History of the Spanish Conquest of Yucatan and of the Itzas Part 24

Chapter V

[Footnote 5.1: Villagutierre's spelling of proper names and capitalization are given in most cases.]

[Footnote 5.2: Cogolludo adds some details concerning the mock emba.s.sy of the Itzas to Merida which the account of Villagutierre lacks.

Cogolludo says (p. 472 ff.) that, in the time of Don Antonio de Figueroa, who was Governor of Yucatan from August, 1612, to September, 1617, Yucatan enjoyed a goodly measure of prosperity, which was interrupted in the following manner: "... there came in the time of this Governor [Figueroa] to the city of Merida some Itzaex Indians, saying that their purpose was to give their obedience to the King and to the Governor in his name, and he gave them staffs as Alcaldes, and appointed them a government, and they returned, leaving him in the belief that they were voluntarily his subjects, but soon it was all seen to be a trick. Now that it was known that the coming of those Indians had no better end than this, in the reign of this Governor a great reduction of this province was carried on, for many of the people of this Province were fugitives in the Woodlands of Zahcabchen. By these, says the Bachiller Valencia in his relation, were founded the Villages of San Antonio de Zahcabchen, San Lorenzo de Vlumal, Tzuctok, Cauich, by a commission headed by Captain Francisco de Villalobos, his [Valencia's] grandfather, who intended the reduction of these people...."]

[Footnote 5.3: This was the Juan de Coronel who was the author of an "Arte en lengua de Maya" published by Diego Garrido, Mexico, 1620. See Wilkinson Sale Catalog, 1914, number 193.]

[Footnote 5.4: A curious misuse of this word. The Caribs of the West Indies were so ferocious that their name became proverbial as a synonym for savagery; our own word "cannibal" is derived from it. Ancona says that the Caribs actually made invasions into Yucatan (1878, vol. i, p.

29). The present Lacandones are usually called Caribes by the Spanish population.]

[Footnote 5.5: _Vecino_ = citizen, i.e., freeholder. The non-freeholders were not citizens in Spanish America.]

[Footnote 5.6: The prophecies spoken of by Avendano (pp. 22, 23) are interesting. They are those of Patzin Yaxun, of Nahau Pec, of Ahkukil-Chel, of Ahnupuc-Tun, and of Chilan-Balam, High-priest of Tixcacayoc Cab.i.+.c.h in Mani. The text of all of them is given by Villagutierre and by Cogolludo; translations appear in Fancourt and many other places.

We may believe that no matter when the events took place which gave rise to the present versions of the prophecies, the versions themselves probably grew up among the Itzas between 1524 and 1618, for, as we have seen, the Canek of Cortes's day displayed no aversion to the proposed introduction of Christianity among his subjects.

It is not denied that a foundation in fact may have existed for the belief that the seers of northern Yucatan foretold some calamity; the present contention is merely that the prophecies which the Itzas had in mind when they told Padre Fuensalida that the time for their conversion had not yet come were of comparatively recent origin among them. The Catholic character of the phraseology is too obvious to dwell upon.

Cf. Villagutierre, p. 35 ff.; Cogolludo, p. 96 ff.; Fancourt, 1854, p.

57 ff.; Lizana, 1633, pt. ii, chap. i; Bra.s.seur de Bourbourg, 1858, vol. ii, p. 603; Orozco y Berra, 1880, pp. 73-74; Carrillo y Ancona, 1883, pp. 523-606.

It is impossible to pa.s.s over without remark the fact that Mr.

Maudslay, in a note at pages 34 and 35 of the last volume of his edition of Bernal Diaz, creates a false impression of the reason why Padres Fuensalida and Orbita left Tayasal. As the two last paragraphs of Maudslay's note stand they imply that the Padres left Tayasal because of the hostility of the Indians caused by the breaking of the idol of the horse. As a matter of fact this was not the reason. Rather, their leaving was due to the fact that the Itzas refused to be baptized before the time which they believed to be appointed for their conversion.]

Chapter VI

[Footnote 6.1: The description given by Cogolludo (lib. x, caps. 2, 3) of the events during and resulting from the entrada of Delgado is much the same as that of Villagutierre y Sotomayor. He calls Zaclun "Zacalum." This entrada is mentioned by Fray Andres de Avendano y Loyola (p. 28 verso), who attributes the blame for the slaying of Delgado to the Spanish soldiers who followed him.]

Chapter VII

[Footnote 7.1: Avendano (p. 1 recto) calls him Don Martin de Urssua y Arismendi.]

[Footnote 7.2: See Tozzer, 1912.]

Chapter VIII

[Footnote 8.1: Others write this name Ursua y Arizmendi.]

[Footnote 8.2: A digest of the itinerary of the two trips of Avendano is given in Appendix IV.]

