherence to a type, and the banishment of artistic fancy, which will allow of progress in the deciphering of the inscriptions or the comparison of the statues. Line after line, ornament after ornament, is repeated with utter fidelity. The reason of this is not far to seek. This, however, is not the place to explain it, but rather to take advantage of the fact itself. We may fairly say that were it not so, and with our present data, all advances would be tenfold more difficult.
III.
SYSTEM OF NOMENCLATURE.
It is impossible without a special and expensive font of type to refer pictorially to each character, and therefore some system of nomenclature must be adopted. The one I employ I could now slightly improve, but it has been used and results have been obtained by it. It is sufficient for the purpose, and I will, therefore, retain it rather than to run the risk of errors by changing it to a more perfect system. I have numbered the plates in STEPHENS'S Central America according to the following scheme:
ENGRAVINGS OF VOLUME I.
Page. Stone Statue, front view, I have called Plate I Frontispiece. Wall of Copan, Plate II 96 Plan of Copan, Plate III 133 Death's Head, Plate III^a 135 Portrait, Plate III^b 136 Stone Idol, Plate IV 138 Portrait, Plate IV^a 139 Stone Idol, Plate V 140 Tablet of Hieroglyphics, Plate V^a 141 No. 1, Sides of Altar, Plate VI 142 No. 2, Sides of Altar, Plate VII 142 Gigantic Head, Plate VIII 143 No. 1, Stone Idol, front view, Plate IX 149 No. 2, Stone Idol, back view, Plate X 150 Idol half buried, Plate XI 151 No. 1, Idol, Plate XII 152 No. 2, Idol, Plate XIII 152 No. 1, Idol, Plate XIV 153 No. 2, Idol, Plate XV 153 Idol and Altar, Plate XVI 154 Fallen Idol, Plate XVII 155 No. 1, Idol, front view, Plate XVIII 156 No. 2, Idol, back view, Plate XIX 156 No. 3, Idol, side view, Plate XX 156 Fallen Idol, Plate XX^a 157 Circular Altar, Plate XX^b 157 No. 1, Stone Idol, front view, Plate XXI 158 No. 2, Stone Idol, back view, Plate XXII 158 No. 3, Stone Idol, side view, Plate XXIII 158 Great Square of Antigua Guatimala, Plate XXIII^a 266 Profile of Nicaragua Canal, Plate XXIII^b 412
ENGRAVINGS OF VOLUME II. Page. Stone Tablet, Plate XXIV Frontispiece. Idol at Quirigua, Plate XXV 121 Idol at Quirigua, Plate XXVI 122 Santa Cruz del Quiche, Plate XXVII 171 Place of Sacrifice, Plate XXVIII 184 Figures found at Santa Cruz del Quiche, Plate XXIX 185 Plaza of Quezaltenango, Plate XXX 204 Vases found at Gueguetenango, Plate XXXI 231 Ocosingo, Plate XXXII 259 Palace at Palenque, Plate XXXIII 309 Plan of Palace, Plate XXXIV 310 Stucco Figure on Pier, Plate XXXV 311 Front Corridor of Palace, Plate XXXVI 313 No. 1, Court-yard of Palace, Plate XXXVIII 314 No. 2, Colossal Bas-reliefs in Stone, Plate XXXIX 314 East side of Court-yard, Plate XXXVII 314 No. 1, Bas-relief in Stucco, Plate XL 316 No. 2, Bas-relief in Stucco, Plate XLI 316 No. 3, Bas-relief in Stucco, Plate XLII 316 Oval Bas-relief in Stone, Plate XLIII 318 Bas-relief in Stucco, Plate XLIV 319 General Plan of Palenque, Plate XLV 337 Casa No. 1 in Ruins, Plate XLVI 338 Casa No. 1 restored, Plate XLVII 339 No. 1, Bas-relief in Stucco, Plate XLVIII 340 No. 2, Bas-relief in Stucco, Plate XLIX 340 No. 3, Bas-relief in Stucco, Plate L 340 No. 4, Bas-relief in Stucco, Plate LI 340 No. 1, Tablet of Hieroglyphics, Plate LII 342 No. 2, Tablet of Hieroglyphics, Plate LIII 342 Tablet on inner