I have left to the last the subject of the hieroglyphic inscriptions. For those of my readers who have not previously paid any attention to the subject it is necessary to begin at the beginning and to say that there is a very considerable difference between the Mexican picture-writing and the Maya hieroglyphics, although not so very long ago they were all classed under the same head and called Mexican. The Maya writing may again be divided into two classes—the Inscriptions carved in stone or moulded in stucco, and the Codices or Manuscripts. Of these Codices there are four only known to students preserved in the museums and libraries of Paris, Dresden, and Madrid, and all four are in a more or less damaged condition. Between the glyphs of the carved inscriptions and the codices it may be stated roughly that there is not more difference than might naturally be looked for between a carved and written script.

Up to the present time more efforts have been made to interpret the codices than the carved inscriptions. It seems to be generally admitted that the former bear a hieratic character and deal for the most part with religious rites and festivals and the fixing of the times and seasons of their occurrence; but whether under a clothing of myth and fable, ceremonial observance, or cryptic puzzle, the probable object of these writings was the establishment with something like accuracy of the position of the solar year, a knowledge of which, from our very familiarity with it, we are wont to overlook as one of the first necessities of civilization. Both codices and carved inscriptions are thickly studded with numerals and signs for periods of time, and it is in dealing with these time-computations and the arrangement of the calendar that students of Maya writings have up to the present met with their chief success. It seems doubtful if more than a mere trace of phoneticism has as yet been established, and more than doubtful if the inscriptions when fully deciphered will yield us much direct information of a historical nature.

The principal and earliest authority for the divisions of time and the signs by which they were represented is a document preserved in the Royal Academy of History at Madrid, believed to have been written in 1566 by Diego de Landa, Bishop of Yucatan. The signs for the days and months given by Landa, although carelessly drawn, have proved of inestimable value, and a facsimile of them is here given:—

An attempt was also made by Landa to construct an alphabet and to give a short example of phonetic writing; but in this he was not successful, for whatever phonetic value the glyphs may possess was probably of a syllabic and not of an alphabetic character, and Landa’s alphabet has proved to be to students almost as great a puzzle as the hieroglyphics themselves.It may, however, be taken as clearly established:—

If the year begins with 1 Kan, the first day of the month Pop, the last day of that month will be 7 Akbal, the twentieth day of the month Pop; and the next day following will be 8 Akbal, the first day of the month Uo, and so on. The last day of the eighteenth month would be 9 Akbal, the twentieth day of the month Cumhu; then follow the five intercalated days, 10 Kan, 11 Chicchan, 12 Cimi, 13 Manik, 1 Lamat, so that the first day of the next year would be 2 Muluc. If the Table were drawn out in full it would be seen that the third year would commence with 3 Ix, the fourth year with 4 Cauac, the fifth year with 5 Kan, and so on through fifty-two years, and the fifty-third year would commence with 1 Kan again. From this it will be seen that the Maya year could commence on four only out of the twenty days of the month, and these four days are commonly called the “year-bearers.”

In the Annual Calendar given above, which begins with 1 Kan, the first day of the month Pop, it will be noticed that after a period of thirteen months the next month again commences with 1 Kan, but in this case 1 Kan falls on the first day of the 14th month Kankin.

This period of 260 days (20 × 13), that is to say the period of time which must elapse before a day can recur in the same position in the month with the same day-numeral attached to it, appears to have been of special importance in the arrangement of the religious ritual, but how far this period of 260 days enters into the actual computation of time is at present difficult to determine.

It is also claimed for the Mayas by some writers that they had an almost exact knowledge of the length of the solar year, and that there was some arrangement of their calendar by which leap years could be counted.

The foregoing account of the Maya calendar has been derived from the writings of students who, after making a careful examination of the early Spanish writers, have devoted their attention almost exclusively to the study of the codices. All mention has been avoided of Katuns and Ahaukatuns (the longer time-periods spoken of by Landa and others), about the length of which there has been much disputation, as I have wished to confine myself to statements which are generally accepted as correct.