Chapter IX

[Footnote 9.1: The text of the cedula in question may be found at pp.

18v-22r in Avendano's MS.]

[Footnote 9.2: The reader's attention is called here to Plates Ia and Ib, and also to Maler, 1908, p. 56 for a reproduction and translation of the map by Avendano.]

[Footnote 9.3: This refers to the myth, shared alike by the Toltecs and Mayas, of the culture hero, Quetzalcoatl-Kulkulcan, who was to return to the land from across the ocean.]

[Footnote 9.4: A gloss reads "Cajon con el huesso."]

[Footnote 9.5: This work has never been found.]

[Footnote 9.6: Cogolludo (lib. iv, cap. 5) gives the following description of the calendar and the method of reckoning time. "In the time of their heathendom the Indians of Yucathan had books made of the bark of trees; over this was a white cement which was perpetual, and these books were from ten to twelve varas long, being doubled over and folded.... On these the Indians painted the accounts of their years, wars, inundations, famines, hurricanes, and other events. From one of them, which Dr. Aguilar took away from some Idolaters, it was learned that in ancient times there was a plague called _Mayacimil_ and also another called _Ocna Kuchil_, which is to say Sudden Deaths, and Times-in-which-ravens-entered-the-houses-to-eat-the-corpses. Inundation and hurricane they called _Hunyecil_, Overflowing-of-trees....

"They counted the year as having 365 days, divided into months of twenty days each, corresponding to ours in this order:

Jan. 12-Feb. 1 was Yaax July 11-July 17 was Vayeab Feb. 1-Feb. 21 " Zac July 17-Aug. 6 " p.o.o.p Feb. 21-Mch. 13 " Ceh Aug. 6-Aug. 26 " Voo Mch. 13-Apr. 2 " Mac Aug. 26-Sept. 15 " Cijp Apr. 2-Apr. 22 " Kan Kin Sept. 15-Oct. " Zeec Apr. 22-May 12 " Muan Oct. -Nov. " Zul May 12-Jun. 1 " Paax Nov. -Dec. " Yax Kin Jun. 1-Jun. 21 " Kayab Dec. -Dec. " Mool Jun. 21-July 11 " c.u.m Ku Dec. -Jan. 11 " Cheen

By this count the year was divided into eighteen months, but their year began on the seventeenth of our July. The five days which were lacking to complete the 365 were called Nameless Days. They held them to be melancholy, and they said that on them happened disastrous deaths and unforeseen events, such as stings and bites from poisonous snakes and wild or venomous animals as well as quarrels and dissensions; and they especially feared the first of these days. During this period they tried not to go out of their houses, and so they always provided themselves with what was necessary beforehand so as not to have to go to the fields or elsewhere. At this time they attended especially to their Heathen Rites, begging their Idols to keep them free from harm in those dangerous days and to grant that the following year might be fertile and abundant. And these days so greatly feared were the 11, 12, 13, 14, 15 and 16 (sic) of our July. All the days of the month had each its name, which I leave untold for fear of prolixity.

"By means of this count they know the time in which to clear the woodlands and to burn the underbrush, to expect rains, to sow the Maize and other vegetables, for all which actions they have their Proverbs.

The first Religious (says Aguilar), holy men, and true Keepers of the Vineyard of Jesus Christ, tried to abolish this count, holding it to be superst.i.tious, but they did not progress far because most [of the Indians] know it. This matter was laid before a great and Apostolic Man named Padre Solana, and before another scarcely less great called Fray Caspar de Naxara, who were great Ministers and Preachers and who felt that it was not prejudicial to the Christianizing of the Indians; but Padre Fuensalida says in his Relacion, treating of the ancient counts: 'It would be far better in every way if the Indians did not learn and know of the ancient peoples, because they have been found still at their idolatries, and those who were converted to our Holy Catholic Faith still perform the rites, adoring the Demon through thousands of Idols which have been found in this Province.' ...

"They counted their eras and ages which they put in their books by groups of twenty years and by l.u.s.tra of four years. The first year they fixed in the East, calling it _Cuchhaab_; the second in the West, calling it _Hijx_; the third in the South, _Cavac_; the fourth in the North, called _Muluc_." These refer to the four dominical days, which he has given incorrectly. They should be Kan, Muluc, Ix (Hijx), and Cauac. (See Bowditch, 1910, p. 278.) "When these l.u.s.tra reached five, which is exactly twenty years, they called it a _Katun_ and placed a carved stone upon another, fixing them with lime and sand in the walls of their Temples and the houses of their Priests, as is to be seen today in the edifices which have been spoken of and in certain ancient walls of our Convent in Merida, over which there are cells. In a village called Tixualahtun, which signifies Place-where-a-carved-stone-is-placed-upon-another, it is said that there were Archives where were preserved all the events, as is done in Spain at the Archivo de Simancas.