Wall, Plate LIV 343 Casa di Piedras, No. 2, Plate LV 344 Tablet on back Wall of Altar, Casa No. 2, Plate LVI 345 Stone Statue, Plate LVII 349 Casa No. 3, Plate LVIII 350 Front Corridor, Plate LIX 351 No. 1, Bas-reliefs in Front of Altar, Plate LX 353 No. 2, Bas-reliefs in Front of Altar, Plate LXI 353 Adoratorio or Altar, Plate LXII 354 Casa No. 4, Plate LXIII 355 House of the Dwarf, Plate LXIV 420 Casa del Gobernador, Plate LXV 428 Sculptured Front of Casa del Gobernador, Plate LXVI 443 Egyptian Hieroglyphics, Plate LXVIII 441 Top of Altar at Copan, Plate LXVIII=V^a 454 Mexican Hieroglyphical Writing, Plate LXIX 454
In each plate I have numbered the hieroglyphs, giving each one its own number. Thus the hieroglyphs of the Copan altar (vol. i, p. 141) which I have called plate V^a, are numbered from 1 to 36 according to this scheme--
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24
25 26 27 28 29 30
31 32 33 34 35 36
And the right hand side of the Palenque Cross tablet, as given by RAU in his memoir published by the Smithsonian Institution (1880), has the numbers--
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025
2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
2040 2041 2042 2043 2044 2045
2050 2051 2052 2053 2054 2055
* * * * * *
* * * * * *
3080 3081 3082 3083 3084 3085
These are consecutive with the numbers which I have attached to the left-hand side, as given by STEPHENS. Whenever I have stated any results here, I have also given the means by which any one can number a copy of STEPHENS'S work in the way which I have adopted, and thus the means of testing my conclusions is in the hands of every one who desires to do so.
In cases where only a part of a hieroglyphic is referred to, I have placed its number in a parenthesis, as 1826 see (122), by which I mean that the character 1826 is to be compared with a part of the character 122. The advantages of this system are many: for example; a memorandum can easily be taken that two hieroglyphs are alike, thus 2072=2020 and 2073=2021. Hence the pair 2020--2021, read horizontally, occurs again at the point 2072--2073, etc. Horizontal pairs will be known by their numbers being consecutive, as 2020--2021; vertical pairs will usually be known by their numbers differing by 10. Thus, 2075--2085 are one above the other.
This method of naming the chiffres, then, is a quick and safe one, and we shall see that it lends itself to the uses required of it.
I add here the scheme according to which the principal plates at Palenque have been numbered.
PLATE XXIV (left-hand side).
v----------v
{ 37 37 38 39 94 96 98 100 102 104 106
{_See_ See See
{ 1800 1800 1806
{
{ 40 40 41 42 95 97 99=127 101 103 105 107
43=1810 43^a=46^a 44 45 108
See
91
46=1810 46^a=43^a 47 48
49 50 51
In the middle of the
52 52^a=1820? 53 54 plate at the top.
v----------v
55 56=1840? 57 58 109 115
See
1802
59 60 61 62=58? 110 116
See
2020
63 64 65[+] 66 111 117
See
2025
67 68 69 70 112 118
See
1911
71 72=281 73 74 113 119
See
2020
75 76=67 77 78 114 120
79 80 81 82
83 84 85 86=56?
86[*] 86[*] 87 88
89 90 91 92
93
[*] Accidental error in numbering here.
[+] Possibly Muluc--a Maya day; the meaning is "reunion."
PLATE XXIV (right-hand side).
v-------------------v 121 122=86?[+] 123=87 124=88 See 74, See 61, 1822 86[*]
125 126[++] 127=99 128 See 1940 See 1940 See (44), 64
129 130 131=147 132 See 50, 58, 62
133 134 135 136=47?