In the concluding pages of this chapter I propose to give some examples of the inscriptions carved on the Monolithic StelÆ and on the walls of the ancient temples, and then to examine them, and to some extent explain them, with the aid of the notes and tables prepared by my friend Mr. J. T. Goodman, of California, whose essay on the subject has been published as an Appendix to the ArchÆological Section of the ‘Biologia Centrali-Americana.’

As the subject is one about which controversy is already rife, it is not likely that Mr. Goodman’s methods will escape hostile criticism, and however favourable my own views may be of their merits, his method is applied here not with a view of claiming for it either priority or exclusive originality, but (as it is the method with which I am most familiar) as a means of showing to the general reader the way in which such a difficult problem has been attacked and to some extent conquered.According to Mr. Goodman the Mayas, although understanding and using the year of 365 days, based their calendar on the Ahau of 360 days, and made all their computations in Ahaus, Katuns, &c., according to the following table:—

The following signs are employed in the inscriptions to denote these periods of time:—

and it will be seen from the following tables that the signs for the days and months found on the carved stelÆ do not differ materially from those given by Landa. A number of alternative signs is given for the day Ahau, and one named Uayeb is added to the list of eighteen months. This month Uayeb consists of the five intercalated days only.

All the dates on the monuments which have as yet been examined fall within the three Great Cycles numbered, according to Mr. Goodman, the 53rd, 54th, and 55th.

Mr. Goodman has prepared and published full tables of these three Great Cycles which he calls the “Chronological Calendar,” as well as a “Yearly Calendar” extending over the complete calendar round of 52 years.

Fifty-fourth Great Cycle.

Ninth Cycle.

Archaic Annual Calendar.

1st Year.

13th Year.

35th Year.

38th Year.

On the following plate is given the first half of an inscription carved on the sides of stela B from Copan[11].

The Initial date of this inscription therefore reads as follows:—

As a “full count” of days (twenty) is a Chuen, a “full count” of Chuens (eighteen) is an Ahau, and a “full count” of Ahaus (twenty) is a Katun. The foregoing inscription may be read thus:—

The 15th Katun of the 9th Cycle with no Ahaus, Chuens, or days added, begins with 4 Ahau 13 Yax.

A reference to Mr. Goodman’s Chronological Calendar shows that the 15th Katun of the 9th Cycle of the 54th Great Cycle commences with the day 4 Ahau, the 13th day of the month Yax, the date which is here given in the inscription. The combination 4 Ahau 13 Yax can only occur once in a period of fifty-two years.

The second example on the plate gives the commencement of an inscription from the east side of Stela F at Quirigua.

The Great Cycle sign (54th) extends over the two columns of glyphs.

The signs for the Cycle, Katun, &c. are not in this case preceded by bar and dot numerals, but by grotesque human faces; Mr. Goodman has discovered that these faces are also numerals, and, although the whole series has not yet been satisfactorily established, the inscription may with some confidence be read as follows:—

The five following glyphs are not yet satisfactorily deciphered, and it is not until the 12th glyph that the month sign is arrived at.

A reference to Mr. Goodman’s Chronological Calendar would show that 1 Ahau 3 Zip is the first day of the 10th Ahau of the 16th Katun of the 9th Cycle of the 54th Great Cycle.

The third example of an inscription given on the plate shows four squares of picture-writing from Stela D at Quirigua[12]. It seems probable that in these pictures, which are found only on two monuments at Quirigua and on one at Copan[13], we have a survival of a form of writing which antedated the more conventional hieroglyphs. Both numerals and time periods are expressed by human and grotesque figures instead of by the heads alone, as in the preceding examples. The time periods in the example here figured take the form of grotesque birds.

These three squares following the Great Cycle sign denote the Cycle, Katun, and Ahau count, and may probably be written:—

So far I have dealt only with the Initial dates on the Inscriptions. I now propose to examine a complete inscription with the help of Goodman’s notes and tables, and for this purpose have selected one which was discovered by Mr. Teobert Maler amongst the ruins of Piedras Negras on the Usumacinta.

