SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION
BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY
BULLETIN 57

AN INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY
OF THE MAYA HIEROGLYPHS

BY
SYLVANUS GRISWOLD MORLEY

WASHINGTON
GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
1915

{iii}

LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL

Smithsonian Institution,
Bureau of American Ethnology,
Washington, D. C., January 7, 1914.

Sir: I have the honor to submit the accompanying manuscript of a memoir bearing the title "An Introduction to the Study of the Maya Hieroglyphs," by Sylvanus Griswold Morley, and to recommend its publication as a bulletin of the Bureau of American Ethnology.

The hieroglyphic writing developed by the Maya of Central America and southern Mexico was probably the foremost intellectual achievement of pre-Columbian times in the New World, and as such it deserves equal attention with other graphic systems of antiquity.

The earliest inscriptions now extant probably date from about the beginning of the Christian era, but such is the complexity of the glyphs and subject matter even at this early period, that in order to estimate the age of the system it is necessary to postulate a far greater antiquity for its origin. Indeed all that can be accepted safely in this direction is that many centuries must have elapsed before the Maya hieroglyphic writing could have been developed to the highly complex stage where we first encounter it.

The first student to make any progress in deciphering the Maya inscriptions was Prof. Ernst Förstemann, of the Royal Library at Dresden. About 1880 Professor Förstemann published a facsimile reproduction of the Dresden codex, and for the next twenty years devoted the greater part of his time to the elucidation of this manuscript. He it was who first discovered and worked out the ingenious vigesimal system of numeration used by the Maya, and who first pointed out how this system was utilized to record astronomical and chronological facts. In short, his pioneer work made possible all subsequent progress in deciphering Maya texts.

Curiously enough, about the same time, or a little later (in 1891), another student of the same subject, Mr. J. T. Goodman, of Alameda, California, working independently and without knowledge of Professor Förstemann's researches, also succeeded in deciphering the chronological parts of the Maya texts, and in determining the values of the head-variant numerals. Mr. Goodman also perfected some {iv}tables, "The Archaic Chronological Calendar" and "The Archaic Annual Calendar," which greatly facilitate the decipherment of the calculations recorded in the texts.

It must be admitted that very little progress has been made in deciphering the Maya glyphs except those relating to the calendar and chronology; that is, the signs for the various time periods (days and months), the numerals, and a few name-glyphs; however, as these known signs comprise possibly two-fifths of all the glyphs, it is clear that the general tenor of the Maya inscriptions is no longer concealed from us. The remaining three-fifths probably tell the nature of the events which occurred on the corresponding dates, and it is to these we must turn for the subject matter of Maya history. The deciphering of this textual residuum is enormously complicated by the character of the Maya glyphs, which for the greater part are ideographic rather than phonetic; that is, the various symbols represent ideas rather than sounds.

In a graphic system composed largely of ideographic elements it is extremely difficult to determine the meanings of the different signs, since little or no help is to be derived from varying combinations of elements as in a phonetic system. In phonetic writing the symbols have fixed sounds, which are unchanging throughout, and when these values have once been determined, they may be substituted for the characters wherever they occur, and thus words are formed.

While the Maya glyphs largely represent ideas, indubitable traces of phoneticism and phonetic composition appear. There are perhaps half a dozen glyphs in all which are known to be constructed on a purely phonetic basis, and as the remaining glyphs are gradually deciphered this number will doubtless be increased.

The progress which has been made in deciphering the Maya inscriptions may be summarized as follows: The Maya calendar, chronology, and astronomy as recorded in the hieroglyphic texts have been carefully worked out, and it is unlikely that future discoveries will change our present conception of them. There remains, however, a group of glyphs which are probably non-calendric, non-chronologic, and non-astronomic in character. These, it may be reasonably expected, will be found to describe the subject matter of Maya history; that is, they probably set forth the nature of the events which took place on the dates recorded. An analogy would be the following: Supposing, in scanning a history of the United States, only the dates could be read. We would find, for example, July 4, 1776, followed by unknown characters; April 12, 1861, by others; and March 4, 1912, by others. This, then, is the case with the Maya glyphs—we find dates followed by glyphs of unknown meaning, which presumably set forth the nature of the corresponding events. In a word, we know now the {v}chronologic skeleton of Maya history; it remains to work out the more intimate details which alone can make it a vital force.

The published writings on the subject of the Maya hieroglyphs have become so voluminous, and are so widely scattered and inaccessible, that it is difficult for students of Central American archeology to become familiar with what has been accomplished in this important field of investigation. In the present memoir Mr. Morley, who has devoted a number of years to the study of Maya archeology, and especially to the hieroglyphs, summarizes the results of these researches to the present time, and it is believed that this Introduction to the Study of the Maya Hieroglyphs will be the means of enabling ready and closer acquaintance with this interesting though intricate subject.

{vii}

PREFACE

With the great expansion of interest in American archeology during the last few years there has grown to be a corresponding need and demand for primary textbooks, archeological primers so to speak, which will enable the general reader, without previous knowledge of the science, to understand its several branches. With this end in view, the author has prepared An Introduction to the Study of the Maya Hieroglyphs.

The need for such a textbook in this particular field is suggested by two considerations: (1) The writings of previous investigators, having been designed to meet the needs of the specialist rather than those of the beginner, are for the greater part too advanced and technical for general comprehension; and (2) these writings are scattered through many publications, periodicals as well as books, some in foreign languages, and almost all difficult of access to the average reader.

To the second of these considerations, however, the writings of Mr. C. P. Bowditch, of Boston, Massachusetts, offer a conspicuous exception, particularly his final contribution to this subject, entitled "The Numeration, Calendar Systems, and Astronomical Knowledge of the Mayas," the publication of which in 1910 marked the dawn of a new era in the study of the Maya hieroglyphic writing. In this work Mr. Bowditch exhaustively summarizes all previous knowledge of the subject, and also indicates the most promising lines for future investigation. The book is a vast storehouse of heretofore scattered material, now gathered together for the first time and presented to the student in a readily accessible form. Indeed, so thorough is its treatment, the result of many years of intensive study, that the writer would have hesitated to bring out another work, necessarily covering much of the same ground, had it not been for his belief that Mr. Bowditch's book is too advanced for lay comprehension. The Maya hieroglyphic writing is exceedingly intricate; its subject matter is complex and its forms irregular; and in order to be understood it must be presented in a very elementary way. The writer believes that this primer method of treatment has not been followed in the publication in question and, furthermore, that the omission of specimen texts, which would give the student practice in deciphering the glyphs, renders it too technical for use by the beginner. {viii}

Acknowledgment should be made here to Mr. Bowditch for his courtesy in permitting the reproduction of a number of drawings from his book, the examples of the period, day and month glyphs figured being derived almost entirely from this source; and in a larger sense for his share in the establishment of instruction in this field of research at Harvard University where the writer first took up these studies.

In the limited space available it would have been impossible to present a detailed picture of the Maya civilization, nor indeed is this essential to the purpose of the book. It has been thought advisable, however, to precede the general discussion of the hieroglyphs with a brief review of the habitat, history, customs, government, and religion of the ancient Maya, so that the reader may gather a general idea of the remarkable people whose writing and calendar he is about to study.

{ix}

CONTENTS

{x}

List of Tables

{xi}

ILLUSTRATIONS

{xv}

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Aguilar, Sanchez de. 1639. Informe contra idolorum cultores del Obispado de Yucatan. Madrid. (Reprint in Anales Mus. Nac. de Mexico, VI, pp. 17-122, Mexico, 1900.)

Bowditch, Charles P. 1901 a. Memoranda on the Maya calendars used in the Books of Chilan Balam. Amer. Anthr., n. s., III, No. 1, pp. 129-138, New York.

—— 1906. The Temples of the Cross, of the Foliated Cross, and of the Sun at Palenque. Cambridge, Mass.

—— 1909. Dates and numbers in the Dresden Codex. Putnam Anniversary Volume, pp. 268-298, New York.

—— 1910. The numeration, calendar systems, and astronomical knowledge of the Mayas. Cambridge, Mass.

Brasseur de Bourbourg, C. E. 1869-70. Manuscrit Troano. Études sur le système graphique et la langue des Mayas. 2 vols. Paris.

Brinton, Daniel G. 1882 b. The Maya chronicles. Philadelphia. (No. 1 of Brinton's Library of Aboriginal American Literature.)

—— 1894 b. A primer of Mayan hieroglyphics. Pubs. Univ. of Pa., Ser. in Philol., Lit., and Archeol., III, No. 2.

Bulletin 28 of the Bureau of American Ethnology, 1904: Mexican and Central American antiquities, calendar systems, and history. Twenty-four papers by Eduard Seler, E. Förstemann, Paul Schellhas, Carl Sapper, and E. P. Dieseldorff. Translated from the German under the supervision of Charles P. Bowditch.

Cogolludo, D. L. 1688. Historia de Yucathan. Madrid.

Cresson, H. T. 1892. The antennæ and sting of Yikilcab as components in the Maya day-signs. Science, XX, pp. 77-79, New York.

Dieseldorff, E. P. See Bulletin 28.

Förstemann, E. 1906. Commentary on the Maya manuscript in the Royal Public Library of Dresden. Papers Peabody Mus., IV, No. 2, pp. 48-266, Cambridge. See also Bulletin 28.

Gates, W. E. 1910. Commentary upon the Maya-Tzental Perez Codex, with a concluding note upon the linguistic problem of the Maya glyphs. Papers Peabody Mus., VI, No. 1, pp. 5-64, Cambridge.

Goodman, J. T. 1897. The archaic Maya inscriptions. (Biologia Centrali-Americana, Archæology, Part XVIII. London.) [See Maudslay, 1889-1902.]

—— 1905. Maya dates. Amer. Anthr., n. s., VII, pp. 642-647, Lancaster, Pa.

Hewett, Edgar L. 1911. Two seasons' work in Guatemala. Bull. Archæol. Inst. of America, II, pp. 117-134, Norwood, Mass.

Holmes, W. H. 1907. On a nephrite statuette from San Andrés Tuxtla, Vera Cruz, Mexico. Amer. Anthr., n. s., IX, No. 4, pp. 691-701, Lancaster, Pa.

Landa, Diego de. 1864. Relacion de las cosas de Yucatan. Paris.

Le Plongeon, A. 1885. The Maya alphabet. Supplement to Scientific American, vol. XIX, Jan. 31, pp. 7572-73, New York.

Maler, Teobert. 1901. Researches in the central portion of the Usumatsintla valley. Memoirs Peabody Mus., II, No. 1, pp. 9-75, Cambridge.

—— 1903. Researches in the central portion of the Usumatsintla valley. [Continued.] Ibid., No. 2, pp. 83-208.

—— 1908 a. Explorations of the upper Usumatsintla and adjacent region. Ibid., IV, No. 1, pp. 1-51. {xvi}

Maler, Teobert. 1908 b. Explorations in the Department of Peten, Guatemala, and adjacent region. Ibid., No. 2, pp. 55-127.

—— 1910. Explorations in the Department of Peten, Guatemala, and adjacent region. [Continued.] Ibid., No. 3, pp. 131-170.

—— 1911. Explorations in the Department of Peten, Guatemala. Tikal. Ibid., V, No. 1, pp. 3-91, pls. 1-26.

Maudslay, A. P. 1889-1902. Biologia Centrali-Americana, or contributions to the knowledge of the flora and fauna of Mexico and Central America. Archæology. 4 vols. of text and plates. London.

Morley, S. G. 1910 b. Correlation of Maya and Christian chronology. Amer. Journ. Archeol., 2d ser., XIV, pp. 193-204, Norwood, Mass.

—— 1911. The historical value of the Books of Chilan Balam. Ibid., XV, pp. 195-214.

Ponce, Fray Alonzo. 1872. Relacion breve y verdadera de algunas cosas de las muchas que sucedieron al Padre Fray Alonzo Ponce, Comisario General en las provincias de Nueva España. Colección de documentos ineditos para la historia de España, LVII, LVIII. Madrid.

Rosny, Leon de. 1876. Essai sur le déchiffrement de l'écriture hiératique de l'Amérique Centrale. Paris.

Sapper, Carl. See Bulletin 28.

Schellhas, Paul. See Bulletin 28.

Seler, Eduard. 1901 c. Die alten Ansiedelungen von Chaculá im Distrikte Nenton des Departements Huehuetenango der Republik Guatemala. Berlin.

—— 1902-1908. Gesammelte Abhandlungen zur amerikanischen Sprach- und Alterthumskunde. 3 vols. Berlin. See also Bulletin 28.

Spinden, H. J. 1913. A study of Maya art, its subject-matter and historical development. Memoirs Peabody Mus., VI, pp. 1-285, Cambridge.

Stephens, J. L. 1841. Incidents of travel in Central America, Chiapas, and Yucatan. 2 vols. New York.

—— 1843. Incidents of travel in Yucatan. 2 vols. New York.

Thomas, Cyrus. 1893. Are the Maya hieroglyphs phonetic? Amer. Anthr., VI, No. 3, pp. 241-270, Washington.

Villagutierre, Sotomayor J. 1701. Historia de la conquista de la provinzia de el Itza, reduccion, y progressos de la de el Lacandon y otras naciones de el reyno de Guatimala, a las provincias de Yucatan, en la America septentrional. Madrid.

BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGYBULLETIN 57 PLATE 1

{1}

AN INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY OF THE MAYA HIEROGLYPHS

By SYLVANUS GRISWOLD MORLEY

Chapter I. THE MAYA

Habitat

Broadly speaking, the Maya were a lowland people, inhabiting the Atlantic coast plains of southern Mexico and northern Central America. (See pl. 1.) The southern part of this region is abundantly watered by a network of streams, many of which have their rise in the Cordillera, while the northern part, comprising the peninsula of Yucatan, is entirely lacking in water courses and, were it not for natural wells (cenotes) here and there, would be uninhabitable. This condition in the north is due to the geologic formation of the peninsula, a vast plain underlaid by limestone through which water quickly percolates to subterranean channels.

In the south the country is densely forested, though occasional savannas break the monotony of the tropical jungles. The rolling surface is traversed in places by ranges of hills, the most important of which are the Cockscomb Mountains of British Honduras; these attain an elevation of 3,700 feet. In Yucatan the nature of the soil and the water-supply not being favorable to the growth of a luxuriant vegetation, this region is covered with a smaller forest growth and a sparser bush than the area farther southward.

The climate of the region occupied by the Maya is tropical; there are two seasons, the rainy and the dry. The former lasts from May or June until January or February, there being considerable local variation not only in the length of this season but also in the time of its beginning.

Deer, tapirs, peccaries, jaguars, and game of many other kinds abound throughout the entire region, and doubtless formed a large part of the food supply in ancient times, though formerly corn was the staple, as it is now.

There are at present upward of twenty tribes speaking various dialects of the Maya language, perhaps half a million people in all. These live in the same general region their ancestors occupied, but under greatly changed conditions. Formerly the Maya were the van of civilization in the New World,^[1] but to-day they are a dwindling {2}race, their once remarkable civilization is a thing of the past, and its manners and customs are forgotten.

History

The ancient Maya, with whom this volume deals, emerged from barbarism probably during the first or second century of the Christian Era; at least their earliest dated monument can not be ascribed with safety to a more remote period.^[2] How long a time had been required for the development of their complex calendar and hieroglyphic system to the point of graphic record, it is impossible to say, and any estimate can be only conjectural. It is certain, however, that a long interval must have elapsed from the first crude and unrelated scratches of savagery to the elaborate and involved hieroglyphs found on the earliest monuments, which represent not only the work of highly skilled sculptors, but also the thought of intensively developed minds. That this period was measured by centuries rather than by decades seems probable; the achievement was far too great to have been performed in a single generation or even in five or ten.

It seems safe to assume, therefore, that by the end of the second century of the Christian Era the Maya civilization was fairly on its feet. There then began an extraordinary development all along the line. City after city sprang into prominence throughout the southern part of the Maya territory,^[3] each contributing its share to the general progress and art of the time. With accomplishment came confidence and a quickening of pace. All activities doubtless shared in the general uplift which followed, though little more than the material evidences of architecture and sculpture have survived the ravages of the destructive environment in which this culture flourished; and it is chiefly from these remnants of ancient Maya art that the record of progress has been partially reconstructed.

This period of development, which lasted upward of 400 years, or until about the close of the sixth century, may be called {3}perhaps the "Golden Age of the Maya"; at least it was the first great epoch in their history, and so far as sculpture is concerned, the one best comparable to the classic period of Greek art. While sculpture among the Maya never again reached so high a degree of perfection, architecture steadily developed, almost to the last. Judging from the dates inscribed upon their monuments, all the great cities of the south flourished during this period: Palenque and Yaxchilan in what is now southern Mexico; Piedras Negras, Seibal, Tikal, Naranjo, and Quirigua in the present Guatemala; and Copan in the present Honduras. All these cities rose to greatness and sank again into insignificance, if not indeed into oblivion, before the close of this Golden Age.

The causes which led to the decline of civilization in the south are unknown. It has been conjectured that the Maya were driven from their southern homes by stronger peoples pushing in from farther south and from the west, or again, that the Maya civilization, having run its natural course, collapsed through sheer lack of inherent power to advance. Which, if either, of these hypotheses be true, matters little, since in any event one all-important fact remains: Just after the close of Cycle 9 of Maya chronology, toward the end of the sixth century, there is a sudden and final cessation of dates in all the southern cities, apparently indicating that they were abandoned about this time.

Still another condition doubtless hastened the general decline if indeed it did no more. There is strong documentary evidence^[4] that about the middle or close of the fifth century the southern part of Yucatan was discovered and colonized. In the century following, the southern cities one by one sank into decay; at least none of their monuments bear later dates, and coincidently Chichen Itza, the first great city of the north, was founded and rose to prominence. In the absence of reliable contemporaneous records it is impossible to establish the absolute accuracy of any theory relating to times so {4}remote as those here under consideration; but it seems not improbable that after the discovery of Yucatan and the subsequent opening up of that vast region, the southern cities commenced to decline. As the new country waxed the old waned, so that by the end of the sixth century the rise of the one and the fall of the other had occurred.

The occupation and colonization of Yucatan marked the dawn of a new era for the Maya although their Renaissance did not take place at once. Under pressure of the new environment, at best a parched and waterless land, the Maya civilization doubtless underwent important modification.^[5] The period of colonization, with the strenuous labor by which it was marked, was not conducive to progress in the arts. At first the struggle for bare existence must have absorbed in a large measure the energies of all, and not until their foothold was secure could much time have been available for the cultivation of the gentler pursuits. Then, too, at first there seems to have been a feeling of unrest in the new land, a shifting of homes and a testing of localities, all of which retarded the development of architecture, sculpture, and other arts. Bakhalal (see pl. 1), the first settlement in the north, was occupied for only 60 years. Chichen Itza, the next location, although occupied for more than a century, was finally abandoned and the search for a new home resumed. Moving westward from Chichen Itza, Chakanputun was seized and occupied at the beginning of the eighth century. Here the Maya are said to have lived for 260 years, until the destruction of Chakanputun by fire about 960 A. D. again set them wandering. By this time, however, some four centuries had elapsed since the first colonization of the country, and they doubtless felt themselves fully competent to cope with any problems arising from their environment. Once more their energies had begun to find outlet in artistic expression. The Transitional Period was at an end, and The Maya Renaissance, if the term may be used, was fully under way.

The opening of the eleventh century witnessed important and far-reaching political changes in Yucatan. After the destruction of Chakanputun the horizon of Maya activity expanded. Some of the fugitives from Chakanputun reoccupied Chichen Itza while others established themselves at a new site called Mayapan. About this time also the city of Uxmal seems to have been founded. In the year 1000 these three cities—Chichen Itza, Uxmal, and Mayapan—formed a confederacy,^[6] in which each was to share equally in the government of the country. Under the peaceful conditions which {5}followed the formation of this confederacy for the next 200 years the arts blossomed forth anew.

This was the second and last great Maya epoch. It was their Age of Architecture as the first period had been their Age of Sculpture. As a separate art sculpture languished; but as an adjunct, an embellishment to architecture, it lived again. The one had become handmaiden to the other. Façades were treated with a sculptural decoration, which for intricacy and elaboration has rarely been equaled by any people at any time; and yet this result was accomplished without sacrifice of beauty or dignity. During this period probably there arose the many cities which to-day are crumbling in decay throughout the length and breadth of Yucatan, their very names forgotten. When these were in their prime, the country must have been one great beehive of activity, for only a large population could have left remains so extensive.

This era of universal peace was abruptly terminated about 1200 A. D. by an event which shook the body politic to its foundations and disrupted the Triple Alliance under whose beneficent rule the land had grown so prosperous. The ruler of Chichen Itza, Chac Xib Chac, seems to have plotted against his colleague of Mayapan, one Hunnac Ceel, and in the disastrous war which followed, the latter, with the aid of Nahua allies,^[7] utterly routed his opponent and drove him from his city. The conquest of Chichen Itza seems to have been followed during the thirteenth century by attempted reprisals on the part of the vanquished Itza, which plunged the country into civil war; and this struggle in turn paved the way for the final eclipse of Maya supremacy in the fifteenth century.

After the dissolution of the Triple Alliance a readjustment of power became necessary. It was only natural that the victors in the late war should assume the chief direction of affairs, and there is strong evidence that Mayapan became the most important city in the land. It is not improbable also that as a result of this war Chichen Itza was turned over to Hunnac Ceel's Nahua allies, perhaps in recognition of their timely assistance, or as their share in the spoils of war. It is certain that sometime during its history Chichen Itza came under a strong Nahua influence. One group of buildings in particular^[8] shows in its architecture and bas-reliefs that it was undoubtedly inspired by Nahua rather than by Maya ideals.

According to Spanish historians, the fourteenth century was characterized by increasing arrogance and oppression on the part of the rulers of Mayapan, who found it necessary to surround themselves with Nahua allies in order to keep the rising discontent of their {6}subjects in check.^[9] This unrest finally reached its culmination about the middle of the fifteenth century, when the Maya nobility, unable longer to endure such tyranny, banded themselves together under the leadership of the lord of Uxmal, sacked Mayapan, and slew its ruler.

All authorities, native as well as Spanish, agree that the destruction of Mayapan marked the end of strongly centralized government in Yucatan. Indeed there can be but little doubt that this event also sounded the death knell of Maya civilization. As one of the native chronicles tersely puts it, "The chiefs of the country lost their power." With the destruction of Mayapan the country split into a number of warring factions, each bent on the downfall of the others. Ancient jealousies and feuds, no longer held in leash by the restraining hand of Mayapan, doubtless revived, and soon the land was rent with strife. Presently to the horrors of civil war were added those of famine and pestilence, each of which visited the peninsula in turn, carrying off great numbers of people.

