12.
The Meaning of Maya Myths
Introduction: Method, Context and Interpretation
Each thing was made silent,
Each thing was made calm,
Was made invisible,
Was made to rest in heaven.
(Edmonson 1971: 9-10; lines 125-128.)
Understanding Maya myths is of supreme importance for comprehending their religion
and worldview – more precisely, a variety of cults,13 rituals, and beliefs that form their
“part” in Mesoamerican religions. This complex is very specific because of the great
number of common beliefs and similar rituals, as well as numerous deities that have
common traits in different civilizations – extending from the “Olmec” and Teotihuacán
to the Zapotec, Toltec, Mixtec, and Aztec. In this universe of extraordinary cultures the
Maya have a very important place.
However, each study of Maya religion is rendered much more difficult by the lack of
the sources. The little we know comes mostly from the Postclassic period (10th-16th
centuries CE) and the question regarding the extent of continuity between the Classic
and Postclassic is still open (see, for example, Edmonson 1979: 157-166). What survived
are stelae, lintels, reliefs, bas-reliefs, and figurines and sculptures on one hand – and
ceramics and oral tradition on the other, with a few manuscripts written down during
the colonial period, of which “Popol Vuh” is the most important for the subject of
this paper. The trails of ancient beliefs can be found even in some very “Christian”
ceremonies of the present-day Maya. As noted by Thomas Gann (1918: 40): “Nominally,
they are Christians, but the longer one lives among them, and the better one gets to
know them, the more he realizes that Christianity is to a great extent merely a thin
veneer, and that fundamentally their religious conceptions and even their ritual
and ceremonies are survivals – degenerate, much changed, and with most of their
significance lost – but still survivals of those of their ancestors of pre-Columbian days.”
Having in mind all these obstacles, it is no wonder that there are only a few useful
studies of Maya religion. However, it is only in the last 50 years that we are witnessing
the gradual accumulation of knowledge on different aspects of their society and culture,
including religion. If one turns to mythology, a very important break through has been
made in the decipherment of most Mayan hieroglyphs (Grube and Gaida 2006), study of
ceramics found in the dignitaries’ tombs (Adams 1971), and great progress made in the
study of art and iconography (Kampen 1981; Baudez 2004) and works that point to the
legacy of ancient beliefs in present-day communities (Scholes and Roys 1948). There
13
For the definition of cult which is in my opinion especially valid for the religious complexes of this part of
the world, I refer to Brundage (1985: 4 ff.). He stresses that “Failure in it [cult - A.B.] leads to the disorientation
of the group and the unpinning of its value systems.”
42
12. The Meaning of Maya Myths 43
has been a lot of dispute about the methodological approach employed in the study of
iconography, which directly influences the study of religion and myths. On the one hand,
there is the so-called “direct historical approach,” based on the comparative study of
Mesoamerican civilizations (predominantly Aztec), as well as on modern ethnological
research. This approach has been accepted by many of the leading authorities in Maya
studies (like Gordon R. Willey), and I think that its best presentation and defence
against its critics has been that of Henry B. Nicholson (1976: 157-175). On the other
hand is the intrinsic configurational iconographic analysis proposed by George Kubler
(1972), but also supported by scholars like Jiménez Moreno (1971). However, despite
the strength of their arguments and the remarkable academic reputation of these two
scholars, their attempt to point to some remarkable inconsistencies in interpretations
of Mesoamerican religions (including the Maya) was mostly ignored – at least until the
1990s and the large-scale decipherment of Mayan texts and their practical implications
(for example, Houston and Stuart 1996).14 The Mayas were at the same time familiar
(as they had been critically studied for almost a century by then), and exotic, as
representatives of the ultimate others, Native Americans. This familiarity translated
into attempts to bring them closer to the contemporary public. Observations of beliefs
and rituals made during the 20th century about particular ethnographic communities
were simply transferred into the past. In this way, anthropological data from the present
were used to interpret archaeological data in the past – until two decades ago, seriously
hampered by the inability of most scholars to read Maya script.
