Heinrich Berlin

The Palenque Triad

In: Journal de la Socit des Amricanistes. Tome 52, 1963. pp. 91-99.

Citer ce document / Cite this document : Berlin Heinrich. The Palenque Triad. In: Journal de la Socit des Amricanistes. Tome 52, 1963. pp. 91-99. doi : 10.3406/jsa.1963.1994 http://www.persee.fr/web/revues/home/prescript/article/jsa_0037-9174_1963_num_52_1_1994

THE

PALENQUE

TRIAD

by Heinrich BERLIN.

Sweeping attempts to read the Maya inscriptions have failed time and again and there is little chance that they will succeed in the near future. One of the reasons for these failures seems to be that the vast non-calendaric mater ial has not even been properly organized. Few efforts have been made so far to work out how glyphs interact, affect others, and may be related to specific dates. In other words, more studies of patterns are necessary. Such studies will show whether all Maya cities use the same patterns or different ones ; just as with individual glyphs there may be general patterns as well as very local ones. The common patterns, then, most likely will treat the same subject matt er, the local ones topics peculiar to the cities where they occur exclusively. Further : though a pattern discovered for one town may not be found to work for other cities, it still may give clues for solving problems at other sites. In the present study we are going to experiment with three non-calendaric glyphs very prominent in the inscriptions at Palenque. For this study the illustrations should be consulted in the publications cited in the reference list at the end of this paper. At Palenque even the casual visitor cannot fail to be struck by the simila rity between the temples of the Cross (TC), Foliated Cross (TFC) and Sun (TS), and to recognize that these three temples, grouped around a plaza, form a very specific unit in the general layout of the city. Thus the visual impression already anticipates the formula : three in one. Studying the temples more closely one could demonstrate how TC and TS show, within the group, the widest diff erences and that TFC keeps a middle position : now leaning more towards TC, now more towards TS. It is not necessary to elaborate here on the proofs for the foregoing statement, but we may say already that our study will bear it out from a completely new viewpoint. Besides the famous inner tablets of the sanctuaries each temple originally had a great wealth of additional inscriptions : the the the the sanctuary door jambs, sanctuary outer tablets, stuccoed piers, balustrade slabs.

92

SOCIT DES AMRICANISTES

The latter were leaning against the bases of the balustrades of the upper stairway sections. Of these slabs, the right ones, going up, are almost identical at the TC and the TFC, but quite different at the TS. The left slabs follow the same pattern in all three cases : a very early Calen dar Round date, always contained also on the inner tablet of the respective sanctuary, followed by three intervening glyphs, a distance number and the date 9.12.19.14.12 5 Eb 5 Kayab. Of the three intervening glyphs two are once more identical on the three slabs, only one is different : TC has a Kin-like face (hereafter called GI) with a rather roundish eye and a strand of hair on the cheek (Fig. 6, n 1). TFC has a reclining full figure (Gil) (fig. 6, n 2). The corresponding glyph of the slab of the TS must be on a still missing por tion. Thus these three left slabs differ from each other only by different starting dates which condition different distance numbers, and by one glyph which is peculiar to each slab. It seems likely, therefore, that the peculiar glyph has a special relationship to the whole respective temple. This is indeed the case. For the TC the typical glyph is GI, which occurs on the main tablet at D8, Du (with special affixes), D16 and also on the right outer sanctuary tablet. It is found also on Blom's tablet 1 (1926-27, vol. 1, fig. 158). In an earlier paper (Berlin, 1957) I have shown that tablet 1 must have served as sanctuary door jamb. Although according to Blom it was found behind the TS, I suggested the possibility that it could have belonged to the TC. Though it is true that GI occurs also once on the TS (Qio, close to the date 9 Akbal 6 Xul, which occurs also on the TC) this glyph is much more typical for the TC and this fact strengthens my belief that tablet 1 came from the Temple of the Cross. Apparently completely isolated GI appears also on tablet III of the Temple of the Inscriptions (TI) at 12. GI is frequently preceded by a very specific glyph which has a dot as prefix (fig. 6, n 4). In Palenque this latter glyph never appears in other contexts. There is yet another glyph linked somehow but how ? with GI, always preceding it, never following it. This glyph has the numeral 6 as prefix, a superfix of two Ben signs, the so-called Al subfix and a symbolic main element (fig. 6, n 5). I have found it four times : TC : Dio ; GI at Du TI, II : M8 ; GI at N9 Blom's tablet 1 : (B3) ; GI at (B4) TC outer sanctuary tablets : left sanctuary tablet ; GI on the right one. Gil is the typical glyph for the TFC. As previously stated this is a reclining full figure which has the head of the long-nosed god with flare in forehead ; or instead of this head its symbolic substitute. Essential is moreover a scrolland-comb affix on top or in front of the knee. In two cases at Palenque, where one would expect to find Gil, viz TI, tablet I, C12 and tablet III, M12, only

