The Cult of the Book. What Precolumbian Writing Contributes to Philology

10.3726/78000_29 The Cult of the Book. What Precolumbian Writing Contributes to Philology Markus Eberl Vanderbilt University, Nashville Abstract Precolumbian people developed writing independently from the Old World. In Mesoamerica, writing existed among the Olmecs, the Zapotecs, the Maya, the Mixtecs, the Aztecs, on the Isthmus of Tehuantepec, and at Teotihuacan. In South America, the knotted strings or khipus were used. Since their decipherment is still ongoing, Precolumbian writing systems have often been studied only from an epigraphic perspective and in isolation. I argue that they hold considerable interest for philology because they complement the latter’s focus on Western writing. I outline the eight best-known Precolumbian writing systems and de- scribe their diversity in form, style, and content. These writing systems conceptualize writing and written communication in different ways and contribute new perspectives to the study of ancient texts and languages. Keywords Precolumbian writing, decipherment, defining writing, authoritative discourses, canon Introduction Written historical sources form the basis for philology. Traditionally these come from the Western world, especially ancient Greece and Rome. Few classically trained scholars are aware of the ancient writing systems in the Americas and the recent advances in deciphering them. In Mesoamerica – the area of south-central Mexico and western Central America – various societies had writing (Figure 1). This included the Olmecs, the Zapotecs, the people of the Isthmus of Tehuantepec, the Maya, Teotihuacan, Mix- tecs, and the Aztecs. In South America, the Inka used knotted strings or khipus (Figure 2). At least eight writing systems are attested. They differ in language, formal structure, and content. Their decipherment is still in progress and scholars continue to argue about basic issues like reliable sign catalogues, the reading of specific signs, and the languages repre- sented. Here, I go beyond epigraphy and suggest that the written texts of © Peter Lang AG Philology, vol. 1/2015, pp. 29–52 30 Markus Eberl Precolumbian societies deserve the attention of philologists. After sketch- ing out what is known and, even more importantly, how much still is to be known, I discuss what Precolumbian writing can contribute to philology as “the multifaceted study of texts, languages, and the phenomenon of language itself ” (Turner, 2014, p. ix). Figure 1: Writing systems in Precolumbian Mesoamerica with examples of the major traditions; the approximate boundaries of Mesoamerica are grayed out (Berdan & Anawalt, 1997 [Codex Mendoza]; Flannery & Marcus, 2003: Figure 3b [San José Mogote]; Nielsen & Helmke, 2008, p. 464 Figure 4 [Atetelco]; Pohl et al., 2002: Figure 2 [San Andrés]; Saturno et al., 2006: Figure 4 [San Bartolo]; Winfield Capitaine, 1988, p. 7 [La Mojarra Stela 1 detail]; all figures by the author except where indicated). © Peter Lang AG Philology, vol. 1/2015, pp. 29–52 The Cult of the Book. What Precolumbian Writing Contributes to Philology 31 Writing in the Precolumbian Americas Just two generations ago, scholars looked at writing in the Precolumbian Americas and saw a largely barren landscape. They acknowledged that these ancient people expressed themselves in complex, intricate, and puzzling ways but few ventured to call it writing. In his influential book A Study of Writing, Ignace Gelb concluded that “the Amerindian systems of the Mayas and Aztecs do not represent full writing since even in their most advanced stages they never attained the level of development characteristic of the earli- est phases of the Oriental systems” (Gelb, 1952, p. 61). In the case of ancient Maya glyphs, J. Eric S. Thompson, the twentieth century doyen of Maya studies, similarly declared that “glyphic inscriptions on the monuments, un- like those of almost every other civilization in the history of mankind, almost certainly do not record the deeds of individuals; instead, they are utterly impersonal records of calendrical and astronomical data and of religious matters” (Thompson, 1950, p. 15). His argument for Maya exceptionalism faded by the second half of the twentieth century. Scholars now recognize Maya glyphs as a full writing system (Bricker, 1995; Coe, 1992; Houston, 1989, 2000). The ongoing decipherment of Maya glyphs exemplifies the growing appreciation of Precolumbian writing (Figure 1). Writing appeared in the Americas in the Isthmus of Tehuantepec area during the first millennium b.c. The incised Cascajal slab with an undeciphered list of signs may date to 900 b.c. (Rodríguez Martínez et al., 2006). A monument with the possible name of a captive was possibly erected at the Oaxacan site of San José Mogote between 600 and 800 b.c. (Flannery & Marcus, 2003).1 At San Andrés near the Gulf of Mexico, a roller stamp carved with the name ‘3 Lord’ dates to 650 b.c. (Pohl, Pope, & von Nagy, 2002). Since these objects are isolated finds, little can be said about the writing system or even the language they belong to. Nonetheless, their sty- listic diversity epitomizes