As another note on methodology, it should be noted that the “direct historical approach”
was first challenged by art historians and iconographers. Contemporary judgments
may be made about an ancient work of art, but very few scholars would then take her or
his impression of that work of art as an integral part of its meaning. For example, no one
has attempted to seriously interpret ancient Greek religion by interviewing citizens
of contemporary Greece, nor am I aware of the interpretations of ancient Roman
religion through interviews of the citizens of present-day Italy. Somehow, however,
such an approach has been seen as perfectly legitimate when it comes to establishing
connections between contemporary Mayas and their distant ancestors – even when
there were no elements that would enable one to determine which ethnic group
ancestors belonged to or which language they spoke. The leading Maya art historian
of the second half of the 20th century, George Kubler, proposed instead what he called
(following Renaissance art historian Erwin Panofsky) an “intrinsic approach” – looking
at images in the context where they originated, and trying to interpret them from that
very same context.15
14
I should add that the epigraphers who were mostly responsible for the breakthrough in the decipherment
of ancient Maya script, Houston and Stuart (as well as their students and colleagues), were very well aware
that the wild analogies in the interpretations of Maya iconography (that were subsequently “exported” onto
their religion and ritual) simply did not work, but their work was considered to be “too specialized” or even
“exotic” for the members of the wider Mesoamericanist academic community.
15
Panofsky insisted on the understanding of the particular imagery (iconology) as the basis of eventual
understanding of its meaning in the wider context (iconography): “…the correct identification of motifs is
the prerequisite of their correct iconographical analysis, so is the correct analysis of images, stories and
allegories the prerequisite of their correct iconological interpretation” (1955: 32).
44 Mesoamerican Religions and Archaeology
But the subject of this chapter is the meaning of Maya myths, especially regarding
customs and beliefs of other Mesoamerican peoples, and the fact that about some of
them we know much more (those from the Valley of Mexico in the first place). I prefer
to call this a comparative approach, which does not mean that I take data from other
cultures to interpret Maya myths – my only interest is in comparing them, because
certain “types” or “models” are encountered in different traditions (which does not
mean that they were “carried” or “diffused” from culture to culture), suggesting
similar models of the manifestations of the sacred. It will become obvious that in some
cases we deal with patterns characteristic of this part of the world, while in others
Maya tradition retains a sort of “exclusiveness.” I must note that I use the word myth
to denote a traditional tale, one aiming at a symbolic explanation of the world around
us and the paradoxical ambiguity of human existence, as well as at the justification
of the present hierarchy and social order (among gods or men). We do not deal with
some sort of “pre-scientific” or “proto-scientific” thinking. The point is that everything
important and fascinating was to be explained through mythic thinking as the adequate
sphere of symbolic expression (Kirk 1970; Bošković 2002). It excludes bivalent logic and
many other relations familiar to us (before/after; cause/effect; etc.). Myth as symbol
offers ground for the development and extension of all human intellectual and creative
activity, especially the inclination towards the gathering and classifying of notions
and concepts, which enabled mythical heroes to become subject(s) of religious cults.
The evidence we have justifies the term “Maya myths” because, despite the regional,
language, and cultural differences, there is a corpus of myths common to the majority
of Maya groups, as well as to their Mesoamerican neighbours. I shall deal here only with
characteristic myths on creation, divine hero-twins, and moon goddess.
1. Ages of the World
[The day] 4 Ahau will be creation.
[The day] 4 Ahau will be darkness.
Then were born the heart of creation,
the heart of darkness. (Roys 1965: 6)
The myth of the periodic cycle of cosmic destruction and renovation, the so-called “ages
of the world” (or suns in Nahuatl tradition), is common to all Mesoamerican cultures
and has also parallels among the Indians of the Southwest of the USA. According to the
version given by Tozzer (1907: 153-154) - and based on informants from the vicinity
of Valladolid - the present world is in its fourth “age.” At first, it was inhabited by
zayamuincob (“the disjointed men”), dwarfs capable of carrying large stones on their
hunched backs. This strength and their miraculous ability to bring firewood to the
hearth by whistling, enabled them to build ancient cities and huge paved roads. There
also existed a great road suspended in the sky, stretching from Tulum and Coba to
Chichén Itzá and Uxmal. A great living rope was also connected with this road (blood
flowed in the interior of it), and it served as a mean by which gods sent food to the
ancient cities’ rulers. In the course of time men had become wicked, so gods decided to
destroy the world using a flood hayiokocab (“water over the earth”). The rope was cut,
all the blood flowed out, and it disappeared forever. Until then all was still in darkness.
12. The Meaning of Maya Myths 45
In the midst of unending gloom the sun suddenly rose for the first time and its rays
turned the industrious dwarfs into stone. In the next creation there lived people called
dz’olob, but they were destroyed by another flood. In the third period, the world was
inhabited by macehualli (Nahuatl word for “ordinary people”), ancestors of the present-
day Mayas. These were destroyed by a hunyecil (“hurricane and earthquake”) or bulcabal.