This inscription was known neither to Mr. Goodman nor myself until his essay and tables were already issuing from the press, and it therefore affords a fair field on which to test the value of his methods. The following partial explanation of the inscription is taken from a paper on the subject published in the ‘Proceedings of the Royal Society’[14]:—

“The glyph A 1 is the initial glyph indicating the Great Cycle. It has more the appearance of the sign for the 53rd than for that of the 54th Great Cycle; but the signs for the different Great Cycles are still in need of elucidation, and the subsequent reckoning shows clearly that the dates fall within the table given by Mr. Goodman as that of the 54th Great Cycle.

“The next glyph B 1 is the Cycle sign with the numeral 9 in front of it (one bar =5 and four dots =4).

“A 2 is the Katun sign with the numeral 12 in front of it (two bars =10, and two dots =2; the hollow curve between the two round dots is merely used to fill up the space, and does not count).

“B 2 is the Ahau sign with the numeral 2.

“Turning to the tables of Mr. Goodman’s Chronological Calendar, of which an extract showing the 10th to the 14th Katuns of the 9th Cycle is given on page 265, we find that the first day of the—

falls on the day 2 Ahau, the 18th day of the month Xul (which is underlined in the table).

“This is as far as the Chronological Calendar can guide us. We have next to find the position of this date in the Annual Calendar. The date can only occur once in the fifty-two years which constitute a calendar round, and an examination of the tables shows that it falls in the first year of the annual calendar (see page 266, where it is marked with a square).

“The next glyph in the inscription, A 3, is the Chuen sign with the sign which signifies a ‘full count’ of Chuens, in front of it. As a full count of Chuens is 18 and equals 1 Ahau, and as the number of Ahaus has already been recorded, the glyph A 3 means that no odd Chuens are to be added to the date already expressed.

“The glyph B 3 is the sign for a day (of twenty-four hours) preceded by the numeral 16.

“Turning to the first year of the annual calendar, we now add these 16 days to 2 Ahau 18 Xul, the date already arrived at, and it will be found to bring us to 5 Cib 14 Yaxkin (marked with a dashed border).

“That this reckoning is correct is shown by the inscription itself, where the result is expressed: A 4 being 5 Cib, and B 7 14 Yaxkin. The six glyphs in the inscription intermediate between the sign of the day Cib, and the sign of the month Yaxkin, have not yet been thoroughly deciphered, but there is reason to suppose that they contain a parallel reckoning differently expressed.

“The next three glyphs are undeciphered; then comes another reckoning:—

“C 1 is the Chuen sign with the numeral 10 (two bars =10) above it, and a ‘full count’ sign at the side. Whether the 10 applies to the Chuens or days can only be determined by experiment, and such experiment in this case shows that the reckoning intended to be expressed is 10 Chuens and a ‘full count’ of days, that is for practical purposes 10 Chuens only, for as in the last reckoning when the full count of Chuens was expressed in the Ahaus, so here the full count of days is expressed in the Chuens.

“The next glyph D 1 is an Ahau sign, preceded by the numeral 12.

“This gives us—

“Adding 4520 days, or 12 years and 140 days, to the date 5 Cib 14 Kankin, it brings us to the date 1 Cib 14 Kankin in the thirteenth year of the annual calendar.

“Turning to the inscription we find at C 2 (passing over the first half of the glyph), 1 Cib followed by (the first half of D 2) 14 Kankin, the date at which we have already arrived by computation.

“Passing over the next three glyphs we arrive at another reckoning: D 4 gives 10 days, 11 Chuens, 1 Ahau; and the first half of C 5 gives 1 Katun.

“Adding 7790 days or 21 years and 125 days to the previous date, 1 Cib 14 Kankin, it will bring us to 4 Cimi 14 Uo in the thirty-fifth year of the annual calendar, and we find this date expressed in the inscription in the glyphs D 5 and C 6.