137 138 139 140
See 39, See 1811
91
141 142[Sec.] 143 144 See 54 See 50, 58, 62, 132
145 146 147=131 148 See 71
149 150 151 152
See 56,
1882
153 154 155 156
See 53 See 50,
58, 132
157[*] 158 159 160
See 68 See 38 See 46^a,
49^a, 52^a
v------------------------------------------v 161=50 162 [+]163=1936 164 See 58, See 56, See 57 See 58, 62 62, 132 73, 1882
165 166 167 168 See 81?
169 170 171 172 See 68?
173 174 175 176
See 67, 76, See 57 See 126
90, 1910
177 178 179 180 See 43^a See 50, 58, 62
181 182 183 184
See 57,
163, 1936
185
[*] Possibly Ymix--a Maya day.
[+] Possibly Chuen--a Maya day; meaning "a board," "a tree."
[++] Possibly Ahau--a Maya day; meaning "king."
[Sec.] Possibly Ezanab--a Maya day.
PLATE LII.
200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 } } 210 211 212 214 215 216 217 218 219 } Line 1. See } 2020 }
220 221 222 223 224=2060 225 226 227 228 229 } See See See } 2030 2060 1811-2 } } Line 2. 230 231 232 234 235 236 237 238 239 } See } 1822 }
240 241 242=2020 243=1951 244 245 246 247 248 249 } } 250 251 252 254 255 256 257 258 259=1943} Line 3. See } 214 }
v-----------------v
260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 }
See See See }
2020 2021 2022 }
} Line 4.
270 271 274=244 275 276 277 278 279 }
See }
204 }
280 281=72 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 } See See } 1820 385 } Line 5. } 290 294 295 296 297 298 299 }
300 301 302 303=360 304 305 306 307 } See } 203 } Line 6. } 310 311 314 315 316 317 318 319 }
v-----------v 320 321 322 323 324=1824 325 326 327 328 329 } See See See See } 203 204 285 305 } } Line 7. 330 331 332 334 335 336 337 338 339 } See } 209 }
340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 } See See } 209 322 } } Line 8. 350 351 352 354 355 356=1822 357 358 359 } See See } 267, 230 } 298 }
360=303 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 }
See See }
351 303, } Line 9.
360 }
}
370 371 375 376 377 378 379 }
380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 }
See }
286, } Line 10.
1822 }
}
390 391 392 394 395 396 397 398 399 }
400 401 402 403=360 404 405 406 407 408 409 } See 367 See } 326 360 } } Line 11. 410 411 412 414 415 416 417 418 419 } See See } 326 324 }
420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 } See } 324 } Line 12. } 430 432 434 435 436 437 438 439 }
PLATE LIII.
[The upper left-hand square is No. 500, the upper right is 519, the lower left-hand is 720, the lower right is 739. All the squares from 500 to 508, 520 to 528, 530 to 538, etc., up to 720 to 728, are obliterated (and their numbers omitted here) except a few.]
509 510 511 512 513 514 515 516 517 518 519
See See See
1967 509 510
529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 537 538 539
See
3012
549 550 551 552 553 554 555 556 557 558 559
See
162
570 571 572 573 574 575 576 577 578 579
See
1823
589 590 591 592 593 594 595 596 597 598 599
604 605 609 610 611 612 613 614 615 616 617 618 619
See
571
628 629 630 631 632 633 634 635 636 637 638 639
See
3054
649 650 651 652 653 654 655 656 657 658 659
See
150,
1882
669 670 671=324 672=322? 673=323? 674 675 676 677 678 679 See See See 2042 77 1802
688 689 690 691 692 693 694 695 696 697 698 699
708 709 710 711 712 713=1802 714 715 716 717 718 719
See
439
729 730=1845 731 732 733 734 735 736 737 738 739
See
2020
PLATE LIV.
v-----------v 800 801 802 803 804 805 806 807 808 809 810 811 812 813 See See See See 1882 26 1940 1941, 3011
900 901 902 903 904 905 906 907=1003 908 909 910 911 912 913
See See
2020 1310
1000 1001 1002 1003=907 1004 1005 1006 1007 1008 1009 1010 1011 1012 1013
See See See
2021 3054 1811-2
v------------v
1100 1101 1102=717 1103 1104 1105=2020 1106 1107 1108 1109 1110=1209 1113 1114 1115
See See See See
1820 2021 1840 1841?
