SciELO - Scientific Electronic Library Online

 
vol.61La travesía de Chahk: predicación locativa en el Códice de Dresde. Propuestas de lectura para T667El problema de la decadencia en el Chiapas tardocolonial índice de autoresíndice de materiabúsqueda de artículos
Home Pagelista alfabética de revistas  

Servicios Personalizados

Revista

Articulo

Indicadores

Links relacionados

  • No hay artículos similaresSimilares en SciELO

Compartir


Estudios de cultura maya

versión impresa ISSN 0185-2574

Estud. cult. maya vol.61  Ciudad de México  2023  Epub 26-Jun-2023

https://doi.org/10.19130/iifl.ecm/61.002x4856001sm6 

Artículos

The Cuceb of Chilam Balam Books: Difrasismos and Intertextuality

El Cuceb de los Libros de Chilam Balam: difrasismos e intertextualidad

Péter Bíró* 

*Independent Philologist, Hungary


Abstract:

The Cuceb is one of the most mysterious texts in the Books of Chilam Balam written during the early Colonial Period. Previous scholars have commented that it recounts a fictitious katun and contains events from different epochs ranging from the 13th to the 17th centuries. The text itself incorporates allusions of historical and mythological stories with origins from the Postclassic and Classic Periods. In this paper I will examine some expressions and key parts of the Cuceb. I propose that these passages interconnect with other texts in the Books of Chilam Balam and Paris codex, which together point to the collapse of Mayapan, the last capital of the Northern Yucatan.

Keywords: Colonial Period; Northern Yucatan; Books of Chilam Balam; difrasismos; intertextuality

Resumen:

El Cuceb es uno de los textos más misteriosos de los Libros de Chilam Balam realizados durante el periodo Colonial temprano. Investigadores anteriores han comentado que se correspondía a un katun ficticio y contenía eventos de diferentes épocas, del siglo xiii hasta el xvii. Mientras tanto, el texto mismo incorporó alusiones de narrativas históricas y mitológicas. Sus orígenes provienen de los periodos Pos-clásico y Clásico. En este artículo examinaré algunas expresiones y partes centrales del Cuceb, argumentando que tales pasajes se interconectan con otros textos de los Libros de Chilam Balam y del Códice París, los cuales, en conjunto, apuntan al colapso de Mayapán, la última capital del norte de Yucatán.

Palabras clave: Época Colonial; norte de Yucatán; Libros de Chilam Balam; difrasismos; intertextualidad

Introduction

The Cuceb1 is one of the most interesting narratives found in the Chilam Balam books, but it is also one of the most difficult texts to interpret. On one hand, it describes a war between cavalcade gods and monsters. Meanwhile, it likewise describes the cycles of the tun, haab, and katun as well as the days themselves (which embody time) as a journey in the sky, on earth, and across the Underworld, during which individuals and communities (Itza) generally suffer from diseases, wars, starvation, and thirst. Throughout this text, each sentence contains dense metaphors that sometimes can be interpreted correctly, but other times we have only vague conjectures as to what they actually refer to.

This text likely dates to the beginning of the 17th century, as the Cuceb itself states in the first sentence, however, other fragments suggest that it was written sometime in the late 18th century. Both the language and vocabulary in the Perez manuscript had been altered from the original, which in some cases helps interpretation, but also raises the question whether these changes redesign the original narrative, are hypothetical texts, or contains additions copied from another manuscript.2

The etymology of cuceb is derived from the verb root cuc (“to turn, to revolve”) with the added instrumental suffix -eb meaning, “that which revolves” (Bolles, 2001). At the beginning of the Pérez manuscript, there is a drawing depicting a squirrel, pronounced kúˀuk in the Yucatec language (Bricker, 1998: 202) which is almost identical to the pronunciation of the word kúuk (“returns”) - noting that Colonial orthography never signaled the tone - therefore this squirrel functions as a rebus. Cuceb is an old noun: the instrumental suffix in the Colonial Yucatec was already -Vb by the second half of the 16th century, therefore we expect the form of *cucub. Nevertheless, this noun used the Proto-Yucatecan -eeb’ suffix (Bricker, 2019: 201), which was not used in the Colonial Period. The root of cuc as “return” has disappeared in the Modern Yucatec language, although it remains a productive root in Modern Itza (kuk as “roll”; Hofling and Tesucún, 1997: 365).

The authors of previous translations have interpreted the text very differently depending on when they wrote their narratives as well as which period are they referring to. Roys (1949: 158) says that the Cuceb was a fictitious Katun 5 Ahau, while Barrera Vásquez and Rendón (1948: 46) have argued that it is about Katun 3 Ahau, but both agree that it is a tun prophecy wheel. Craine and Reindorp (1979: 99-101) accepted the argument of Roys concerning the tun wheel and that it was a fictitious katun, however, they argued that the internal criticisms recounted in Cuceb clearly occurred before either 1544 or 1593. Edmonson (1982: 69-70), on the other hand, claimed that the text was finished by Kauil Chhel in Bacalar on February 8, 1596, and that he forecasted the history of Katun 5 Ahau two years before it was due to begin. Furthermore, Edmonson believes that Kauil Chhel used the preceding cycle of the calendar round (fifty-two years earlier) and was recounting the events from 1541 to 1561. According to Edmonson (1982: 70, note 1549) “[the author] presents instead a year-by-year and calendar round (i. e., totally Nahua) view of the events, he chronicles, using tun (360 days) for hab (365 days) and misdating the katun by five years”. Edmonson thought that Kauil Chhel was of both Xiu and Nahuatl origin and was adviser to the lord of Uxmal, although he relocated, in old age, to Bacalar. Nevertheless, Edmonson (1982: 112, note 2980) also said that he did not believe that the real Kauil Chhel wrote the narrative, but a scribe who used the famous prophet’s name and purportedly in the years of 1618-1623.

Gunsenheimer accepted both that the katun is fictitious as well as the travel to Bacalar in 1544, and that this tale was invented intentionally to hide the original source:

An original hieroglyphic source from a region exempt from Spanish rule, on the other hand, would have been much more authentic and credible, in particular with respect to the prophecies. In addition, dating the text with the year 1544 also meant less risk for the scribe, because it set them in the generation of his parents or even grandparents. At the same time, the dating of the journey linked to an original hieroglyphic source dating from the year 1544, must be seen as programmatic, not accidental. […] Rather […] [the] record 1544 as the year marking the advent of Christianity, the first baptism of Mayans, and the arrival of Bishop Toral. […] It is therefore possible that the year 1544 was intentionally chosen to juxtapose the traumatic transformation of the lives of the Maya with the apparent continuity of their own culture. By virtue of that date claim, the historical, calendrical and prophetic testimony was rendered unique and genuine. It suggested that at a time when old, familiar traditions were disintegrating into chaos and destruction, there was still credible contemporaneous documentation that could serve as a basis for generations to follow (Gunsenheimer, 2009: 132).

Most recently, David Bolles (2010: 97) offered an interesting explanation that the anomalies that occur in the Cuceb suggest that the text is a partial remnant of a 52-year-old calendar circle, but only the first 21 years, the rest being lost. If this suggestion is true, then every 52 years of the prophecies presumably include not only the events of Katun 5 Ahau but others as well. Bolles also speculates that the scribes wrote the original manuscript in hieroglyphs but renewed it on its anniversary date 52 years later in 1596, but this time in Latin script. The date Bolles refers to is mentioned in the Prologue chapter of the Cuceb (2010: 97).