These several calamities, however, were but harbingers of worse soon to come. In 1517 Francisco de Cordoba landed the first Spanish expedition^[10] on the shores of Yucatan. The natives were so hostile, however, that he returned to Cuba, having accomplished little more than the discovery of the country. In the following year Juan de Grijalva descended on the peninsula, but he, too, met with so determined a resistance that he sailed away, having gained little more than hard knocks for his pains. In the following year (1519) Hernando Cortez landed on the northeast coast but reembarked in a few days for Mexico, again leaving the courageous natives to themselves. Seven years later, however, in 1526, Francisco Montejo, having been granted the title of Adelantado of Yucatan, set about the conquest of the country in earnest. Having obtained the necessary "sinews of war" through his marriage to a wealthy widow of Seville, he sailed with 3 ships and 500 men for Yucatan. He first landed on the island of Cozumel, off the northeast coast, but soon proceeded to the mainland and took formal possession of the country in the name of the King of Spain. This empty ceremony soon proved to be {7}but the prelude to a sanguinary struggle, which broke out almost immediately and continued with extraordinary ferocity for many years, the Maya fighting desperately in defense of their homes. Indeed, it was not until 14 years later, on June 11, 1541 (old style), that, the Spaniards having defeated a coalition of Maya chieftains near the city of Ichcanzihoo, the conquest was finally brought to a close and the pacification of the country accomplished. With this event ends the independent history of the Maya.

Manners and Customs

According to Bishop Landa,^[11] who wrote his remarkable history of Yucatan in 1565, the Maya of that day were a tall race, active and strong. In childhood the forehead was artificially flattened and the ears and nose were pierced for the insertion of earrings and nose-ornaments, of which the people were very fond. Squint-eye was considered a mark of beauty, and mothers strove to disfigure their children in this way by suspending pellets of wax between their eyes in order to make them squint, thus securing the desired effect. The faces of the younger boys were scalded by the application of hot cloths, to prevent the growth of the beard, which was not popular. Both men and women wore their hair long. The former had a large spot burned on the back of the head, where the hair always remained short. With the exception of a small queue, which hung down behind, the hair was gathered around the head in a braid. The women wore a more beautiful coiffure divided into two braids. The faces of both sexes were much disfigured as a result of their religious beliefs, which led to the practice of scarification. Tattooing also was common to both sexes, and there were persons in almost every community who were especially proficient in this art. Both men and women painted themselves red, the former decorating their entire bodies, and the latter all except their faces, which modesty decreed should be left unpainted. The women also anointed themselves very freely with fragrant gums and perfumes. They filed their teeth to sharp points, a practice which was thought to enhance their beauty.

The clothing of the men was simple. They wore a breechclout wrapped several times around the loins and tied in such a way that one end fell in front between the legs and the other in the {8}corresponding position behind. These breechclouts were carefully embroidered by the women and decorated with featherwork. A large square cape hung from the shoulders, and sandals of hemp or leather completed the costume. For persons of high rank the apparel was much more elaborate, the humble breechclout and cape of the laboring man giving place to panaches of gorgeously colored feathers hanging from wooden helmets, rich mantles of tiger skins, and finely wrought ornaments of gold and jade.

The women sometimes wore a simple petticoat, and a cloth covering the breasts and passing under the arms. More often their costume consisted of a single loose sacklike garment called the hipil, which reached to the feet and had slits for the arms. This garment, with the addition of a cloth or scarf wrapped around the shoulders, constituted the women's clothing a thousand years ago, just as it does to-day.

In ancient times the women were very chaste and modest. When they passed men on the road, they stepped to one side, turning their backs and hiding their faces. The age of marriage was about 20, although children were frequently affianced when very young. When boys arrived at a marriageable age their fathers consulted the professional matchmakers of the community, to whom arrangements for marriage were ordinarily intrusted, it being considered vulgar for parents or their sons to take an active part in arranging these affairs. Having sought out the girl's parents, the matchmaker arranged with them the matter of the dowry, which the young man's father paid, his wife at the same time giving the necessary clothing for her son and prospective daughter-in-law. On the day of the wedding the relatives and guests assembled at the house of the young man's parents, where a great feast had been prepared. Having satisfied himself that the young couple had sufficiently considered the grave step they were about to take, the priest gave the bride to her husband. The ceremony closed with a feast in which all participated. Immediately after the wedding the young husband went to the home of his wife's parents, where he was obliged to work five or six years for his board. If he refused to comply with this custom he was driven from the house, and the marriage presumably was annulled. This step seems rarely to have been necessary, however, and the mother-in-law on her part saw to it that her daughter fed the young husband regularly, a practice which betokened their recognition of the marriage rite.

Widowers and widows married without ceremony, it being considered sufficient for a widower to call on his prospective wife and eat in her house. Marriage between people of the same name was considered an evil practice, possibly in deference to some former exogamic law. It was thought improper to marry a mother-in-law or an aunt {9}by marriage, or a sister-in-law; otherwise a man could marry whom he would, even his first cousin.

The Maya were of a very jealous nature and divorces were frequent. These were effected merely by the desertion of the husband or wife, as the case might be. The parents tried to bring the couple together and effect a reconciliation, but if their efforts proved unsuccessful both parties were at liberty to remarry. If there were young children the mother kept them; if the children were of age the sons followed the father, the daughters remaining with their mother. Although divorce was of common occurrence, it was condemned by the more respectable members of the community. It is interesting to note that polygamy was unknown among the Maya.

Agriculture was the chief pursuit, corn and other grains being extensively cultivated, and stored against time of need in well-appointed granaries. Labor was largely communal; all hands joined to do one another's work. Bands of twenty or more each, passing from field to field throughout the community, quickly finished sowing or harvesting. This communal idea was carried to the chase, fifty or more men frequently going out together to hunt. At the conclusion of these expeditions the meat was roasted and then carried back to town. First, the lord of the district was given his share, after which the remainder was distributed among the hunters and their friends. Communal fishing parties are also mentioned.

Another occupation in high favor was that of trade or commerce. Salt, cloth, and slaves were the chief articles of barter; these were carried as far as Tabasco. Cocoa, stone counters, and highly prized red shells of a peculiar kind were the media of exchange. These were accepted in return for all the products of the country, even including the finely worked stones, jades possibly, with which the chiefs adorned themselves at their fetes. Credit was asked and given, all debts were honestly paid, and no usury was exacted.

The sense of justice among the Maya was highly developed. If a man committed an offense against one of another village, the former's lord caused satisfaction to be rendered, otherwise the communities would come to blows. Troubles between men of the same village were taken to a judge, who having heard both sides, fixed appropriate damages. If the malefactor could not pay these, the obligation extended to his wife and relatives. Crimes which could be satisfied by the payment of an indemnity were accidental killings, quarrels between man and wife, and the accidental destruction of property by fire. Malicious mischief could be atoned for only by blows and the shedding of blood. The punishment of murder was left in the hands of the deceased's relatives, who were at liberty to exact an indemnity or the murderer's life as they pleased. The thief was obliged to make good whatever he had stolen, no matter how little; in event of failure to do so he was reduced to slavery. Adultery was punishable by {10}death. The adulterer was led into the courtyard of the chief's house, where all had assembled, and after being tied to a stake, was turned over to the mercies of the outraged husband, who either pardoned him or crushed his head with a heavy rock. As for the guilty woman, her infamy was deemed sufficient punishment for her, though usually her husband abandoned her.

The Maya were a very hospitable people, always offering food and drink to the stranger within their gates, and sharing with him to the last crumb. They were much given to conviviality, particularly the lords, who frequently entertained one another with elaborate feasts, accompanied by music and dancing, expending at times on a single occasion the proceeds of many days' accumulation. They usually sat down to eat by twos or fours. The meal, which consisted of vegetable stews, roast meats, corn cakes, and cocoa (to mention only a few of the viands) was spread upon mats laid on the ground. After the repast was finished beautiful young girls acting as cupbearers passed among the guests, plying them industriously with wine until all were drunk. Before departing each guest was presented with a handsome vase and pedestal, with a cloth cover therefor. At these orgies drinking was frequently carried to such excess that the wives of the guests were obliged to come for their besotted husbands and drag them home. Each of the guests at such a banquet was required to give one in return, and not even death could stay the payment of a debt of this kind, since the obligation descended to the recipient's heirs. The poor entertained less lavishly, as became their means. Guests at the humbler feasts, moreover, were not obliged to return them in kind.

The chief amusements of the Maya were comedies and dances, in both of which they exhibited much skill and ingenuity. There was a variety of musical instruments—drums of several kinds, rattles, reed flutes, wooden horns, and bone whistles. Their music is described as having been sad, owing perhaps to the melancholy sound of the instruments which produced it.

The frequent wars which darken the final pages of Maya history doubtless developed the military organization to a high degree of efficiency. At the head of the army stood two generals, one hereditary and the other elective (nacon), the latter serving for three years. In each village throughout the country certain men (holcanes) were chosen to act as soldiers; these constituted a kind of a standing army, thoroughly trained in the art of war. They were supported by the community, and in times of peace caused much disturbance, continuing the tumult of war after war had ceased. In times of great stress when it became necessary to call on all able-bodied men for military service, the holcanes mustered all those available in their respective districts and trained them in the use of arms. There were but few weapons: Wooden bows strung with hemp cords, and arrows {11}tipped with obsidian or bone; long lances with sharp flint points; and metal (probably copper) axes, provided with wooden handles. The defensive armor consisted of round wicker shields strengthened with deer hide, and quilted cotton coats, which were said to have extraordinary resisting power against the native weapons. The highest chiefs wore wooden helmets decorated with brilliant plumes, and cloaks of "tiger" (jaguar) skin, thrown over their shoulders.

With a great banner at their head the troops silently stole out of the city, and moved against the enemy, hoping thus to surprise them. When the enemies' position had been ascertained, they fell on them suddenly with extraordinary ferocity, uttering loud cries. Barricades of trees, brush, and stone were used in defense, behind which archers stood, who endeavored to repulse the attack. After a battle the victors mutilated the bodies of the slain, cutting out the jawbones and cleaning them of flesh. These were worn as bracelets after the flesh had been removed. At the conclusion of their wars the spoils were offered in sacrifice. If by chance some leader or chief had been captured, he was sacrificed as an offering particularly acceptable to the gods. Other prisoners became the slaves of those who had captured them.

The Maya entertained an excessive and constant fear of death, many of their religious practices having no other end in view than that of warding off the dread visitor. After death there followed a prolonged period of sadness in the bereaved family, the days being given over to fasting, and the more restrained indulgence in grief, and the nights to dolorous cries and lamentations, most pitiful to hear. Among the common people the dead were wrapped in shrouds; their mouths were filled with ground corn and bits of worked stone so that they should not lack for food and money in the life to come. The Maya buried their dead inside the houses^[12] or behind them, putting into the tomb idols, and objects indicating the profession of the deceased—if a priest, some of his sacred books; if a seer, some of his divinatory paraphernalia. A house was commonly abandoned after a death therein, unless enough remained in the household to dispel the fear which always followed such an occurrence.

In the higher walks of life the mortuary customs were more elaborate. The bodies of chiefs and others of high estate were burned and their ashes placed in large pottery vessels. These were buried in the ground and temples erected over them.^[13] When the deceased {12}was of very high rank the pottery sarcophagus took the form of a human statue. A variant of the above procedure was to burn only a part of the body, inclosing the ashes in the hollow head of a wooden statue, and sealing them in with a piece of skin taken from the back of the dead man's skull. The rest of the body was buried. Such statues were jealously preserved among the figures of the gods, being held in deep veneration.

The lords of Mayapan had still another mortuary practice. After death the head was severed from the body and cooked in order to remove all flesh. It was then sawed in half from side to side, care being taken to preserve the jaw, nose, eyes, and forehead in one piece. Upon this as a form the features of the dead man were filled in with a kind of a gum. Such was their extraordinary skill in this peculiar work that the finished mask is said to have appeared exactly like the countenance in life. The carefully prepared faces, together with the statues containing the ashes of the dead, were deposited with their idols. Every feast day meats were set before them so they should lack for nothing in that other world whither they had gone.

Very little is known about the governmental organization of the southern Maya, and it seems best, therefore, first to examine conditions in the north, concerning which the early authorities, native as well as Spanish, have much to say. The northern Maya lived in settlements, some of very considerable extent, under the rule of hereditary chiefs called halach uinicil, or "real men," who were, in fact as well as name, the actual rulers of the country. The settlements tributary to each halach uinic were doubtless connected by tribal ties, based on real or fancied blood relationship.

During the period of the Triple Alliance (1000-1200 A. D.) there were probably only three of these embryonic nations: Chichen Itza, Uxmal, and Mayapan, among which the country seems to have been apportioned. After the conquest of Chichen Itza, however, the halach uinic of Mayapan probably attempted to establish a more autocratic form of government, arrogating to himself still greater power. The Spanish authorities relate that the chiefs of the country assembled at Mayapan, acknowledged the ruler of that city as their overlord, and finally agreed to live there, each binding himself at the same time to conduct the affairs of his own domain through a deputy.

This attempt to unite the country under one head and bring about a further centralization of power ultimately failed, as has been seen, through the tyranny of the Cocom family, in which the office of halach uinic of Mayapan was vested. This tyranny led to the overthrow of the Cocoms and the destruction of centralized government, so that when the Spaniards arrived they found a number of petty chieftains, acknowledging no overlord, and the country in chaos.

The powers of the halach uinic are not clearly understood. He seems to have stood at the apex of the governmental organization, and {13}doubtless his will prevailed just so far as he had sufficient strength to enforce it. The batabs, or underchiefs, were obliged to visit him and render him their homage. They also accompanied him in his tours about the country, which always gave rise to feasting back and forth. Finally they advised him on all important matters. The office would seem to have been no stronger in any case than its incumbent, since we hear of the halach uinic of Mayapan being obliged to surround himself with foreign troops in order to hold his people in check.

Each batab governed the territory of which he was the hereditary ruler, instructing his heir in the duties of the position, and counseling that he treat the poor with benevolence and maintain peace and encourage industry, so that all might live in plenty. He settled all lawsuits, and through trusted lieutenants ordered and adjusted the various affairs of his domain. When he went abroad from his city or even from his house a great crowd accompanied him. He often visited his underchiefs, holding court in their houses, and meeting at night in council to discuss matters touching the common good. The batabs frequently entertained one another with dancing, hunting, and feasting. The people as a community tilled the batab's fields, reaped his corn, and supplied his wants in general. The underchiefs were similarly provided for, each according to his rank and needs.

The ahkulel, the next highest official in each district, acted as the batab's deputy or representative; he carried a short thick baton in token of his office. He had charge of the localities subject to his master's rule as well as of the officers immediately over them. He kept these assistants informed as to what was needed in the batab's house, as birds, game, fish, corn, honey, salt, and cloth, which they supplied when called on. The ahkulel was, in short, a chief steward, and his house was the batab's business office.

Another important position was that of the nacon, or war-chief. In times of war this functionary was second only to the hereditary chief, or batab, and was greatly venerated by all. His office was elective, the term being three years, during which he was obliged to refrain from intercourse with women, and to hold himself aloof from all.

An important civil position was that held by the ahholpop, in whose keeping was the tunkul, or wooden drum, used in summoning people to the dances and public meetings, or as a tocsin in case of war. He had charge also of the "town hall" in which all public business was transacted.

The question of succession is important. Bishop Landa distinctly states in one passage "That when the lord died, although his oldest son succeeded him, the others were always loved and served and even regarded as lords." This would seem to indicate definitely that descent was by primogeniture. However, another passage suggests that the oldest son did not always succeed his father: "The lords were the governors and confirmed their sons in their offices if they {14}[the sons] were acceptable." This suggests the possibility, at least, that primogeniture could sometimes be set aside, particularly when the first-born lacked the necessary qualifications for leadership. In a somewhat drawn-out statement the same authority discusses the question of "princely succession" among the Maya:

The foregoing would seem to imply that the rulers were succeeded by their eldest sons if the latter were of age and otherwise generally acceptable; and that, if they were minors when their fathers died, their paternal uncles, if any, or otherwise some capable man selected by the priests, took the reins of government, instructing the heir in the duties of the position which he was to occupy some day; and finally that the regent did not lay down his authority until death, even though the heir had previously attained his majority. This custom is so unusual that its existence may well be doubted, and it is not at all improbable that Bishop Landa's statement to the contrary may have arisen from some misapprehension. Primogeniture was not confined to the executive succession alone, since Bishop Landa states further that the high priest Ahau can mai was succeeded in his dignity by his sons, or those next of kin.

Nepotism doubtless prevailed extensively, all the higher offices of the priesthood as well as the executive offices being hereditary, and in all probability filled with members of the halach uinic's family.

The priests instructed the younger sons of the ruling family as well as their own, in the priestly duties and learning; in the computation of years, months, and days; in unlucky times; in fetes and ceremonies; in the administration of the sacraments; in the practices of prophecy and divination; in treating the sick; in their ancient history; and finally in the art of reading and writing their hieroglyphics, which was taught only to those of high degree. Genealogies were carefully preserved, the term meaning "of noble birth" being ah kaba, "he who has a name." The elaborate attention given to the subject of lineage, and the exclusive right of the ah kaba to the benefits of education, show that in the northern part of the Maya territory at least government rested on the principle of hereditary succession. The accounts of native as well as of Spanish writers leave the impression that a system not unlike a modified form of feudalism prevailed.

BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGYBULLETIN 57 PLATE 2

{15}

In attempting to gain an approximate understanding of the form of government which existed in the southern part of the Maya territory it is necessary in the absence of all documentary information to interpret the southern chronology, architecture, and sculpture—practically all that remains of the older culture—in the light of the known conditions in the north. The chronology of the several southern cities (see pl. 2) indicates that many of them were contemporaneous, and that a few, namely, Tikal, Naranjo, Palenque, and Copan were occupied approximately 200 years, a much longer period than any of the others.^[15] These four would seem to have been centers of population for a long time, and at least three of them, Tikal, Palenque, and Copan, attained considerable size. Indeed they may well have been, like Chichen Itza, Uxmal, and Mayapan, at a later epoch in the north, the seats of halach uincil, or overlords, to whom all the surrounding chiefs were tributary. Geographically considered, the country was well apportioned among these cities: Tikal dominating the north, Palenque, the west, and Copan, the south.

The architecture, sculpture, and hieroglyphic writing of all the southern centers is practically identical, even to the borrowing of unessential details, a condition which indicates a homogeneity only to be accounted for by long-continued and frequent intercourse. This characteristic of the culture, together with the location and contemporaneity of its largest centers, suggests that originally the southern territory was divided into several extensive political divisions, all in close intercourse with one another, and possibly united in a league similar to that which later united the principal cities of the north. The unmistakable priestly or religious character of the sculptures in the southern area clearly indicates the peaceful temper of the people, and the conspicuous absence of warlike subjects points strongly to the fact that the government was a theocracy, the highest official in the priesthood being at the same time, by virtue of his sacerdotal rank, the highest civil authority. Whether the principle of hereditary succession determined or even influenced the selection of rulers in the south is impossible to say. However, since the highest offices, both executive and priestly, in the north were thus filled, it may be assumed that similar conditions prevailed in the south, particularly as the northern civilization was but an outgrowth of the {16}southern. There is some ground for believing that the highest office in the south may have been elective, the term being a hotun^[16] (1,800 days), and the choice restricted to the members of a certain family. The existence of this restriction, which closely parallels the Aztec procedure in selecting rulers,^[17] rests on very slender evidence, however, so far as the Maya are concerned and is mentioned here simply by way of suggestion.

The religion of the ancient Maya was polytheistic, its pantheon containing about a dozen major deities and a host of lesser ones. At its head stood Itzamna, the father of the gods and creator of mankind, the Mayan Zeus or Jupiter. He was the personification of the East, the rising sun, and, by association, of light, life, and knowledge. He was the founder of the Maya civilization, the first priest of the Maya religion, the inventor of writing and books, and the great healer. Whether Itzamna has been identified with any of the deities in the ancient Maya picture-writings is uncertain, though there are strong reasons for believing that this deity is the god represented in figure 1. His characteristics here are: The aged face, Roman nose, and sunken toothless mouth.

Scarcely less important was the great god Kukulcan, or Feathered Serpent, the personification of the West. It is related of him that he came into Yucatan from the west and settled at Chichen Itza, where he ruled for many years and built a great temple. During his sojourn he is said to have founded the city of Mayapan, which later became so important. Finally, having brought the country out of war and dissension to peace and prosperity, he left by the same way he had entered, tarrying only at Chakanputun on the west coast to build a splendid temple as an everlasting memorial of his residence among the people. After his departure he was worshipped as a god because of what he had done for the public good. Kukulcan was the Maya counterpart of the Aztec Quetzalcoatl, the Mexican god of light, learning, and culture. In the Maya pantheon he was regarded as having been the great organizer, the founder of cities, the framer of laws, and the teacher of their new calendar. Indeed, his attributes {17}and life history are so human that it is not improbable he may have been an actual historical character, some great lawgiver and organizer, the memory of whose benefactions lingered long after death, and whose personality was eventually deified. The episodes of his life suggest he may have been the recolonizer of Chichen Itza after the destruction of Chakanputun. Kukulcan has been identified by some as the "old god" of the picture-writings (fig. 2), whose characteristics are: Two deformed teeth, one protruding from the front and one from the back part of his mouth, and the long tapering nose. He is to be distinguished further by his peculiar headdress.

The most feared and hated of all the Maya deities was Ahpuch, the Lord of Death, God "Barebones" as an early manuscript calls him, from whom evil and especially death were thought to come. He is frequently represented in the picture-writings (fig. 3), usually in connection with the idea of death. He is associated with human sacrifice, suicide by hanging, death in childbirth, and the beheaded captive. His characteristics are typical and unmistakable. His head is the fleshless skull, showing the truncated nose, the grinning teeth, and fleshless lower jaw, sometimes even the cranial sutures are portrayed. In some places the ribs and vertebrae are shown, in others the body is spotted black as if to suggest the discoloration of death. A very constant symbol is the stiff feather collar with small bells attached. These bells also appear as ornaments on the head, arms, and ankles. The to us familiar crossbones were also another Maya death symbol. Even the hieroglyph of this god (fig. 3) suggests the dread idea for which he stood. Note the eye closed in death.

Closely associated with the God of Death is the God of War, who probably stood as well for the larger idea of death by violence. He is characterized (fig. 4) by a black line painted on his face, sometimes curving, sometimes straight, supposed to be symbolical of war paint, or, according to others, of his gaping wounds. He appears in the picture-writings as the Death God's companion. He presides with him over the body of a sacrificial victim, and again follows him applying torch and knife to the habitations of man. His hieroglyph shows as its characteristic the line of black paint (fig. 4).