1200 1201 1202=1110 1203 1204=1008 1205 1206 1207 1208 1209=1110 1210 1211 1212 1213 See 3054 See 1823
1300 1301 1302 1303=1910 1304 1305 1306 1307 1308 1309 1310 1311 1312 1313
See
910
1400=1823 1401 1402 1403 1404 1405 1406 1407 1408 1409 1410 1411 1412 1413
1500 1501 1502=1010 1503 1504=717 1505 1506 1507 1508 1509 1510 1511 1512 1513 1102
v-----------------v 1600 1601 1602 1603 1604 1605 1606 1607 1608 1609=1304 1610=1305 1611=1010 1612 1613
1700 1701 1702=1911 1703 1704 1705 1706 1707 1708 1709 1710 1711=1702 1712=1708 1713 1911
PLATE LVI (left-hand side--Palenque Cross).
{ 1801 1802 1803 1804 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965
{ See
{ 163,
1800 { 175
{
{ 1805 1806 1807 1808 1966
{_See_ See
{ 155 138
v---------------------v
[*]1810 1811 1812 1813 1814 1815 1816 1967
See See See See See
150 139, (1852) 131, 126,
179 146 127,
176
1820 1821 1822 1823 1824 1825 1826 1968 See See See 161 124 122, 160
1830=1820 1831 1832 1833 1834 1835 1836 1969 See 161 See See See See See 123, 121 163 182 123 124
1840 1841 1842 1843 1844 1845=1822 1846 1970 See See See 124 See 1835 124, 179 1836
1850 1851 1852 1853 1854=1806 1855
See
122
1860 1861 1862 1863 1864 1865=2021 1866 See See 144 See 126, 136?, 127 184?
1870=1820 1871 1872=1842? 1873=1803 1874 1875 1876
See 160, See 182
161
1880 1881 1882 1883 1884=1834 1885
See See See 163, See
150, 124 182 132,
162 144
1890 1891 1892 1893 1894=1822 1895 See See See See 124 See 130, 131?, 132? 144 158 147?
1900 1901 1902 1903 1904 1905=1803 1971 See See See 146 157, 1802 182
1910 1911 1912 1913=1834 1914 1915 1972
See See See 1884
174 174 141
v---------------v
1920 1921 1922 1923 1924 1925 1973
See See
123 124
1930 1931 1932=1811-2? 1933 1934 1935=1884 1975 1974 See 182
v-----------------v 1940=1862 1941 1942 1943 1944=1922 1945=1923 See See 123 See 124 126, 127
1950 1951 1952 1953 1954 1955
See
164
[*] At and after this place, in vertical columns, 1810-1-2, 1820-1-2, 1830-1-2, 1840-1-2, and 1860-1-2 may be taken as 2 or 3 symbols. I have assumed them to be 3.
PLATE LVI (right-hand side--Palenque Cross).
1980 1981 1982 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025=123
See See See
131, 144 163
147,
150
1983 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
See See See See
132 134, 1811, 124
146, 1812
149
v---------v 1984 2040 2041 2042 2043=123 2044 2045 See See See 131, 131, 132, 147 147 150
2000 2050 2051 2052 2053 2054 2055
2001 2060 2061 2062 2063 2064 2065
See
182
2002=122 2070 2071 2072 2073 2074 2075
2003=2021 2080 2081 2082 2083 2084 2085 See 130
2004 2090 2091 2092 2093 2094 2095
2005 3000 3001 3002 3003 3004 3005
{ 1976 1978 2006 3010 3011 3012 3013 3014 3015
{ See
{ 1902,
[*] { 1903
{
{ 1977 1979 2007 3020 3021 3022 3023 3024 3025
{ See
{ 182?
