An Exploration of Maya Writing
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
An Exploration of Maya Writing By Spencer Mitchell Anth395 Anth 350 An Exploration of Maya Writing Part 1: History, Discovery and Knowledge Anth 395 1 A culture is defined by its history, whether it is oral or written. For every culture, this most precious gift is always in danger of being destroyed or forgotten. For the Maya, the cultural enslavement by the Spanish all but crippled their sense of cultural memory and identity. This is due in part to their advanced writing system being oppressed by the Spanish inquisition of the Americas during the 1500s. This first section will discuss the archaeological and linguistic evidence of its origins, how its people forgot its sacred meanings, the story of its decipherment and a general explanation of the grammar system. The Classic Maya writing system that is known today was created by the Ch’olan language group of the Maya language family (Stone and Zender 2011). For centuries it was believed to be Yukatec Maya, but this was later disproven by the royal title inscription glyphs, which are actually Ch’olan in origin. This may be evidence that this dialect was that of the educated elite much like Latin in Medieval Europe. Today there are thirty-one known members of the Maya language family (Stone and Zender 2011), that are descendents of the Protomayan language. During the Classic Period (A.D. 250 to 900) the Maya generally used a standard writing system that is known today as Classic Mayan, which is polysynthetic language. This means that each word has a base stem and is altered by bound derivational affixes. Unfortunately, as a result of the founding of New Spain, the written form of Mayan slowly faded away from the cultural memory of the native speakers. The Catholic missionaries led by Bishop de Landa led a full out war against the Maya culture when he saw the Maya presenting offerings to the old gods. After seeing the depictions of the gods and the writing system’s otherworldly appearance, he came to the conclusion that it was all satanic. He then set to work on destroying the culture. He 2 captured the scribes and forced them to learn Latin based language systems. Any scribe that refused to use the Latin based writing system or was found to be reading or writing their own language was either tortured or burned at the stake (Coe 1999). They were further humiliated by being forced to give up their true names in favor of more “correct” Christian names. The worst offense occurred on the night of July 16, 1562 when he burned the all the codices. This atrocity resulted the Maya people into forgetting their own written language; thus losing a vital connection to their cultural heritage (Coe, 1999). Surprisingly the main villain in this story, Bishop Diego de Landa laid the foundations to repair some of the damage he had caused. He had attempted to create a Maya alphabet to be a part of a cultural handbook to help future missionaries understand the Maya people. This alphabet was incorrect, primarily because the scribes he questioned gave him false information. Despite this, it helped organize some of the more prominant glyphs into some sort of list that would be helpful to future epigraphers (Coe and Stone, 2005). It took several centuries for the Maya writing system to be rediscovered. Many westerners believed that the ruins in the Yucatan were built by the people of India or a lost tribe of Israel. They even went as far as to alter the glyphs in their transcriptions into matching their poorly founded hypothesis (Coe 1999). The first accurate documentation of the glyphs was preformed Alfred P. Muadslay. He hauled a new technology known as “glass plate photography” in the jungle to document the monuments and hired the local people to tear the vegetation away from the monuments so they could be photographed. 3 The photographs captured the first unbiased representations of the glyphs. This enabled scholars to an accurate reading of the monuments for the first time (Coe 1999). No real progress was made until 1880s, when Constantine Samuel Waldeck stumbled across the Dresden Codex in the Library of Dresden. The strange figures painted on the aged paper completely possessed him. His attention was drawn to the bar- and-dot systems; he soon realized that the sequence of dots never surpassed four. This led him to believe that the bars represented five. This was the first successful translation of any Maya hieroglyph in the Post-Landa era (Coe 1999). This discovery allowed Ernst Forstemann to analyze the figures attached to the numbers. He soon realized that the codex seemed to revolve around dates and times. He also determined that the codex followed lunar and solar eclipses (Coe and Stone 2005). During the twentieth century a new scholar rose to dominate the study of Maya epigraphy; this scholar’s name is Sir Eric Thompson. He worked closely with the Maya while conducting ethnographic studies of their modern cultures. Due to his research and his service in World War I, he became convinced that the Maya were a peaceful civilization free of the conflict that poisoned western society. He believed that they were simply a group of philosophical star watchers and time keepers. Thompson theorized that all of the Maya monuments and depictions were of gods and spirits; not accounts of historical events and lineages. He also believed that the Maya writing system was purely logographic and was extremely defensive against anyone who disagreed (Coe, 1999). Unfortunately he was the number one authority on Maya epigraphy, so it was difficult to introduce new evidence during his reign. 4 During the early twentieth century there were few women in the field of archaeology but Tatiana Proskouriakoff was one of the elite few. She originally was an architect student at University of Pennsylvania but was pulled into the field of archaeology by a small advertisement asking for artist to join an expedition to the site of Figure 1.1: Glyph for Birth. Drawing by Spencer Mitchell. Piedras Negras. She used her knowledge of architecture to create accurate artist renditions of Maya cities (Guernsey 2006). After her Figure 1.2: Glyph for Death. Drawing by Spencer Mitchell. field experience she got a project in reconstructing jade Mitchell. artifacts in the Peabody Museum at Harvard. This only increased her obsession with the Maya writing system. She began pouring over the field notes from Piedras Negras, trying to make sense of the strange mixture of symbols she encountered. She found that the monuments were built in sequence; one was built every five years in front of a major structure. She then noted that the first in each monument set featured a sacrificial figure at the base from which a ladder stretched up to meet another important figure set in a niche. She then came up with the idea that this figure was actually a ruler. This was an incredible controversial notion because it was widely accepted that each of the monuments represented mythological figures. She then began to notice that every monument that introduced a new figure had a special glyph depicting an upturned chameleon head (Figure 1.1), she discovered that this signified a birth. She also noted a calendar glyph she called the “toothache glyph” that noted the death of the individual depicted (Figure 1.2). When she tried to share her new ideas with academia but Sir Eric 5 Thompson scoffed at the idea that a woman had a new theory relating to the study of epigraphy (Coe 1999). After careful analysis however he realized that she was indeed correct and sent a formal apology. The next great breakthrough came from Yuri Valentinovitch Knorosov. During his tour in World War II he came across a strange charred book in a bombed building. This book contained copies of the Paris, Madrid and Dresden codices. When he returned to the Soviet Union he began to study the strange book he had found. He was able to develop new and revolutionary ideas behind the iron curtain, completely free from the influence of Sir Eric Thompson. Knorosov began to use his linguistic background to analyze the structure of the strange writing system. He knew if it was an alphabetic language it would have had only twenty to thirty symbols. If it had only eighty to hundred symbols it would have been a syllabic language, but it did not match that either. He also noted that Sir Eric Thompson theory of it being a logographic language (such as Figure 1.3: Compound Glyph for West. Drawing by Michael Coe. Chinese) was improbable because it had only about eight hundred symbols in total. He Mitchell. began to wonder if it was a combination of syllabic and logographic,Mitchell. because it seemed illogical that a civilization would create a written system that could not fully express their language. Another issue he found that no one had ever considered comparing it the modern Mayan dialects spoken today. He tested his theory with the glyph that had been identified for the word “west” on the Madrid Codex (Figure 1.3). The first thing he did was split the glyph into parts: the upper and lower. The upper was a variation of a hand or chi’ in modern Mayan and the lower was the glyph for “sun” or “K’in” in Mayan. 6 When these are said together they form the word chik’in which translates to west. He had just proven that Classic Mayan is a polysynthetic language, not logographic Sir Thompson suggested. He then tested this on several known glyphs to prove the relation.