THE PALENQ.UE TRIAD

93

the head is portrayed but with the definite addition of a prefix. Though in both cases this prefix is severely damaged, there can be little doubt that ori ginally the scroll-and-comb prefix was carved there. Gil occurs on the sanc tuary main tablet at D2, C6, M4, and at A9 on the right sanctuary door jamb. This glyph, too, is very often preceded by another glyph composed of a rodent with the so-called bone subfix (fig. 6 n 6). As the association of these

Fia. 9

fig. 10 Fig. 6. Triad and related glyphes.

two glyphs is not constant, and as the rodent glyph with bone subfix appears also with other glyphs, the latter seems to contain a concept which is not exclusively linked with the former. The typical glyph for the TS is one which might be called the checkerboard glyph (GUI), as the glyph consists of essentially two elements : a face in a frame and a checkerboard. The glyph may, in addition, be prefixed by a band in which a Kin element is prominent (fig. 6, n 3). GUI occurs on the main tablet at D6 (where the band prefix is missing, but is attached as a postfix to the preceding glyph at C6) and 06 ; also as a stucco glyph on the piers. In the Palenque inscriptions these three glyphs appear not only individually but also as a triad : always all three of them, never two. I have found the following occurences of this triad, always in the order of GI-GII-GIII :

94

SOCIT DES AMRICANISTES

TFC : N-Oio Palace, House stairway : block C2 Palace tablet : E10-E12 ; H15-17 TI, I : B8-B9 ; D11-E1 ; F9-F10 II : F5-E7 III : A5-B6. In the underlined cases the triad is followed or preceded by a glyph compos ed three dots, a main element with crossed bands, a subfix and a postfix. of One can hardly fail to interpret the three dots as having reference to the triad. For lack of a better name I shall call this glyph Ox-compound 1 to distin guish it from other similar ones in the Palenque texts. We can even refine this compound further. Apparently the affixes are always the same, but their sizes differ. Thus Ox-compound iA has a short postfix and a long subfix (fig. 6, n 8). It is used exclusively where the three triad glyphs appear together. Ox-compound iB has a short subfix and a long postfix (fig. 6, n 7). It is associated with individual triad glyphs : with Gil at L3-M4 in the TFC and N11-M12 on TI, III ; with GUI at N6-06 in the TS. We find it alone at O7 of the TC, there apparently completely isolated and with no reference to the triad. However, in that same column is a distance number 6. 11. 6, the same which occurs also in the TFC, leading in both cases to the date 9.12. 18.5. 16 2 Cib 14 Mol. This date precedes in the TS glyph GUI and in the TFC glyph Gil. So I think we are justified in assuming that also in this particular case of the Temple of the Cross, Ox-compound iB refers to a triad glyph, here natu rally GI. At B18 of the north tablet of Temple XVIII is shown a glyph very similar to Ox-compound 1 ; it is, however, neither iA nor iB, since instead of one postfix it has two postfixes. Whether one should consider it to be a still less understood 1 remains an open question. There is certainly no triad glyph to be found anyhwere on the Temple XVIII inscriptions. There is yet another glyph possibly but no necessarily linked with the triad (fig. 6, n 10). It occurs three times on the tablets of TI always before a triad expression. A very interesting presentation of the triad not listed above is found on tablet II of the TI in three pairs of related clauses. The rather irregular way in which these six clauses are written, passing from one vertical row to the next one, makes the immediate understanding difficult and therefore I present them in a horizontal scheme (fig. 7). la) 2a) 3a) 1 5) C5-D7 C8-E1 F1-E4 I4-J9 A Xi B C D GI A X2 a B C -D Gil A X3 B C D (GUI??) A b c C 0 P Q d Zi Xi B GI