Finally, the present world is inhabited by the descendants of all the ancient races and
will disappear after a flood (a fire, according to “Relación de Merida”--but one must
remember that, for the ancient Mesoamericans, water and fire were not opposites).
According to the “Popol Vuh,” the first people were just “dolls made of wood” – they
watched... talked... multiplied... but had no heart or soul, and they were not even aware
of their creators – so they had to be destroyed:
Then their flood was invented by the heart of
Heaven
A great flood was made, and descended on the heads
Of those who were dolls
Who were carved of wood. (Edmonson 1971: 25-26)
Besides this flood their utensils and domestic animals also rebelled against the first
people, and had prominent part in their annihilation. From the few survivors descended
monkeys... In the second creation, it seemed that the work of the gods was well executed,
since the people were really brilliant:
They came to see;
They came to know
Everything under heaven
If they could see it.
(Edmonson 1971: 150)
But the gods were far from being satisfied with their brilliancy:
“It is not good
What they said,
Our forming
Our shaping:
We know everything great
And small,” they said.
And so they took back again
Their knowledge,
Did Bearer
And Engenderer.
(Edmonson 1971: 151-152)
The first pair of divine hero-twins, 1 Hunter (Hun Hunahpu) and 7 Hunter (Vuqub
Hunahpu), were defeated by the Lords of the Underworld (Xíbalba, “place of dread”).
46 Mesoamerican Religions and Archaeology
This world was also inhabited by giants, led by 7 Parrot (Vuqub Kaqix) and his sons
Alligator (Cipacna) and 2 Leg (Kaab r Aqan). They were all killed by the next pair of hero-
twins who, afterwards, proceeded to defeat the Lords of the Underworld. Of special
interest among all these giants is the story of the Alligator, whose only “sin” seems to
have been some sort of hubris and who slayed 400 young men – an episode resembling
similar adventure of the great Mexica Aztec warrior god Huitzilopochtli (cf. the chapter
on Aztec Great Goddesses).
In the third creation a dramatic showdown between the hero-twins and the Lords of the
Underworld took place; and finally, in the fourth creation, people were made of yellow
and white maize.
According to Mexican tradition, the first creation was 4 Jaguar (naui ocelotl)16 and the
world was inhabited by giants. After 13 periods of 52 years these giants were devoured
by jaguars. Tezcatlipoca was the sun of this age. The second creation was named 4 Wind
(naui ehecatl), and Quetzalcoatl was its sun. After 7 periods of 52 years this world was
destroyed when terrible winds swept away houses, trees, and people, and survivors
were turned into monkeys. The next creation was 4 Rain (naui quiauitl) and Tlaloc was
its sun. After 6 cycles of 52 years it ended in a rain of fire from the sky and volcanic
eruptions. This world was inhabited by children who were afterwards turned into birds.
The fourth creation was 4 Water (naui atl), its sun being goddess Chalchihuitlicue. After
13 periods of 52 years the world was destroyed by floods and people were turned into
fish. Finally, we live in the time of the fifth creation, 4 Movement (naui ollin), whose sun
is Tonatiuh. People were made of bones brought from the Underworld by Quetzalcoatl
and the present world will be destroyed by a series of earthquakes.
This symbolism is quite complex when we bear in mind that, for example, jaguars were
believed to represent “des forces obscures de la terre, de tout le mystère qui rôde ‘au
cœur des montagnes’” (Soustelle 1967: 8). The feline cult is one of the most prominent
ritual practices of “Olmec” religion in ancient Mexico, where it can be traced as far
back as the 12th century BCE, and it is also characteristic of many pre-Columbian South
American cultures (starting with 850 BCE in Chavin, Peru). It seems that many different
cultures regarded the jaguar as their ancestor and the continuity of this belief was
preserved at the time of the Conquest, since “the jaguar was an important emblem
of their [Aztec] all-powerful Smoking Mirror God [Tezcatlipoca]” (Davies 1982: 48).
The myths related to the jaguar’s role in creation and destruction of the world have
numerous variations,17 but they all reflect basic concepts of these cultures: that the
world is periodically being created and destroyed. Here, destroying should not be taken
16
In this brief account I follow the most widely accepted order, but León-Portilla (1961: 14-17), based on the
16th century manuscript known as “Anales de Cuauhtitlán,” presents these ages in a different order: 4 Atl, 4
Ocelotl, 4 Quiauitl, 4 Ehecatl, 4 Ollin.