Another unpropitious deity was Ek Ahau, the Black Captain, also a war god, being represented (fig. 5) in the picture-writings as armed {18}with a spear or an ax. It was said of him that he was a very great and very cruel warrior, who commanded a band of seven blackamoors like himself. He is characterized by his black color, his drooping lower lip, and the two curved lines at the right of his eye. His hieroglyph is a black eye (fig. 5).

Contrasted with these gods of death, violence, and destruction was the Maize God, Yum Kaax, Lord of the Harvest Fields (fig. 6). Here we have one of the most important figures in the whole Maya pantheon, the god of husbandry and the fruits of the earth, of fertility and prosperity, of growth and plenty. The Maize God was as well disposed toward mankind as Ahpuch and his companions were unpropitious. In many of the picture-writings Yum Kaax is represented as engaged in agricultural pursuits. He is portrayed as having for his head-dress a sprouting ear of corn surrounded by leaves, symbolic of growth, for which he stands. Even the hieroglyph of this deity (fig. 6) embodies the same idea, the god's head merging into the conventionalized ear of corn surrounded by leaves.

Another important deity about whom little or nothing is known was Xaman Ek, the North Star. He is spoken of as the "guide of the merchants," and in keeping with that character is associated in the picture-writings with symbols of peace and plenty. His one characteristic seems to be his curious head, which also serves as his name hieroglyph (fig. 7).

Other Maya deities were: Ixchel, the Rainbow, consort of Itzamna and goddess of childbirth and medicine; Ixtab, patroness of hunting and hanging; Ixtubtun, protectress of jade cutters; Ixchebelyax, the inventress of painting and color designing as applied to fabrics.

Although the deities above described represent only a small fraction of the Maya pantheon, they include, beyond all doubt, its most important members, the truly great, who held the powers of life and death, peace and war, plenty and famine—who were, in short, the arbiters of human destiny.

The Maya conceived the earth to be a cube, which supported the celestial vase resting on its four legs, the four cardinal points. Out of this grew the Tree of Life, the flowers of which were the immortal principle of man, the soul. Above hung heavy clouds, the fructifying waters upon which all growth and life depend. The religion was dualistic in spirit, a constant struggle between the powers of {19}light and of darkness. On one side were arrayed the gods of plenty, peace, and life; on the other those of want, war, and destruction; and between these two there waged an unending strife for the control of man. This struggle between the powers of light and darkness is graphically portrayed in the picture-writings. Where the God of Life plants the tree, Death breaks it in twain (fig. 8); where the former offers food, the latter raises an empty vase symbolizing famine; where one builds, the other destroys. The contrast is complete, the conflict eternal.

The Maya believed in the immortality of the soul and in a spiritual life hereafter. As a man lived in this world so he was rewarded in the next. The good and righteous went to a heaven of material delights, a place where rich foods never failed and pain and sorrow were unknown. The wicked were consigned to a hell called Mitnal, over which ruled the archdemon Hunhau and his minions; and here in hunger, cold, and exhaustion they suffered everlasting torment. The materialism of the Maya heaven and hell need not surprise, nor lower our estimate of their civilization. Similar realistic conceptions of the hereafter have been entertained by peoples much higher in the cultural scale than the Maya.

Worship doubtless was the most important feature of the Maya scheme of existence, and an endless succession of rites and ceremonies was considered necessary to retain the sympathies of the good gods and to propitiate the malevolent ones. Bishop Landa says that the aim and object of all Maya ceremonies were to secure three things only: Health, life, and sustenance; modest enough requests to ask of any faith. The first step in all Maya religious rites was the expulsion of the evil spirits from the midst of the worshipers. This was accomplished sometimes by prayers and benedictions, set formulæ of proven efficacy, and sometimes by special sacrifices and offerings.

It would take us too far afield to describe here even the more important ceremonies of the Maya religion. Their number was literally legion, and they answered almost every contingency within the range of human experience. First of all were the ceremonies dedicated to special gods, as Itzamna, Kukulcan, and Ixchel. Probably every deity in the pantheon, even the most insignificant, had at least one rite a year addressed to it alone, and the aggregate must have made a very considerable number. In addition there were the annual feasts of the ritualistic year brought around by the ever-recurring {20}seasons. Here may be mentioned the numerous ceremonies incident to the beginning of the new year and the end of the old, as the renewal of household utensils and the general renovation of all articles, which took place at this tine; the feasts of the various trades and occupations—the hunters, fishers, and apiarists, the farmers, carpenters, and potters, the stonecutters, wood carvers, and metal workers—each guild having its own patron deity, whose services formed another large group of ceremonials. A third class comprised the rites of a more personal nature, those connected with baptism, confession, marriage, setting out on journeys, and the like. Finally, there was a fourth group of ceremonies, held much less frequently than the others, but of far greater importance. Herein fall the ceremonies held on extraordinary occasions, as famine, drought, pestilence, victory, or defeat, which were probably solemnized by rites of human sacrifice.

The direction of so elaborate a system of worship necessitated a numerous and highly organized priesthood. At the head of the hierarchy stood the hereditary high priest, or ahaucan mai, a functionary of very considerable power. Although he had no actual share in the government, his influence was none the less far-reaching, since the highest lords sought his advice, and deferred to his judgment in the administration of their affairs. They questioned him concerning the will of the gods on various points, and he in response framed the divine replies, a duty which gave him tremendous power and authority. In the ahuacan mai was vested also the exclusive right to fill vacancies in the priesthood. He examined candidates on their knowledge of the priestly services and ceremonies, and after their appointment directed them in the discharge of their duties. He rarely officiated at sacrifices except on occasions of the greatest importance, as at the principal feasts or in times of general need. His office was maintained by presents from the lords and enforced contributions from the priesthood throughout the country.

The priesthood included within its ranks women as well as men. The duties were highly specialized and there were many different ranks and grades in the hierarchy. The chilan was one of the most important. This priest was carried upon the shoulders of the people when he appeared in public. He taught their sciences, appointed the holy days, healed the sick, offered sacrifices, and most important of all, gave the responses of the gods to petitioners. The ahuai chac was a priest who brought the rains on which the prosperity of the country was wholly dependent. The ah macik conjured the winds; the ahpul caused sickness and induced sleep; the ahuai xibalba communed with the dead. At the bottom of the ladder seems to have stood the nacon, whose duty it was to open the breasts of the sacrificed victims. An important elective office in each community was that held by the chac, or priest's assistant. These officials, of which there {21}were four, were elected from the nucteelob, or village wise men. They served for a term of one year and could never be reelected. They aided the priest in the various ceremonies of the year, officiating in minor capacities. Their duties seem to have been not unlike those of the sacristan in the Roman Catholic Church of to-day.

In closing this introduction nothing could be more appropriate than to call attention once more to the supreme importance of religion in the life of the ancient Maya. Religion was indeed the very fountain-head of their civilization, and on its rites and observances they lavished a devotion rarely equaled in the annals of man. To its great uplifting force was due the conception and evolution of the hieroglyphic writing and calendar, alike the invention and the exclusive property of the priesthood. To its need for sanctuary may be attributed the origin of Maya architecture; to its desire for expression, the rise of Maya sculpture. All activities reflected its powerful influence and all were more or less dominated by its needs and teachings. In short, religion was the foundation upon which the structure of the Maya civilization was reared. {22}

Chapter II. THE MAYA HIEROGLYPHIC WRITING

The inscriptions herein described are found throughout the region formerly occupied by the Maya people (pl. 1), though by far the greater number have been discovered at the southern, or older, sites. This is due in part, at least, to the minor role played by sculpture as an independent art among the northern Maya, for in the north architecture gradually absorbed in its decoration the sculptural activity of the people which in the south had been applied in the making of the hieroglyphic monuments.

The materials upon which the Maya glyphs are presented are stone, wood, stucco, bone, shell, metal, plaster, pottery, and fiber-paper; the first-mentioned, however, occurs more frequently than all of the others combined. Texts have been found carved on the wooden lintels of Tikal, molded in the stucco reliefs of Palenque, scratched on shells from Copan and Belize, etched on a bone from Wild Cane Key, British Honduras, engraved on metal from Chichen Itza, drawn on the plaster-covered walls of Kabah, Chichen Itza, and Uxmal, and painted in fiber-paper books. All of these, however, with the exception of the first and the last (the inscriptions on stone and the fiber-paper books or codices) just mentioned, occur so rarely that they may be dismissed from present consideration.

The stones bearing inscriptions are found in a variety of shapes, the commonest being the monolithic shafts or slabs known as stelæ. Some of the shaft-stelæ attain a height of twenty-six feet (above ground); these are not unlike roughly squared obelisks, with human figures carved on the obverse and the reverse, and glyphs on the other faces. Slab-stelæ, on the other hand, are shorter and most of them bear inscriptions only on the reverse. Frequently associated with these stelæ are smaller monoliths known as "altars," which vary greatly in size, shape, and decoration, some bearing glyphs and others being without them.

The foregoing monuments, however, by no means exhaust the list of stone objects that bear hieroglyphs. As an adjunct to architecture inscriptions occur on wall-slabs at Palenque, on lintels at Yaxchilan and Piedras Negras, on steps and stairways at Copan, and on piers and architraves at Holactun; and these do not include the great number of smaller pieces, as inscribed jades and the like. Most of the glyphs in the inscriptions are square in outline except for rounded corners (fig. 9, c). Those in the codices, on the other hand, approximate more nearly in form rhomboids or even ovals (fig. 9, a, b). This difference in outline, however, is only superficial in significance and involves no corresponding difference in meaning between {23}otherwise identical glyphs; it is due entirely to the mechanical dissimilarity of the two materials. Disregarding this consideration as unessential, we may say that the glyphs in both the inscriptions and the codices belong to one and the same system of writing, and if it were possible to read either, the other could no longer withhold its meaning from us.

In Maya inscriptions the glyphs are arranged in parallel columns, which are to be read two columns at a time, beginning with the uppermost glyph in the left-hand column, and then from left to right and top to bottom, ending with the lowest glyph in the second column. Then the next two columns are read in the same order, and so on. In reading glyphs in a horizontal band, the order is from left to right in pairs. The writer knows of no text in which the above order of reading is not followed.

A brief examination of any Maya text, from either the inscriptions or the codices, reveals the presence of certain elements which occur repeatedly but in varying combinations. The apparent multiplicity of these combinations leads at first to the conclusion that a great number of signs were employed in Maya writing, but closer study will show that, as compared with the composite characters or glyphs proper, the simple elements are few in number. Says Doctor Brinton (1894 b: p. 10) in this connection: "If we positively knew the meaning ... of a hundred or so of these simple elements, none of the inscriptions could conceal any longer from us the general tenor of its contents." Unfortunately, it must be admitted that but little advance has been made toward the solution of this problem, perhaps because later students have distrusted the highly fanciful results achieved by the earlier writers who "interpreted" these "simple elements."

Moreover, there is encountered at the very outset in the study of these elements a condition which renders progress slow and results uncertain. In Egyptian texts of any given period the simple phonetic elements or signs are unchanging under all conditions of composition. Like the letters of our own alphabet, they never vary and may be recognized as unfailingly. On the other hand, in Maya texts each glyph is in itself a finished picture, dependent on no other for its meaning, and consequently the various elements entering into it undergo very considerable modifications in order that the resulting composite character may not only be a balanced and harmonious {24}design, but also may exactly fill its allotted space. All such modifications probably in no way affect the meaning of the element thus mutilated.

The element shown in figure 10, a-e is a case in point. In a and b we have what may be called the normal or regular forms of this element. In c, however, the upper arm has been omitted for the sake of symmetry in a composite glyph, while in d the lower arm has been left out for want of space. Finally in e both arms have disappeared and the element is reduced to the sign (*), which we may conclude, therefore, is the essential characteristic of this glyph, particularly since there is no regularity in the treatment of the arms in the normal forms. This suggests another point of the utmost importance, namely, the determination of the essential elements of Maya glyphs. The importance of this point lies in the fact that great license was permitted in the treatment of accessory elements so long as the essential element or elements of a glyph could readily be recognized as such. In this way may be explained the use of the so-called "head" variants, in which the outline of the glyph was represented as a human or a grotesque head modified in some way by the essential element of the intended form. The first step in the development of head variants is seen in figure 11, a, b, in which the entire glyph a is used as a headdress in glyph b, the meaning of the two forms remaining identical. The next step is shown in the same figure, c and d, in which the outline of the entire glyph c has been changed to form the grotesque head d, though in both glyphs the essential elements are the same. A further development was to apply the essential element (**) of e to the head in f, giving rise to a head variant, the meaning of which suffered no corresponding change. The element (†) in figure 11, g, has been reduced in size in h, though the other two essential elements remain unchanged. A final step appears in i and j, where in j the position of one of the two essential elements of i (††) and the form of the other (‡) have been changed. These variants {25}are puzzling enough when the essential characteristics and meaning of a glyph have been determined, but when both are unknown the problem is indeed knotty. For example, it would seem as a logical deduction from the foregoing examples, that l of figure 11 is a "head" variant of k; and similarly n might be a "head" variant of m, but here we are treading on uncertain ground, as the meanings of these forms are unknown.

Nor is this feature of Maya writing (i. e., the presence of "head variants") the only pitfall which awaits the beginner who attempts to classify the glyphs according to their appearance. In some cases two entirely dissimilar forms express exactly the same idea. For example, no two glyphs could differ more in appearance than a and b, figure 12, yet both of these forms have the same meaning. This is true also of the two glyphs c and d, and e and f. The occurrence of forms so absolutely unlike in appearance, yet identical in meaning, greatly complicates the problem of glyph identification. Indeed, identity in both meaning and use must be clearly established before we can recognize as variants of the same glyph, forms so dissimilar as the examples above given. Hence, because their meanings are unknown we are unable to identify g and h, figure 12, as synonyms, notwithstanding the fact that their use seems to be identical, h occurring in two or three texts under exactly the same conditions as does g in all the others.

A further source of error in glyph identification is the failure to recognize variations due merely to individual peculiarities of style, which are consequently unessential. Just as handwriting differs in each individual, so the delineation of glyphs differed among the ancient Maya, though doubtless to a lesser extent. In extreme cases, however, the differences are so great that identification of variants as forms of one and the same glyph is difficult if indeed not impossible. Here also are to be included variations due to differences in the materials upon which the glyphs are delineated, as well as those arising from careless drawing and actual mistakes.

The foregoing difficulties, as well as others which await the student who would classify the Maya glyphs according to form and appearance, have led the author to discard this method of classification as unsuited to the purposes of an elementary work. Though a problem of first importance, the analysis of the simple elements is far too complex for presentation to the beginner, particularly since the {26}greatest diversity of opinion concerning them prevails among those who have studied the subject, scarcely any two agreeing at any one point; and finally because up to the present time success in reading Maya writing has not come through this channel.

The classification followed herein is based on the general meaning of the glyphs, and therefore has the advantage of being at least self-explanatory. It divides the glyphs into two groups: (1) Astronomical, calendary, and numerical signs, that is, glyphs used in counting time; and (2) glyphs accompanying the preceding, which have an explanatory function of some sort, probably describing the nature of the occasions which the first group of glyphs designate.

According to this classification, the great majority of the glyphs whose meanings have been determined fall into the first group, and those whose meanings are still unknown into the second. This is particularly true of the inscriptions, in which the known glyphs practically all belong to the first group. In the codices, on the other hand, some little progress has made been in reading glyphs of the second group. The name-glyphs of the principal gods, the signs for the cardinal points and associated colors, and perhaps a very few others may be mentioned in this connection.^[18]

Of the unknown glyphs in both the inscriptions and the codices, a part at least have to do with numerical calculations of some kind, a fact which relegates such glyphs to the first group. The author believes that as the reading of the Maya glyphs progresses, more and more characters will be assigned to the first group and fewer and fewer to the second. In the end, however, there will be left what we may perhaps call a "textual residue," that is, those glyphs which explain the nature of the events that are to be associated with the corresponding chronological parts. It is here, if anywhere, that fragments of Maya history will be found recorded, and precisely here is the richest field for future research, since the successful interpretation of this "textual residue" will alone disclose the true meaning of the Maya writings.

Three principal theories have been advanced for the interpretation of Maya writing:

1. That the glyphs are phonetic, each representing some sound, and entirely dissociated from the representation of any thought or idea.

2. That the glyphs are ideographic, each representing in itself some complete thought or idea.

3. That the glyphs are both phonetic and ideographic, that is, a combination of 1 and 2.

It is apparent at the outset that the first of these theories can not be accepted in its entirety; for although there are undeniable traces {27}of phoneticism among the Maya glyphs, all attempts to reduce them to a phonetic system or alphabet, which will interpret the writing, have signally failed. The first and most noteworthy of these so-called "Maya alphabets," because of its genuine antiquity, is that given by Bishop Landa in his invaluable Relacion de las cosas de Yucatan, frequently cited in Chapter I. Writing in the year 1565, within 25 years of the Spanish Conquest, Landa was able to obtain characters for 27 sounds, as follows: Three a's, two b's, c, t, e, h, i, ca, k, two l's, m, n, two o's, pp, p, cu, ku, two x's, two v's, z. This alphabet, which was first published in 1864 by Abbé Brasseur de Bourbourg (see Landa, 1864), was at once heralded by Americanists as the long-awaited key which would unlock the secrets of the Maya writing. Unfortunately these confident expectations have not been realized, and all attempts to read the glyphs by means of this alphabet or of any of the numerous others^[19] which have appeared since, have completely broken down.

This failure to establish the exclusive phonetic character of the Maya glyphs has resulted in the general acceptance of the second theory, that the signs are ideographic. Doctor Brinton (1894b: p. 14), however, has pointed out two facts deducible from the Landa alphabet which render impossible not only the complete acceptance of this second theory but also the absolute rejection of the first: (1) That a native writer was able to give a written character for an unfamiliar sound, a sound, moreover, which was without meaning to him, as, for example, that of a Spanish letter; and (2) that the characters he employed for this purpose were also used in the native writings. These facts Doctor Brinton regards as proof that some sort of phonetic writing was not unknown, and, indeed, both the inscriptions and the codices establish the truth of this contention. For example, the sign in a, figure 13, has the phonetic value kin, and the sign in b the phonetic value yax. In the latter glyph, however, only the upper part (reproduced in c) is to be regarded as the essential element. It is strongly indicative of phoneticism therefore to find the sound yaxkin, a combination of these two, expressed by the sign found in d. Similarly, the character representing the phonetic value kin is found also as an element in the glyphs for the words likin {28}and chikin (see e and f, respectively, fig. 13), each of which has kin as its last syllable. Again, the phonetic value tun is expressed by the glyph in g, and the sound ca (c hard) by the sign h. The sound katun is represented by the character in i, a combination of these two. Sometimes the glyph for this same sound takes the form of j, the fish element in k replacing the comblike element h. Far from destroying the phonetic character of this composite glyph, however, this variant k in reality strengthens it, since in Maya the word for fish is cay (c hard) and consequently the variant reads caytun, a close phonetic approximation of katun. The remaining element of this glyph (l) has the value cauac, the first syllable of which is also expressed by either h or k, figure 13. Its use in i and j probably may be regarded as but a further emphasis of the phonetic character of the glyph.

It must be remembered, however, that all of the above glyphs have meanings quite independent of their phonetic values, that primarily their function was to convey ideas, and that only secondarily were they used in their phonetic senses.

If neither the phonetic nor the ideographic character of the glyphs can be wholly admitted, what then is the true nature of the Maya writing? The theory now most generally accepted is, that while chiefly ideographic, the glyphs are sometimes phonetic, and that although the idea of a glyphic alphabet must finally be abandoned, the phonetic use of syllables as illustrated above must as surely be recognized.

This kind of writing Doctor Brinton has called ikonomatic, more familiarly known to us under the name of rebus, or puzzle writing. In such writing the characters do not indicate the ideas of the objects which they portray, but only the sounds of their names, and are used purely in a phonetic sense, like the letters of the alphabet. For example, the rebus in figure 14 reads as follows: "I believe Aunt Rose can well bear all for you." The picture of the eye recalls not the idea "eye" but the sound of the word denoting this object, which is also the sound of the word for the first person singular of the {29}personal pronoun I. Again, the picture of a bee does not represent the idea of that insect, but stands for the sound of its name, which used with a leaf indicates the sound "beeleaf," or in other words, "believe."^[20]

It has long been known that the Aztec employed ikonomatic characters in their writing to express the names of persons and places, though this practice does not seem to have been extended by them to the representation of abstract words. The Aztec codices contain many glyphs which are to be interpreted ikonomatically, that is, like our own rebus writing. For example in figure 15, a, is shown the Aztec hieroglyph for the town of Toltitlan, a name which means "near the place of the rushes." The word tollin means "place of the rushes," but only its first syllable tol appears in the word Toltitlan. This syllable is represented in a by several rushes. The word tetlan means "near something" and its second syllable tlan is found also in the word tlantli, meaning "teeth." In a therefore, the addition of the teeth to the rushes gives the word Toltitlan. Another example of this kind of writing is given in figure 15, b, where the hieroglyph for the town of Acatzinco is shown. This word means "the little reed grass," the diminutive being represented by the syllable tzinco. The reed grass (acatl) is shown by the pointed leaves or spears which emerge from the lower part of a human figure. This part of the body was called by the Aztecs tzinco, and as used here expresses merely the sound tzinco in the diminutive acatzinco, "the little reed grass," the letter l of acatl being lost in composition.

The presence of undoubted phonetic elements in these Aztec glyphs expressing personal names and place names would seem to indicate that some similar usage probably prevailed among the Maya. {30}While admitting this restricted use of phonetic composition by the Maya, Professor Seler refuses to recognize its further extension:

Doctor Förstemann also regards the use of phonetic elements as restricted to little more than the above when he says, "Finally the graphic system of the Maya ... never even achieved the expression of a phrase or even a verb."

On the other hand, Mr. Bowditch (1910: p. 255) considers the use of phonetic composition extended considerably beyond these limits:

Doctor Brinton (1894 b: p. 13) held an opinion between these two, perhaps inclining slightly toward the former: "The intermediate position which I have defended, is that while chiefly ideographic, they [the Maya glyphs] are occasionally phonetic, in the same manner as are confessedly the Aztec picture-writings."

These quotations from the most eminent authorities on the subject well illustrate their points of agreement and divergence. All admit the existence of phonetic elements in the glyphs, but disagree as to their extent. And here, indeed, is the crux of the whole phonetic question. Just how extensively do phonetic elements enter into the composition of the Maya glyphs? Without attempting to dispose of this point definitely one way or the other, the author may say that he believes that as the decipherment of Maya writing progresses, more and more phonetic elements will be identified, though the idea conveyed by a glyph will always be found to overshadow its phonetic value.