“Passing over the next three glyphs we arrive at another reckoning (E 1), 3 Ahaus, 8 Chuens, 15 days:—

“Adding 3 years and 160 days to the last date, 4 Cimi 14 Uo, brings us to 11 Ymix 14 Yax in the thirty-eighth year of the annual calendar; this is the date we find expressed in the glyphs E 2 and F 2 of the inscription.

“It is true that the sign in the glyph E 2 is not the sign usually employed for the day Ymix, but that it is a day-sign we know from the fact that it is included in a cartouche, and I am inclined to think that the more usual Ymix sign (something like an open hand with the fingers extended) was inclosed in the oval on the top of the grotesque head, but it is too much worn for identification.

“Passing over seven glyphs, the next reckoning occurs at F 6, which gives:—

“Adding 99 days to the last date, 11 Ymix 14 Yax, brings us to 6 Ahan 13 Muan in the same year, and we find this date expressed in F 7 and F 8.

“The last glyph in the inscription is a Katun sign with the numeral 14 above it, and a sign for ‘beginning’ in front of it, and indicates that the last date is the beginning of a 14th Katun. If we turn to the Table for the 9th Cycle of the 54th Great Cycle, from which we started, it will be seen that the 14th Katun of that cycle does commence with the date 6 Ahan 13 Muan.”

It is beyond the limits of possibility that the identity of the dates and intervals found in this inscription with those shown in the Calendars is the result of chance, and we may now fairly assume that the essential features of the dates and computations of time found on the carved inscriptions have passed from the region of mystery into that of established fact. This is, indeed, only one step in the elucidation of the meaning of the inscriptions, but it is one of the greatest importance. The next step, it is to be hoped, will be the collation of the dates on the Maya monuments with those of our own system of reckoning time. And although this step is beset with many difficulties, it should not be looked upon as impossible.

I regret to say that I am frequently asked, What is the good of labouring at the collection and interpretation of inscriptions which promise to add little or nothing to our historical knowledge and have no connection with the development of our own civilization? This question seems to me to imply a narrow view both of Anthropology and History. If the study of Egyptology and Assyriology possesses an especial interest to us through its connection with our ideas of religion, philosophy, and art filtered through Palestine, Greece, and Rome, surely it has as well a more general value, which American ArchÆology shares with it, in showing the evolution of human intelligence. The civilizations of the East are known to have acted and reacted on one another, so that it is often difficult to trace things to their original source; whereas in the civilization of America the culture must to a great extent have arisen and developed on the soil, free from extraneous influence, and on this account may furnish facts of the greatest importance which the East cannot supply. It is, indeed, possible that accidental drifts from Asia may occasionally have influenced American culture, but such drifts across a great ocean must have been few and far between, and cannot be compared to the influence exercised by one civilization on another in Asia and Africa. If, as is generally believed, the population of America came originally from the Asiatic continent, such an original migration must have taken place so early in the history of the human race that it antedated the use of bronze, iron, or domestic animals in the land from which the migrants came. Should further proof be needed to show the antiquity of the American races, it may be seen in the diversity of types amongst the races themselves, all, however, more nearly related to one another than to any types outside the American continent, and in the hundreds of distinct languages all bearing a similar relation to one another. Moreover, in the development of the maize-plant from an unknown wild stock into the numerous varieties yielding the magnificent grain which formed the staple food of the country, and has since the discovery of America become one of the most valuable food-stuffs of the world, we have evidence that the settlement of some of the American people as agriculturists must date from a remote past.

It is therefore with no regret that I look back on the years spent in the collection of materials for the study of Central-American ArchÆology; and I shall feel more than contented if the present volume helps to direct attention to the stores of material already accumulated, and to lead others to continue the interesting search for relics of the past amongst surroundings which it has been our desire to show in the pages of this book are neither wanting in human interest nor natural beauty.