"The common way of counting their age was by these periods or Katuns, as, for instance, to say 'I have sixty years' _Oxppelvabil_--'I have three eras of age,' that is, three stones; for seventy it is three and a half. Wherever it was known that there were not too many barbarians, they continued to live by this count, and it was said to be very accurate, so much so that not only did they know with certainty of an event, but also of the day and month on which it took place."]

[Footnote 9.7: A gloss reads "the devil excites their minds."]

[Footnote 9.8: A gloss reads "varias cosas que tratamos."]

Chapter X

[Footnote 10.1: This pa.s.sage (Villagutierre, p. 315) is very important.

The question of the location of Dolores and of Lacandon, as well as that of their ident.i.ty, has long been a moot point. (Tozzer's introduction to Marjil, 1912.) The main body of the Lacandones, as well Chol-speaking as Maya-speaking, lies southwest of Lake Peten. (Cf.

Tozzer, 1907.) That fact accounts for Costello's location of Los Dolores southwest of the lake. (Fancourt, 1854, map.) On the map of our region in Hazius and Lowitz' Atlas of 1746 Lacandon and Los Dolores are located northwest of the lake, whereas maps such as those of Bellin (1764) and Brion de la Tour (1783) do not mention either, nor do they leave any territory southeast of the lake where they might possibly be.

In spite of these contradictions we need be in little doubt as to the true location of Los Dolores del Lacandon, for as the expedition under Paredes was marching southward, their left was to the east, and consequently they were to march southeast from Tzucthok in order to reach Los Dolores. The Lacandones have been shown to have existed in that region as well as in Chiapas. (Thomas, 1911, p. 70 and map.) Therefore we may safely believe that Hendges (Map of Guatemala, 1902) is right in locating Los Dolores southeast of the lake. Further confirmation of this belief lies in the fact that Mr. Morley found in the village of Dolores three church bells dated 1718, which bear inscriptions that show they were intended for the Church of Nuestra Senora de los Dolores en la Provincia del Yiza, i.e., the Dolores of which we speak.]

[Footnote 10.2: This is, of course, the same amba.s.sador in whose authenticity Avendano, as we know, felt so much distrust. Something is known in regard to this messenger. His full name was Don Martin Can, and he was a native of Peten Grande, whose King was Canek. His father was Can, a native of Tipu; his mother was Cante, sister of Canek. His father, stung by a serpent, had long been dead; his mother, of whom he had heard it said that she came from Chichen Itza, had also been dead a long time. He was baptized Martin a year before in Merida, and, though he did not know exactly, he thought he was about thirty years old. He was married to an Indian girl named Coboh, who lived in Alain. Canek had sent him and three other Indians of Alain to Merida with an emba.s.sy and with a crown of plumes as homage, to ask for Padres to come and enlighten the Indians as to the True G.o.d. Having pa.s.sed from Alain he had arrived at Tipu, where the Muzules Indians had wished to join him, and although he knew them to be mere savages, he took them with him.

All sorts of food and drink, as well as a house, had been made ready for the Padres who should go to Alain. He had then gone to Merida and had been most cordially received by Ursua. His baptism had taken place and he had delivered his message, receiving in return many presents for Canek and for himself. After taking leave of Don Martin de Ursua, Can and his companions, together with Hariza and the Padres, had returned to Tipu, where they stayed two weeks until, on account of the opposition of the Cacique Zima, Can fled to Alain, leaving the present for Canek in the hands of Hariza. Arrived in Alain, Can was told by Chamaxculu, the Cacique, that many of the Indians had rebelled against Canek, killing many of the Spaniards. He himself was the object of the Indians' hatred on account of his conversion. He took refuge in the small Peten of Motzkal until he was sent for by Canek, his uncle. He told how trenches and walls of stones had been built at Peten Grande.

Both the King Canek and the chief priest Kincanek were now in Peten ready to defend it against the Spaniards who had injured them. The Cacique of Alain, Chamaxculu, wished, with his people, to be Christianized.]

Appendix II

[Footnote A2.1: To judge by the haphazard way in which the words and phrases contained in the MS. are set down, and taking into consideration the informal nature of the MS. itself, this vocabulary was intended by Dr. Berendt merely to act as a field glossary and phrase book. Despite its incompleteness and formlessness, however, it is of value for us because it is the only known glossary of the Itza dialect.]

Appendix III

[Footnote A3.1: Nord. = Baron Nordenskiold's reproductions, Stockholm, 1889.]

[Footnote A3.2: E. L. S. = Dr. Edward Luther Stevenson's reproductions of maps.]

[Footnote A3.3: The tracings from the originals of these two maps were made by Dr. Tozzer in Madrid. The translation was done by the author.]