THE PALENQUE TRIAD

95

2b) K3-K9 A D C O P Q e f Z2 X2 B g Gil 36) L9-M5 A Z> C O P(?) Q h Z3 X3 B i GUI. Constant components are designated by capital letters and non-constants are shown by small letters ; g is, of course, the rodent with bone subfix, here in its function as pre-glyph to Gil. Glyphs X, Z and G (the latter the triad glyphs) seem to be different in each clause, but I suspect an underlying unifying concept. Their specific differences are made clear through added numerals. When in the second series a glyph has a prefix different from the correspon ding in the first series, then it is shown underlined. prefix The a) series is followed by a complete triad expression ; the b) series by Oxcompound iA only. In the above clauses the sequence of the triad glyphs is the accustomed one : GI-GII-GIII. GUI seems to be absent in the a) series. The place in E4, where one would expect it, is occupied by a Kin-like face with an Ahau on his for ehead and two hooks as subfixes. Could this be a genuine substitute for GUI ? Glyph GI at J9 is followed by a prefixed Chicchan god. The same pairing is found at N9-M10 preceded by the GI accompanying glyph at M9. Thus, there seems to be a definite linkage of 3 glyphs, and the glyph at N10 (once more a compound with three dots) very likely refers to this fact (fig. 6, n 9). The meaning of these six clauses is still a mystery, but the following lines of approach may be, perhaps, a step towards its solution. As the a) series are shorter and less complicated we are going to concentrate on them. An (as do the b) series, too) start with the same glyph : A. This I take to be the inscriptional form of Zimmermann's glyph 166 of the codices (fig. 6 n 11), which he considers to belong to the thematical glyphs, that is to say glyphs which stand at the beginning of certain texts and are limited to closed sections. From the way X, , and D are paired in the ) series it is further obvious that X and belong together on the one hand and and D on the other. (Glyph a perhaps is nothing else but a substitute far the missing prefix of in line 2 ; or it could have something to do with the fact that the head of X2 is different in the two series). Thus in reality we have only four different concepts per line : the thematical glyph (A) at the beginning a triad glyph at the end (G) a constant expres sion (C-D) and a varying expression (X-B), related to the respective triad glyph. This arrangement of four concepts is extremely frequent in the codices and as there one of the four glyphs often is that of a god, we may conclude that either the X or the G (or both) glyphs stand for divine personalities. To make the parallelism complete we ought to have also pictures . In some way the central parts of the three sanctuary tablets may stand for them. Pro bably it is not chance alone that in the TC the cross stands above the ele-

THE PALENQ.UE TRIAD

97

ments which compose Xi and that these same elements are also present on the staff held by the small priest, and also on that of the person depicted on the left outer sanctuary tablet of the same temple. Now, what do the three discussed glyphs stand for ? Embedded as they are in chronological contexts, which span more than 3000 years, a likely guess would be that they stand for three different cycles, which occasionally meet. In favour of this theory speaks that in each of the three temples the Initial Series is followed by a short distance number leading always to a day with coefficient i. Unfortunately in the TS the corresponding date 1 ? 10 Tzec has not yet been convincingly fixed in the Long Count. Nei ther do we know with what dates the triad goes provided it does go on TI, I. In short, I have been unable to find any satisfactory mathematical expla nation. Do they stand for mythological beings, gods ? We have seen above that GI is frequently preceded by a glyph with a dot as prefix ; this suggests a reading of Hun GI itself shows certain similarities with the true Kin glyph, and the related Xi glyph, too, has a very conspicuous Kin element. So we might venture to read both glyphs as Hun-abku and Colop-u-uich-kin, two different names for the same creator god according to Roys (1943, p. 73). At the beginning, before 2.0.0.0.0, the three supposed gods appear independ ently.Then, after say 9.4.0.0.0, they somehow join forces often acting as a unit. But this power or realm ended around 9.13.0.0.0 8 Ahau 8 Uo, that cru cial date for Palenque. None of the three supposed gods, nor the associated Ox-compound 1, is related to a date beyond it. In the Chilam Balam of Chumayel (Roys, 1933, p. 76) there exists the following reference : Katun 8 Ahau came. 8 Ahau was the name of the Katun when their government occurred. Then there was a change of the Katun, then there was a change of rulers... Then the law of another Katun was introduced, at the end of the Katun when Ix-Tyiunene was brought... Now began the archery of Ox-halal Chan... Could it be possible that this text has something to do with the discussed situation at Palenque ? The equating of glyphs with gods in the monuments implies, quite naturally, a search for the same in the codices. The god with flare in his forehead has, since the days of Seler (1902-23), been identified as Bolon Tzacab or God K. So we could be satisfied. However, I don't believe that matters are as simple as that. Into the hodge-podge of the equation : god with flare in his forehead = Bolon Tzacab = God have gone faces with or without fleshless jawbone, with or without number 9 attached, with or without the scroll-and-comb affix, etc. ; sometimes one may even question whether the flare is present. I think the study of the importance of affixes has advanced sufficiently to render this hodge-podge highly suspicious. For instance, in the clause which accompanies the 819 cycle, one of its glyphs has tentatively been identified as God (Berlin and Kelley, 1961) ; but there, in none of the known cases it has the 9 or Bolon Socit des Amricanistes , 1963. 7