the widely differing writing systems that were to emerge a few centuries later. By the end of the first millennium b.c., writing appears in several areas of Mesoamerica. I say ‘writing’ because multiple inscriptions with standardized systems of signs but diverging representations of spoken language 1 Robert Cahn and Marcus Winter (1993) argue that the San José Mogote Monument 3 is not this old and dates instead to the Monte Alban II phase. © Peter Lang AG Philology, vol. 1/2015, pp. 29–52 32 Markus Eberl have been located. The Zapotecs immortalized the victories that allowed them to establish an empire centered in Monte Albán. Their carved reliefs show slain captives with their name. Other texts recall the conquests of various settlements (Marcus, 1992; Urcid, 2001; Whittaker, 1992). On the Gulf of Mexico coast, the Olmecs left short and thus far undeciphered texts on the carved monuments of La Venta. In the same geographical area but after the disappearance of the Olmecs, writing blossomed as Epiolmec or Isthmian writing. Long texts like La Mojarra Stela 1 (from a.d. 156) facilitated the decipherment of this writing system (Justeson & Kaufman, 1993, 1997), which represents a Mixe-Zoquean language and combines word signs with syllables. Further east, Maya writing goes back at least to 300 b.c. (Saturno, Stuart, & Beltrán, 2006). In subsequent centuries, inscriptions appear mostly on portable artifacts, but these remain little understood (Mora-Marín, 2001). The number of texts increases exponentially during the third century a.d. Thousands of glyphic texts date to the Classic period, which ends with the close of the first millennium a.d. Due to the tropical climate, surviving texts are mostly found on durable media like carved stone and painted ce- ramic vessels. Similar to Epiolmec writing, Maya glyphs mix word signs and syllables (Coe & Van Stone, 2005). They express a Ch’olan language, the linguistic descendants of which still inhabit parts of the Maya lowlands (Houston, Robertson, & Stuart, 2000; Mora-Marín, 2009). Classic Maya scribes were officials at the courts of divine kings and queens. They cele- brated the lives of their patrons in their texts. When the Maya rulers van- ished during the Maya collapse, glyphic texts became sparse but writing continued and shifted to ritual and calendrical matters. Spaniards arrived in the Maya lowlands during the sixteenth century and encountered a still- literate elite. Their reports mention Maya glyphic texts (Chuchiak, 2010) and Yucatan’s second bishop, Diego de Landa, even records an ‘alphabet’ (Tozzer, 1941). Priests attempted to exterminate Maya writing, along with the assumed idolatries it recorded. Native scribes clandestinely used Maya writing into the eighteenth century (Bricker, 1987, 1989). The first Mesoamerican empire, Teotihuacan, was created at the be- ginning of the first millennium a.d. Scholars first assumed that this was done without writing but evidence to the contrary has been accumulating for several years (Cabrera Castro, 1996; Langley, 1991; Nielsen & Helmke, 2008; Taube, 2000; Whittaker, 2012b). Teotihuacan’s complex iconography contains isolatable signs that are standardized and substitute for one-other. © Peter Lang AG Philology, vol. 1/2015, pp. 29–52 The Cult of the Book. What Precolumbian Writing Contributes to Philology 33 Whether Teotihuacan writing represents language (and if so, which one) is still an open question. Its association with specific objects and people sug- gests that its signs served at the very least as emblems or name tags. The next well-known Mesoamerican writing system emerged shortly before the Spanish conquest. It is often called “Aztec” in recognition of the predominant contemporary empire with which it is associated, but it also contains elements from other cultures (Dibble, 1971; Prem, 1992). This hybridity may have been intentional. Instead of representing a single language, its symbols refer to concepts shared across Highland Mexican cultures. Aztec writing may have facilitated communication within a lin- guistically diverse empire. Best-known for its colorful codices (Boone, 2000, 2007), Aztec writing “registers certain information not by record- ing the verbal form of the message but by interpreting and depicting its content” (Prem, 1992, p. 54). It is a narrative pictography (Prem, 1992, p. 53) with an agreed-upon standard of graphic representation and the substitution of elements (Eberl, 2013, p. 460–461). However, some codices express place names and personal names phonetically in Nahuatl, the language of the Aztecs. This has led to a reevaluation of the phonetic aspects of Aztec writing (Lacadena, 2008a; Whittaker, 2009, 2012a). Closely related to Aztec writing in form, style, and content is Mixtec pictography (Caso, 1965; Jansen, 1992). According to Jansen (1992, p. 20), “it does not record a number of sentences phonetically, but conveys information more directly through images, with only incidental interference of the language.” Mixtec codices narrate the history of native elites like Lord Eight Deer but also native myths, for example regarding the creation of the universe.

Load more