2008 3030 3031 3032 3033 3034 3035
2009 3040 3041 3042 3043 3044 3045
2010 3050 3051 3052 3053 3054 3055
See
184
2011 3060 3061 3062 3063 3064 3065
See
131,
2020
2012 3070 3071 3072 3073 3074 3075
2013 3080 3081 3082 3083 3084 3085
2014
[*] These four each side of the main stem of the cross. 1976=_Ezanab_--a Maya day[TN-3]
FIG. 48.--The Palenquean Group of the Cross.
IV.
IN WHAT ORDER ARE THE HIEROGLYPHS READ?
Before any advance can be made in the deciphering of the hieroglyphic inscriptions, it is necessary to know in what directions, along what lines or columns, the verbal sense proceeds.
All the inscriptions that I know of are in rectangular figures. At Copan they are usually in squares. At Palenque the longest inscriptions are in rectangles. At Palenque again, there are some cases where there is a single horizontal line of hieroglyphs over a pictorial tablet. Here clearly the only question is, do the characters proceed from left to right, or from right to left? In other cases as in the tablet of the cross, there are vertical columns. The question here is, shall we read up or down?
Now, the hieroglyphs must be phonetic or pictorial, or a mixture of the two. If they are phonetic, it will take more than one symbol to make a word, and we shall have groups of like characters when the same word is written in two places. If the signs are pictorial, the same thing will follow; that is, we shall have groups recurring when the same idea recurs. Further, we know that the subjects treated of in these tablets must be comparatively simple, and that names, as of gods, kings, etc., must necessarily recur.
The names, then, will be the first words deciphered. At present no single name is known. These considerations, together with our system of nomenclature, will enable us to take some steps.
Take, for example, the right-hand side of the Palenque cross tablet as given by RAU. See our figure 48, which is Plate LVI of STEPHENS (vol. ii, p. 345), with the addition of the part now in the National Museum at Washington.
Our system of numbering is here
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025
2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
* * * * * *
* * * * * *
* * * * * *
3080 3081 3082 3083 3084 3085
Now pick out the duplicate hieroglyphs in this; that is, run through the tablet, and wherever 2020 occurs erase the number which fills the place and write in 2020. Do the same for 2021, 2022, etc., down to 3084. The result will be as follows:
RIGHT-HAND SIDE OF PALENQUE CROSS TABLET (RAU).
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 ^-----------^ ^-----------^
2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 ^-----------^
2040 2041 2042 { 2025 2020 2021 { ^-----------^ { 2050 2051 2034 { 2053 2054 2055 ^-----------^
2053 2061 2062 2063 2064 2065
2070 2071 2020 2021 2022? 2024? } ^-----------^ } ? } 2053 2020 2082 2083 2025 2053 }
2021 2091 2092 { 2025 2094 2095 { 3000 2023 2034 { 2053 2033 3005 ^-----------^ ^-----------^
3010 2083 3012 2024 3014 2091
2053 3021 2023 2020 3024 2024
{ 2024 2025 2021 3033 { 2025 2034* ? { ^-----------^ { ^---- { { { 2053* 3021 3042 3043 { 2035 3045 ----^
3050 2083 { 2025 2034 3054 3055
See 2082 {
^-----------^ {
{
2024 2020 { 2035 3063 2024 2025
^-----------^
2021 2031 2020 2021 2035 3045 ^-----------^
3080 3081 2091 2093 2020 2021 ^-----------^
14 cases of horizontal pairs; 4 cases of vertical pairs; 102 characters in all, of which 51 appear more than once, so that there are but 51 independent hieroglyphs.
Here the first two lines are unchanged. In the third line we find that 2043 is the same as 2025, 2044=2020, 2045=2021, and so on, and we write the smallest number in each case.