The various theories above described have not been presented for the reader's extended consideration, but only in order to acquaint him with the probable nature of the Maya glyphs. Success in deciphering, as we shall see, has not come through any of the above mentioned lines of research, which will not be pursued further in this work. {31}

In taking up the question of the meaning of Maya writing, it must be admitted at the outset that in so far as they have been deciphered both the inscriptions and the codices have been found to deal primarily, if indeed not exclusively, with the counting of time in some form or other. Doctor Förstemann, the first successful interpreter of the codices, has shown that these writings have for their principal theme the passage of time in its varying relations to the Maya calendar, ritual, and astronomy. They deal in great part with the sacred year of 260 days, known to the Aztec also under the name of the tonalamatl, in connection with which various ceremonies, offerings, sacrifices, and domestic occupations are set forth. Doctor Förstemann believed that this 260-day period was employed by the priests in casting horoscopes and foretelling the future of individuals, classes, and tribes, as well as in predicting coming political events and natural phenomena; or in other words, that in so far as the 260-day period was concerned, the codices are nothing more nor less than books of prophecy and divination.

The prophetic character of some of these native books at least is clearly indicated in a passage from Bishop Landa's Relacion (p. 286). In describing a festival held in the month Uo, the Bishop relates that "the most learned priest opened a book, in which he examined the omens of the year, which he announced to all those who were present." Other early Spanish writers state that these books contain the ancient prophecies and indicate the times appointed for their fulfillment.

Doctor Thomas regarded the codices as religious calendars, or rituals for the guidance of the priests in the celebration of feasts, ceremonies, and other duties, seemingly a natural inference from the character of the scenes portrayed in connection with these 260-day periods.

Another very important function of the codices is the presentation of astronomical phenomena and calculations. The latter had for their immediate object in each case the determination of the lowest number which would exactly contain all the numbers of a certain group. These lowest numbers are in fact nothing more nor less than the least common multiple of changing combinations of numbers, each one of which represents the revolution of some heavenly body. In addition to these calculations deities are assigned to the several periods, and a host of mythological allusions are introduced, the significance of most of which is now lost.

The most striking proof of the astronomical character of the codices is to be seen in pages 46-50 of the Dresden Manuscript. Here, to begin with, a period of 2,920 days is represented, which exactly contains five Venus years of 584^[21] days each (one on each page) as well as eight solar years of 365 days each. Each of the Venus years is divided into four parts, respectively, 236, 90, 250, and 8 days. The {32}first and third of these constitute the periods when Venus was the morning and the evening star, respectively, and the second and fourth, the periods of invisibility after each of these manifestations. This Venus-solar period of 2,920 days was taken as the basis from which the number 37,960 was formed. This contains 13 Venus-solar periods, 65 Venus-years, 104 solar years, and 146 tonalamatls, or sacred years of 260 days each. Finally, the last number (37,960) with all the subdivisions above given was thrice repeated, so that these five pages of the manuscript record the passage of 113,880 days, or 312 solar years.

Again, on pages 51-58 of the same manuscript, 405 revolutions of the moon are set down; and so accurate are the calculations involved that although they cover a period of nearly 33 years the total number of days recorded (11,959) is only 89⁄100 of a day less than the true time computed by the best modern method^[22]—certainly a remarkable achievement for the aboriginal mind. It is probable that the revolutions of the planets Jupiter, Mars, Mercury, and Saturn are similarly recorded in the same manuscript.

Toward the end of the Dresden Codex the numbers become greater and greater until, in the so-called "serpent numbers," a grand total of nearly twelve and a half million days (about thirty-four thousand years) is recorded again and again. In these well-nigh inconceivable periods all the smaller units may be regarded as coming at last to a more or less exact close. What matter a few score years one way or the other in this virtual eternity? Finally, on the last page of the manuscript, is depicted the Destruction of the World (see pl. 3), for which these highest numbers have paved the way. Here we see the rain serpent, stretching across the sky, belching forth torrents of water. Great streams of water gush from the sun and moon. The old goddess, she of the tiger claws and forbidding aspect, the malevolent patroness of floods and cloudbursts, overturns the bowl of the heavenly waters. The crossbones, dread emblem of death, decorate her skirt, and a writhing snake crowns her head. Below with downward-pointed spears, symbolic of the universal destruction, the black god stalks abroad, a screeching bird raging on his fearsome head. Here, indeed, is portrayed with graphic touch the final all-engulfing cataclysm.

According to the early writers, in addition to the astronomic, prophetic, and ritualistic material above described, the codices contained records of historical events. It is doubtful whether this is true of any of the three codices now extant, though there are grounds for believing that the Codex Peresianus may be in part at least of an historical nature.

BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGYBULLETIN 57 PLATE 3

{33}

Much less progress has been made toward discovering the meaning of the inscriptions. Doctor Brinton (1894 b: p.32) states:

Mr. Bowditch (1910: p. 199) has also brought forward very cogent points tending to show that in part at least the inscriptions treat of the intercalation of days necessary to bring the dated monuments, based on a 365-day year, into harmony with the true solar year of 365.2421 days.^[23]

While admitting that the inscriptions may, and probably do, contain such astronomical matter as Doctor Brinton and Mr. Bowditch have suggested, the writer believes nevertheless that fundamentally they are historical; that the monuments upon which they are presented were erected and inscribed on or about the dates they severally record; and finally, that the great majority of these dates are those of contemporaneous events, and as such pertain to the subject-matter of history.

The reasons which have led him to this conclusion follow:

First. The monuments at most of the southern Maya sites show a certain periodicity in their sequence. This is most pronounced at Quirigua, where all of the large monuments fall into an orderly series, in which each monument is dated exactly 1,800 days later than the one immediately preceding it in the sequence. This is also true at Copan, where, in spite of the fact that there are many gaps in the sequence, enough monuments conforming to the plan remain to prove its former existence. The same may be said also of Naranjo, Seibal, and Piedras Negras, and in fact of almost all the other large cities which afford sufficient material for a chronological arrangement.

This interval of 1,800 days quite obviously was not determined by the recurrence of any natural phenomenon. It has no parallel in nature, but is, on the contrary, a highly artificial unit. Consequently, monuments the erection of which was regulated by the successive returns of this period could not depend in the least for the fact of their existence on any astronomical phenomenon other than that of the rising and setting of eighteen hundred successive suns, an arbitrary period.

The Maya of Yucatan had a similar method of marking time, though their unit of enumeration was 7,200 days, or four times the {34}length of the one used for the same purpose in the older cities. The following quotations from early Spanish chroniclers explain this practice and indicate that the inscriptions presented on these time-markers were of an historical nature:

The other is even more explicit:

It seems almost necessary to conclude from such a parallel that the inscriptions of the southern cities will also be found to treat of historical matters.

Second. When the monuments of the southern cities are arranged according to their art development, that is, in stylistic sequence, they are found to be arranged in their chronological order as well. This important discovery, due largely to the researches of Dr. H. J. Spinden, has enabled us to determine the relative ages of various monuments quite independent of their respective dates. From a stylistic consideration alone it has been possible not only to show that the monuments date from different periods, but also to establish the sequence of these periods and that of the monuments in them. Finally, it has demonstrated beyond all doubt that the great majority of the dates on Maya monuments refer to the time of their erection, so that the inscriptions which they present are historical in that they are the contemporaneous records of different epochs.

Third. The dates on the monuments are such as to constitute a strong antecedent probability of their historical character. Like the records of most ancient peoples, the Maya monuments, judging from their dates, were at first scattered and few. Later, as new cities were founded and the nation waxed stronger and stronger, the number of monuments increased, until at the flood tide of Maya prosperity they were, comparatively speaking, common. Finally, as decline set in, fewer and fewer monuments were erected, and eventually effort in this field ceased altogether. The increasing number of the monuments by ten-year periods is shown in plate 4, where the passage of time (i. e., the successive ten-year periods) is represented from left to right, and the number of dates in each ten-year period from bottom to top. Although other dated monuments will be found from time to time, which will necessarily change the details given in this diagram, such additional evidence in all probability will never controvert the following general conclusions, embodied in what has just been stated, which are deducible from it:

BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGYBULLETIN 57 PLATE 4

{35}

1. At first there was a long period of slow growth represented by few monuments, which, however, increased in number toward the end.

2. This was followed without interruption by a period of increased activity, the period from which the great majority of the monuments date.

3. Finally this period came to rather an abrupt end, indicated by the sudden cessation in the erection of dated monuments.

The consideration of these indisputable facts tends to establish the historical rather than the astronomical character of the monuments. For had the erection of the monuments depended on the successive recurrences of some astronomical phenomenon, there would be corresponding intervals between the dates of such monuments^[26] the length of which would indicate the identity of the determining phenomenon; and they would hardly have presented the same logical increase due to the natural growth of a nation, which the accompanying diagram clearly sets forth.

Fourth. Although no historical codices^[27] are known to have survived, history was undoubtedly recorded in these ancient Maya books. The statements of the early Spanish writers are very explicit on this point, as the following quotations from their works will show. Bishop Landa (here, as always, one of the most reliable authorities) says: "And the sciences which they [the priests] taught were the count of the years, months and days, the feasts and ceremonies, the administration of their sacraments, days, and fatal times, their methods of divination and prophecy, and foretelling events, and the remedies for the sick, and their antiquities" [p. 44]. And again, "they [the priests] attended the service of the temples and to the teaching of their sciences and how to write them in their books." And again, [p. 316], "This people also used certain characters or letters with which they wrote in their books their ancient matters and sciences."

Father Lizana says (see Landa, 1864: p. 352): "The history and authorities we can cite are certain ancient characters, scarcely understood by many and explained by some old Indians, sons of the priests {36}of their gods, who alone knew how to read and expound them and who were believed in and revered as much as the gods themselves."

Father Ponce (tome LVIII, p. 392) who visited Yucatan as early as 1588, is equally clear: "The natives of Yucatan are among all the inhabitants of New Spain especially deserving of praise for three things. First that before the Spaniards came they made use of characters and letters with which they wrote out their histories, their ceremonies, the order of sacrifices to their idols and their calendars in books made of the bark of a certain tree."

Doctor Aguilar, who wrote but little later (1596), gives more details as to the kind of events which were recorded. "On these [the fiber books] they painted in color the reckoning of their years, wars, pestilences, hurricanes, inundations, famines and other events."

Finally, as late as 1697, some of these historical codices were in the possession of the last great independent Maya ruler, one Canek. Says Villagutierre (1701: lib. VI, cap. IV) in this connection: "Because their king [Canek] had read it in his analtehes [fiber-books or codices] they had knowledge of the provinces of Yucatan, and of the fact that their ancestors had formerly come from them; analtehes or histories being one and the same thing."

It is clear from the foregoing extracts, that the Maya of Yucatan recorded their history up to the time of the Spanish Conquest, in their hieroglyphic books, or codices. That fact is beyond dispute. It must be remembered also in this connection, that the Maya of Yucatan were the direct inheritors of that older Maya civilization in the south, which had produced the hieroglyphic monuments. For this latter reason the writer believes that the practice of recording history in the hieroglyphic writing had its origin, along with many another custom, in the southern area, and consequently that the inscriptions on the monuments of the southern cities are probably, in part at least, of an historical nature.

Whatever may be the meaning of the undeciphered glyphs, enough has been said in this chapter about those of known meaning to indicate the extreme importance of the element of time in Maya writing. The very great preponderance of astronomical, calendary, and numerical signs in both the codices and the inscriptions has determined, so far as the beginner is concerned, the best way to approach the study of the glyphs. First, it is essential to understand thoroughly the Maya system of counting time, in other words, their calendar and chronology. Second, in order to make use of this knowledge, as did the Maya, it is necessary to familiarize ourselves with their arithmetic and its signs and symbols. Third, and last, after this has been accomplished, we are ready to apply ourselves to the deciphering of the inscriptions and the codices. For this reason the next chapter will be devoted to the discussion of the Maya system of counting time. {37}

Chapter III. HOW THE MAYA RECKONED TIME

Among all peoples and in all ages the most obvious unit for the measurement of time has been the day; and the never-failing reappearance of light after each interval of darkness has been the most constant natural phenomenon with which the mind of man has had to deal. From the earliest times successive returns of the sun have regulated the whole scheme of human existence. When it was light, man worked; when it was dark, he rested. Conformity to the operation of this natural law has been practically universal.

Indeed, as primitive man saw nature, day was the only division of time upon which he could absolutely rely. The waxing and waning of the moon, with its everchanging shape and occasional obscuration by clouds, as well as its periodic disappearances from the heavens all combined to render that luminary of little account in measuring the passage of time. The round of the seasons was even more unsatisfactory. A late spring or an early winter by hastening or retarding the return of a season caused the apparent lengths of succeeding years to vary greatly. Even where a 365-day year had been determined, the fractional loss, amounting to a day every four years, soon brought about a discrepancy between the calendar and the true year. The day, therefore, as the most obvious period in nature, as well as the most reliable, has been used the world over as the fundamental unit for the measurement of longer stretches of time.

Table I. THE TWENTY MAYA DAY NAMES

In conformity with the universal practice just mentioned the Maya made the day, which they called kin, the primary unit of their calendar. There were twenty such units, named as in Table I; these followed each other in the order there shown. When Ahau, the last day in the list, had been reached, the count began anew with Imix, and thus repeated itself again and again without interruption, throughout time. It is important that the student should fix this {38}Maya conception of the rotation of days firmly in his mind at the outset, since all that is to follow depends upon the absolute continuity of this twenty-day sequence in endless repetition.

The glyphs for these twenty days are shown in figures 16 and 17. The forms in figure 16 are from the inscriptions and those in figure 17 from the codices. In several cases variants are given to facilitate identification. A study of the glyphs in these two figures shows on the whole a fairly close similarity between the forms for the same {39}day in each. The sign for the first day, Imix, is practically identical in both. Compare figure 16, a and b, with figure 17, a and b. The usual form for the day Ik in the inscriptions (see fig. 16, c), however, is unlike the glyph for the same day in the codices (fig. 17, c, d). The forms for Akbal and Kan are practically the same in each (see fig. 16, d, e, and f, and fig. 17, e and f, respectively). The day Chicchan, figure 16, g, occurs rarely in the inscriptions; when present, it takes the {40}form of a grotesque head. In the codices the common form for this day is very different (fig. 17, g). The head variant, however (fig. 17, h), shows a slightly closer similarity to the form from the inscriptions. The forms in both figure 16, h, i, and figure 17, i, j, for the day Cimi show little resemblance to each other. Although figure 17, i, represents the common form in the codices, the variant in j more closely resembles the form in figure 16, h, i. The day Manik is practically the same in both (see figs. 16, j, and 17, k), as is also Lamat (figs. 16, k, l, and 17, l, m). The day Muluc occurs rarely in the inscriptions (fig. 16, m, n). Of these two variants m more closely resembles the form from the codices (fig. 17, n). The glyph for the day Oc (fig. 16, o, p, q) is not often found in the inscriptions. In the codices, on the other hand, this day is frequently represented as shown in figure 17, o. This form bears no resemblance to the forms in the inscriptions. There is, however, a head-variant form found very rarely in the codices that bears a slight resemblance to the forms in the inscriptions. The day Chuen occurs but once in the inscriptions where the form is clear enough to distinguish its characteristic (see fig. 16, r). This form bears a general resemblance to the glyph for this day in the codices (fig. 17, p, q). The forms for the day Eb in both figures 16, s, t, u, and 17, r, are grotesque heads showing but remote resemblance to one another. The essential element in both, however, is the same, that is, the element occupying the position of the ear. Although the day Ben occurs but rarely in the inscriptions, its form (fig. 16, v) is practically identical with that in the codices (see fig. 17, s). The day Ix in the inscriptions appears as in figure 16, w, x. The form in the codices is shown in figure 17, t. The essential element in each seems to be the three prominent dots or circles. The day Men occurs very rarely on the monuments. The form shown in figure 16, y, is a grotesque head not unlike the sign for this day in the codices (fig. 17, u). The signs for the day Cib in the inscriptions and the codices (figs. 16, z, and 17, v, w), respectively, are very dissimilar. Indeed, the form for Cib (fig. 17, v) in the codices resembles more closely the sign for the day Caban (fig. 16, a', b') than it does the form for Cib in the inscriptions (see fig. 16, z). The only element common to both is the line paralleling the upper part of the glyph (*) and the short vertical lines connecting it with the outline at the top. The glyphs for the day Caban in both figures 16, a', b', and 17, x, y, show a satisfactory resemblance to each other. The forms for the day Eznab are also practically identical (see figs. 16, c', and 17, z, a'). The forms for the day Cauac, on the other hand, are very dissimilar; compare figures 16, d', and 17, b'. The only point of resemblance between the two seems to be the element which appears in the eye of the former and at the lower left-hand side of the latter. The last of the twenty Maya days, and by {41}far the most important, since it is found in both the codices and the inscriptions more frequently than all of the others combined, is Ahau (see figs. 16, e'-k', and 17, c', d'). The latter form is the only one found in the codices, and is identical with e', f', figure 16, the usual sign for this day in the inscriptions. The variants in figure 16, g'-k', appear on some of the monuments, and because of the great importance of this day Ahau it is necessary to keep all of them in mind.

These examples of the glyphs, which stand for the twenty Maya days, are in each case as typical as possible. The student must remember, however, that many variations occur, which often render the correct identification of a form difficult. As explained in the preceding chapter, such variations are due not only to individual peculiarities of style, careless drawing, and actual error, but also to the physical dissimilarities of materials on which they are portrayed, as the stone of the monuments and the fiber paper of the codices; consequently, such differences may be regarded as unessential. The ability to identify variants differing from those shown in figures 16 and 17 will come only through experience and familiarity with the glyphs themselves. The student should constantly bear in mind, however, that almost every Maya glyph, the signs for the days included, has an essential element peculiar to it, and the discovery of such elements will greatly facilitate his study of Maya writing.

Why the named days should have been limited to twenty is difficult to understand, as this number has no parallel period in nature. Some have conjectured that this number was chosen because it represents the number of man's digits, the twenty fingers and toes. Mr. Bowditch has pointed out in this connection that the Maya word for the period composed of these twenty named days is uinal, while the word for 'man' is uinik. The parallel is interesting and may possibly explain why the number twenty was selected as the basis of the Maya system of numeration, which, as we shall see later, was vigesimal, that is, increasing by twenties or multiples thereof.

The Tonalamatl, or 260-day Period

Merely calling a day by one of the twenty names given in Table I, however, did not sufficiently describe it according to the Maya notion. For instance, there was no day in the Maya calendar called merely Imix, Ik, or Akbal, or, in fact, by any of the other names given in Table I. Before the name of a day was complete it was necessary to prefix to it a number ranging from 1 to 13, inclusive, as 6 Imix or 13 Akbal. Then and only then did a Maya day receive its complete designation and find its proper place in the calendar.

The manner in which these thirteen numbers, 1 to 13, inclusive, were joined to the twenty names of Table I was as follows: Selecting {42}any one of the twenty names^[28] as a starting point, Kan for example, the number 1 was prefixed to it. See Table II, in which the names of Table I have been repeated with the numbers prefixed to them in a manner to be explained hereafter. The star opposite the name Kan indicates the starting point above chosen. The name Chicchan immediately following Kan in Table II was given the next number in order (2), namely, 2 Chicchan. The next name, Cimi, was given the next number (3), namely, 3 Cimi, and so on as follows: 4 Manik, 5 Lamat, 6 Muluc, 7 Oc, 8 Chuen, 9 Eb, 10 Ben, 11 Ix, 12 Men, 13 Cib.

Table II. SEQUENCE OF MAYA DAYS

Instead of giving to the next name in Table II (Caban) the number 14, the number 1 was prefixed; for, as previously stated, the numerical coefficients of the days did not rise above the number 13. Following the day 1 Caban, the sequence continued as before: 2 Eznab, 3 Cauac, 4 Ahau. After the day 4 Ahau, the last in Table II, the next number in order, in this case 5, was prefixed to the next name in order—that is, Imix, the first name in Table II—and the count continued without interruption: 5 Imix, 6 Ik, 7 Akbal, or back to the name Kan with which it started. There was no break in the sequence, however, even at this point (or at any other, for that matter). The next name in Table II, Kan, selected for the starting point, was given the number next in order, i. e., 8, and the day following 7 Akbal in Table II would be, therefore, 8 Kan, and the sequence would continue to be formed in the same way: 8 Kan, 9 Chicchan, 10 Cimi, 11 Manik, 12 Lamat, 13 Muluc, 1 Oc, 2 Chuen, 3 Eb, and so on. So far as the Maya conception of time was concerned, this sequence of days went on without interruption, forever.

While somewhat unusual at first sight, this sequence is in reality exceedingly simple, being governed by three easily remembered rules:

Rule 1. The sequence of the 20 day names repeats itself again and again without interruption.

BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGYBULLETIN 57 PLATE 5

{43}

Rule 2. The sequence of the numerical coefficients 1 to 13, inclusive, repeats itself again and again without interruption, 1 following immediately 13.

Rule 3. The 13 numerical coefficients are attached to the 20 names, so that after a start has been made by prefixing any one of the 13 numbers to any one of the 20 names, the number next in order is given to the name next in order, and the sequence continues indefinitely in this manner.

It is a simple question of arithmetic to determine the number of days which must elapse before a day bearing the same designation as a previous one in the sequence can reappear. Since there are 13 numbers and 20 names, and since each of the 13 numbers must be attached in turn to each one of the 20 names before a given number can return to a given name, we must find the least common multiple of 13 and 20. As these two numbers, contain no common factor, their least common multiple is their product (260), which is the number sought. Therefore, any given day can not reappear in the sequence until after the 259 days immediately following it shall have elapsed. Or, in other words, the 261st day will have the same designation as the 1st, the 262d the same as the 2d, and so on.

This is graphically shown in the wheel figured in plate 5, where the sequence of the days, commencing with 1 Imix, which is indicated by a star, is represented as extending around the rim of the wheel. After the name of each day, its number in the sequence beginning with the starting point 1 Imix, is shown in parenthesis. Now, if the star opposite the day 1 Imix be conceived to be stationary and the wheel to revolve in a sinistral circuit, that is contra-clockwise, the days will pass the star in the order which they occupy in the 260-day sequence. It appears from this diagram also that the day 1 Imix can not recur until after 260 days shall have passed, and that it always follows the day 13 Ahau. This must be true since Ahau is the name immediately preceding Imix in the sequence of the day names and 13 is the number immediately preceding 1. After the day 13 Ahau (the 260th from the starting point) is reached, the day 1 Imix, the 261st, recurs and the sequence, having entered into itself again, begins anew as before.

This round of the 260 differently named days was called by the Aztec the tonalamatl, or "book of days." The Maya name for this period is unknown^[29] and students have accepted the Aztec name for it. The tonalamatl is frequently represented in the Maya codices, there being more than 200 examples in the Codex Tro-Cortesiano alone. It was a very useful period for the calculations of the priests because of the different sets of factors into which it can be resolved, {44}namely, 4×65, 5×52, 10×26, 13×20, and 2×130. Tonalamatls divided into 4, 5, and 10 equal parts of 65, 52, and 26 days, respectively, occur repeatedly throughout the codices.