Albeit it is in itself a fascinating topic to unravel, the true time of production of the Cuceb, for the purpose of this presentation I will focus on some facets of the narrative. These intriguing entries associate with Pre-Columbian historiography while the scribes applied expressions which link to the Postclassic and possibly the Classic Periods. Additionally, I consider other texts from the Chilam Balam, some of which contradict the correct framework of dates that appeared in other parts of the books as well as the Spanish sources. In the following pages I deal with two features of the Cuceb, namely expressions that connect to Pre-Columbian sources indicated by a scribe familiar with traditional (pre-contact) indigenous literary style; the second feature is the recollection about famous destruction of Mayapan through the viewpoint of the Xiu family, whose member allegedly wrote the narrative (Bolles, 2010: 97) claims that Gaspar Antonio Chi Xiu would be a possible candidate for the real author of the Cuceb.

Difrasismos and the Eclipse Monster

The structure of the Cuceb is simple: it consists of 21 tun (360 days) prophecies. These prophecies actually refer to haab year (365 days) prophecies because each one begins with a year-bearer -13 Kan 1 Pop, 1 Muluc 1 Pop, 2 Ix 1 Pop, 3 Cauac 1 Pop and so on. The seat of the katun is Mayapan. The Cuceb hints at several events such as depopulation, destruction, famine, diseases, and death everywhere, which are very similar to the katun prophecies (u uudz katunoob) in the Chilam Balam books.

In the narrative there are many gods, monsters and malevolent beings. We know about some of them from other sources, but the rest are still waiting to be identified. There are metaphors for people, objects and actions. Among these, some are metaphors, while others are animals such as jaguar, opossum, deer, ants and bees which represent people. One particular expression that often appears in the Cuceb (in 13 Kan, 7 Cauac, 1 Ix, and 4 Muluc prophecies) and in parts of Chilam Balam, connects to a Classic Ch’olan expression. It could be possible that the latter was the origin for the Yucatec difrasismos.

Originally Garibay Kintana coined the word difrasismo to describe the pairing of two terms employed as a single metaphorical unit (1968).3Difrasismos work as nouns in Mesoamerican languages. In Mayan languages, just as in Classic Ch’olan, there are compound and complex nouns (England, 1983: 70). Compounds contain two roots but they refer to a single lexeme. When it is possessed, the ergative precedes the compound and the eclitic follows it (examples in Classic Ch’olan are u-lakamtun-il, u-k’altun-il, y-etk’ab’a’-il, etc.). Complex nouns contain two roots, where the first is possessed by the second, however this phrase refers to a single lexeme. When a complex noun is possessed, it is only the second root which receives the possessive affixes. Such complex nouns are rare in Classic Ch’olan, but in Yucatec we can find u lèekilimpòol “my skull” (from leek “gourd” and pool “head”) or in Ch’orti’ uut e k’in “sky” (from ut “surface, face, eye, fruit” and k’in “sun”). Difrasismos are added to the system. They contain two roots which express one single lexeme but when they are possessed the ergative precedes both roots (in Classic Ch’olan the example are u-b’akil u-jolil, u-ch’ahb’il y-ahk’b’al, u-k’ab u-ch’e’n, etcétera).

Other expressions would be metaphors, and some of them could have already appeared in the Classic Period inscriptions, one occurs often in the Cuceb.

Mul tun tzek

The first-year prophecy (13 Kan) contains the sentence t u kinil yan ox mul tun tzek, which can be translated as “at that time there will be a large mound of skulls”:

t-u-kin-il yan ox mul tun tzek

pre-3erg-TIME-poss.suff EXIST THREE MOUND/HILL-STONE SKULL

The item mul could have either a noun, such as “montón, cerro”, or a verb meaning, “reunirse en montón, amontonarse” (Barrera, 1980: 538). With the noun tun “stone” the meaning changes to “montón grande de piedras o montecillo hecho así a mano, cerro hecho a mano, cerro natural, montículo, colina” (Barrera,1980: 538). The mul tun tzek expression has another meaning, “mortandad”, an apt description of this articulation (Barrera, 1980: 540).

As it happens, a well-known expression from the Classic period inscriptions describes the piling of skulls into mountains: witzij jol, in which the noun witz “mountain” with the -Vj intransitivizing suffix creates a verb (Tortuguero, Mon. 6, C6-D6; see Lacadena for the morphological analysis; Figure 1):

NAB‘-ja CH’ICH‘ WITZ-ja JOL

na[h]b’[a]j ch’ich’ witz[i]j ujol

nahb’-Vj-ø ch’ich’ witz-Vj-ø jol

POOL-intra.suff-3ab BLOOD MOUNTAIN-intra.suff-3ab SKULL

“The blood pooled like rivers, the skulls piled up like mountains”.

The “skull” as a symbol of war is also appearing in another expression of kokol tzek in the Cuceb (for example in the 4th tun narrative), as a synonym of mul tun tzek:

1, 3rd tun, Tizimin folio 1v
tukin tukatunil, oxkokol tzek,
Pérez page 102
tu kin tu katunil oxkokol tzek
Translation4
In the time of the katun,
skulls will be struck in the
stone.
u uat nom yax cach, tu hoc a
be, tu hoc an luub
auat u caah yax cach tu
hocanbe tu hocan lub
The flies will cry at the
intersections areas,
tu than ca tu likil, auat nom
cui auat nom ycim, auat nom
ah ya
tu than cati liki: auat u caah
mucuy auat u caah icim, auat
u caah h yaa
the pigeons will cry, the
owls will cry and the
flycatchers will cry!

Kokol is derivate of kol “beat, struck, hit” (Bricker, 1998: 155) and it describes the action of struck of the skulls on the stones or on the sticks in the intersection (kokol be “las piedras movedizas y palos que están en el camino”, Barrera, 1980: 411). It is even possible that it would refer to the Central Mexican tzompantli “skull rack” platform.

Well and Cave

There is a particular difrasismo which I believe refers to settlements and cities, and it only appears in the Cuceb.5 In the prophecies of the 3rd, 10th, 12th, 14th, 18th tuns, and the end of the 13 Oc chapter this expression consists of the words chhen (well) and actun (cave):6