17
It is very interesting to compare these traditions with the ones from American Southwest. Hopis believe
that they have come to earth, the Fourth world, after passing from three other worlds, and each world is
placed in the layer above the former one. A very complex Navaho myth explains how their ancestors reached
the Fifth world, the world we live in, using extremely intriguing symbolism (for the Hopi tradition see Harold
Courlander (1982); and the Navaho myth is reprinted in Frederick W. Turner (1974).
12. The Meaning of Maya Myths 47
as a mere destruction; essentially, it represents renovation, the new world is always
better than the former one.
The difference in the number of the “ages of the world” in two Mesoamerican traditions
– four for the Maya and (usually) five for the people from the Valley of Mexico – appears
unusual. But both quantities mark the same basic concept. Postclassic Maya tradition
mentions four cosmic trees (yaxche) placed at the four world directions – which denote
their colour: red at east, white at north, black at west, and yellow at south. This idea
unites the image of the “tree of life” (with the treetop belonging to the heaven, trunk
to the earth, and roots to the underworld) as the axis mundi with numinous “bearers”
(which, like Hellenic Atlantes, hold the sky on their shoulders). Such “fusion” of two
cosmological concepts has in the course of time caused the change from the belief that
the world is “supported” by four trees into the more anthropomorphic belief that it
is “supported” by four gods. The Nahuatl myth explains that, when Tezcatlipoca and
Quetzalcoatl have destroyed the world with a flood, four men survived – so the gods
transform them into the trees and place them at the four corners of the world. The
Maya “bearers” were known as Bacabs, and their oldest representation was found at the
Temple 22 at Copán, dating from the 8th century CE (Baudez et Becquelin 1984: 384).
In his “Relación de las cosas de Yucatan,” written in the 16th century Landa described
them,
Among the multitude of gods which this nation worshipped they worshipped four,
each of them called Bacab. They said that they were four brothers whom God placed,
when he created the world, at the four points of it, holding up the sky so that it
should not fall. They also said of these Bacabs that they escaped when the world was
destroyed by the deluge (1985: 115; see also Tozzer 1941: 135-136).
By determining four basic points they also determine whether particular years will be
generally good or bad for people (Landa witnessed the New Year ceremonies where
Bacabs were of great importance) – and that is where the role of priests as “mediators”
became very important.
But why number 4? In Mesoamerican iconography this number is associated with the
sun (Beyer 1928: 32 ff.) – representing its creative power as “life-giver” and “fire in the
sky.” When the sun appeared for the first time (13.0.0.0.0. 4 Ajaw 8 Cumku, corresponding
to 11 August 3114 BCE in our calendar – the date of the creation of the world),18 the
Maya started their “Long Count” (Spanish Cuenta larga). It is quite predictable that the
sun, whose daily and nightly journey19 dominate the great part of Maya religion and
which witnesses and participates in all the important events in the sky and in the realm
of Xíbalba, determines the ages of the world. And it is quite natural that these ages are
called “suns” in the Nahuatl tradition.
18
This particular “age of the world” ended on 21 December 2012.
19
After sunset it is to become a “Jaguar-Sun,” which is led by the young moon goddess towards the place
where it will be ritually decapitated; but the female counterpart of the great underworld jaguar – analogous
to the Aztec Tepeyollotl (“Heart of the Mountain”) – will just before dawn give birth to a new sun, now led by
the old moon goddess towards the place where it is supposed to start another day.
48 Mesoamerican Religions and Archaeology
The fifth age is a sort of “appendix” derived from the need to “unite” four sides of
the world. So beside four sacred trees (yaxche – white one in the North, yellow in the
South, red in the East, and black in the West), an additional one, blue/green,20 is placed
in the centre (cf. Bricker 1983). Furthermore, the great importance of rain and related
divinities throughout Mesoamerica must not be forgotten, since 5 is also a cipher that
“symbolizes” rain (Beyer 1928: 36). This recalls the cosmological concepts of North
American Indians where, beside four points for the world directions, a fifth one (pou
sto) is added in the very centre, signifying the observer (Alexander 1920: 52).