It is all the more curious, therefore, that this period is rarely represented in the inscriptions. The writer recalls but one city (Copan) in which this period is recorded to any considerable extent. It might almost be inferred from this fact alone that the inscriptions do not treat of prophecy, divinations, or ritualistic and ceremonial matters, since these subjects in the codices are always found in connection with tonalamatls. If true this considerably restricts the field of which the inscriptions may treat.

Mr. Goodman has identified the glyph shown in figure 18 as the sign for the 260-day period, but on wholly insufficient evidence the writer believes. On the other hand, so important a period as the tonalamatl undoubtedly had its own particular glyph, but up to the present time all efforts to identify this sign have proved unsuccessful.

The Haab, or Year of 365 Days

Having explained the composition and nature of the tonalamatl, or so-called Sacred Year, let us turn to the consideration of the Solar Year, which was known as haab in the Maya language.

The Maya used in their calendar system a 365-day year, though they doubtless knew that the true length of the year exceeds this by 6 hours. Indeed, Bishop Landa very explicitly states that such knowledge was current among them. "They had," he says, "their perfect year, like ours, of 365 days and 6 hours;" and again, "The entire year had 18 of these [20-day periods] and besides 5 days and 6 hours." In spite of Landa's statements, however, it is equally clear that had the Maya attempted to take note of these 6 additional hours by inserting an extra day in their calendar every fourth year, their day sequence would have been disturbed at once. An examination of the tonalamatl, or round of days (see pl. 5), shows also that the interpolation of a single day at any point would have thrown into confusion the whole Maya calendar, not only interfering with the sequence but also destroying its power of reentering itself at the end of 260 days. The explanation of this statement is found in the fact that the Maya calendar had no elastic period corresponding to our month of February, which is increased in length whenever the accumulation of fractional days necessitates the addition of an extra day, in order to keep the calendar year from gaining on the true year.

If the student can be made to realize that all Maya periods, from the lowest to the highest known, are always in a continuous sequence, {45}each returning into itself and beginning anew after completion, he will have grasped the most fundamental principle of Maya chronology—its absolute continuity throughout.

It may be taken for granted, therefore, in the discussion to follow that no interpolation of intercalary days was actually made. It is equally probable, however, that the priests, in whose hands such matters rested, corrected the calendar by additional calculations which showed just how many days the recorded year was ahead of the true year at any given time. Mr. Bowditch (1910: Chap. XI) has cited several cases in which such additional calculations exactly correct the inscriptions on the monument upon which they appear and bring their dates into harmony with the true solar year.

So far as the calendar is concerned, then, the year consisted of but 365 days. It was divided into 18 periods of 20 days each, designated in Maya uinal, and a closing period of 5 days known as the xma kaba kin, or "days without name." The sum of these (18×20+5) exactly made up the calendar year.

Table III. THE DIVISIONS OP THE MAYA YEAR

The names of these 19 divisions of the year are given in Table III in the order in which they follow one another; the twentieth day of one month was succeeded by the first day of the next month.

The first day of the Maya year was the first day of the month Pop, which, according to the early Spanish authorities, Bishop Landa (1864: p. 276) included, always fell on the 16th of July.^[30] Uayeb, the last division of the year, contained only 5 days, the last day of Uayeb being at the same time the 365th day of the year. Consequently, when this day was completed, the next in order was the Maya New Year's Day, the first day of the month Pop, after which the sequence repeated itself as before.

The xma kaba kin, or "days without name," were regarded as especially unlucky and ill-omened. Says Pio Perez (see Landa, 1864: p. 384) in speaking of these closing days of the year: "Some call them u yail kin or u yail haab, which may be translated, the sorrowful and laborious days or part of the year; for they [the Maya] {46}believed that in them occurred sudden deaths and pestilences, and that they were diseased by poisonous animals, or devoured by wild beasts, fearing that if they went out to the field to their labors, some tree would pierce them or some other kind of misfortune happen to them." The Aztec held the five closing days of the year in the same superstitious dread. Persons born in this unlucky period were held to be destined by this fact to wretchedness and poverty for life. These days were, moreover, prophetic in character; what occurred during them continued to happen ever afterward. Hence, quarreling was avoided during this period lest it should never cease.

Having learned the number, length, and names of the several periods into which the Maya divided their year, and the sequence in which these followed one another, the next subject which claims attention is the positions of the several days in these periods. In order properly to present this important subject, it is first necessary to consider briefly how we count and number our own units of time, since through an understanding of these practices we shall better comprehend those of the ancient Maya.

It is well known that our methods of counting time are inconsistent with each other. For example, in describing the time of day, that is, in counting hours, minutes, and seconds, we speak in terms of elapsed time. When we say it is 1 o'clock, in reality the first hour after noon, that is, the hour between 12 noon and 1 p. m., has passed and the second hour after noon is about to commence. When we say it is 2 o'clock, in reality the second hour after noon is finished and the third hour about to commence. In other words, we count the time of day by referring to passed periods and not current periods. This is the method used in reckoning astronomical time. During the passage of the first hour after midnight the hours are said to be zero, the time being counted by the number of minutes and seconds elapsed. Thus, half past 12 is written: 0^hr. 30^min. 0^sec., and quarter of 1, 0^hr. 45^min. 0^sec.. Indeed one hour can not be written until the first hour after midnight is completed, or until it is 1 o'clock, namely, 1^hr. 0^min. 0^sec..

We use an entirely different method, however, in counting our days, years, and centuries, which are referred to as current periods of time. It is the 1st day of January immediately after midnight December 31. It was the first year of the Eleventh Century immediately after midnight December 31, 1000 A. D. And finally, it was the Twentieth Century immediately after midnight December 31, 1900 A. D. In this category should be included also the days of the week and the months, since the names of these periods also refer to present time. In other words when we speak of our days, months, years, and centuries, we do not have in mind, and do not refer to completed periods of time, but on the contrary to current periods. {47}

It will be seen that in the first method of counting time, in speaking of 1 o'clock, 1 hour, 30 minutes, we use only the cardinal forms of our numbers; but in the second method we say the 1st of January, the Twentieth Century, using the ordinal forms, though even here we permit ourselves one inconsistency. In speaking of our years, which are reckoned by the second method, we say "nineteen hundred and twelve," when, to be consistent, we should say "nineteen hundred and twelfth," using the ordinal "twelfth" instead of the cardinal "twelve."

We may then summarize our methods of counting time as follows: (1) All periods less than the day, as hours, minutes, and seconds, are referred to in terms of past time; and (2) the day and all greater periods are referred to in terms of current time.

The Maya seem to have used only the former of these two methods in counting time; that is, all the different periods recorded in the codices and the inscriptions seemingly refer to elapsed time rather than to current time, to a day passed, rather than to a day present. Strange as this may appear to us, who speak of our calendar as current time, it is probably true nevertheless that the Maya, in so far as their writing is concerned, never designated a present day but always treated of a day gone by. The day recorded is yesterday because to-day can not be considered an entity until, like the hour of astronomical time, it completes itself and becomes a unit, that is, a yesterday.

This is well illustrated by the Maya method of numbering the positions of the days in the months, which, as we shall see, was identical with our own method of counting astronomical time. For example, the first day of the Maya month Pop was written Zero Pop, (0 Pop) for not until one whole day of Pop had passed could the day 1 Pop be written; by that time, however, the first day of the month had passed and the second day commenced. In other words, the second day of Pop was written 1 Pop; the third day, 2 Pop; the fourth day, 3 Pop; and so on through the 20 days of the Maya month. This method of numbering the positions of the days in the month led to calling the last day of a month 19 instead of 20. This appears in Table IV, in which the last 6 days of one year and the first 22 of the next year are referred to their corresponding positions in the divisions of the Maya year. It must be remembered in using this Table that the closing period of the Maya year, the xma kaba kin, or Uayeb, contained only 5 days, whereas all the other periods (the 18 uinals) had 20 days each.

Curiously enough no glyph for the haab, or year, has been identified as yet, in spite of the apparent importance of this period.^[31] The {48}glyphs which represent the 18 different uinals and the xma kaba kin, however, are shown in figures 19 and 20. The forms in figure 19 are taken from the inscriptions and those in figure 20 from the codices.

Table IV. POSITIONS OF DAYS AT THE END OF A YEAR

The signs for the first four months, Pop, Uo, Zip, and Zotz, show a convincing similarity in both the inscriptions and the codices. The essential elements of Pop (figs. 19, a, and 20, a) are the crossed bands and the kin sign. The latter is found in both the forms figured, though only a part of the former appears in figure 20, a. Uo has two forms in the inscriptions (see fig. 19, b, c),^[32] which are, however, very similar to each other as well as to the corresponding forms in the codices (fig. 20, b, c). The glyphs for the month Zip are identical in both figures 19, d, and 20, d. The grotesque heads for Zotz in figures 19, e, f,^[33] and 20, e, are also similar to each other. The essential {49}characteristic seems to be the prominent upturned and flaring nose. The forms for Tzec (figs. 19, g, h, and 20, f) show only a very general similarity, and those for Xul, the next month, are even more unlike. The only sign for Xul in the inscriptions (fig. 19, i, j) bears very little resemblance to the common form for this month in the codices (fig. 20, g), though it is not unlike the variant in h, figure 20. The essential characteristic seems to be the familiar ear and the small mouth, shown in the inscription as an oval and in the codices as a hook surrounded with dots.

{50}

The sign for the month Yaxkin is identical in both figures 19, k, l, and 20, i, j. The sign for the month Mol in figures 19, m, n, and 20, k exhibits the same close similarity. The forms for the month Chen in figures 19, o, p, and 20, l, m, on the other hand, bear only a slight resemblance to each other. The forms for the months Yax (figs. 19, q, r, and 20, n), Zac (figs. 19, s, t, and 20, o), and Ceh (figs. 19, u, v, and {51}20, p) are again identical in each case. The signs for the next month, Mac, however, are entirely dissimilar, the form commonly found in the inscriptions (fig. 19, w) bearing absolutely no resemblance to that shown in figure 20, q, r, the only form for this month in the codices. The very unusual variant (fig. 19, x), from Stela 25 at Piedras Negras is perhaps a trifle nearer the form found in the codices. The flattened oval in the main part of the variant is somewhat like the upper part of the glyph in figure 20, q. The essential element of the glyph for the month Mac, so far as the inscriptions are concerned, is the element (*) found as the superfix in both w and x, figure 19. The sign for the month Kankin (figs. 19, y, z, and 20, s, t) and the signs for the month Muan (figs. 19, a', b', and 20, u, v) show only a general similarity. The signs for the last three months of the year, Pax (figs. 19, c', and 20, w), Kayab (figs. 19, d'-f', and 20, x, y), and Cumhu (figs. 19, g', h', and 20, z, a', b') in the inscriptions and codices, respectively, are practically identical. The closing division of the year, the five days of the xma kaba kin, called Uayeb, is represented by essentially the same glyph in both the inscriptions and the codices. Compare figure 19, i', with figure 20, c'.

It will be seen from the foregoing comparison that on the whole the glyphs for the months in the inscriptions are similar to the corresponding forms in the codices, and that such variations as are found may readily be accounted for by the fact that the codices and the inscriptions probably not only emanate from different parts of the Maya territory but also date from different periods.

The student who wishes to decipher Maya writing is strongly urged to memorize the signs for the days and months given in figures 16, 17, 19, and 20, since his progress will depend largely on his ability to recognize these glyphs when he encounters them in the texts.

The Calendar Round, or 18980-day Period

Before taking up the study of the Calendar Round let us briefly summarize the principal points ascertained in the preceding pages concerning the Maya method of counting time. In the first place we learned from the tonalamatl (pl. 5) three things: (1) The number of differently named days; (2) the names of these days; (3) the order in which they invariably followed one another. And in the second place we learned in the discussion of the Maya year, or haab, just concluded, four other things: (1) The length of the year; (2) the number, length, and names of the several periods into which it was divided; (3) the order in which these periods invariably followed one another; (4) the positions of the days in these periods.

The proper combination of these two, the tonalamatl, or "round of days," and the haab, or year of uinals, and the xma kaba kin, formed the Calendar Round, to which the tonalamatl contributed the names {52}of the days and the haab the positions of these days in the divisions of the year. The Calendar Round was the most important period in Maya chronology, and a comprehension of its nature and of the principles which governed its composition is therefore absolutely essential to the understanding of the Maya system of counting time.

It has been explained (see p. 41) that the complete designation or name of any day in the tonalamatl consisted of two equally essential parts: (1) The name glyph, and (2) the numerical coefficient. Disregarding the latter for the present, let us first see which of the twenty names in Table I, that is, the name parts of the days, can stand at the beginning of the Maya year.

In applying any sequence of names or numbers to another there are only three possibilities concerning the names or numbers which can stand at the head of the resulting sequence:

1. When the sums of the units in each of the two sequences contain no common factor, each one of the units in turn will stand at the head of the resulting sequence.

2. When the sum of the units in one of the two sequences is a multiple of the sum of the units in the other, only the first unit can stand at the head of the resulting sequence.

3. When the sums of the units in the two sequences contain a common factor (except in those cases which fall under (2), that is, in which one is a multiple of the other) only certain units can stand at the head of the sequence.

Now, since our two numbers (the 20 names in Table I and the 365 days of the year) contain a common factor, and since neither is a multiple of the other, it is clear that only the last of the three contingencies just mentioned concerns us here; and we may therefore dismiss the first two from further consideration.

The Maya year, then, could begin only with certain of the days in Table I, and the next task is to find out which of these twenty names invariably stood at the beginnings of the years.

When there is a sequence of 20 names in endless repetition, it is evident that the 361st will be the same as the 1st, since 360 = 20 × 18. Therefore the 362d will be the same as the 2d, the 363d as the 3d, the 364th as the 4th, and the 365 as the 5th. But the 365th, or 5th, name is the name of the last day of the year, consequently the 1st day of the following year (the 366th from the beginning) will have the 6th name in the sequence. Following out this same idea, it appears that the 361st day of the second year will have the same name as that with which it began, that is, the 6th name in the sequence, the 362d day the 7th name, the 363d the 8th, the 364th the 9th, and the 365th, or last day of the second year, the 10th name. Therefore the 1st day of the third year (the 731st from the beginning) will have the 11th name in the sequence. Similarly it could be shown {53}that the third year, beginning with the 11th name, would necessarily end with the 15th name; and the fourth year, beginning with the 16th name (the 1096th from the beginning) would necessarily end with the 20th, or last name, in the sequence. It results, therefore, from the foregoing progression that the fifth year will have to begin with the 1st name (the 1461st from the beginning), or the same name with which the first year also began.

This is capable of mathematical proof, since the 1st day of the fifth year has the 1461st name from the beginning of the sequence, for 1461 = 4×365+1 = 73×20+1. The 1 in the second term of this equation indicates that the beginning day of the fifth year has been reached; and the 1 in the third term indicates that the name-part of this day is the 1st name in the sequence of twenty. In other words, every fifth year began with a day, the name part of which was the same, and consequently only four of the names in Table I could stand at the beginnings of the Maya years.

The four names which successively occupied this, the most important position of the year, were: Ik, Manik, Eb, and Caban (see Table V, in which these four names are shown in their relation to the sequence of twenty). Beginning with any one of these, Ik for example, the next in order, Manik, is 5 days distant, the next, Eb, another five days, the next, Caban, another 5 days, and the next, Ik, the name with which the Table started, another 5 days.

Table V. RELATIVE POSITIONS OF DAYS BEGINNING MAYA YEARS

Since one of the four names just given invariably began the Maya year, it follows that in any given year, all of its nineteen divisions, the 18 uinals and the xma kaba kin, also began with the same name, which was the name of the first day of the first uinal. This is necessarily true because these 19 divisions of the year, with the exception of the last, each contained 20 days, and consequently the name of the first day of the first division determined the names of the first days of all the succeeding divisions of that particular year. Furthermore, since the xma kaba kin, the closing division of the year, contained but 5 days, the name of the first day of the following year; as well as {54}the names of the first days of all of its divisions, was shifted forward in the sequence another 5 days, as shown above.

This leads directly to another important conclusion: Since the first days of all the divisions of any given year always had the same name-part, it follows that the second days of all the divisions of that year had the same name, that is, the next succeeding in the sequence of twenty. The third days in each division of that year must have had the same name, the fourth days the same name, and so on, throughout the 20 days of the month. For example, if a year began with the day-name Ik, all of the divisions in that year also began with the same name, and the second days of all its divisions had the day-name Akbal, the third days the name Kan, the fourth days the name Chicchan, and so forth. This enables us to formulate the following—

Rule. The 20 day-names always occupy the same positions in all the divisions of any given year.

But since the year and its divisions must begin with one of four names, it is clear that the second positions also must be filled with one of another group of four names, and the third positions with one of another group of four names, and so on, through all the positions of the month. This enables us to formulate a second—

Rule. Only four of the twenty day-names can ever occupy any given position in the divisions of the years.

But since, in the years when Ik is the 1st name, Manik will be the 6th, Eb the 11th, and Caban the 16th, and in the years when Manik is the 1st, Eb will be the 6th, Caban the 11th, and Ik the 16th, and in the years when Eb is the 1st, Caban will be the 6th, Ik the 11th, and Manik the 16th, and in the years when Caban is the 1st, Ik will be the 6th, Manik the 11th, and Eb the 16th, it is clear that any one of this group which begins the year may occupy also three other positions in the divisions of the year, these positions being 5 days distant from each other. Consequently, it follows that Akbal, Lamat, Ben, and Eznab in Table V, the names which occupy the second positions in the divisions of the year, will fill the 7th, 12th, and 17th positions as well. Similarly Kan, Muluc, Ix, and Cauac will fill the 3d, 8th, 13th, and 18th positions, and so on. This enables us to formulate a third—

Rule. The 20 day-names are divided into five groups of four names each, any name in any group being five days distant from the name next preceding it in the same group, and furthermore, the names of any one group will occupy four different positions in the divisions of successive years, these positions being five days apart in each case. This is expressed in Table VI, in which these groups are shown as well as the positions in the divisions of the years which the names of each group may occupy. A comparison with Table V will demonstrate that this arrangement is inevitable. {55}

Table VI. POSITIONS OF DAYS IN DIVISIONS OF MAYA YEAR

But we have seen on page 47 and in Table IV that the Maya did not designate the first days of the several divisions of the years according to our system. It was shown there that the first day of Pop was not written 1 Pop, but 0 Pop, and similarly the second day of Pop was written not 2 Pop, but 1 Pop, and the last day, not 20 Pop, but 19 Pop. Consequently, before we can use the names in Table VI as the Maya used them, we must make this shift, keeping in mind, however, that Ik, Manik, Eb, and Caban (the only four of the twenty names which could begin the year and which were written 0 Pop, 5 Pop, 10 Pop, or 15 Pop) would be written in our notation 1st Pop, 6th Pop, 11th Pop, and 16th Pop, respectively. This difference, as has been previously explained, results from the Maya method of counting time by elapsed periods.

Table VII shows the positions of the days in the divisions of the year according to the Maya conception, that is, with the shift in the month coefficient made necessary by this practice of recording their days as elapsed time.

The student will find Table VII very useful in deciphering the texts, since it shows at a glance the only positions which any given day can occupy in the divisions of the year. Therefore when the sign for a day has been recognized in the texts, from Table VII can be ascertained the only four positions which this day can hold in the month, thus reducing the number of possible month coefficients for which search need be made, from twenty to four.

Table VII. POSITIONS OF DAYS IN DIVISIONS OF MAYA YEAR ACCORDING TO MAYA NOTATION

Now let us summarize the points which we have successively established as resulting from the combination of the tonalamatl and haab, remembering always that as yet we have been dealing only with {56}the name parts of the days and not their complete designations. Bearing this in mind, we may state the following facts concerning the 20 day-names and their positions in the divisions of the year:

1. The Maya year and its several divisions could begin only with one of these four day-names: Ik, Manik, Eb, and Caban.

2. Consequently, any particular position in the divisions of the year could be occupied only by one of four day-names.

3. Consequently, every fifth year any particular day-name returned to the same position in the divisions of the year.

4. Consequently, any particular day-name could occupy only one of four positions in the divisions of the year, each of which it held in successive years, returning to the same position every fifth year.

5. Consequently, the twenty day-names were divided into five groups of four day-names each, any day-name of any group being five days distant from the day-name of the same group next preceding it.

6. Finally, in any given year any particular day-name occupied the same relative position throughout the divisions of that year.

Up to this point, however, as above stated, we have not been dealing with the complete designations of the Maya days, but only their name parts or name glyphs, the positions of which in the several divisions of the year we have ascertained.

It now remains to join the tonalamatl, which gives the complete names of the 260 Maya days, to the haab, which gives the positions of the days in the divisions of the year, in such a way that any one of the days whose name-part is Ik, Manik, Eb, or Caban shall occupy the first position of the first division of the year; that is, 0 Pop, or, as we should write it, the first day of Pop. It matters little which one of these four name parts we choose first, since in four years each one of them in succession will have appeared in the position 0 Pop.

Perhaps the easiest way to visualize the combination of the tonalamatl and the haab is to conceive these two periods as two cogwheels revolving in contact with each other. Let us imagine that the first of these, A (fig. 21), has 260 teeth, or cogs, each one of which is named after one of the 260 days of the tonalamatl and follows the sequence shown in plate 5. The second wheel, B (fig. 21), is somewhat larger, having 365 cogs. Each of the spaces or sockets between these represents one of the 365 positions of the days in the divisions of the year, beginning with 0 Pop and ending with 4 Uayeb. See Table IV for the positions of the days at the end of one year and the commencement of the next. Finally, let us imagine that these two wheels are brought into contact with each other in such a way that the tooth or cog named 2 Ik in A shall fit into the socket named {57}0 Pop in B, after which both wheels start to revolve in the directions indicated by the arrows.

The first day of the year whose beginning is shown at the point of contact of the two wheels in figure 21 is 2 Ik 0 Pop, that is, the day 2 Ik which occupies the first position in the month Pop. The next day in succession will be 3 Akbal 1 Pop, the next 4 Kan 2 Pop, the next 5 Chicchan 3 Pop, the next 6 Cimi 4 Pop, and so on. As the wheels revolve in the directions indicated, the days of the tonalamatl successively fall into their appropriate positions in the divisions of the year. Since the number of cogs in A is smaller than the number in B, it is clear that the former will have returned to its starting point, 2 Ik (that is, made one complete revolution), before the latter will have made one complete revolution; and, further, that when the latter (B) has returned to its starting point, 0 Pop, the corresponding cog in B will not be 2 Ik, but another day (3 Manik), since by that time the smaller wheel will have progressed 105 cogs, or days, farther, to the cog 3 Manik.