After this is done, connect like pairs by braces whenever they are consecutive, either vertical or horizontal. Take the pair 2020 and 2021 for example; 2020 occurs eight times in the tablet, viz, as 2020, 2044, 2072, 2081, 3023, 3061, 3072, 3084. In five out of the eight cases, it is followed by 2021, viz, as 2021, 2045, 2073, 3073, 3085.
It is clear this is not the result of accident. The pair 2020 and 2021 means something, and when the two characters occur together they must be read together. There is no point of punctuation between them. We also learn that they are not inseparable. 2020 will make sense with 2082, 3024 and 3062. Here it looks as if the writing must be read in lines horizontally. We do not know yet in which direction.
We must examine other cases. This is to be noticed: If the reading is in horizontal lines from left to right, then the progress is from top to bottom in columns, as the case of 3035 and 3040 shows. This occurs at the end of a line, and the corresponding chiffre required to make the pair is at the other end of the next line. I have marked this case with asterisks. If we must read in the lines from right to left we must necessarily read in columns from bottom to top. Thus the lines are connected.
A similar process with all the other tablets in STEPHENS leads to the conclusion that the reading is in lines horizontally and in columns vertically. The cases 1835-'45, 1885-'95, 1914-'24, and 1936-'46 should, however, be examined. We have now to decide at which end of the lines to begin. The reasons given by Mr. BANCROFT (Native Races, vol. ii, p. 782) appeared to me sufficient to decide the question before I was acquainted with his statement of them.
Therefore, the sum total of our present data, examined by a rational method, leads to the conclusion, so far as we can know from these data, that the verbal sense proceeded in lines from left to right, in columns from top to bottom; just as the present page is written, in fact.
For the present, the introduction of the method here indicated is the important step. It has, as yet, been applied only to the plates of STEPHENS' work. The definite conclusion should be made to rest on all possible data, some of which is not at my disposition at present. Tablets exist in great numbers at other points besides Palenque, and for the final conclusion these must also be consulted. If each one is examined in the way I have indicated, it will yield a certain answer. The direction of reading for that plate can be thus determined. At Palenque the progress is in the order I have indicated.
V.
THE CARD-CATALOGUE OF HIEROGLYPHS.
It has already been explained how a system of nomenclature was gradually formed. As I have said, this is not perfect, but it is sufficiently simple and full for the purpose. By it, every plate in STEPHENS' work receives a number and every hieroglyph in each plate is likewise numbered.
This was first done in my private copy of the work. I then procured another copy and duplicated these numbers both for plates and single chiffres. The plates of this copy were then cut up into single hieroglyphs and each single hieroglyph was mounted on a library card, as follows:
____________________________________________
| | | |
| No. 2020. | Hieroglyph. | Plate LVI. |
| |_______________| |
|__________________________________________|
| Same as Numbers. | Similar to Numbers. |
| ---------------- | ------------------- |
| ---------------- | ------------------- |
| ---------------- | ------------------- |
| ---------------- | ------------------- |
| ---------------- | ------------------- |
|__________________________________________|
The cards were 6.5 by 4.5 inches. The chiffre was pasted on, in the center of the top space. Its number and the plate from which it came were placed as in the cut. The numbers of hieroglyphs which resembled the one in question could be written on the right half of the card, and the numbers corresponding to different recurrences of this hieroglyph occupied the left half.
All this part of the work was most faithfully and intelligently performed for me by Miss MARY LOCKWOOD, to whom I desire to express the full amount of my obligations. A mistake in any part would have been fatal. But no mistakes occurred.
These cards could now be arranged in any way I saw fit. The simple chiffres, for example, could be placed so as to bring like ones together. A compound hieroglyph could be placed among simple ones agreeing with any one of its components, and so on.
The expense of forming this card catalogue of about 1,500 single hieroglyphs was borne by the Ethnological Bureau of the Smithsonian Institution, and the catalogue is the property of that bureau, forming only one of its many rich collections of American picture-writings.
VI.