Sun symbolism, along with the creation of corn, is connected with many scenes on
murals and ceramics, but it is especially interesting if one follows the adventures of
the hero-twins preserved in the written documents. The myth of the divine hero-twins
is characteristic of many American Indian traditions. They are present in myths and
tales as legendary ancestors and heroes that must overcome various trials. The most
interesting detail regarding 1 Hunter (Hunahpu) and Jaguar-Sun (Xbalanqué) is their role
in the creation of the world. Edmonson’s “Second Creation” obviously places them in
the same world as the giants. Their ancestors, the Maize Twins (1 Hunter and 7 Hunter),
were defeated in the sacred ball game by the Lords of Xíbalba and ritually decapitated.
In retaliation Hunahpu and Xbalanque went on to “avenge” them and (on the cosmic
level) to defeat Death.
Their descent metaphorically represents the descent of the sun and, on a broader scale,
it serves as an example of the trials the deceased ruler must encounter on his or her
journey. However, they will prove to be much wiser and more skilled than their father
and uncle (although Hunahpu will, during the night in the house of Killer Bat, also be
decapitated, and his brother for some time will replace his head with a squash) and
finally defeat the “Lords of the Night,” sacrificing two of them, and dispersing the
others. After all their exploits,
(...) they walked back up
Here amid the light,
And at once
They walked into the sky.
And one is the sun,
And the other of them is the moon.
(Edmonson 1971: 144)
A new ritual pattern is established after their victory. Until their descent, the Lords of
the Underworld had been absolutely merciless: Death was the supreme ruler and its
superiority was confirmed by the sun sacrifice already mentioned above.
Hunahpu and Xbalanque did not abolish the sacrifice, as it was essential for the creation
of the world. Thus, Hunahpu will be decapitated – but he will get his head back in a
miraculous way. According to Thompson (1950: 87-88), Hunahpu is the K’iche’ day
20
Yucatec Maya have the same word (yax) for both blue and green.
12. The Meaning of Maya Myths 49
corresponding to Yucatec 1 Ajaw, the day that “belongs” to the sun god. Among the
contemporary K’iche’ Maya the word junajpu also signifies player par excellence). The
defeated players in the sacred ball game were also decapitated, an event resulting in the
miracle needed for the maize to grow (Baudez 1984). Death and rebirth are suggested
with the appearance of hero-twins in the form of men-fish. Furthermore, it seems that
many Mesoamerican Indians believed that gods “catch” fish – representing human
embryos that float in the mythical lake whose Nahuatl equivalent is Tamoanchán
(Dütting 1976: 42-43 ff.). This power of the gods is also suggested by the image of the
Bone MT-51:A of Tikal Temple 1, Burial 116, in which three long nosed gods (identified
as Chac Xib Chacs) are depicted capturing fish. However, it should not be forgotten
that long-nosed heads were also aspects of the primordial alligator. Their association
with resurrection is perhaps the most important mark of the victorious divine twins.
Their victory was eternalized in the sun’s “taking over” of the ball game; and in that
extraordinary ambience the sun’s underworld journey will be experienced forever.
2. The Maya Moon Goddess and the Mystery of Creation
Who is your tree? Who is your bush?
What was your trunk when you were born?
(Roys 1965: 4)
The above incantation reflects an ancient belief, found even today among the Maya, that
a certain animal or plant “watches” the fate of each individual. “Ritual of the Bacabs”
shows the healer and medicine man’s efforts to determine which plant “guards” the
sick one. Such knowledge enables him to cure the plant, too, and to find the exact place
where sickness is located. This belief probably results from the ancient fascination with
the mystery of life and the imposing veneration of ancestors (deities were ancestors
of specific ruling lineages in various Maya city-states). Furthermore, everyone has his
“animal spirit companion” – Nahuatl nahual. On its underworld journey, the deceased
is led by the horrible dog known among the Postclassic Yucatec Maya as Xul – Nahuatl
Xolotl, Aztec Xulotl. Or, as summed by Vogt, when writing about a modern Maya
community during 1960s:
Each person and his animal spirit companion (vay-j-el or wayhel in most Tzotzil
communities, but chanul in Zinacantán) share the same soul (ch’ulel in Tzotzil).
Thus, when the ancestral gods install a soul in the embryo of a Zinacanteco, they
simultaneously install the same soul in the embryo of an animal. Similarly, the
moment a Zinacanteco baby is born a supernatural jaguar, coyote, ocelot, or other
animal is born. Throughout life, whatever happens of note to the Zinacanteco
happens to the animal spirit companion, and vice versa. (Vogt 1969: 372)
These “animal spirit companions” are kept in some sort of corral by the ancestral deities.