The question now arises, how many revolutions will each wheel have to make before the day 2 Ik will return to the position 0 Pop. The solution of this problem depends on the application of one sequence to another, and the possibilities concerning the numbers or names which stand at the head of the resulting sequence, a subject already discussed on page 52. In the present case the numbers in question, 260 and 365, contain a common factor, therefore our problem falls under the third contingency there presented. Consequently, only certain of the 260 days can occupy the position 0 Pop, or, in other words, cog 2 Ik in A will return to the position 0 Pop in B in fewer than 260 revolutions of A. The actual solution of the problem {58}is a simple question of arithmetic. Since the day 2 Ik can not return to its original position in A until after 260 days shall have passed, and since the day 0 Pop can not return to its original position in B until after 365 days shall have passed, it is clear that the day 2 Ik 0 Pop can not recur until after a number of days shall have passed equal to the least common multiple of these numbers, which is (260/5)×(365/5)×5, or 52×73×5 = 18,980 days. But 18,980 days = 52×365 = 73×260; in other words the day 2 Ik 0 Pop can not recur until after 52 revolutions of B, or 52 years of 365 days each, and 73 revolutions of A, or 73 tonalamatls of 260 days each. The Maya name for this 52-year period is unknown; it has been called the Calendar Round by modern students because it was only after this interval of time had elapsed that any given day could return to the same position in the year. The Aztec name for this period was xiuhmolpilli or toxiuhmolpia.^[34]

The Calendar Round was the real basis of Maya chronology, since its 18,980 dates included all the possible combinations of the 260 days with the 365 positions of the year. Although the Maya developed a much more elaborate system of counting time, wherein any date of the Calendar Round could be fixed with absolute certainty within a period of 374,400 years, this truly remarkable feat was accomplished only by using a sequence of Calendar Rounds, or 52-year periods, in endless repetition from a fixed point of departure.

In the development of their chronological system the Aztec probably never progressed beyond the Calendar Round. At least no greater period of time than the round of 52 years has been found in their texts. The failure of the Aztec to develop some device which would distinguish any given day in one Calendar Round from a day of the same name in another has led to hopeless confusion in regard to various events of their history. Since the same date occurred at intervals of every 52 years, it is often difficult to determine the particular Calendar Round to which any given date with its corresponding event is to be referred; consequently, the true sequence of events in Aztec history still remains uncertain.

Professor Seler says in this connection:^[35]

{59}

Such confusion indeed is only to be expected from a system of counting time and recording events which was so loose as to permit the occurrence of the same date twice, or even thrice, within the span of a single life; and when a system so inexact was used to regulate the lapse of any considerable number of years, the possibilities for error and misunderstanding are infinite. Thus it was with Aztec chronology.

On the other hand, by conceiving the Calendar Rounds to be in endless repetition from a fixed point of departure, and measuring time by an accurate system, the Maya were able to secure precision in dating their events which is not surpassed even by our own system of counting time.

The glyph which stood for the Calendar Round has not been determined with any degree of certainty. Mr. Goodman believes the form shown in figure 22, a, to be the sign for this period, while Professor Förstemann is equally sure that the form represented by b of this figure expressed the same idea. This difference of opinion between two authorities so eminent well illustrates the prevailing doubt as to just what glyph actually represented the 52-year period among the Maya. The sign in figure 22, a, as the writer will endeavor to show later, is in all probability the sign for the great cycle.

As will be seen in the discussion of the Long Count, the Maya, although they conceived time to be an endless succession of Calendar Rounds, did not reckon its passage by the lapse of successive Calendar Rounds; consequently, the need for a distinctive glyph which should represent this period was not acute. The contribution of the Calendar Round to Maya chronology was its 18,980 dates, and the glyphs which composed these are found repeatedly in both the codices and the inscriptions (see figs. 16, 17, 19, 20). No signs have been found as yet, however, for either the haab or the tonalamatl, probably because, like the Calendar Round, these periods were not used as units in recording long stretches of time.

It will greatly aid the student in his comprehension of the discussion to follow if he will constantly bear in mind the fact that one Calendar Round followed another without interruption or the interpolation of a single day; and further, that the Calendar Round may be likened to a large cogwheel having 18,980 teeth, each one of which represented one of the dates of this period, and that this wheel revolved forever, each cog passing a fixed point once every 52 years. {60}

The Long Count

We have seen:

1. How the Maya distinguished 1 day from the 259 others in the tonalamatl;

2. How they distinguished the position of 1 day from the 364 others in the haab, or year; and, finally,

3. How by combining (1) and (2) they distinguished 1 day from the other 18,979 of the Calendar Round.

It remains to explain how the Maya insured absolute accuracy in fixing a day within a period of 374,400 years, as stated above, or how they distinguished 1 day from 136,655,999 others.

The Calendar Round, as we have seen, determined the position of a given day within a period of only 52 years. Consequently, in order to prevent confusion of days of the same name in successive Calendar Rounds or, in other words, to secure absolute accuracy in dating events, it was necessary to use additional data in the description of any date.

In nearly all systems of chronology that presume to deal with really long periods the reckoning of years proceeds from fixed starting points. Thus in Christian chronology the starting point is the Birth of Christ, and our years are reckoned as B. C. or A. D. according as they precede or follow this event. The Greeks reckoned time from the earliest Olympic Festival of which the winner's name was known, that is, the games held in 776 B. C., which were won by a certain Coroebus. The Romans took as their starting point the supposed date of the foundation of Rome, 753 B. C. The Babylonians counted time as beginning with the Era of Nabonassar, 747 B. C. The death of Alexander the Great, in 325 B. C., ushered in the Era of Alexander. With the occupation of Babylon in 311 B. C. by Seleucus Nicator began the so-called Era of Seleucidæ. The conquest of Spain by Augustus Cæsar in 38 B. C. marked the beginning of a chronology which endured for more than fourteen centuries. The Mohammedans selected as their starting point the flight of their prophet Mohammed from Mecca in 622 A. D., and events in this chronology are described as having occurred so many years after the Hegira (The Flight). The Persian Era began with the date 632 A. D., in which year Yezdegird III ascended the throne of Persia.

It will be noted that each of the above-named systems of chronology has for its starting point some actual historic event, the occurrence, if not the date of which, is indubitable. Some chronologies, however, commence with an event of an altogether different character, the date of which from its very nature must always remain hypothetical. In this class should be mentioned such chronologies as reckon time from the Creation of the World. For example, the Era of Constantinople, the chronological system used in the Greek Church, {61}commences with that event, supposed to have occurred in 5509 B. C. The Jews reckoned the same event as having taken place in 3761 B. C. and begin the counting of time from this point. A more familiar chronology, having for its starting point the Creation of the World, is that of Archbishop Usher, in the Old Testament, which assigns this event to the year 4004 B. C.

In common with these other civilized peoples of antiquity the ancient Maya had realized in the development of their chronological system the need for a fixed starting point, from which all subsequent events could be reckoned, and for this purpose they selected one of the dates of their Calendar Round. This was a certain date, 4 Ahau 8 Cumhu,^[36] that is, a day named 4 Ahau, which occupied the 9th position in the month Cumhu, the next to last division of the Maya year (see Table III).

While the nature of the event which took place on this date^[37] is unknown, its selection as the point from which time was subsequently reckoned alone indicates that it must have been of exceedingly great importance to the native mind. In attempting to approximate its real character, however, we are not without some assistance from the codices and the inscriptions. For instance, it is clear that all Maya dates which it is possible to regard as contemporaneous^[38] refer to a time fully 3,000 years later than the starting point (4 Ahau 8 Cumhu) from which each is reckoned. In other words, Maya history is a blank for more than 3,000 years after the initial date of the Maya chronological system, during which time no events were recorded.

This interesting condition strongly suggests that the starting point of Maya chronology was not an actual historical event, as the founding of Rome, the death of Alexander, the birth of Christ, or the flight of Mohammed from Mecca, but that on the contrary it was a purely hypothetical occurrence, as the Creation of the World or the birth of the gods; and further, that the date 4 Ahau 8 Cumhu was not chosen as the starting point until long after the time it designates. This, or some similar assumption, is necessary to account satisfactorily for the observed facts:

1. That, as stated, after the starting point of Maya chronology there is a silence of more than 3,000 years, unbroken by a single contemporaneous record, and {62}

2. That after this long period had elapsed all the dated monuments^[39] had their origin in the comparatively short period of four centuries.

Consequently, it is safe to conclude that no matter what the Maya may have believed took place on this date 4 Ahau 8 Cumhu, in reality when this day was present time they had not developed their distinctive civilization or even achieved a social organization.

It is clear from the foregoing that in addition to the Calendar Round, the Maya made use of a fixed starting point in describing their dates. The next question is, Did they record the lapse of more than 3,000 years simply by using so unwieldy a unit as the 52-year period or its multiples? A numerical system based on 52 as its primary unit immediately gives rise to exceedingly awkward numbers for its higher terms; that is, 52, 104, 156, 208, 260, 312, etc. Indeed, the expression of really large numbers in terms of 52 involves the use of comparatively large multipliers and hence of more or less intricate multiplications, since the unit of progression is not decimal or even a multiple thereof. The Maya were far too clever mathematicians to have been satisfied with a numerical system which employed units so inconvenient as 52 or its multiples, and which involved processes so clumsy, and we may therefore dismiss the possibility of its use without further consideration.

In order to keep an accurate account of the large numbers used in recording dates more than 3,000 years distant from the starting point, a numerical system was necessary whose terms could be easily handled, like the units, tens, hundreds, and thousands of our own decimal system. Whether the desire to measure accurately the passage of time actually gave rise to their numerical system, or vice versa, is not known, but the fact remains that the several periods of Maya chronology (except the tonalamatl, haab, and Calendar Round, previously discussed) are the exact terms of a vigesimal system of numeration, with but a single exception. (See Table VIII.)

Table VIII. THE MAYA TIME-PERIODS

Table VIII shows the several periods of Maya chronology by means of which the passage of time was measured. All are the exact terms of a vigesimal system of numeration, except in the 2d place (uinals), {63}in which 18 units instead of 20 make 1 unit of the 3d place, or order next higher (tuns). The break in the regularity of the vigesimal progression in the 3d place was due probably to the desire to bring the unit of this order (the tun) into agreement with the solar year of 365 days, the number 360 being much closer to 365 than 400, the third term of a constant vigesimal progression. We have seen on page 45 that the 18 uinals of the haab were equivalent to 360 days or kins, precisely the number contained in the third term of the above table, the tun. The fact that the haab, or solar year, was composed of 5 days more than the tun, thus causing a discrepancy of 5 days as compared with the third place of the chronological system, may have given to these 5 closing days of the haab—that is, the xma kaba kin—the unlucky character they were reputed to possess.

The periods were numbered from 0 to 19, inclusive, 20 units of any order (except the 2d) always appearing as 1 unit of the order next higher. For example, a number involving the use of 20 kins was written 1 uinal instead.

We are now in possession of all the different factors which the Maya utilized in recording their dates and in counting time:

1. The names of their dates, of which there could be only 18,980 (the number of dates in the Calendar Round).

2. The date, or starting point, 4 Ahau 8 Cumhu, from which time was reckoned.

3. The counters, that is, the units, used in measuring the passage of time.

It remains to explain how these factors were combined to express the various dates of Maya chronology.

Initial Series

The usual manner in which dates are written in both the codices and the inscriptions is as follows: First, there is set down a number composed of five periods, that is, a certain number of cycles, katuns, tuns, uinals, and kins, which generally aggregate between 1,300,000 and 1,500,000 days; and this number is followed by one of the 18,980 dates of the Calendar Round. As we shall see in the next chapter, if this large number of days expressed as above be counted forward from the fixed starting point of Maya chronology, 4 Ahau 8 Cumhu, the date invariably^[41] reached will be found to be the date written at the end of the long number. This method of dating has been called the Initial Series, because when inscribed on a monument it invariably stands at the head of the inscription.

The student will better comprehend this Initial-series method of dating if he will imagine the Calendar Round represented by a large cogwheel A, figure 23, having 18,980 teeth, each one of which is {64}named after one of the dates of the calendar. Furthermore, let him suppose that the arrow B in the same figure points to the tooth, or cog, named 4 Ahau 8 Cumhu; and finally that from this as its original position the wheel commences to revolve in the direction indicated by the arrow in A.

It is clear that after one complete revolution of A, 18,980 days will have passed the starting point B, and that after two revolutions 37,960 days will have passed, and after three, 56,940, and so on. Indeed, it is only a question of the number of revolutions of A until as many as 1,500,000, or any number of days in fact, will have passed the starting point B, or, in other words, will have elapsed since the initial date, 4 Ahau 8 Cumhu. This is actually what happened according to the Maya conception of time.

For example, let us imagine that a certain Initial Series expresses in terms of cycles, katuns, tuns, uinals, and kins, the number 1,461,463, and that the date recorded by this number of days is 7 Akbal 11 Cumhu. Referring to figure 23, it is evident that 77 revolutions of the cogwheel A, that is, 77 Calendar Rounds, will use up 1,461,460 of the 1,461,463 days, since 77×18,980 = 1,461,460. Consequently, when 77 Calendar Rounds shall have passed we shall still have left 3 days (1,461,463 - 1,461,460 = 3), which must be carried forward into the next Calendar Round. The 1,461,461st day will be 5 Imix 9 Cumhu, that is, the day following 4 Ahau 8 Cumhu (see fig. 23); the 1,461,462d day will be 6 Ik 10 Cumhu, and the 1,461,463d day, the last of the days in our Initial Series, 7 Akbal 11 Cumhu, the date recorded. Examples of this method of dating (by Initial Series) will be given in Chapter V, where this subject will be considered in greater detail.

THE INTRODUCING GLYPH

In the inscriptions an Initial Series is invariably preceded by the so-called "introducing glyph," the Maya name for which is unknown. {65}Several examples of this glyph are shown in figure 24. This sign is composed of four constant elements:

In addition to these four constant elements there is one variable element which is always found between the pair of comblike lateral appendages. In figure 24, a, b, e, this is a grotesque head; in c, a natural head; and in d, one of the 20 day-signs, Ik. This element varies greatly throughout the inscriptions, and, judging from its central position in the "introducing glyph" (itself the most prominent character in every inscription in which it occurs), it must have had an exceedingly important meaning.^[42] A variant of the comblike appendages is shown in figure 24, c, e, in which these elements are replaced by a pair of fishes. However, in such cases, all of which occur at Copan, the treatment of the fins and tail of the fish strongly suggests the elements they replace, and it is not improbable, therefore, that the comblike appendages of the "introducing glyph" are nothing more nor less than conventionalized fish fins or tails; in other words, that they are a kind of glyphic synecdoche in which a part (the fin) stands for the whole (the fish). That the original form of this element was the fish and not its conventionalized fin (*) seems to be indicated by several facts: (1) On Stela D at Copan, where only full-figure glyphs are presented,^[43] the two comblike appendages of the "introducing glyph" appear unmistakably as two fishes. (2) In some of the earliest stelæ at Copan, as Stelæ 15 and P, while these elements are not fish forms, a head (fish?) appears with the conventionalized comb element in each case. The writer believes the interpretation of this phenomenon to be, that at the early epoch in which {66}Stelæ 15 and P were erected the conventionalization of the element in question had not been entirely accomplished, and that the head was added to indicate the form from which the element was derived. (3) If the fish was the original form of the comblike element in the "introducing glyph," it was also the original form of the same element in the katun glyph. (Compare the comb elements (†) in figures 27, a, b, e, and 24, a, b, d with each other.) If this is true, a natural explanation for the use of the fish in the katun sign lies near at hand. As previously explained on page 28, the comblike element stands for the sound ca (c hard); while kal in Maya means 20. Also the element (**) stands for the sound tun. Therefore catun or katun means 20 tuns. But the Maya word for "fish," cay (c hard) is also a close phonetic approximation of the sound ca or kal. Consequently, the fish sign may have been the original element in the katun glyph, which expressed the concept 20, and which the conventionalization of glyphic forms gradually reduced to the element (††) without destroying, however, its phonetic value.

Without pressing this point further, it seems not unlikely that the comblike elements in the katun glyph, as well as in the "introducing glyph," may well have been derived from the fish sign.

Turning to the codices, it must be admitted that in spite of the fact that many Initial Series are found therein, the "introducing glyph" has not as yet been positively identified. It is possible, however, that the sign shown in figure 24, f, may be a form of the "introducing glyph"; at least it precedes an Initial Series in four places in the Dresden Codex (see pl. 32). It is composed of the trinal superfix and a conventionalized fish (?).

Mr. Goodman calls this glyph (fig. 24, a-e) the sign for the great cycle or unit of the 6th place (see Table VIII). He bases this identification on the fact that in the codices units of the 6th place stand immediately above^[44] units of the 5th place (cycles), and consequently since this glyph stands immediately above the units of the 5th place in the inscriptions it must stand for the units of the 6th place. While admitting that the analogy here is close, the writer nevertheless is inclined to reject Mr. Goodman's identification on the following grounds: (1) This glyph never occurs with a numerical coefficient, while units of all the other orders—that is, cycles, katuns, tuns, uinals, and kins are never without them. (2) Units of the 6th order in the codices invariably have a numerical coefficient, as do all the other orders. (3) In the only three places in the inscriptions^[45] in which six periods are seemingly recorded, though not as Initial Series, the 6th period has a numerical coefficient just as have the other five, and, {67}moreover, the glyph in the 6th position is unlike the forms in figure 24. (4) Five periods, not six, in every Initial Series express the distance from the starting point, 4 Ahau 8 Cumhu, to the date recorded at the end of the long numbers.

It is probable that when the meaning of the "introducing glyph" has been determined it will be found to be quite apart from the numerical side of the Initial Series, at least in so far as the distance of the terminal date from the starting point, 4 Ahau 8 Cumhu, is concerned.

While an Initial Series in the inscriptions, as has been previously explained, is invariably preceded by an "introducing glyph," the opposite does not always obtain. Some of the very earliest monuments at Copan, notably Stelæ 15, 7, and P, have "introducing glyphs" inscribed on two or three of their four sides, although but one Initial Series is recorded on each of these monuments. Examples of this use of the "introducing glyph," that is, other than as standing at the head of an Initial Series, are confined to a few of the earliest monuments at Copan, and are so rare that the beginner will do well to disregard them altogether and to follow this general rule: That in the inscriptions a glyph of the form shown in figure 24, a-e, will invariably be followed by an Initial Series.

Having reached the conclusion that the introducing glyph was not a sign for the period of the 6th order, let us next examine the signs for the remaining orders or periods of the chronological system (cycles, katuns, tuns, uinals, and kins), constantly bearing in mind that these five periods alone express the long numbers of an Initial Series.^[46]

Each of the above periods has two entirely different glyphs which may express it. These have been called (1) The normal form; (2) The head variant. In the inscriptions examples of both these classes occur side by side in the same Initial Series, seemingly according to no fixed rule, some periods being expressed by their normal forms and others by their head variants. In the codices, on the other hand, no head-variant period glyphs have yet been identified, and although the normal forms of the period glyphs have been found, they do not occur as units in Initial Series.

As head variants also should be classified the so-called "full-figure glyphs," in which the periods given in Table VIII are represented by full figures instead of by heads. In these forms, however, only the heads of the figures are essential, since they alone present the determining characteristics, by means of which in each case identification is possible. Moreover, the head part of any full-figure variant is characterized by precisely the same essential elements as the {68}corresponding head variant for the same period, or in other words, the addition of the body parts in full-figure glyphs in no way influences or changes their meanings. For this reason head-variant and full-figure forms have been treated together. These full-figure glyphs are exceedingly rare, having been found only in five Initial Series throughout the Maya area: (1) On Stela D at Copan; (2) on Zoömorph B at Quirigua; (3) on east side Stela D at Quirigua; (4) on west side Stela D at Quirigua; (5) on Hieroglyphic Stairway at Copan. A few full-figure glyphs have been found also on an oblong altar at Copan, though not as parts of an Initial Series, and on Stela 15 as a period glyph of an Initial Series.

THE CYCLE GLYPH

The Maya name for the period of the 5th order in Table VIII is unknown. It has been called "the cycle," however, by Maya students, and in default of its true designation, this name has been generally adopted. The normal form of the cycle glyph is shown in figure 25, a, b, c. It is composed of an element which appears twice over a knotted support. The repeated element occurs also in the signs for the months Chen, Yax, Zac, and Ceh (see figs. 19, o-v, 20, l-p). This has been called the Cauac element because it is similar to the sign for the day Cauac in the codices (fig. 17, b'), though on rather inadequate grounds the writer is inclined to believe. The head variant of the cycle glyph is shown in figure 25, d-f. The essential characteristic of this grotesque head with its long beak is the hand element (*), which forms the lower jaw, though in a very few instances even this is absent. In the full-figure forms this same head is joined to the body of a bird (see fig. 26). The bird intended is clearly a parrot, the feet, claws, and beak being portrayed in a very realistic manner. No glyph for the cycle has yet been found in the codices.

THE KATUN GLYPH

The period of the 4th place or order was called by the Maya the katun; that is to say, 20 tuns, since it contained 20 units of the 3d {69}order (see Table VIII). The normal form of the katun glyph is shown in figure 27, a-d. It is composed of the normal form of the tun sign (fig. 29, a, b) surmounted by the pair of comblike appendages, which we have elsewhere seen meant 20, and which were probably derived from the representation of a fish. The whole glyph thus graphically portrays the concept 20 tuns, which according to Table VIII is equal to 1 katun. The normal form of the katun glyph in the codices (fig. 27, c, d) is identical with the normal form in the inscriptions (fig. 27, a, b). Several head variants are found. The most easily recognized, though not the most common, is shown in figure 27, e, in which the superfix is the same as in the normal form; that is, the element (†), which probably signifies 20 in this connection. To be logical, therefore, the head element should be the same as the head variant of the tun glyph, but this is not the case (see fig. 29, e-h). When this superfix is present, the identification of the head variant of the katun glyph is an easy matter, but when it is absent it is difficult to fix on any essential characteristic. The general shape of the head is like the head variant of the cycle glyph. Perhaps the oval (**) in the top of the head in figure 27, f-h, and the small curling fang (††) represented as protruding from the back part of the mouth are as constant as any of the other elements. The head of the full-figure variant in figure 28 presents the same lack of essential characteristics as the head variant, though in this form the small curling fang is also found. Again, the body attached to this head is that of a bird which has been identified as an eagle. {70}

THE TUN GLYPH

The period of the 3d place or order was called by the Maya the tun, which means "stone," possibly because a stone was set up every 360 days or each tun or some multiple thereof. Compare so-called hotun or katun stones described on page 34. The normal sign for the tun in the inscriptions (see fig. 29, a, b) is identical with the form found in the codices (see fig. 29, c). The head variant, which bears a general resemblance to the head variant for the cycle and katun, has several forms. The one most readily recognized, because it has the normal sign for its superfix, is shown in figure 29, d, e. The determining characteristic of the head variant of the tun glyph, however, is the fleshless lower jaw (‡), as shown in figure 29 f, g, though even this is lacking in some few cases. The form shown in figure 29, h, is found at Palenque, where it seems to represent the tun period in several places. The head of the full-figure form (fig. 30) has the same fleshless lower jaw for its essential characteristic as the head-variant forms in figure 29. The body joined to this head is again that of a bird the identity of which has not yet been determined.