COMPARISON OF PLATES I AND IV (COPAN).
In examining the various statues at Copan, as given by STEPHENS, one naturally looks for points of striking resemblance or striking difference. Where all is unknown, even the smallest sign is examined, in the hope that it may prove a clue. The Plate I, Fig. 49, has a twisted knot (the "square knot" of sailors) of cords over its head, and above this is a chiffre composed of ellipses, and above this again a sign like a sea-shell. A natural suggestion was that these might be the signs for the name of the personage depicted in Plate I. If this is so and we should find the same sign elsewhere in connection with a figure, we should expect to find this second figure like the first in every particular. This would be a rigid test of the theory. After looking through the Palenque series, and finding no similar figure and sign, I examined the Copan series, and in Plate IV, our Fig. 50, I found the same signs exactly; i. e., the knot and the two chiffres.
FIG. 49.--Statue at Copan.
FIG. 50.--Statue at Copan.
At first sight there is only the most general resemblance between the personages represented in the two plates; as STEPHENS says in his original account of them, they are "in many respects similar." If he had known them to be the same, he would not have wasted his time in drawing them. The scale of the two drawings and of the two statues is different; but the two personages are the same identically. Figure for figure, ornament for ornament, they correspond. It is unnecessary to give the minute comparison here in words. It can be made by any one from the two plates herewith. Take any part of Plate I, find the corresponding part of Plate IV, and whether it is human feature or sculptured ornament the two will be found to be the same.
Take the middle face depending from the belt in each plate. The earrings are the same; the ornament below the chin, the knot above the head, the complicated beadwork on each side of this face, all are the same. The bracelets of the right arms of the main figures have each the forked serpent tongue, and the left-arm bracelets are ornamented alike. The crosses with beads almost inclosed in the right hands are alike; the elliptic ornaments above each wrist, the knots and chiffres over the serpent masks which surmount the faces, all are the same. In the steel plates given by STEPHENS there are even more coindences[TN-4] to be seen than in the excellent wood-cuts here given, which have been copied from them.
Here, then, is an important fact. The theory that the chiffre over the forehead is characteristic, though it is not definitively proved, receives strong confirmation. The parts which have been lost by the effects of time on one statue can be supplied from the other. Better than all, we gain a test of the minuteness with which the sculptors worked, and an idea of how close the adherence to a type was required to be. Granting once that the two personages are the same (a fact about which I conceive there can be no possible doubt, since the chances in favor are literally thousands to one), we learn what license was allowed, and what synonyms in stone might be employed. Thus, the ornament suspended from the neck in Plate IV is clearly a tiger's skull. That from the neck of Plate I has been shown to be the derived form of a skull by Dr. HARRISON ALLEN,[225-*] and we now know that this common form relates not to the human skull, as Dr. ALLEN has supposed, but to that of the tiger. We shall find this figure often repeated, and the identification is of importance. This is a case in regard to synonyms. The kind of symbolism so ably treated by Dr. ALLEN is well exemplified in the conventional sign for the crotalus jaw at the mouth of the mask over the head of each figure. This is again found on the body of the snake in Plate LX, and in other places. Other important questions can be settled by comparison of the two plates. For example, at Palenque we often find a sign composed of a half ellipse, inside of which bars are drawn.
I shall elsewhere show that there is reason to believe the ellipse is to represent the concave of the sky, its diameter to be the level earth, and in some cases at least the bars to be the descending and fertilizing rain. The bars are sometimes two, three, and sometimes four in number. Are these variants of a single sign, or are they synonyms? Before the discovery of the identity of the personages in these two plates, this question could not be answered. Now we can say that they are not synonyms, or at least that they must be considered separately. To show this, examine the bands just above the wristlets of the two figures. Over the left hands of the figures the bars are two in number; over the right hands there are four. This exact similarity is not accidental; there is a meaning in it, and we must search for its explanation elsewhere, but we now have a valuable test of what needs to be regarded, and of what, on the other hand, may be passed over as accidental or unimportant.