The “instalment of the soul” was probably done by an aspect of the Earth Goddess (or
what some scholars called “Great Goddess”). Among the Mayas one sees her in at least
two important aspects: as young moon goddess (Postclassic Yucatec Ixchel, Goddess I
in the codices, according to Schellhas’ classification) and also as an old goddess with
50 Mesoamerican Religions and Archaeology
jaguar claws and spouse of the creator god, who was in Postclassic Yucatan known as
Ix Chebel Yax (Goddess O in Schellhas’ classification). Both aspects can be recognized
among the four goddesses that Landa (1985: 49; Tozzer 1941: 10) mentions as the ones
venerated on the island of Cozumel – Ix Chel, Ix Chebel Yax, Ix Hunie, Ix Hunieta. There
is some evidence that suggests the latter two are the same deity, and the question about
the actual relationship between Ixchel and Ix Chebel Yax is very interesting (cf. Tozzer
1941: notes 46, 47). Thompson (1939) regarded them as the same deity, but later (1970)
changed his mind. It seems that Landa considered them to be mother and daughter,
as did Knorozov (1964: 3). However, if one accepts the general notion that Maya and
Mesoamerican deities more generally presented themselves in different aspects, these
two could be treated as one deity21. Ixchel is also being mentioned as a goddess of
childbirth and medicine in Landa’s manuscript, while Scholes and Roys (1948: 57) give
more information in their excellent monograph,
Ix Chel was evidently a very popular deity among the Chontal generally. Her shrine
on Cozumel Island off the northeastern coast of Yucatan was visited by pilgrims
from Tabasco, and the site of Tixchel, which was twice occupied by Acalan, [and] was
apparently named for her. As Seler pointed out, the names of Ciuatecpan (“palace
of the woman”) on the Usumacinta and of Ciuatan (“the place of the woman”) in
central Tabasco must refer to her worship. Landa notes that Isla de Mujeres (“island
of the women”) north of Cozumel was named for the idols of goddesses which
were found there. He names Ix Chel and three others, but Tozzer suggests that at
least two of them were the same deity. In Tabasco on the Rio Chico, a branch of the
Usumacinta, is a site named Cuyo de las Damas, which may well refer to Ix Chel
also. She was probably the goddess to whom, according to Cortés, the people of
Teutiercas in Acalan dedicated their principal temple. In her “they had much faith
and hope.” In her honor “they sacrificed only maidens who were virgins and very
beautiful; and if they were not such, she became very angry with them.” For this
reason they took especial pains to find girls with whom she would be satisfied and
brought them up from childhood for this purpose.
While the reliability of Cortes’ account can be doubted, this sort of sacrifice is similar
to the one that the Aztecs had in the month Ochpaniztli, especially that in benefit of
ixiptla (impersonator) of the goddess Chicomecóatl (“Seven Snake”) (Brundage 1985:
51-54), although they made sacrifices to the four aspects of their Great Goddesses.
Toci (“Grandmother”) is the most interesting of these, since her equivalent among the
Yucatec Maya is Ix Chebel Yax. Originally the Great Goddess (and the moon goddess, too)
of the Huastecs, she was “via Culhuacán” absorbed into the Aztec pantheon (Brundage
1985: 51). As an old goddess, she reminds one of the image of the Ix Chebel Yax on the
page 74 of the Dresden Codex (one of the three existing Postclassic Maya codices), but it
is also worth noting that weaving and embroidering, which are attributed to Ixchel, are
supervised by (and actually are emblems of) Ix Chebel Yax. Her connection with the
spindle associates her with the spider (Thompson 1939: 147-149). In the Dresden Codex
her role as the goddess of fate is emphasized with the prefix sak. This prefix means
21
For the detailed treatment of the attributes of merchant gods see Thompson (1966).
12. The Meaning of Maya Myths 51
(among other things) white, chastity, and virginity – and all of these qualities are also
connected with the name of the young moon goddess as White Ix Chel (Roys 1965: 154).
Ixchel was also known as “The One that Emerges from the Sand” and, taking into
account the Nahuatl sacrifice of the ixiptla of goddess Xilonen, for whom “it was
said ‘she enters the sand’ because in this way she made known her death – that on
the morrow she would die” (Dibble 1980: 199), this could express her superiority over
death. This could also explain her role in bringing the sun to the underworld altar. She
was also considered as an ancestress of the ruling dynasties in several Maya cities, and
her power was symbolically given to the ruler in the form of a “bundle of power.” On
page 18 of the Dresden Codex she is depicted both in her terrifying aspects (carrying a
skeleton, middle row), as well as the nurturing ones (carrying corn that will be planted,
lower row) – in charge of the wellbeing of the whole community.