1, 3rd tun, Tizimin folio 1v Pérez page 102 Translation7
oxil cauac ual u kin upec tu chhenil tu yac tunil Oxil cauac ual u kin u pec tu chhenil tu yactunil 3 Cauac would be the time of movement from their wells and their caves
binel u cah utzacle kauil binel u caah u tzacle, kauil for going to seek food.
... ti to tu kinil tu katunil uale, u uiil che, u uiil tu nich8 ti tu kinil tu kaatunil, uilmon che, uilmon tunich At that time, at that katun, their food will be wood, their food will be stones,
yokol culan tu chhenil ti yactunil, yokol culan tu chhenil ti yactunil, those who sit on the thrones at their wells and their caves.
2, 10th tun, Tizimin folio 4 Pérez page 107 Translation9
lai u koch tu uuclahun ca bin hokoc tu chhenil ti yac tunil ma lay u kooch tu Uuclahun tun lae lay ca bin hokoc tu chhenil tu yactunil mta. This is the true destiny in the 17th tun when they will leave their wells and their caves. Edict.
3, 12th tun, Tizimin folios4r-4v Pérez page 108 Translation10
ti tun sutnom tu chhe nil ti yactunil uchhapakoch, tii tun u zutpahal tu chhenil tu yactunil uchhapakoch. Then they return to their wells and their caves to get the stored food.
... amayte u uich ah kine, lai bin ocbal tu chhenil / ti yac tunil tu caten, ... amayte u uich ah kine: lai u katunil, ocbal tu chhenil tu yactunil tu caten, The priests’ faces would be Amayte Kauil when the katun will enter to their wells and their caves.
bin kamac u payalchi, bin tu yactunil, bin kamac u payalchi, bin tu yactunil, Their prayer shall be received in their caves.
... catun sut nac ti yac tunil, tu chhenil tu catene, ... Catun sutnac ti yactun tu chhenil tu caten: Then they will return again to their caves and their wells.
4, 14th tun, Tizimin folio 5r Pérez page 109 Translation11
emom xulab emom chac uayab cab, ti eman xulab, eman chac uayab cab. Then Xulab ants shall descend, and Chac Uayac Cab ants shall descend
paic tu chhenel, ti yactunil Paic tu chhenil tu yactunil, to destroy their wells and their caves.
5, 18th tun, Tizimin folios 6r- 6v Pérez page 112 Translation12
tu kin u sutup tu chhenil ti yactunil tu kinil u sutup t u chhenil At that time, they return to their wells and their caves.
... tu kinil u sutup ah itza, likul tu cal ya tu cal ukah, bai ual bin ualaknahbal tu kinil uchci u zutup ah itza, likul tu cal yaa, tu cal ukah: bai ua bin ualaknahbal, At that time, it occurred the return of the Itza be cause of misery, because of thirst.
u kat / u cuchil u yanalix yac tunil, u kat u kuchil u yonixil actunil, Thus, it would be necessary to seek other caves.
ti uchom u pec can ti u chom u pec luum, ti uchan u peec caan yetel luum Then it will resound on high, it will resound on earth
hum no mix chac ix chuah tu cheenil ti yactunil, hum nom, ix chacix- chhuuah tu cheenil tu yactunil: and the Chacs and Chuah will thunder in their wells and their caves.
6, 13 Oc, Tizimin folio 7r Pérez page 114 Translation13
halili uchan tu dzoc u cuch katun, ti to uil yokol maya pan halili uchan tu dzoc u cuch katun: ti to yokol mayapan, Truly the burden of the katun over Mayapan will be ended.
ti uchom may cu u yedz uchhibal ti chhenil ti yactu nil, ti uchan maycu, u yeedz, uchibal te tu chhenil ti yactunil Later it would come to pass in Maya Cuzamil [when] its lineages settle down in their wells and their caves.

The “well-cave” behaves as other difrasismo: it contains two roots that express one single lexeme but when they are possessed the ergative precedes both words (example: Classic Ch’olan u b’akil u jolil, u ch’ahb’il yak’b’al, etcétera). In this particular case of chhen actun, the order of the roots is not regulated. In most cases chhen is the first word in the expression, although in one instance actun comes first (Example 3). Moreover, this expression occurs in abbreviated form when either of the words is missing: for Example 5, the CB Tizimin version has tu chhenil ti yactun, while in the parallel version of Pérez appears tu chhenil; in same tun prophecy yactun shows up alone.

The expression then works like kab-ch’en/chan-ch’en in the Classic Period (Stuart and Houston, 1994; Hull, 2003, 2012; Lacadena, 2009; Bíró, 2011; Tokovinine, 2013). Ch’en often appears alone while it refers to settlement, or in rare cases, it is associated with a shrine in which the gods are living. In the Yucatec language, chhen has a special meaning of “well, water cistern” (Barrera, 1980: 131); Modern Yucatec č’éʔen in Bricker (1998: 82). Actun is “cave” (Barrera, 1980: 7); Modern Yucatec ʔáaktun in Bricker (1998: 2). In Colonial Yucatec there is the lexeme of actunchhen “cave with water” (Barrera, 1980: 7), which in Modern Yucatec changes to “collapsed cave” (ʔáaktunč’éʔen in Bricker, 1998: 3).

Nevertheless, there are two examples (2 and 6) which offer key insight into understanding the meaning in the Cuceb. At the end of the 10th t un prophecy there is an omen which says that the Itza will leave their well-and-cave in the 17th tun. On the surface this is a confusing entry because this year supposedly gives the next year’s (the 11th one) prophecy. Barrera Vásquez and Rendón (1948: 116) corrected it to eleven, but I think it connects to another narrative within the books of Chilam Balam, one which clarifies this mysterious passage.

In the 3rd, fragmented katun-wheel, in the Katun 8 Ahau there is a description of the conquest of Chichen Itza in the 17th tun (in the Pérez version it is the 16th tun; see Roys, 1962: 80). I suggest that the Cuceb story contains data from Katun 8 Ahau in which Mayapan was destroyed and depopulated (more below). In this particular case of the 10th tun prophecy, the author used the same tradition in which the siege of Chichen Itza occurred in the 17th tun of Katun 8 Ahau. The “cave-and-well” then refers to Chichen Itza, or the town of the Itza.

Following the tun prophecies in the Cuceb there is a confusing explanation of how the katun works (Roys, 1949: 177, note 224) in the so-called “pacing off the katun” section. Here the scribe describes the ending of the katun over Mayapan and it passes to Maya Cuzamil (Bíró, 2012, on this toponym). The text then recounts the events of Katun 8 Ahau, when Mayapan was abandoned by its inhabitants and major noble families, which later settled down in different regions of Northern Yucatan. In this specific example, the chhibalob established (edz) themselves in their cities after leaving Mayapan, an apt description of the historical event, which probably took place in the second half of the 15th century. It is apparent that terms “well-and-cave” are referring to settlements and from these two contexts I believe that it can expand into other contexts in which the meaning of “city” functions well.

Eclipse and the Big Shark

The eclipses of the sun and the moon feature prominently in the Maya codices and are also mentioned many times in the Chilam Balam (Bricker and Bricker, 2011: 249-366). The Pre-Columbian Maya and the Colonial Yucatec believe that a monster devours the sun or the moon, which is represented in the codices. The best two examples are in the Paris codex’s so-called ‘Zodiac’ pages (Codex Peresianus 1968: 23-24) and the Eclipse Table in the Dresden codex (Codex Dresdensis, 1975: 51-58). The images of the eclipses are varied but one representation occurs frequently in which an animal opens its mouth trying to swallow the sun or the moon. In D56b and D57b the images show the serpent and the fish-like creature (shark) opening their mouths while the sign of K’IN is stabbed by two bones. This complex emblem hangs on the sky-band glyphs of star (EK’), skull (the moon UH), cloud (MUYAL), or darkness (AK’AB’). On both sides of the K’IN sign are white and dark cartouches called “the eclipse glyph” in the epigraphic literature (T326), and according to Christian Prager (2006), the reading is NAM, “disappearance, waning, vanishing, dearth, lack” (from Ch’orti’). In pages 23 and 24 there are 13 beasts that swallow the sun while they are clinging from the sky-band. Beast 6 is a shark-like creature, the others are scorpion, turtle, rattlesnake, muwan owl, frog and so on (Bricker and Bricker, 2011: 695-708). We can find the particular representation in the prophecy of the 14th tun in the Cuceb narrative:

Tizimin folio 5r Pérez page 108 Translation
u kinil tu katunil, ualci14ual uxix tic u ba15ah xixtee ul, chac uayab xoc, tu kinil tu katunil: laix ua tu kinil: u yichtic uxixte uba ah xixte ulil yetel chac uayab xoc: In its time of this katun, it will be at that time that Ah Xixte Ul and Chac Uayab Xoc deloused themselves.
tu kin uti dzay16kak, utzai ne xoc tu kinil u dzai kak ut zaine17xooc: At that time, it was set fire on, and it is tied the tail of the shark
lai ual tzailic18ca tzayi ti can ti muyal, lai ual tzailic ca tzayi19ti can ti muyal: when it became joined and it clings to the sky, to the clouds.
tu kinil yuklah chaan, tu kinil yuklah chan: At that time, it is beheld every part of the sky.
tu kinil u macal uuich kin u macal uuich u. tu kinil u macal u uich kin, u macal u uich U. At that time, the face of the sun is covered, the face of the moon is covered.20

Here we have a curious description which hitherto scholars have not paid sufficient attention. The text begins with two creatures, Ah Xixte Ul and Chac Uayab Xoc who initially deloused themselves. Although it is difficult to understand what the sentence refers to, these two monsters prepare to act during the ominous last five days of the year, on which the ceremony of the New Year occurs. Ah Xixte Ul was translated by Barrera Vásquez and Rendón (1948: 1 y 13) as El-rugoso-caracol-de-tierra or the Rough Earthly Snail, however Barrera provides another translation, “caracol-arrugado-o-espulgador” or Wrinkle Licker Snail (Barrera, 1980: 947), or “a snail who cleanses off lice/fleas” -an association with death. The other creature, Chac Uayab Xok is the Great Uayab Shark, uayab connects to a Classic Ch’olan expression uwayhab’, “the sleep of the year” or the last month of the year (in Colonial Yucatec uayeb). Because the Cuceb contains the prophecies for the next year, it is obviously that the prophet or the priest identifies this as a menacing period.

The next sentence describes that the Great Shark’s tail is set on fire while the shark is tied up clinging from the sky and the clouds. Although we do not have this particular image of a burning shark in the Classic Period, we have another monster, the Starry Deer Crocodile, which is often represented with incense on its tail -the latter called the Quadripartite Badge (Taube, 2009: 99-106). In the Cuceb, the shark clings from the sky and clouds which aptly describes the iconographic figures in the Dresden and Paris codices where monsters try to swallow the sun and the moon (here “it is covered”); a later narrative also mentions this (Figure 2). In summary, we can say that these lines of the 14th tun prophecies really recount the general image of an eclipse and a celestial creature.

Pre-Columbian Past and Intertextuality

Intertextuality was coined by Julia Kristeva in the 1960s working on Bakhtin’s theories on literature (Kristeva, 1986: 34-61). In her own words, “any text is constructed as a mosaic of quotation; any text is the absorption and transformation of another” (Kristeva, 1986: 37). Later on, she proposes that we must think on literary genres as a “imperfect semiological system signifying beneath the surface of language but never without it” and secondly, we can discover “relations among larger units such as sentences, questions-and-answers, dialogues, etc.” (Kristeva, 1986: 37). Although intertextuality would become a common concept in literary criticism in the age of postmodernism (see Allen, 2000, for this development in several academic disciplines), it also appeared in the research of ancient literacy such as in Mesopotamian, Biblical, and Classic hermeneutics (Bauks, Horowitz, and Lange, 2013).

One important concept is the realization that the textual world, which has been flourishing for millennia, is “saturated”, it is no longer possible to write something that has not been written before. This means that things cannot be written, only rewritten. Therefore, literature is not a creation or a representation, but a rearrangement of pre-existing stories, images, symbols. This is accomplished by the text having a “dialogue” within the text, and the resulting literature is created out of the interaction between old and modern texts.

The manuscripts of Chilam Balam contain multiple texts in different genres, such as prophecies, chronicles, stories of the Bible, correlation of the Maya and European calendars, etc. which ultimately derive from other texts (Roys, 1933; Edmonson, 1982, 1986; Gunsenheimer, 2002, 2003, 2009). The Cuceb is among the prophecy genres where the wheel or fold of the katun texts is of noted importance. The Cuceb engages distinctive sources and stories all underscoring that are part of the mythological narratives.

In this section I argue that some of the tun prophecies are directly concerned with the destruction of Mayapan. These narratives explicitly use sentences from other stories, or they employ those from an original source. First, there is a puzzling entry in the Third Chumayel Chronicle, which connects to the narrative of the Cuceb (Roys, 1933: 140, notes 1 and 4; Edmonson, 1986: 60, note 268):

Chumayel page 79 Translation
Hoo ahau pacxi u cab yahau ah ytzamal
Kinich Kakmoo. y pop hol chan tumenel hunnac
Ceel,21
In 5 Ahau the rulers of Itzamal, Kinich
Kakmoo and Pop Hol Chan were destroyed by
Hunac Ceel

The mystery is the date of Katun 5 Ahau; in every other source, such as the other chronicles and the katun prophecies, the events concerning Hunac Ceel occurred in Katun 8 Ahau (Roys, 1933: 177-181). This anomaly, however, could be explained if there were two traditions, one which dated the events to Katun 8 Ahau, while the second one fixed them to Katun 5 Ahau. There are many hints for this in the narrative of the Cuceb. In several parts of the Cuceb we find events associated with the collapse of Mayapan, which are traditionally dated to Katun 8 Ahau.

In general, the ‘face’ or the aspect of Katun 5 Ahau in the Cuceb, is Mayapan. This is unique in the Chilam Balam (CB) manuscripts because the face (u uich) is connected to gods (or rulers) and not with places. When the fictitious Katun 5 Ahau ended, the Katun leaves Mayapan (see 13 Oc chapter above in the Example 6), alluding to these events occurring in Katun 8 Ahau at Mayapan.

In the first tun prophecy there is a line which describes the overthrow of a wall, which usually relates to Mayapan (one common epithet of the city is ich paa “within the walls”):

Tizimin folio 1r Pérez page 101 Translation22
tu kinyan ox mul tun tzek,
pail akab23ppixich24ox
hublah cot,
tu kinil yan ox mul tun tzek:
pail akab, chhamil, ox hublah
coot,
At the time there will be a
large mound of skulls. Vigil
at dawn thrice the wall will
be thrown down.

In the second tun prophecy, at the beginning of the narrative there is a description of talking among the people of the mountain:

Tizimin folio 1r Pérez page 101 Translation25
ual tu kinile ti u thantamba
ui-yokol u suyil cab yokol ah
uuc chapat
Tu kinile ti uthantanba uitzi,
yokol u suyil cab, yokol
uuc chapat
At that time [the foreig
ners] from the hills discuss
among themselves over the
surrounding lands and over
Ah Uuc Chapat,
u—te u cuch, uucte u ppic uucppel u cuch uucppel u ppic over the seven-year of tribute.

Although in the CB Tizimin ui appears alone, in the Pérez version uitzi shows up which I can reconstruct as uitzi[l dzul] “foreigners from the hills”. These foreigners are mentioned in the Tizimin and Pérez chronicles in Katun 8 Ahau: pax ci cah mayapan tumen uitzil dzul or “the city of Mayapan was destroyed by the foreigners from the hills (Boot, 2005: 487). In the Cuceb, the winners of the battle discuss the lands and the tribute (cuch is in burden and ppic is also), as well as the captives whom later they sacrifice to Uuc Chapat, the mouth of the monster who controls the gate of the Underworld.