THE UINAL GLYPH

The period occupying the 2d place was called by the Maya uinal or u. This latter word means also "the moon" in Maya, and the fact that the moon is visible for just about 20 days in each lunation may account for the application of its name to the 20-day period. The normal form of the uinal glyph in the inscriptions (see fig. 31, a, b) is practically identical with the form in the codices (see fig. 31, c). {71}Sometimes the subfixial element (‡‡) is omitted in the inscriptions, as in figure 31, a. The head variant of the uinal glyph (fig. 31, d-f) is the most constant of all of the head forms for the various periods. Its determining characteristic is the large curl emerging from the back part of the mouth. The sharp-pointed teeth in the upper jaw are also a fairly constant feature. In very rare cases both of these elements are wanting. In such cases the glyph seems to be without determining characteristics. The animal represented in the full-figure variants of the uinal is that of a frog (fig. 32,) the head of which presents precisely the same characteristics as the head variants of the uinal, just described. That the head variant of the uinal-period glyph was originally derived from the representation of a frog can hardly be denied in the face of such striking confirmatory evidence as that afforded by the full-figure form of the uinal in figure 33. Here the spotted body, flattened head, prominent mouth, and bulging eyes of the frog are so realistically portrayed that there is no doubt as to the identity of the figure intended. Mr. Bowditch (1910: p. 257) has pointed out in this connection an interesting phonetic coincidence, which can hardly be other than intentional. The Maya word for frog is uo, which is a fairly close phonetic approximation of u, the Maya word for "moon" or "month." Consequently, the Maya may have selected the figure of the frog on phonetic grounds to represent their 20-day period. If this point could be established it would indicate an unmistakable use of the rebus form of writing employed by the Aztec. That is, the figure of a frog in the uinal-period glyph would not recall the object which it pictures, but the sound of that object's name, uo, approximating the sound of u, which in turn expressed the intended idea, namely, the 20-day period. Mr. Bowditch has suggested also that the grotesque birds which stand for the cycle, katun, and tun periods in these full-figure forms may also have been chosen because of the phonetic similarity of their names to the names of these periods.

{72}

THE KIN GLYPH

The period of the 1st, or lowest, order was called by the Maya kin, which meant the "sun" and by association the "day." The kin, as has been explained, was the primary unit used by the Maya in counting time. The normal form of this period glyph in the inscriptions is shown in figure 34, a, which is practically identical with the form in the codices (fig. 34, b). In addition to the normal form of the kin sign, however, there are several other forms representing this period which can not be classified either as head variants or full-figure variants, as in figure 34, c, for example, which bears no resemblance whatever to the normal form of the kin sign. It is difficult to understand how two characters as dissimilar as those shown in a and c, figure 34, could ever be used to express the same idea, particularly since there seems to be no element common to both. Indeed, so dissimilar are they that one is almost forced to believe that they were derived from two entirely distinct glyphs. Still another and very unusual sign for the kin is shown in figure 34, d; indeed, the writer recalls but two places where it occurs: Stela 1 at Piedras Negras, and Stela C (north side) at Quirigua. It is composed of the normal form of the sign for the day Ahau (fig. 16, e') inverted and a subfixial element which varies in each of the two cases. These variants (fig. 34, c, d) are found only in the inscriptions. The head variants of the kin period differ from each other as much as the various normal forms above given. The form shown in figure 34, e, may be readily recognized by its subfixial element (*) and the element (†), {73}both of which appear in the normal form, figure 34, a. In some cases, as in figure 34, f-h, this variant also has the square irid and the crooked, snag-like teeth projecting from the front of the mouth. Again, any one of these features, or even all, may be lacking. Another and usually more grotesque type of head (fig. 34, i, j) has as its essential element the banded headdress. A very unusual head variant is that shown in figure 34, k, the essential characteristic of which seems to be the crossbones in the eye. Mr. Bowditch has included also in his list of kin signs the form shown in figure 34, l, from an inscription at Tikal. While this glyph in fact does stand between two dates which are separated by one day from each other, that is, 6 Eb 0 Pop and 7 Ben 1 Pop, the writer believes, nevertheless, that only the element (‡)—an essential part of the normal form for the kin—here represents the period one day, and that the larger characters above and below have other meanings. In the full-figure variants of the kin sign the figure portrayed is that of a human being (fig. 35), the head of which is similar to the one in figure 34, i, j, having the same banded headdress.^[47]

This concludes the presentation of the various forms which stand for the several periods of Table VIII. After an exhaustive study of these as found in Maya texts the writer has reached the following generalizations concerning them:

1. Prevalence. The periods in Initial Series are expressed far more frequently by head variants than by normal forms. The preponderance of the former over the latter in all Initial Series known is in the proportion of about 80 per cent of the total^[48] against 12 per cent, the periods in the remaining 8 per cent being expressed by these two forms used side by side. In other words, four-fifths of all the Initial Series known have their periods expressed by head-variant glyphs.

2. Antiquity. Head-variant period glyphs seem to have been used very much earlier than the normal forms. Indeed, the first use of the former preceded the first use of the latter by about 300 years, while in Initial Series normal-form period glyphs do not occur until nearly 100 years later, or about 400 years after the first use of head variants for the same purpose.

3. Variation. Throughout the range of time covered by the Initial Series the normal forms for any given time-period differ but little from one another, all following very closely one fixed type. Although {74}nearly 200 years apart in point of time, the early form of the tun sign in figure 36, a, closely resembles the late form shown in b of the same figure, as to its essentials. Or again, although 375 years apart, the early form of the katun sign in figure 36, c, is practically identical with the form in figure 36, d. Instances of this kind could be multiplied indefinitely, but the foregoing are sufficient to demonstrate that in so far as the normal-form period glyphs are concerned but little variation occurred from first to last. Similarly, it may be said, the head variants for any given period, while differing greatly in appearance at different epochs, retained, nevertheless, the same essential characteristic throughout. For example, although the uinal sign in figure 36, e, precedes the one in figure 36, f, by some 800 years, the same essential element—the large mouth curl—appears in both. Again, although 300 years separate the cycle signs shown in g and h, figure 36, the essential characteristic of the early form (fig. 36, g), the hand, is still retained as the essential part of the late form (h).

4. Derivation. We have seen that the full-figure glyphs probably show the original life-forms from which the head variants were developed. And since from (2), above, it seems probable that the head variants are older than the so-called normal forms, we may reasonably infer that the full-figure glyphs represent the life-forms whose names the Maya originally applied to their periods, and further that the first signs for those periods were the heads of these life-forms. This develops a contradiction in our nomenclature, for if the forms which we have called head variants are the older signs for the periods and are by far the most prevalent, they should have been called the normal forms and not variants, and vice versa. However, the use of the term "normal forms" is so general that it would be unwise at this time to attempt to introduce any change in nomenclature.

Secondary Series

The Initial Series method of recording dates, although absolutely accurate,^[49] was nevertheless somewhat lengthy, since in order to express a single date by means of it eight distinct glyphs were required, namely: (1) The Introducing glyph; (2) the Cycle glyph; {75}(3) the Katun glyph; (4) the Tun glyph; (5) the Uinal glyph; (6) the Kin glyph; (7) the Day glyph; (8) the Month glyph. Moreover, its use in any inscription which contained more than one date would have resulted in needless repetition. For example, if all the dates on any given monument were expressed by Initial Series, every one would show the long distance (more than 3,000 years) which separated it from the common starting point of Maya chronology. It would be just like writing the legal holidays of the current year in this way: February 22d, 1913, A. D., May 30th, 1913, A. D., July 4th, 1913, A. D., December 25th, 1913, A. D.; or in other words, repeating in each case the designation of time elapsed from the starting point of Christian chronology.

The Maya obviated this needless repetition by recording but one Initial Series date on a monument;^[50] and from this date as a new point of departure they proceeded to reckon the number of days to the next date recorded; from this date the numbers of days to the next; and so on throughout that inscription. By this device the position of any date in the Long Count (its Initial Series) could be calculated, since it could be referred back to a date, the Initial Series of which was expressed. For example, the terminal day of the Initial Series given on page 64 is 7 Akbal 11 Cumhu, and its position in the Long Count is fixed by the statement in cycles, katuns, tuns, etc., that 1,461,463 days separate it from the starting point, 4 Ahau 8 Cumhu. Now let us suppose we have the date 10 Cimi 14 Cumhu, which is recorded as being 3 days later than the day 7 Akbal 11 Cumhu,^[51] the Initial Series of which is known to be 1,461,463. It is clear that the Initial Series corresponding to the date 10 Cimi 14 Cumhu, although not actually expressed, will also be known since it must equal 1,461,463 (Initial Series of 7 Akbal 11 Cumhu) + 3 (distance from 7 Akbal 11 Cumhu to 10 Cimi 14 Cumhu), or 1,461,466. Therefore it matters not whether we count three days forward from 7 Akbal 11 Cumhu, or whether we count 1,461,466 days forward from the starting point of Maya chronology, 4 Ahau 8 Cumhu since in each case the date reached will be the same, namely, 10 Cimi 14 Cumhu. The former method, however, was used more frequently than all of the other methods of recording dates combined, since it insured all the accuracy of an Initial Series without repeating for each date so great a number of days.

Thus having one date on a monument the Initial Series of which was expressed, it was possible by referring subsequent dates to it, or to other dates which in turn had been referred to it, to fix accurately {76}the positions of any number of dates in the Long Count without the use of their corresponding Initial Series. Dates thus recorded are known as "secondary dates," and the periods which express their distances from other dates of known position in the Long Count, as "distance numbers." A secondary date with its corresponding distance number has been designated a Secondary Series. In the example above given the distance number 3 kins and the date 10 Cimi 14 Cumhu would constitute a Secondary Series.

Here, then, in addition to the Initial Series is a second method, the Secondary Series, by means of which the Maya recorded their dates. The earliest use of a Secondary Series with which the writer is familiar (that on Stela 36 at Piedras Negras) does not occur until some 280 years after the first Initial Series. It seems to have been a later development, probably owing its origin to the desire to express more than one date on a single monument. Usually Secondary Series are to be counted from the dates next preceding them in the inscriptions in which they are found, though occasionally they are counted from other dates which may not even be expressed, and which can be ascertained only by counting backward the distance number from its corresponding terminal date. The accuracy of a Secondary series date depends entirely on the fact that it has been counted from an Initial Series, or at least from another Secondary series date, which in turn has been derived from an Initial Series. If either of these contingencies applies to any Secondary series date, it is as accurate a method of fixing a day in the Long Count as though its corresponding Initial Series were expressed in full. If, on the other hand, a Secondary series date can not be referred ultimately to an Initial Series or to a date the Initial Series of which is known though it may not be expressed, such a Secondary series date becomes only one of the 18,980 dates of the Calendar Round, and will recur at intervals of every 52 years. In other words, its position in the Long Count will be unknown.

Calendar-round Dates

Dates of the character just described may be called Calendar-round dates, since they are accurate only within the Calendar Round, or range of 52 years. While accurate enough for the purpose of distinguishing dates in the course of a single lifetime, this method breaks down when used to express dates covering a long period. Witness the chaotic condition of Aztec chronology. The Maya seem to have realized the limitations of this method of dating and did not employ it extensively. It was used chiefly at Yaxchilan on the Usamacintla River, and for this reason the chronology of that city is very much awry, and it is difficult to assign its various dates to their proper positions in the Long Count. {77}

Period-ending Dates

The Maya made use of still another method of dating, which, although not so exact as the Initial Series or the Secondary Series, is, on the other hand, far more accurate than Calendar round dating. In this method a date was described as being at the end of some particular period in the Long Count; that is, closing a certain cycle, katun, or tun.^[52] It is clear also that in this method only the name Ahau out of the 20 given in Table I can be recorded, since it alone can stand at the end of periods higher than the kin. This is true, since:

1. The higher periods, as the uinal, tun, katun, and cycle are exactly divisible by 20 in every case (see Table VIII), and—

2. They are all counted from a day, Ahau, that is, 4 Ahau 8 Cumhu. Consequently, all the periods of the Long Count, except the kin or primary unit, end with days the name parts of which are the sign Ahau.

This method of recording dates always involves the use of at least two factors, and usually three:

1. A particular period of the Long Count, as Cycle 9, or Katun 14, etc.

2. The date which ends the particular period recorded, as 8 Ahau 13 Ceh, or 6 Ahau 13 Muan, the closing dates respectively of Cycle 9 and Katun 14 of Cycle 9; and

3. A glyph or element which means "ending" or "is ended," or which indicates at least that the period to which it is attached has come to its close.

The first two of these factors are absolutely essential to this method of dating, while the third, the so-called "ending sign," is usually, though not invariably, present. The order in which these factors are usually found is first the date composed of the day glyph and month glyph, next the "ending sign," and last the glyph of the period whose closing day has just been recorded. Very rarely the period glyph and its ending sign precede the date.

The ending glyph has three distinct variants: (1) the element shown as the prefix or superfix in figure 37, a-h, t, all of which are forms of the same variant; (2) the flattened grotesque head appearing either as the prefix or superfix in i, r, u, v of the same figure; and (3) the hand, which appears as the main element in the forms shown in figure 37, j-q. The two first of these never stand by themselves but always modify some other sign. The first (fig. 37, a-h, t) is always attached to the sign of the period whose end is recorded either as a {78}superfix (see fig. 37, a, whereby the end of Cycle 10 is indicated^[53]), or as a prefix (see t, whereby the end of Katun 14 is recorded). The second form is seen as a prefix in u, whereby the end of Katun 12 is recorded, and in i, whereby the end of Katun 11 is shown. This latter sign is found also as a superfix in r.

The hand-ending sign rarely appears as modifying period glyphs, although a few examples of such use have been found (see fig. 37, j, k). This ending sign usually appears as the main element in a separate glyph, which precedes the sign of the period whose end is recorded (see fig. 37, l-q). In these cases the subordinate elements differ somewhat, although the element (*) appears as the suffix in l, m, n, q, and the element (†) as a postfix therein, also in o and p. In a few cases the hand is combined with the other ending signs, sometimes with one and sometimes with the other. {79}

The use of the hand as expressing the meaning "ending" is quite natural. The Aztec, we have seen, called their 52-year period the xiuhmolpilli, or "year bundle." This implies the concomitant idea of "tying up." As a period closed, metaphorically speaking, it was "tied up" or "bundled up." The Maya use of the hand to express the idea "ending" may be a graphic representation of the member by means of which this "tying up" was effected, the clasped hand indicating the closed period.

This method of describing a date may be called "dating by period endings." It was far less accurate than Initial-series or Secondary-series dating, since a date described as occurring at the end of a certain katun could recur after an interval of about 18,000 years in round numbers, as against 374,400 years in the other 2 methods. For all practical purposes, however, 18,000 years was as accurate as 374,400 years, since it far exceeds the range of time covered by the written records of mankind the world over.

Period-ending dates were not used much, and, as has been stated above, they are found only in connection with the larger periods—most frequently with the katun, next with the cycle, and but very rarely with the tun. Mr. Bowditch (1910: pp. 176 et seq.) has reviewed fully the use of ending signs, and students are referred to his work for further information on this subject.

U Kahlay Katunob

In addition to the foregoing methods of measuring time and recording dates, the Maya of Yucatan used still another, which, however, was probably derived directly from the application of Period-ending dating to the Long Count, and consequently introduces no new elements. This has been designated the Sequence of the Katuns, because in this method the katun, or 7,200-day period, was the unit used for measuring the passage of time. The Maya themselves called the Sequence of the Katuns u tzolan katun, "the series of the katuns"; or u kahlay uxocen katunob, "the record of the count of the katuns"; or even more simply, u kahlay katunob, "the record of the katuns." These names accurately describe this system, which is simply the record of the successive katuns, comprising in the aggregate the range of Maya chronology.

Each katun of the u kahlay katunob was named after the designation of its ending day, a practice derived no doubt from Period-ending dating, and the sequence of these ending days represented passed time, each ending day standing for the katun of which it was the close. The katun, as we have seen on page 77, always ended with some day Ahau, consequently this day-name is the only one of the twenty which appears in the u kahlay katunob. In this method the katuns were distinguished from one another, not by the positions {80}which they occupied in the cycle, as Katun 14, for example, but by the different days Ahau with which they ended, as Katun 2 Ahau, Katun 13 Ahau, etc. See Table IX.

Table IX.—SEQUENCE OF KATUNS IN U KAHLAY KATUNOB

The peculiar retrograding sequence of the numerical coefficients in Table IX, decreasing by 2 from katun to katun, as 2, 13, 11, 9, 7, 5, 3, 1, 12, etc., results directly from the number of days which the katun contains. Since the 13 possible numerical coefficients, 1 to 13, inclusive, succeed each other in endless repetition, 1 following immediately after 13, it is clear that in counting forward any given number from any given numerical coefficient, the resulting numerical coefficient will not be affected if we first deduct all the 13s possible from the number to be counted forward. The mathematical demonstration of this fact follows. If we count forward 14 from any given coefficient, the same coefficient will be reached as if we had counted forward but 1. This is true because, (1) there are only 13 numerical coefficients, and (2) these follow each other without interruption, 1 following immediately after 13; hence, when 13 has been reached, the next coefficient is 1, not 14; therefore 13 or any multiple thereof may be counted forward or backward from any one of the 13 numerical coefficients without changing its value. This truth enables us to formulate the following rule for finding numerical coefficients: Deduct all the multiples of 13 possible from the number to be counted forward, and then count forward the remainder from the known coefficient, subtracting 13 if the resulting number is above 13, since 13 is the highest possible number which can be attached to a day sign. If we apply this rule to the sequence of the numerical coefficients in Table IX, we shall find that it accounts for the retrograding sequence there observed. The first katun in Table IX, Katun 2 Ahau, is named after its ending day, 2 Ahau. Now let us see whether the application of this rule will give us 13 Ahau as the ending day of the next katun. The number to be counted forward from 2 Ahau is 7,200, the number of days in one katun; therefore we must first deduct from 7,200 all the 13s possible. 7,200 ÷ 13 = 55311⁄13. In other words, after we have deducted all the 13's possible, that is, {81}553 of them, there is a remainder of 11. This the rule says is to be added (or counted forward) from the known coefficient (in this case 2) in order to reach the resulting coefficient. 2 + 11 = 13. Since this number is not above 13, 13 is not to be deducted from it; therefore the coefficient of the ending day of the second katun is 13, as shown in Table IX. Similarly we can prove that the coefficient of the ending day of the third katun in Table IX will be 11. Again, we have 7,200 to count forward from the known coefficient, in this case 13 (the coefficient of the ending day of the second katun). But we have seen above that if we deduct all the 13s possible from 7,200 there will be a remainder of 11; consequently this remainder 11 must be added to 13, the known coefficient. 13 + 11 = 24; but since this number is above 13, we must deduct 13 from it in order to find out the resulting coefficient. 24 - 13 = 11, and 11 is the coefficient of the ending day of the third katun in Table IX. By applying the above rule, all of the coefficients of the ending days of the katuns could be shown to follow the sequence indicated in Table IX. And since the ending days of the katuns determined their names, this same sequence is also that of the katuns themselves.

The above table enables us to establish a constant by means of which we can always find the name of the next katun. Since 7,200 is always the number of days in any katun, after deducting all the 13s possible the remainder will always be 11, which has to be added to the known coefficient to find the unknown. But since 13 has to be deducted from the resulting number when it is above 13, subtracting 2 will always give us exactly the same coefficient as adding 11; consequently we may formulate for determining the numerical coefficients of the ending days of katuns the following simple rule: Subtract 2 from the coefficient of the ending day of the preceding katun in every case. A glance at Table IX will demonstrate the truth of this rule.

In the names of the katuns given in Table IX it is noteworthy that the positions which the ending days occupied in the divisions of the haab, or 365-day year, are not mentioned. For example, the first katun was not called Katun 2 Ahau 8 Zac, but simply Katun 2 Ahau, the month part of the day, that is, its position in the year, was omitted. This omission of the month parts of the ending days of the katuns in the u kahlay katunob has rendered this method of dating far less accurate than any of the others previously described except Calendar-round Dating. For example, when a date was recorded as falling within a certain katun, as Katun 2 Ahau, it might occur anywhere within a period of 7,200 days, or nearly 20 years, and yet fulfill the given conditions. In other words, no matter how accurately this Katun 2 Ahau itself might be fixed in a long stretch of time, there was always the possibility of a maximum error of about 20 years in {82}such dating, since the statement of the katun did not fix a date any closer than as occurring somewhere within a certain 20-year period. When greater accuracy was desired the particular tun in which the date occurred was also given, as Tun 13 of Katun 2 Ahau. This fixed a date as falling somewhere within a certain 360 days, which was accurately fixed in a much longer period of time. Very rarely, in the case of an extremely important event, the Calendar-round date was also given as 9 Imix 19 Zip of Tun 9 of Katun 13 Ahau. A date thus described satisfying all the given conditions could not recur until after the lapse of at least 7,000 years. The great majority of events, however, recorded by this method are described only as occurring in some particular katun, as Katun 2 Ahau, for example, no attempt being made to refer them to any particular division (tun) of this period. Such accuracy doubtless was sufficient for recording the events of tribal history, since in no case could an event be more than 20 years out of the way.

Aside from this initial error, the accuracy of this method of dating has been challenged on the ground that since there were only thirteen possible numerical coefficients, any given katun, as Katun 2 Ahau, for example, in Table IX would recur in the sequence after the lapse of thirteen katuns, or about 256 years, thus paving the way for much confusion. While admitting that every thirteenth katun in the sequence had the same name (see Table IX), the writer believes, nevertheless, that when the sequence of the katuns was carefully kept, and the record of each entered immediately after its completion, so that there could be no chance of confusing it with an earlier katun of the same name in the sequence, accuracy in dating could be secured for as long a period as the sequence remained unbroken. Indeed, the u kahlay katunob^[54] from which the synopsis of Maya history given in Chapter I was compiled, accurately fixes the date of events, ignoring the possible initial inaccuracy of 20 years, within a period of more than 1,100 years, a remarkable feat for any primitive chronology.