98

SOCIT DES AMRICANISTES

prefix. As it stands, the equation has become useless and it will require further study in order to obtain a workable re-interpretation. The rodent with bone subfix, too, is known from the Dresden codex, but as the few occurrences there are not limited to associations with gods it cannot be used as proof in either direction. In TI, II the Chicchan god, known also from the codices, is closely associa ted GI. Zimmermann (1956, p. 164) has already pointed out certain rela with tionships between the Chicchan and the Sun gods. The mentioned association, then, argues slightly in favour of the assumption that the G glyphs really stand for gods. Our above analysis of the six clauses pointed into the same direction. Outside Palenque I know of only one case strikingly similar to our triad complex : stela 26 at Tikal (Shook, 1958). This stela is undated and, for the moment, does not help to solve our problem. This brief excursion, though somewhat suggestive in favour of a divine theory, is still far from being conclusive. Returning to firmer ground I think one can state with a fair degree of assu rance : each of the three Palenque temples emphasizes a special concept of more or less the same category, since they can be joined or considered as an aggregate as is implied by the Ox-compound 1 glyph. In the latter the three dots are to be read in the true numerical sense and not figuratively ; the esta blished differences A and seem to imply something like the members of the triad and a member of the triad . Whether in all other Palenque. Ox-com pounds the number 3 is always to be considered as truly numerical and not figurative remains open to study. The discussed facts go to show that at Pa lenque the number 3 played a significant rle also. It would have been more satisfactory had we been in a position to state that each of the three temples was devoted to a special god, who acted indivi dually during the mythical dawn, and often jointly with the other two as a kind of Trinity during the historic period of Palenque until 9.13.0.0.0, when a new era was ushered in with other ruling deities, but the presented facts alone are not yet sufficient to sustain this. REFERENCES Berlin (H.) (1945). A critique of dates at Palenque. Amer. Antiquity, 10 : 34047 1957. A new inscription from the Temple of the Foliated Cross. Carnegie Inst. Wash. Dept. Archaeol., Notes on Middle Amer. Archaeol. and Ethnol. n 130. Cambridge. Berlin (H.) and Kelley (D. H.) (1961). The 819-day Count and Color-Direc tion Symbolism Among the Classic Maya. Middle American Research Inst itute Tulane University. Publ. 26, p. 9-20. New Orlans. Blom (F) and La Farge (O) (1926-27). Tribes and Temples. Tulane Univ. Middle Amer. Research Inst., 2 vols. New Orlans.

THE PALENQ.UE TRIAD 99 Maudslay (A. P.) (1889-1902). Archaeology. Biologia Centrali- Americana. 5 vols. London. Roys (R. L.) (1933). The book of Chilam Balam of Chumayel. Carnegie Inst. Wash., Publ. 438. Washington. (1943). The Indian background of colonial Yucatan. Carnegie Inst. Wash., Pub. 548. Washington. Ruz (L. A.) (1952). Exploraciones Arqueolgicas en Palenque (1949). Anales del Institute Nacionl de Antropologa e Historia. Vol. 4. Mexico. (1958). Exploraciones Arqueolgicas en Palenque 1935-1956. Anales del Inst. Nal. de Antr. e Hist. Vol. 10. Mexico. Seler (E.) (1902-23). Gesammelte Abhandlungen zur amerikanischen Sprachund Alterthumskunde. 5 vol. Berlin. Shook (E. M.) (1958). The Temple of the Red Stela. Expedition. The Bulletin of the University Museum of the University of Pensylvania. Vol. 1, n 1. Philadelphia. Thompson (J. E.) (1954). Memoranda on some dates at Palenque, Chiapas. Car negie Inst. Wash., Dept. Archaeol. Notes on Middle Amer. Archaeol. and Ethnol. 1 20. Cambridge. Zimmermann (G.) (1956). Die Hieroglyphen der Maya-Handschriften. Universitdt Hamburg Abhandlungen aus dem Gebiet der Auslandskunde. Band 62 Reihe B. Hamburg.