In the tenth tun prophecy, at the end of a rather long narrative, there is a story of the destruction of Mayapan by the Xiu family containing metaphorical expressions and puns:

[ Pérez pages 106-107 Translation26
ti emon u cuch uitz, yokol may
cuy
ti eman u cuch uitz yokol may
zuy.27
The burden of the hills will
descend over Maya Cuzamil.
uai uchom mayan, tu may
ceeh, tu xau cutz mani,
uay uchan mayapan, tu may
ceeh, tu xau cutz manii
It will occur in Mayapan
from the deer hoofs and
turkey claws of Mani.
uai u man uay yuchul, uay u manel28tulacale: uay u yuchul
u dzoc lae,
Here is the passing of all
things; it would occur to
finish [the katun].
u yokot chac dzidzib, chac
tum pilix29, tu may actun,
lay u katunil ca bin okotnac
chac dzidzib lae yetel chactun
ppilix, tu may actun:
In this katun the red parrot
and the cardinal dance at
[i. e. katun] stone table,
lai uaan tan chakan, lau u uaan tan chakan, which is set up erect in the
savanna.
ti u yuchul uale yoklal lay u
chhichhilob. U mut halach
uinicob,
There it would occur because
these are the birds, the
augury of the rulers.
lay ca bin babal zithnac
yxuixum u chhichh ahau
The yaxum birds, the birds
of the ruler shall hop about.
u dzoctu than buluc am lay
montesumae
It is fulfillment of the
command of Buluc-Am
Montesuma,
uayi u dzoc tu may ceeh, it is fulfillment of the deer
hoofs.
uaye u manel tulacale caix bin
u yalahob manii
Here passes everything and
they will say “it passed
uaye u cahal ah itzaob. Alabtiob
tumenel he montesumae
to the town of the Itza”.
Montesuma said it them,
U tunil ah ytzaob tu-/ menel
ah buluc am u kaba,
the year for the Itza, therefore
they called it Ah Buluc Am.
u chom ti to tu katunil, bini
ual uchom, tumen lai u katunil
tu menelob ti to tu katunil
bini ual tumenel tu katunil
It shall occur, still is its katun,
it would come to pass
because this is its katun,
ca uchi hapai canil, ca uchi, hapai canil, when happened with Hapai
Can.

This very complex story describes the collapse of Mayapan and Itza cities. While the Pérez version is longer than that of the Tizimin, this text might be interpolated with the original narrative remaining in the Tizimin version. The text begins with the descending of the burden from the hills to Maya Cuzamil, a toponym which may refer to the polity of Mayapan in the 15th century. The “burden from the hills” is associated with the Puuc region and with the Xiu family who rebelled against the power of the Cocom dynasty as Landa noted in his Relación (Tozzer, 1941: 31-39). The next line mentions that the burden falls over Mayapan from the deer hoofs and turkey claws of Mani. Although “the deer-and-turkey” is the name of Yucatán in Landa, it is curious that in this particular part of the Cuceb is connected to Mani, the capital of the Xiu after they left Mayapan. A relevant key in understanding this sentence can be found in the Xiu family tree, from the Xiu Chronicle. On the bottom of the image (Restall, 1998: 145) there is a bowl with burning deer hoofs (may ceeh) which can represent the Xiu family and the ancestor Hun Uitzil Chac or One Hilly Chac. It is obvious that the place name of Mani in this context is anachronistic because the town was founded after the abandonment of Mayapan.

The next part of the narrative depicts the birds of the king as the animal augury: here there is a pun mut’s meanings are “bird” and “augury” (Barrera, 1980: 542). The next line there is a corrupt word (yxuixum) which Barrera Vásquez and Rendón (1948: v109) reconstructed as yaxum or “cotinga” a turquoise bird which in Classic Nahuatl is xuihtototl, or Tutul Xiu. Whatever the significance of this section is, it certainly symbolizes the Xiu family.

Next, we find a story within the story where the scribe creates an ethnic etymology of Mani, which according to him is derived from the perfective aspect of mani “it passed” or “it is past” (Craine and Reindorp, 1979: 107, note 154). In these passages are mentioned the names of Montesuma and Buluc Am (11 Spider) which appear in another part of the Pérez manuscript (Craine and Reindorp, 1979: 127). Note that in the latter text the scribe begins with the date of the 10th of May 1756 and follows by discussing the fragmented katun-wheel. The first wheel is Katun 8 Ahau which tells the plotting of Hunac Ceel against Chac Xib Chac of Chichen Itza. Similar to the section of the Cuceb, the author highlights that Montezuma and Buluc Am foresaw the events and also the Aztec emperor said it to the Itza. It is highly likely that this is a fictitious narrative invented by the Yucatec people in the 18th century. Nevertheless, the text shows the link between the Cuceb‘s presentation of the past and the later pieces of the story. The two last lines of the Cuceb tale finish introducing Hapai Can, the “Sucking Serpent”, from the famous storyline of Katun 8 Ahau. Hapai Can plays a prominent role in the Katun 8 Ahau of the fragmented third katun-wheel (Roys, 1962: 80) with his arrival to Izamal, and also the ruler fed his children to him (presumably meaning sacrifice).

After examining the narrative of the 10th tun of the Cuceb, I believe this to be strong evidence that it is describing the fateful events which took place in Katun 8 Ahau, albeit here they are associated with Katun 5 Ahau.

The first katun-wheel in Pérez version has a peculiar feature, namely that each katun prophecy contains a year list table which corresponds the Christian year and its correction (Craine and Reindorp, 1979: 157). In three Katuns (Katun 8 Ahau, Katun 11 Ahau and Katun 9 Ahau) there are historical events associated with specific years. In 13 Muluc of Katun 8 Ahau there is an entry which describes the rebellion in Mayapan (Roys, 1962: 78).

Pérez page 153 Translation
Oxlahunil Muluc: Uchici puchhtun ichpa tu
uucppel u uaxac ahau
13 Muluc was when throwing stones occurred
within the fortress. This was in the 7
[year] of [Katun] 8 Ahau.

This event also appears in the katun chronicles (First Chumayel Chronicle and the Tizimin Chronicle) in Katun 8 Ahau. If we check the year of 13 Muluc in the Cuceb we find an intriguing entry right at the beginning of the prophecy:

Tiziminfolio 4v Pérez page 109 Translation30
ca bin emom pope, emom dzame,
yoxlahun pis katun uale
ca bin emom pope, emom
dzame tu yoxlahun dzit katun
uale
Then the mat shall descend,
the throne shall descend in
the thirteenth year of the
katun.
tu kinil multepal tu kinil multepal In the time of the assembly
of the kings.

Recently, Tsubasa Okoshi (2018) has convincingly explained the meaning of mul tepal as an “assembly of the kings/nobles”, which actually shows up in Landa in Spanish:

Que entre los sucesores de la casa Cocomina hubo uno muy orgulloso, imitador de Cocom, y que éste hizo otra liga con los de Tabasco, y que metió más mexicanos dentro de la ciudad, y que comenzó a tiranizar y hacer esclavos a la gente menuda y que por esto se juntaron los señores (multepal) a la parte de Tutuxiu, el cual era gran republicano como sus antepasados, y que concertaron de matar a Cocom, y que así lo hicieron, matando también a todos sus hijos, sin dejar más que uno que estaba ausente (Landa, 1938: 17, cited by Okoshi, 2018: 912).

If we view the full entry for relevant passages of Katun 8 Ahau in the First Chumayel Chronicle, then we see that the entry of 13 Muluc in the first katun-wheel in Pérez is part of the full description of the siege of Mayapan:

Chumayelpage 76 Translation
Vaxac ahau. uch ci pucch tun. ychpaa: maya
pan. tumen u pach paa.
In 8 Ahau it occurred the throwing of stones
within the fortress of Mayapan because of
the outsiders of the wall;
u paah tu lum: tumen multepal ych
camayapan lae
[it occurred] the destruction of the
fortification because of the assembly of the kings.