3. Résumé: The Character of Maya Deities
He is both male and female, and it is the union of this pair which brings about the
birth, or sprouting, of the cultivated plants, which are said to be their offspring. (...)
Ihp’en, as the passive spirit of maize, is said to be a single being and of male sex only.
In this role he is the male consort of the female spirit of the beans, ixq’anan (Wisdom
1940: 402).
The concept of a fantastic mythical being that in itself unites the fundamental opposites
of earth/sky, life/death, male/female, etc., is characteristic of a number of religions,
and there is no reason to consider the Maya as an exception. It seems that this mythical
being is also present in Mesoamerican beliefs and rituals (as what archaeologists call
“Earth Monster,” or “Bicephallic Monster” – see Fig. 6), encountered in the sculptures
dated around 1000 BCE and associated with earth (Miller and Taube 1993: 126). This
symbolic uniting of opposites was sometimes expressed in the idea of a dual ancestor
deity (like the already mentioned Central Mexican Ometeotl) or the pair of creator gods
(like the Mixtec 1 Flower and 13 Flower). Traces of this relatively late concept can still
be seen in the notion of “mother-fathers” in contemporary K’iche’ communities. The
fantastic mythological being is also considered as a “supporter” of the universe and was
designated as Itzamná in Late Postclassic Maya rituals. Although some of his statements
are no longer valid (like the one that “Itzam Na was primarily god of the hierarchy”
[Thompson 1970: 210]), Thompson (1970: 209-233) has pointed to its many different
aspects. The famous representations from Copán (Altar D), Palenque (House E), and
Piedras Negras (Stela 25) were also designated as Terrestrial, Bicephallic, and Celestial
Monster, respectively. All of these manifestations are nicely summed up by Clemency
Coggins (1985: 53-54),
As the reptilian structure of the universe, Itzamná encompasses phenomena that
transcended and are antithetical to the sun. It does, however, have distinct celestial
and Underworld components like the sun. (...) Supernatural beings often emerge
from the open jaws of the celestial serpent and its [serpent’s – A. B.] body may
consist of a Sky Band, a sequence of celestial signs. This serpent is also commonly
52 Mesoamerican Religions and Archaeology
represented as the “serpent bar” carried by many Maya lords in their official
portraiture, showing that the lord and his lineage worship and many [lords – A. B.]
descend from Itzamná. Beneath the human realm, Itzamná symbolized the structure
of the earth, and in the waters of the earth and Underworld, where death reigns,
it takes the skeletal forms of such aquatic reptiles as crocodiles. These are usually
portrayed as Long Nose Heads, either skeletal or with no lower jaw (which means
the same thing).
But it is not only Itzamná that embodies binary opposition, as many Maya deities are
found in pairs (Maize Twins, hero-twins, the Paddlers from the Underworld, Hun Chuen
and Hun Batz, etc.). And such twinned figures are quite common in Native American
traditions as well. With respect to Itzamná, it is also worth pointing that Baudez and
Becquelin (1984: 394-396) consider only Bicephallic and Celestial Monster, while in a
later study of Maya religion Claude Baudez (Baudez 2002), unlike the leading expert in
ancient Maya religion, Mercedes de la Garza (2007; de la Garza and and Nájera Coronado
2002), rejects the very existence of this deity.
On a more abstract level of the history of religions there are opposites of light/creation
on the one side and darkness/death on the other. The first is a principle connected with
sky and male, the other with earth and female. In the “Ritual of the Bacabs” edited by
Ralph L. Roys (1965), their union is designated with the word al (“birth”). The diurnal
Akbal (in other dialects also: Akabal, Uotan, Watan) represents night, the interior of the
earth, caves (Thompson 1950: 73-75), but also the jaguar (God L according to Schellhas’
classification) as Lord of the Night. According to Tzeltal Maya belief, the same day
(Uotan) represents the name of their ancestor, who came probably from the east,
distributed land among the people, and introduced the art of hieroglyphic writing –
the same deeds attributed to Itzamná. Moreover, according to Thompson (1950: 73-75),
earlier authorities (Brinton, Seler) supposed that Uotan was a deity analogous to the
“Heart of the Sky” from the “Popol Vuh.” This set of meanings is derived mostly from
16th century sources and has many parallels with the myths of the Quetzalcoatl. In this
specific mythic history ancient gods (obviously belonging to the variety of biologically
impossible supernatural beings) are being “transformed” in “culture heroes” and their
primary associations are obscured in the past.