How early this method of recording dates was developed is uncertain. It has not yet been found (surely) in the inscriptions in either the south or the north; on the other hand, it is so closely connected with the Long Count and Period-ending dating, which occurs repeatedly throughout the inscriptions, that it seems as though the u kahlay katunob must have been developed while this system was still in use.

There should be noted here a possible exception to the above statement, namely, that the u kahlay katunob has not been found in the inscriptions. Mr. Bowditch (1910: pp. 192 et seq.) has pointed out {83}what seem to be traces of another method of dating. This consists of some day Ahau modified by one of the two elements shown in figure 38 (a-d and e-h, respectively). In such cases the month part is sometimes recorded, though as frequently the day Ahau stands by itself. It is to be noted that in the great majority of these cases the days Ahau thus modified are the ending days of katuns, which are either expressed or at least indicated in adjacent glyphs. In other words, the day Ahau thus modified is usually the ending day of the next even katun after the last date recorded. The writer believes that this modification of certain days Ahau by either of the two elements shown in figure 38 may indicate that such days were the katun ending days nearest to the time when the inscriptions presenting them were engraved. The snake variants shown in figure 38, a-d, are all from Palenque; the knot variants (e-h of the same figure) are found at both Copan and Quirigua.

It may be objected that one katun ending day in each inscription is far different from a sequence of katun ending days as shown in Table IX, and that one katun ending day by itself can not be construed as an u kahlay katunob, or sequence of katuns. The difference here, however, is apparent rather than real, and results from the different character of the monuments and the native chronicles. The u kahlay katunob in Table IX is but a part of a much longer sequence of katuns, which is shown in a number of native chronicles written shortly after the Spanish Conquest, and which record the events of Maya history for more than 1,100 years. They are in fact chronological synopses of Maya history, and from their very nature they have to do with long periods. This is not true of the monuments,^[55] which, as we have seen, were probably set up to mark the passage of certain periods, not exceeding a katun in length in any case. Consequently, each monument would have inscribed upon it only one or two {84}katun ending days and the events which were connected more or less closely with it. In other words, the monuments were erected at short intervals^[56] and probably recorded events contemporaneous with their erection, while the u kahlay katunob, on the other hand, were historical summaries reaching back to a remote time. The former were the periodicals of current events, the latter histories of the past. The former in the great majority of cases had no concern with the lapse of more than one or two katuns, while the latter measured centuries by the repetition of the same unit. The writer believes that from the very nature of the monuments—markers of current time—no u kahlay katunob will be found on them, but that the presence of the katun ending days above described indicates that the u kahlay katunob had been developed while the other system was still in use. If the foregoing be true, the signs in figure 38, a-h, would have this meaning: "On this day came to an end the katun in which fall the accompanying dates," or some similar significance.

If we exclude the foregoing as indicating the u kahlay katunob, we have but one aboriginal source, that is one antedating the Spanish Conquest, which probably records a count of this kind. It has been stated (p. 33) that the Codex Peresianus probably treats in part at least of historical matter. The basis for this assertion is that in this particular manuscript an u kahlay katunob is seemingly recorded; at least there is a sequence of the ending days of katuns shown, exactly like the one in Table IX, that is, 13 Ahau, 11 Ahau, 9 Ahau, etc.

At the time of the Spanish Conquest the Long Count seems to have been recorded entirely by the ending days of its katuns, that is, by the u kahlay katunob, and the use of Initial-series dating seems to have been discontinued, and perhaps even forgotten. Native as well as Spanish authorities state that at the time of the Conquest the Maya measured time by the passage of the katuns, and no mention is made of any system of dating which resembles in the least the Initial Series so prevalent in the southern and older cities. While the Spanish authorities do not mention the u kahlay katunob as do the native writers, they state very clearly that this was the system used in counting time. Says Bishop Landa (1864: p. 312) in this connection: "The Indians not only had a count by years and days ... but they had a certain method of counting time and their affairs by ages, which they made from twenty to twenty years ... these they call katunes." Cogolludo (1688: lib. iv, cap. v, p. 186) makes a similar statement: "They count their eras and ages, which they put in their books from twenty to twenty years ... [these] they call katun." Indeed, there can be but little doubt that the u kahlay katunob had entirely replaced the Initial Series in recording the Long Count centuries before the Spanish Conquest; and if the latter method of dating were known {85}at all, the knowledge of it came only from half-forgotten records the understanding of which was gradually passing from the minds of men.

It is clear from the foregoing that an important change in recording the passage of time took place sometime between the epoch of the great southern cities and the much later period when the northern cities flourished. In the former, time was reckoned and dates were recorded by Initial Series; in the latter, in so far as we can judge from post-Conquest sources, the u kahlay katunob and Calendar-round dating were the only systems used. As to when this change took place, we are not entirely in the dark. It is certain that the use of the Initial Series extended to Yucatan, since monuments presenting this method of dating have been found at a few of the northern cities, namely, at Chichen Itza, Holactun, and Tuluum. On the other hand, it is equally certain that Initial Series could not have been used very extensively in the north, since they have been discovered in only these three cities in Yucatan up to the present time. Moreover, the latest, that is, the most recent of these three, was probably contemporaneous with the rise of the Triple Alliance, a fairly early event of Northern Maya history. Taking these two points into consideration, the limited use of Initial Series in the north and the early dates recorded in the few Initial Series known, it seems likely that Initial-series dating did not long survive the transplanting of the Maya civilization in Yucatan.

Why this change came about is uncertain. It could hardly have been due to the desire for greater accuracy, since the u kahlay katunob was far less exact than Initial-series dating; not only could dates satisfying all given conditions recur much more frequently in the u kahlay katunob, but, as generally used, this method fixed a date merely as occurring somewhere within a period of about 20 years.

The writer believes the change under consideration arose from a very different cause; that it was in fact the result of a tendency toward greater brevity, which was present in the glyphic writing from the very earliest times, and which is to be noted on some of the earliest monuments that have survived the ravages of the passing centuries. At first, when but a single date was recorded on a monument, an Initial Series was used. Later, however, when the need or desire had arisen to inscribe more than one date on the same monument, additional dates were not expressed as Initial Series, each of which, as we have seen, involves the use of 8 glyphs, but as a Secondary Series, which for the record of short periods necessitated the use of fewer glyphs than were employed in Initial Series. It would seem almost as though Secondary Series had been invented to avoid the use of Initial Series when more than one date had to be recorded on the same monument. But this tendency toward brevity in dating did not cease with the invention of Secondary Series. Somewhat later, dating by period-endings was introduced, obviating the {86}necessity for the use of even one Initial Series on every monument, in order that one date might be fixed in the Long Count to which the others (Secondary Series) could be referred. For all practical purposes, as we have seen, Period-ending dating was as accurate as Initial-series dating for fixing dates in the Long Count, and its substitution for Initial-series dating resulted in a further saving of glyphs and a corresponding economy of space. Still later, probably after the Maya had colonized Yucatan, the u kahlay katunob, which was a direct application of Period-ending dating to the Long Count, came into general use. At this time a rich history lay behind the Maya people, and to have recorded all of its events by their corresponding Initial Series would have been far too cumbersome a practice. The u kahlay katunob offered a convenient and facile method by means of which long stretches of time could be recorded and events approximately dated; that is, within 20 years. This, together with the fact that the practice of setting up dated period-markers seems to have languished in the north, thus eliminating the greatest medium of all for the presentation of Initial Series, probably gave rise to the change from the one method of recording time to the other.

This concludes the discussion of the five methods by means of which the Maya reckoned time and recorded dates: (1) Initial-series dating; (2) Secondary-series dating; (3) Calendar-round dating; (4) Period-ending dating; (5) Katun-ending dating, or the u kahlay katunob. While apparently differing considerably from one another, in reality all are expressions of the same fundamental idea, the combination of the numbers 13 and 20 (that is, 260) with the solar year conceived as containing 365 days, and all were recorded by the same vigesimal system of numeration; that is:

1. All used precisely the same dates, the 18,980 dates of the Calendar Round;

2. All may be reduced to the same fundamental unit, the day; and

3. All used the same time counters, those shown in Table VIII.

In conclusion, the student is strongly urged constantly to bear in mind two vital characteristics of Maya chronology:

1. The absolute continuity of all sequences which had to do with the counting of time: The 13 numerical coefficients of the day names, the 20 day names, the 260 days of the tonalamatl, the 365 positions of the haab, the 18,980 dates of the Calendar Round, and the kins, uinals, tuns, katuns, and cycles of the vigesimal system of numeration. When the conclusion of any one of these sequences had been reached, the sequence began anew without the interruption or omission of a single unit and continued repeating itself for all time.

2. All Maya periods expressed not current time, but passed time, as in the case of our hours, minutes, and seconds.

On these two facts rests the whole Maya conception of time. {87}

Chapter IV

MAYA ARITHMETIC

The present chapter will be devoted to the consideration of Maya arithmetic in its relation to the calendar. It will be shown how the Maya expressed their numbers and how they used their several time periods. In short, their arithmetical processes will be explained, and the calculations resulting from their application to the calendar will be set forth.

The Maya had two different ways of writing their numerals,^[57] namely: (1) With normal forms, and (2) with head variants; that is, each of the numerals up to and including 19 had two distinct characters which stood for it, just as in the case of the time periods and more rarely, the days and months. The normal forms of the numerals may be compared to our Roman figures, since they are built up by the combination of certain elements which had a fixed numerical value, like the letters I, V, X, L, C, D, and M, which in Roman notation stand for the values 1, 5, 10, 50, 100, 500, and 1,000, respectively. The head-variant numerals, on the other hand, more closely resemble our Arabic figures, since there was a special head form for each number up to and including 13, just as there are special characters for the first nine figures and zero in Arabic notation. Moreover, this parallel between our Arabic figures and the Maya head-variant numerals extends to the formation of the higher numbers. Thus, the Maya formed the head-variant numerals for 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, and 19 by applying the essential characteristic of the head variant for 10 to the head variants for 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9, respectively, just as the sign for 10—that is, one in the tens place and zero in the units place—is used in connection with the signs for the first nine figures in Arabic notation to form the numbers 11 to 19, inclusive. Both of these notations occur in the inscriptions, but with very few exceptions^[58] no head-variant numerals have yet been found in the codices.

Bar and Dot Numerals

The Maya "Roman numerals"—that is, the normal-form numerals, up to and including 19—were expressed by varying combinations of two elements, the dot (), which represented the numeral, or numerical value, 1, and the bar, or line (), which represented the numeral, or numerical value, 5. By various combinations of these two {88}elements alone the Maya expressed all the numerals from 1 to 19, inclusive. The normal forms of the numerals in the codices are shown in figure 39, in which one dot stands for 1, two dots for 2, three dots for 3, four dots for 4, one bar for 5, one bar and one dot for 6, one bar and two dots for 7, one bar and three dots for 8, one bar and four dots for 9, two bars for 10, and so on up to three bars and four dots for 19. The normal forms of the numerals, in the inscriptions (see fig. 40) are identical with those in the codices, excepting that they are more elaborate, the dots and bars both taking on various decorations. Some of the former contain a concentric circle (*) or cross-hatching (**); some appear as crescents (†) or curls (††), more rarely as (‡) or (‡‡). The bars show even a greater variety of treatment (see fig. 41). All these decorations, however, in no way affect the numerical value of the bar and the dot, which remain 5 and 1, respectively, throughout the Maya writing. Such embellishments as those just described are found only in the inscriptions, and their use was probably due to the desire to make the bar and dot serve a decorative as well as a numerical function.

An important exception to this statement should be noted here in connection with the normal forms for the numbers 1, 2, 6, 7, 11, 12, 16, and 17, that is, all which involve the use of one or two dots in their composition.^[59] In the inscriptions, as we have seen in Chapter II, every glyph was a balanced picture, exactly fitting its allotted space, even at the cost of occasionally losing some of its elements. To have expressed the numbers 1, 2, 6, 7, 11, 12, 16, and 17 as in the codices, with just the proper number of bars and dots in each case, would have left unsightly gaps in the outlines of the glyph blocks (see fig. 42, a-h, where these numbers are shown as the coefficients of the katun sign). In a, c, e, and g of the same figure (the numbers 1, 6, 11, and 16, respectively) the single dot does not fill the space on the left-hand^[60] side of the bar, or bars, as the case may be, and consequently {89}the left-hand edge of the glyph block in each case is ragged. Similarly in b, d, f, and h, the numbers 2, 7, 12, and 17, respectively, the two dots at the left of the bar or bars are too far apart to fill in the left-hand edge of the glyph blocks neatly, and consequently in these cases also the left edge is ragged. The Maya were quick to note this discordant note in glyph design, and in the great majority of the places where these numbers (1, 2, 6, 7, 11, 12, 16, and 17) had to be recorded, other elements of a purely ornamental character were introduced to fill the empty spaces. In figure 43, a, c, e, g, the spaces on each side of the single dot have been filled with ornamental {90}crescents about the size of the dot, and these give the glyph in each case a final touch of balance and harmony, which is lacking without them. In b, d, f, and h of the same figure a single crescent stands between the two numerical dots, and this again harmoniously fills in the glyph block. While the crescent (*) is the usual form taken by this purely decorative element, crossed lines (**) are found in places, as in (†); or, again, a pair of dotted elements (††), as in (‡). These variants, however, are of rare occurrence, the common form being the crescent shown in figure 43.

The use of these purely ornamental elements, to fill the empty spaces in the normal forms of the numerals 1, 2, 6, 7, 11, 12, 16, and 17, is a fruitful source of error to the student of the inscriptions. Slight weathering of an inscription is often sufficient to make ornamental crescents look exactly like numerical dots, and consequently the numerals 1, 2, 3 are frequently mistaken for one another, as are also 6, 7, and 8; 11, 12, and 13; and 16, 17, and 18. The student must exercise the greatest caution at all times in identifying these {91}numerals in the inscriptions, or otherwise he will quickly find himself involved in a tangle from which there seems to be no egress. Probably more errors in reading the inscriptions have been made through the incorrect identification of these numerals than through any other one cause, and the student is urged to be continually on his guard if he would avoid making this capital blunder.

Although the early Spanish authorities make no mention of the fact that the Maya expressed their numbers by bars and dots, native testimony is not lacking on this point. Doctor Brinton (1882 b: p. 48) gives this extract, accompanied by the drawing shown in figure 44, from a native writer of the eighteenth century who clearly describes this system of writing numbers:

This description is so clear, and the values therein assigned to the several combinations of bars and dots have been verified so extensively throughout both the inscriptions and the codices, that we are justified in identifying the bar and dot as the signs for five and one, respectively, wherever they occur, whether they are found by themselves or in varying combinations.

In the codices, as will appear in Chapter VI, the bar and dot numerals were painted in two colors, black and red. These colors were used to distinguish one set of numerals from another, each of which has a different use. In such cases, however, bars of one color are never used with dots of the other color, each number being either all red or all black (see p. 93, footnote 1, for the single exception to this rule).

By the development of a special character to represent the number 5 the Maya had far surpassed the Aztec in the science of mathematics; indeed, the latter seem to have had but one numerical sign, the dot, and they were obliged to resort to the clumsy makeshift of repeating this in order to represent all numbers above 1. It is clearly seen that such a system of notation has very definite limitations, which must have seriously retarded mathematical progress among the Aztec.

In the Maya system of numeration, which was vigesimal, there was no need for a special character to represent the number 20,^[61] because {92}(1) as we have seen in Table VIII, 20 units of any order (except the 2d, in which only 18 were required) were equal to 1 unit of the order next higher, and consequently 20 could not be attached to any period-glyph, since this number of periods (with the above exception) was always recorded as 1 period of the order next higher; and (2) although there were 20 positions in each period except the uinal, as 20 kins in each uinal, 20 tuns in each katun, 20 katuns in each cycle, these positions were numbered not from 1 to 20, but on the contrary from 0 to 19, a system which eliminated the need for a character expressing 20.

In spite of the foregoing fact, however, the number 20 has been found in the codices (see fig. 45). A peculiar condition there, however, accounts satisfactorily for its presence. In the codices the sign for 20 occurs only in connection with tonalamatls, which, as we shall see later, were usually portrayed in such a manner that the numbers of which they were composed could not be presented from bottom to top in the usual way, but had to be written horizontally from left to right. This destroyed the possibility of numeration by position,^[62] according to the Maya point of view, and consequently some sign was necessary which should stand for 20 regardless of its position or relation to others. The sign shown in figure 45 was used for this purpose. It has not yet been found in the inscriptions, perhaps because, as was pointed out in Chapter II, the inscriptions generally do not appear to treat of tonalamatls.

If the Maya numerical system had no vital need for a character to express the number 20, a sign to represent zero was absolutely {93}indispensable. Indeed, any numerical system which rises to a second order of units requires a character which will signify, when the need arises, that no units of a certain order are involved; as zero units and zero tens, for example, in writing 100 in our own Arabic notation.

The character zero seems to have played an important part in Maya calculations, and signs for it have been found in both the codices and the inscriptions. The form found in the codices (fig. 46) is lenticular; it presents an interior decoration which does not follow any fixed scheme.^[63] Only a very few variants occur. The last one in figure 46 has clearly as one of its elements the normal form (lenticular). The remaining two are different. It is noteworthy, however, that these last three forms all stand in the 2d, or uinal, place in the texts in which they occur, though whether this fact has influenced their variation is unknown.

Both normal forms and head variants for zero, as indeed for all the numbers, have been found in the inscriptions. The normal forms for zero are shown in figure 47. They are common and are unmistakable. An interesting origin for this sign has been suggested by Mr. A. P. Maudslay. On pages 75 and 76 of the Codex Tro-Cortesiano^[64] the 260 days of a tonalamatl are graphically represented as forming the outline shown in figure 48, a. Half of this (see fig. 48, b) is the sign which stands for zero (compare with fig. 47). The train of association by which half of the graphic representation of a tonalamatl could come to stand for zero is not clear. Perhaps a of figure 48 may have signified that a complete tonalamatl had passed with no additional days. From this the sign may have come to represent the idea of completeness as apart from the tonalamatl, and finally the general idea of completeness {94}applicable to any period; for no period could be exactly complete without a fractional remainder unless all the lower periods were wanting; that is, represented by zero. Whether this explains the connection between the outline of the tonalamatl and the zero sign, or whether indeed there be any connection between the two, is of course a matter of conjecture.

There is still one more normal form for zero not included in the examples given above, which must be described. This form (fig. 49), which occurs throughout the inscriptions and in the Dresden Codex,^[65] is chiefly interesting because of its highly specialized function. Indeed, it was used for one purpose only, namely, to express the first, or zero, position in each of the 19 divisions of the haab, or year, and for no other. In other words, it denotes the positions 0 Pop, 0 Uo, 0 Zip, etc., which, as we have seen (pp. 47, 48), corresponded with our first days of the months. The forms shown in figure 49, a-e, are from the inscriptions and those in f-h from the Dresden Codex. They are all similar. The general outline of the sign has suggested the name "the spectacle" glyph. Its essential characteristic seems to be the division into two roughly circular parts, one above the other, best seen in the Dresden Codex forms (fig. 49, f-h) and a roughly circular infix in each. The lower infix is quite regular in all of the forms, being a circle or ring. The upper infix, however, varies considerably. In figure 49, a, b, this ring has degenerated into a loop. In c and d of the same figure it has become elaborated into a head. A simpler form is that in f and g. Although comparatively rare, this glyph is so unusual in form that it can be readily recognized. Moreover, if the student will bear in mind the two following points concerning its use, he will never fail to identify it in the inscriptions: The "spectacle" sign (1) can be attached only to the glyphs for the 19 divisions of the haab, or year, that is, the 18 uinals and the xma kaba kin; in other words, it is found only with the glyphs shown in figures 19 and 20, the signs for the months in the inscriptions and codices, respectively.

(2) It can occur only in connection with one of the four day-signs, Ik, Manik, Eb, and Caban (see figs. 16, c, j, s, t, u, a', b', and 17, c, d, k, r, x, y, respectively), since these four alone, as appears in Table VII, can occupy the 0 (zero) positions in the several divisions of the haab. {95}

Examples of the normal-form numerals as used with the day, month, and period glyphs in both the inscriptions and the codices are shown in figure 50. Under each is given its meaning in English.^[66] The student is advised to familiarize himself with these forms, since on his ability to recognize them will largely depend his progress in reading the inscriptions. This figure illustrates the use of all the foregoing forms except the sign for 20 in figure 45 and the sign for zero in figure 46. As these two forms never occur with day, month, or period glyphs, and as they have been found only in the codices, examples showing their use will not be given until Chapter VI is reached, which treats of the codices exclusively. {96}

Head-variant Numerals

Let us next turn to the consideration of the Maya "Arabic notation," that is, the head-variant numerals, which, like all other known head variants, are practically restricted to the inscriptions.^[67] It should be noted here before proceeding further that the full-figure numerals found in connection with full-figure period, day, and month glyphs in a few inscriptions, have been classified with the head-variant numerals. As explained on page 67, the body-parts of such glyphs have no function in determining their meanings, and it is only the head-parts which present in each case the determining characteristics of the form intended.

In the "head" notation each of the numerals, 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13^[68] is expressed by a distinctive type of head; each type has its own essential characteristic, by means of which it can be distinguished from all of the others. Above 13 and up to but not including 20, the head numerals are expressed by the application of the essential characteristic of the head for 10 to the heads for 3 to 9, inclusive. No head forms for the numeral 20 have yet been discovered.

The identification of these head-variant numerals in some cases is not an easy matter, since their determining characteristics are not always presented clearly. Moreover, in the case of a few numerals, notably the heads for 2, 11, and 12, the essential elements have not yet been determined. Head forms for these numerals occur so rarely in the inscriptions that the comparative data are insufficient to enable us to fix on any particular element as the essential one. Another difficulty encountered in the identification of head-variant numerals is the apparent irregularity of the forms in the earlier inscriptions. The essential elements of these early head numerals in some cases seem to differ widely from those of the later forms, and consequently it is sometimes difficult, indeed even impossible, to determine their corresponding numerical values. {97}

The head-variant numerals are shown in figures 51-53. Taking these up in their numerical order, let us commence with the head signifying 1; see figure 51, a-e. The essential element of this head is its forehead ornament, which, to signify the number 1, must be composed of more than one part (*), in order to distinguish it from the forehead ornament (**), which, as we shall see presently, is the essential element of the head for 8 (fig. 52, a-f). Except for their forehead ornaments the heads for 1 and 8 are almost identical, and great care must be exercised in order to avoid mistaking one for the other. {98}

The head for 2 (fig. 51, f, g) has been found only twice in the inscriptions—on Lintel 2 at Piedras Negras and on the tablet in the Temple of the Initial Series at Holactun. The oval at the top of the head seems to be the only element these two forms have in common, and the writer therefore accepts this element as the essential characteristic of the head for 2, admitting at the same time that the evidence is insufficient.