It is also intriguing that the 13 Muluc year events are registered in different years, dated to the 7th tun of 8 Ahau, while in the Cuceb they are dated to the 13th tun of 5 Ahau, while in another chronicle they put it in the 10th tun of 8 Ahau. I can say then that while the 13 Muluc year and the events were not changed, the scribes associated them with different katuns and different countings of the year. Nevertheless, this part of the Cuceb uses the occurrences of Katun 8 Ahau to make its prophecy.

Conclusion

David Bolles (2010: 97) speculated that

The Cuceb is a series of year prognostications. It is probably incomplete, as there should be 52 years with their prognostications instead of the 21 listed here. The 22nd year given in the Cuceb, 8 Muluc, does not have a prognostication, but rather is a statement by Ah Kauil Cħel that he, along with Ah Na Puc Tun and Ah Xupan Nauat, is responsible for “taking this out of the hieroglyphs” (line C560). (See Section J for more on these three men.) Fifty-two years would make a complete cycle of u bubukilhaaboob (see table on lines A440-475) and would be more in keeping with the name Cuceb and the nature of all the other prognosticatory material presented by the Colonial sources. On lines C566-568 Ah Kauil Cħel writes that he wrote the Cuceb with Ah Na Puc Tun in the Mayan date of 18 Zac 11 Chuen, which he equates with the Christian date of February 15, 1544. This Mayan date of 18 Zac 11 Chuen happens only in the year 2 Hiix when the year bearer set is Kan, Muluc, Hiix, Cauac. The year 2 Hiix did fall in the Christian years 1543-1544 if one assumes the Colonial method of dating, but it also fell in the years 1595-1596 which is the year in which the “Prologue to the Cuceb” was written. While the following thought is just speculation on the compiler’s part, it could well be that the Cuceb was in fact originally written in 1544 in hieroglyphs and then renewed on its anniversary date 52 years later in 1596, but this time in Latin script.

If we can accept provisionally this suggestion (below), then we can try to count the wheel of 52-year back:

  • 1st wheel 1596-1544

  • 2nd wheel 1544-1492

  • 3rd wheel 1492-1440

  • 4th wheel 1440-1388

The 52-year 3rd wheel almost matches the date of the 20-year katun wheel of Katun 8 Ahau, which lasted from 1441 to 1461. I am unsure why the scribe used this particular count and dated 5 Ahau from 1593 to 1614, but he employed a tradition in which the collapse of Mayapan dated to Katun 5 Ahau. The Cuceb then recounted, in part, events from Katun 8 Ahau - apart from kennings and descriptions of occurrences which can connect to hieroglyphic sources. Other events come from the Colonial period, such as changing the clothes from Maya garb to Christian garb, or the explicit mention of Spanish people as white men. Although, I believe, as Gunsenheimer has argued convincingly, that the Cuceb was written later than 1544, I also believe that parts of this story were already written up in the Pre-Columbian era. If this is true, then it is a 52-year wheel prophecy that contains events that occurred between 1440 and 1596 written in clever ways of the age of lore of the katun literature.

In this paper I addressed some of the many metaphors or difrasismos and I also try to explain the intertexuality remaining in the narrative of the Cuceb, the only text in the Chilam Balam which focuses on the year-by-year (or tun) prophecies. Indeed, in the hieroglyphic Paris Codex there is a tun-prophecy, from pages 2 to 14, located above the katun-prophecy. According to Bricker and Bricker (2011) the scribes who made the codex copied a katun-prophecy from the early 8th century and it is also possible that the tun-prophecy originated from the same era. Some difrasismos truly came from the Classic Period literature (for example in the 4th tun: elom u uich tu cab tu chhenil “they will be burned the faces of the earth, of the wells”, i.e. the cities will be burned). The Cubeb, to a certain extent, is a past narrative of the Classic Period, though it was updated to the 16th and the 17th centuries.

There are many more intriguing metaphors and gods for future scholars to address here. With our increasing knowledge of the Classic Period inscriptions, perhaps they will continue with what I have unraveled here, revealing more secrets of this wonderful Yucatec text.

Acknowledgements

I want to thank Antje Gunsenheimer, Timothy Knowlton, Jennifer Loughmiller-Cardinal and two anonymous reviewers for their help with this paper.

Bibliography

Allen, Graham 2000 Intertextuality. London, New York: Routledge. [ Links ]

Bauks, Michaela, Wayne Horowitz, and Armin Lange (eds.) 2013 Between Text and Text: The Hermeneutics of Intertextuality in Ancient Cultures and Their Afterlife in Medieval and Modern Time. Journal of Ancient Judaism, Supplement 6. Bristol: Vandenhoeck and Ruprecht. [ Links ]

Barrera Vásquez, Alfredo 1980 Diccionario Maya Cordemex: maya-español, español-maya. Mérida: Ediciones Cordemex. [ Links ]

Barrera Vásquez, Alfredo y Silvia Rendón 1948 El libro de los libros de Chilam Balam. Mexico: Fondo de Cultura Económica, Colección Popular. [ Links ]

Bíró, Péter 2011 “Politics in the Western Maya Region (I): Ajawil/Ajawlel and Ch’e’n”, Estudios de Cultura Maya, XXXVIII: 41-73. [ Links ]

______2012 “The Non-Existence May Cycle: Methods, Colonial Texts and Epigraphy”, Journal de la Société des Américanistes, 98 (2): 33-57. [ Links ]

Bolles, David 2001 Combined Dictionary Concordance of the Yucatec Maya Language. Disponible en <http://www.famsi.org/reports/96072/index.html#dictionary> [accessed in 29 June 2021]. [ Links ]

______2010 Post Conquest Mayan Literature Based on Pre-Columbian Sources. Lancaster: La­ byrinthos. [ Links ]

Boot, Erik 2005 Continuity and Change in Text and Image at Chichén Itzá, Yucatán, México. A Study of the Inscriptions, Iconography, and Architecture at a Late Classic to Early Postclassic Maya Site. Leiden: CNWS Publication. [ Links ]

Bricker, Victoria Reifler 1998 A Dictionary of the Maya Language: As Spoken in Hocabá, Yucatán. Salt Lake City: University of Utah. [ Links ]

______2019 A Historical Grammar of the Maya Language of Yucatan: 1557-2000. Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press. [ Links ]

Bricker, Harvey Miller and Victoria Reifler Bricker 2011 Astronomy in the Maya Codices (Memoirs of the American Philosophical Society Held at Philadelphia for Promoting Useful Knowledge). Philadelphia: American Philosophical Society. [ Links ]

Codex Dresdensis (Sächsische Landesbibliothek Dresden Mscr. Dresd. R 310) 1975 Codices Selecti, LIV. Graz: Akademische Druck-und Verlagsanstalt. [ Links ]

Codex Peresianus (Codex Paris) 1968 Codices Selecti, IX. Graz: Akademische Druck-und Verlagsanstalt. [ Links ]

Craine, Eugene R. and Reginald C. Reindorp 1979 The Codex Perez and the Book of Chilam Balam of Maní. Norman: University of Oklahoma, The Civilization of the American Indian Series. [ Links ]

Edmonson, Munro 1982 The Ancient Future of the Itza. The Book of Chilam Balam of Tizimin. Austin: University of Texas Press, Texas Pan American Series. [ Links ]

______1986 Heaven Born Merida and Its Destiny. The Book of Chilam Balam of Chumayel. Austin: University of Texas Press, Texas Pan American Series. [ Links ]