In parallel to this dualism and its manifestations, it seems that one can actually talk
of several basic groups of relevant mythological material. The “Popol Vuh” complex
forms only one part of it (both temporally and geographically limited to the Late
Postclassic highland Guatemala). Although parallels might look appealing, one must
bear in mind the date and the circumstances of its recording (Edmonson 1971, 1978;
Rivera Dorado 1991, 2000; Van Akkeren 2003). Different animals had different meanings
in mythical stories. For example, let us consider the frog, which appears in some scenes
on ceramics. But the frog is also known as “Uinal Monster,” patron of the month (uinal).
In Edmonson’s edition of the “Chilam Balam of Chumayel” there is a beautiful version
of a myth named “The Birth of the Uinal.” On the conceptual/ symbolic plane, this story
also presents the birth of humankind (Edmonson 1986: 30-31; 120-126). It is interesting
12. The Meaning of Maya Myths 53
to note that it is the woman that comes first, and I propose that here we encounter the
Postclassic Maya goddess of birth, Goddess I or Ixchel, as she was known in the 16th
century Yucatan.
However, we know almost nothing of the majority of episodes depicted on ceramics
from the Classic period and earlier (especially vases from private collections, as
mentioned in the Preface to this book). The interpretations that considered everything
as some episode from the “Popol Vuh” do not lead very far and, helped by the great
progress made in the decipherment of Maya hieroglyphs, as well as some impressive
new archaeological discoveries, the number of scholars attempting other approaches is
increasing,. As already mentioned above, we need sources. Even in their absence we can
speculate that there must have been another corpus of myths. Since the Maya believed
that in some sense everything was divine (including rivers, trees, stones, etc.) and had
to be treated in a way that would ensure manifestation of only the benevolent side of
the object or thing, there were probably tales about the encounters of young men with
different “sacred” things and of the wanderings of men and women far from home, etc.
We can only hope that further work will disclose data regarding this other corpus.
The lack of a hierarchy among Maya deities, or even of a “pantheon” is quite important.
There is no doubt that the roles of some were considered to be of special relevance
for specific activities Besides the those noted above, we can also note that the Jester
God during the Classic period [300-900 CE] is always associated with the ruler and
Xtabai during the Postclassic [after 1000 CE] is associated with hunting, for example.
Although essentially ambivalent, deities could belong both to the Underworld and the
Overworld (as designated by “mirror” signs on their bodies). Some were associated with
particular sites (the most famous examples of the Classic period are the Palenque Triad
and Water-Lily Jaguar at Tikal), where they were represented more often and possibly
were (especially those in animal forms) venerated as ancestors of the ruling dynasties.
Only very few were represented in the human form, and although humans occasionally
wore masks of the particular deities (e.g., the famous vase from Tomb 116, Tikal), the
difference was always made clear.
Whether Maya deities were actually “organized” into different “complexes” (as seem
to be the case with the Aztecs) remains unknown. We also do not know the extent to
which they accepted deities and cults from other Mesoamerican cultures. In some cases
they apparently did. Deities from Teotihuacán appear in places like Tikal during the
Classic period, and the Toltec/Mexican Quetzalcoatl appears in Chichén Itzá during the
Postclassic. Nevertheless, since there was never a strong, united state among the Maya,
the “incorporation” of “foreign” deities for political/ ideological reasons would seem
to be unnecessary.
These are only some of the characteristics of Maya deities; the choice is arbitrary and
there is still much more to say and explore. And I do hope that the difficulties in this
“part” of the Mesoamerican studies will be considered as a challenge and (why not?) as
an invitation.
54 Mesoamerican Religions and Archaeology
Fig. 6. Bicephallic Monster. Copán, Temple D, 790. Drawing by Lidija Taranović
Fig. 7. Maya moon goddess with various Fig. 8. Representations of Itzamna
deities. Postclassic, Dresden Codex, page from the Dresden Codex, page 35. After
18. After chromolithographic edition by chromolithographic edition by Ernst
Ernst Förstemann, 1880/1896. Förstemann, 1880/1896.