England, Nora C. 1983 A Grammar of Mam, A Mayan Language. Austin: University of Texas Press . [ Links ]

Garibay Kintana, Ángel María 1968 Poesía náhuatl III. México: Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México. [ Links ]

Gunsenheimer, Antje 2002 “Geschichtstradierung in den yukatekischen Chilam Balam-Büchern: Eine Analyse der Herkunft und Entwicklung ausgewählter historischer Berichte”, PhD Thesis. Bonn: Rheinische Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universität Bonn. [ Links ]

______2003 “En contra del olvido y en pro de la continuidad: las crónicas de los Libros del Chilam Balam en su contexto colonial”, Escondido en la selva: arqueología en el norte de Yucatán, pp. 371-416, Hanns J. Prem (eds.). México, Bonn: Instituto Nacional de Antropología e Historia, Rheinische Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universität Bonn. [ Links ]

______2006 “Out of Historical Darkness: A Methodological Approach to Uncover the Hidden History of Ethnohistorical Sources”, Indiana, 23: 14-49. [ Links ]

______2009 “Reality Hidden in the Fiction: Literary Traces of Hieroglyphic Sources in the Books of Chilam Balam”, Text and Context: Yucatec Maya Literature in a Diachronic Perspective, pp. 111-136, Antje Gunsenheimer, Tsubasa Okoshi and John F. Chuchiak (eds.). Aachen: Shaker Verlag (Bonner Amerikanistische Studien 47). [ Links ]

Hofling, Charles Andrew and Félix Fernando Tesucún 1997 Itzaj Maya-Spanish-English Dictionary. Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press. [ Links ]

Hull, Kerry Michael 2003 “Verbal Art and Performance in Ch’orti’ and Maya Hieroglyphic Writing”. PhD Dissertation, Department of History of Art. Austin: University of Texas. [ Links ]

______2012 “Poetic Tenacity: A Diachronic Study of Kennings in Mayan Languages”, Parallel Words: Genre, Discourse, and Poetics in Contemporary, Colonial and Classic Period Maya Literature, pp. 73-122, Kerry Michael Hull and Michael David Carrasco (eds.). Boulder: University Press of Colorado. [ Links ]

Kristeva, Julia 1986 “Word, Dialogue and Novel”, Kristeva Reader, pp. 34-61, Toril Moi (ed.). New York: Columbia University Press. [ Links ]

Lacadena, Alfonso 2003 “El sufijo verbalizador -Vj (-aj / -iij) en la escritura jeroglífica maya”, De la tablilla a la inteligencia artificial, homenaje al Prof. Jesús-Luis Cunchillos en su 65 aniversario, pp. 843-865, José Luis ChunchiIlos, Antonin González Blanco y Juan-Pablo Vita (eds.). Zaragoza: Instituto de Estudios Islámicos y del Oriente Próximo. [ Links ]

______2009 “Apuntes para un estudio sobre literatura maya antigua”, Text and Context: Yucatec Maya Literature in a Diachronic Perspective, pp. 31-52, Antje Gunsen-heimer, Tsubasa Okoshi and John F. Chuchiak (eds.). Aachen: Shaker Verlag (Bonner Amerikanistische Studien 47). [ Links ]

Makemson, Maud Worcester 1951 The Book of the Jaguar Priest. A Translation of the Book of Chilam Balam of Tizimin, with commentary. New York: Henry Schuman, Inc. [ Links ]

Montes de Oca Vega, Mercedes 2013 Los difrasismos en el nahuátl de los siglos XVI y XVII. México: Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Instituto Investigaciones Filológicas [ Links ]

Okoshi Harada, Tsubasa 2018 “El significado de multepal y un recuerdo de Alfonso: Izamal, 2016”, Tiempo detenido, tiempo suficiente: Ensayos y narraciones mesoamericanistas en homenaje a Alfonso Lacadena García-Gallo, pp. 909-914, Harri Kettunen, Verónica Vázquez, Félix Kupprat, Cristina Vidal, Gaspar Muñoz y María Josefa Iglesias (eds.). Couvin, European Association of Mayanists Wayeb (Wayeb Series 1). Disponible en <https://www.wayeb.org/download/Kettunen%20et%20al%202018%20Tiempo%20Detenido%20Alfonso%20Lacadena%20%28Wayeb%20Series%201%29.pdf> [accessed in 29 June 2021]. [ Links ]

Prager, Christian 2006 “T326 a logograph for NA:M “hide, to go out of sight”?”, Notes on Ancient Maya Writing. Disponible en <http://www.academia.ed/21971/s_T326_a_Logograph_for_NA_M_hide_to_go_out_of_sight_> [accessed in 29 June 2021]. [ Links ]

Restall, Matthew 1998 Maya Conquistador. Boston: Beacon Press. [ Links ]

Roys, Ralph Loveland 1933 The Book of Chilam Balam of Chumayel. Washington, D. C.: Carnegie Institution of Washington, Publication 438. [ Links ]

______1949 “The prophecies for the Maya tuns or years in the Books of Chilam Balam of Tizimin and Mani”, Contributions to American Anthropology and History, X (51): 157-186. Washington, D. C.: Carnegie Institution of Washington. [ Links ]

______1962 “Literary Sources for the History of Mayapan”, Mayapan, Yucatan, Mexico, pp. 25-86, Harry E. D. Pollock, Ralph L. Roys and Tatiana A. Proskouriakoff (eds.). Washington, D. C.: Carnegie Institution of Washington, Publication 619. [ Links ]

Stuart, David and Stephen D. Houston 1994 Classic Maya Place Names. Washington, D. C.: Dumbarton Oaks, Dumbarton Oaks Pre-Columbian Art and Archaeology Studies (Series 33). [ Links ]

Taube, Karl 2009 “The Womb of the World: The Cuauhxicalli and Other Offering Bowls of Ancient and Contemporary Mesoamerica”, Maya Archaeology 1, pp. 86-106, Charles Golden, Stephen Houston, and Joel Skidmore (eds.). San Francisco: Precolumbia Mesoweb Press. [ Links ]

Tokovinine, Alexander 2013 Place and Identity in Classic Maya Narratives. Washington, D. C.: Dumbarton Oaks, Dumbarton Oaks Pre-Columbian Art and Archaeology Studies (Series 37). [ Links ]

Tozzer, Alfred Marston 1941 Landa’s Relación de las cosas de Yucatán. A translation. Cambridge: Papers of the Peabody Museum. [ Links ]

1For the Colonial Yucatec texts I use the Colonial orthography save in the cases of ejective consonants, for which I employ the following letters: chh = ch’, pp = p’, thh = t’. For the Modern Yucatec I use Bricker’s orthography (1998), while for the epigraphic texts I don’t accept the theory of disharmonic principle.

2The Perez ‘codex’ was copied from different manuscripts in the early 19th century by Juan Pío Pérez (1798-1859) from the Archives of Maní. Later, the codex was copied and deposited at the Museo Nacional de Antropología, Mexico City, and the Peabody Museum, Harvard University, Tozzer Library (Gunsenheimer, 2006: 23-24, Table 1). According to Gunsenheimer (2006: 44) the original manuscript was made in the 17th century, copied from the hypothetical Archetype B. The actual manuscript of Chilam Balam of Tizimín was made in the late 18th century or the early 19th century. The original is in the Museo Nacional de Antropología, Mexico City, and several copies located in the Berendt Linguistic Collection, University Museum of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia; Instituto Yucateco de Antropología e His-toria, Mérida; Latin American Library, Tulane University, New Orleans; Ibero-Amerikanisches Institut, Berlin; Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology, Harvard University, Cambridge; Newberry Library, Ayer Collection, Chicago; and Brigham Young University (Gunsenheimer, 2006: 23-24, Table 1).

3For other works on difrasismos in Nahuatl see Montes de Oca Vega (2013) and for Maya contexts see Hull (2003, 2012) and Lacadena (2009).

4Other translations are Barrera Vásquez and Rendón 1948: 103; Roys, 1949: 166; Makemson, 1951: 5; Craine and Reindorp, 1979: 102; Edmonson, 1982: 75.

5One example occurs in the Chilam Balam of Kaua (page 256) as yan ichil chhen ych actunob (I thank an anonymous reviewer for this information).

6 Edmonson (1982: 76; 1986: 19) argued that chhenil actun referred to towns and villages, though he translated it as “wells-springs”, which I cannot concur.

7Other translations are Barrera Vásquez and Rendón 1948: 103; Roys, 1949: 166; Makemson, 1951: 5; Craine and Reindorp, 1979: 102; Edmonson, 1982: 75.

8Che tunich “wood-stone” is another difrasismo and from other contexts it refers to “war, conflict” as other scholars suggested.

9Barrera and Rendón, 1948: 110; Roys, 1949: 171-172; Makemson, 1951: 9; Craine and Reindorp, 1979: 108; Edmonson, 1982: 89.

10Barrera and Rendón, 1948: 112; Roys, 1949: 172; Makemson, 1951: 14-15; Craine and Reindorp, 1979: 109; Edmonson, 1982: 92-93.

11Barrera and Rendón, 1948: 114; Roys, 1949: 174; Makemson, 1951: 17; Craine and Reindorp, 1979: 110; Edmonson, 1982: 97.

12Barrera and Rendón, 1948: 118; Roys, 1949: 176; Makemson, 1951: 22; Craine and Reindorp, 1979: 113; Edmonson, 1982: 105.

13Barrera and Rendón, 1948: 120; Roys, 1949: 177; Makemson, 1951: 25; Craine and Reindorp, 1979: 115; Edmonson,1982: 110.

14Ualci “a estas horas, por este tiempo” (Bolles, 2001), which is parallel to Pérez version expression of tu kinil.

15Xixtaba “espulgar” (Bolles, 2001).

16Dzay/dzai is the perfective form of the transitive verb root dza “give, put, place” (Barrera, 1980: 870; Bricker, 1998: 47; Bolles, 2001).

17Tzaine “rabiatar vn cauallo con otro, y v baxel con otro” (Barrera, 1980: 855; Bolles, 2001).

18Tzailic “la acción y efecto de aumentar anudando” (Bolles, 2001).

19Tzay “to cling”, a root intransitive with the perfective -i suffix (Bolles, 2001).

20The translation is from Roys (1949: 173) with minor changes by the author. The other translations of the same text are very different among the scholars: Barrera and Rendón (1948: 113-114): “Entonces será cuando se encrespe Ah XixteelUl, El-rugoso-caracol-de-tierra, juntamente con el maligno Xooc, Tiburón, porque el fuego les pegará y será entonces cuando se anuden unos a otros los tiburones de la cola, y pegue el fuego en el cielo y en las nubes. Será entonces cuando se mueva el cielo y se cubra la faz del Sol y se cubra la faz de la Luna”. Makemson (1951: 16-17): “[…] their burning needs, a tale of great distress, on the day in which they read their fortunes in the fangs of the fire. After they had assembled, they rejoiced to see the sky covered with clouds. On that day everyone saw it. Then the face of the sun was veiled, the face of the moon was covered”. Craine and Reindorp (1979: 110): “The fourteenth Tun was the time of the great count. It was the time when the fire which was set in the Petén broke out among the clouds in the sky and was seen everywhere. It was time when the face of the sun and the face of the moon were covered”. Edmonson (1982: 96): “On the fourteenth tun is the time in the katun period. There remains being made to fight oneself. The fighters arrive with the East priest Uayab Xoc at the time of seeking fire, of seeking shark tails. That is the return of seeking things, when one seeks then in the sky, in storms, sun phases far seeing, at the time of covering the face of the sun, of covering of the face of the moon”.

21For Yucatec text I use Boot, 2005: 483.

22For other translations see Barrera Vásquez and Rendón, 1948: 102; Roys, 1949: 165; Craine and Reindorp, 1979: 100; Edmonson, 1982: 71.

23Pa akab “dawn”, from pa “to break, to destroy” and akab “night”, so its meaning is “breaking the night”.

24Ppixich “vela por desvelo, vigilia” (Barrera,1980: 695).

25Barrera and Rendón, 1948: 102; Roys, 1949: 165; Craine and Reindorp, 1979: 101; Edmonson, 1982: 73.

26Barrera and Rendón, 1948: 109-110; Roys, 1949: 171; Craine and Reindorp, 1979: 107; Edmonson, 1982: 88-89.

27For may zuy as Maya Cuzamil see Bíró, 2012. From the various contexts, this particular combi-nation of toponyms may refer, as a literary formula, to the Yucatan peninsula, or the former territories of Mayapan naming the center and the easternmost boundary of this realm.

28Manel “pasar, exceder” (Barrera, 1980: 493), máan “pass by, move” (Bricker, 1998: 179).

29For the identification of the two birds see Roys, 1949: 171.

30Barrera and Rendón, 1948: 113; Roys, 1949: 173; Craine and Reindorp, 1979: 109; Edmonson, 1982: 95.

Received: June 02, 2021; Accepted: November 08, 2021

Péter Bíró. Húngaro. Licenciado en Historia por la Universidad de Szeged, Hungría, maestro en Estudios Mesoamericanos por la Facultad de Filosofía y Letras de la Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, doctor en Arqueología por la Universidad de La Trobe en Australia. Trabajó como investigador en la Universidad de Bonn y ahora es investigador independiente, especializado en epigrafía e historia sobre la civilización maya. Desarrolla actualmente los proyectos de investigación centrados en la historia de Chichén Itzá, la epigrafia, el arte de Copán y la etnogénesis de los Itzá. Entre sus publicaciones más recientes se encuentran “Los rituales de entronización de los príncipes ‘Turbante de Serpiente’ de Chichén Itzá y Hunac Ceel de Mayapán”, “La inscripción de los murales de 96 glifos de Ek Balam en reflejar el texto de murales de Xultun”, “La casa real de Kokom: una Historia de Yucatán” y “Short Note on Winte’ Nah as House of Darts”. bpetr30@gmail.com

Péter Bíró. Hungarian. BA in History from the University of Szeged, Hungary, MA in Estudios Mesoamericanos de la Facultad de Filosofía y Letras de la Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, PhD in Archaeology at the University of La Trobe in Australia. He worked as a researcher at the University of Bonn and is now an independent researcher, specialized in epigraphy and history of the Maya civilization. He is currently developing research projects focused on the history of Chichen Itza, the epigraphy and art of Copan and the ethnogenesis of the Itzas. Among his most recent publications are “Los rituales de entronización de los príncipes ‘Turbante de Serpiente’ from Chichén Itzá y Hunac Ceel de Mayapán”, “La inscripción de los murales de 96 glifos de Ek Balam en reflejar el texto de murales de Xultun”, “La casa real de Kokom: una Historia de Yucatán” and “Short Note on Winte’ Nah as House of Darts”. bpetr30@gmail.com

Creative Commons License This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License