Mayan Hieroglyphs or Glyphs of Insects

Mayan Hieroglyphs or Glyphs of Insects

INSECTA

The Honey Bee (Melipona). A portion of the Tro-Cortesianus appears to treat of apiculture, as previously noted, or, at all events, contains numerous figures of bees, some of which are shown in . As stated by Stempell (1908, p. 735) this is doubtless a species of Melipona, probably M. fulvior do[299]mestica. It is well known that this bee was kept by the ancient Mexicans, and what appear to be improvised hives are shown in figs. 7, 10, where the combs are noted depending from the ceiling or walls. These combs are seen to be composed of cells roughly four-sided for the most part, though in fig. 11 several hexagonal cells are present in the mass of comb held by the black god, M. Darwin, in hisOrigin of Species, has called attention to the form of the comb built by this bee, and considers its irregular cells of from three to six sides intermediate in their degree of perfection between those of the bumble bee (Bombus) and the honey bee of Europe (Apis mellifica). The Caban form in 
connnection
 with the hive in fig. 10 may have some phoneticsignifiance as kab is honey in Maya. This sign occurs very frequently in the pages devoted to apiculture.

The figures of the bees in the codex show a number of interesting variations. In figs. 1-3, 5, 11, the insect is less conventionalized than in figs. 4, 6  The hairy feet are well indicated as well as the segmented body and a single pair of wings. All the figures show an anterodorsal view so that, on account of the size of the first pair of legs, only the tops of the second pair appear in figs. 1, 3, 5. In fig. 2, however, two pairs are seen, and in figs. 4, 6, the anthropomorphic tendency is further shown by providing the insect with two pairs of limbs each with four or five digits, and a conventionalized face, eyes and mouth. In  fig. 1, the bee is represented without mouthparts but antennae only. This may indicate a drone or a queen bee that takes no active part in the work of gathering honey or making comb. Fig. 2 is perhaps the least reduced of any of the figures and shows the worker bee with antennae and mouthparts.

The so-called “cloud balls” of the day sign Cauac , fig. 8) may represent the honey comb. Cauac is usually supposed to have some connection with 
lightening
 and thunder although Valentini agrees with the authors in associating Cauac with the bees and honey. The Cauac-like forms in , figs. 7, 10, have been described above as hives. The representation of legs in the full drawing of a bee as four large limbs, an anterior and a[300] posterior pair, coupled with the method of drawing the insect as seen from above and in front, may have led to its final expression by an X-shaped mark shown in connection with the hives (, figs. 7, 10). The X is also seen in the day sign Cauac.

Apiculture was common among the various peoples of Central America and Mexico. Las Casas speaks of hives of bees and Gomara states that the bees were small and the honey rather bitter. Clavigero (Vol. 1, p. 68)mentions six varieties of bees which were found in Mexico;—the first is the same as the common bee of Europe, the second differs from the first only in having no sting and is the bee of Yucatan and Chiapas which makes the fine clear honey of aromatic flavor. The third species resembles in its form the winged ants but is smaller than the common bee and without a sting. The fourth is a yellow bee, smaller than the common one but, like it, furnished with a sting. The fifth is a small bee without a sting which constructs hives of an orbicular form in subterranean cavities and the honey is sour and somewhat bitter. The Tlalpipiolli, which is the sixth species, is black and yellow, of the size of the common bee, but has no sting.

The natives of the country at the present time often cultivate hives of bees in logs which they hollow out for this purpose and keep in a specially constructed shelter. It is, however, rather the ceremonial side of apiculture that is the interesting feature and this is clearly emphasized in the Tro-Cortesianus. The section in this manuscript (80b, 103-112), as has been noted, is taken up almost exclusively with the culture of the bee and in all probability represents a definite religious ceremony or series of rites which are connected intimately with bees and honey. Landa (1864, p. 292) states that in the month Tzoz the natives prepare for a ceremony in behalf of the bees which takes place in the following month, Tzec. In the month Mol another fiesta is undertaken in behalf of these insects so that[301] the gods may provide an abundance of flowers for the bees (Landa, 1864, p. 306).

It seems clear therefore that we have represented in the pages of the Tro-Cortesianus referred to, the rites carried out in this connection. The more or less realistic drawings of the bees ( figs. 1-6, 9) represent the god of the bees and to him offerings of food and incense are being made. , fig. 11, shows the war god (M) with his eagle head-dress offering a mass of honey in the comb to the god of the bees.

Curiously enough the bee does not seem to be represented in the Dresden Codex. Förstemann’s identification of the head-dress of the goddess in Dresden 9a as a bee does not seem to us to be correct.

In addition to the bees, there occurs in the Nuttall Codex 4 ( fig. 4) a curious representation of an insect with a pointed beak-like structure and a spine at the posterior extremity of its human-like body. It is engaged in apparent conflict with a man and may represent a hornet.

Blow-fly (Sarcophaga). Two figures in the Tro-Cortesianus (, figs. 1, 2) are of special interest since they appear to have been frequently regarded as picturing snakes attacking men. These are thick-bodied sinuous creatures distinguished by the curious conformation of the mouth and by a lateral row of dots that may represent the metameric spiracles or, as commonly, a demarcation between dorsal and ventral surfaces. That these are maggots of a blow-fly (Sarcophaga) there can be little doubt, not only on account of their mouth parts which are similar to those of the agave maggot (see later) but also because of their relation to God F whom they are devouring. The latter in fig. 1 is doubtless dead as shown by the closed eye and it is the habit of the blow-fly to deposit its eggs in the nasal cavity of dead animals as well as elsewhere on the body. The fact that in each case a maggot is attacking the god’s nose may indicate that this habit was known to the artist who, consequently,] shows the larvae in this position. In, fig. 2, the god’s eye is not closed but his passive attitude while the maggot devours his hand and nose does not indicate that he is in full possession of his strength. In addition to the blow-fly, a screw-fly (Chrysomyia) lays its eggs on the bodies of animals, often on persons sleeping, and these may hatch almost at once into small maggots that penetrate the skin. It may be, therefore, that the larvae here considered belong to this genus.

In addition to god F, in Tro-Cortesianus 24d, there is another representation of the same god being attacked by a vulture. This bird is evidently eating his nose. In this case the god is shown with the closed eye as in 27d. In Tro-Cortesianus 25d the fly seems to be attacking the mouth of god F. From the fact that no other god is ever found in this connection it may be suggested that there may be some relation between god F as a god of human sacrifice and the fact that his dead body is being eaten by blow-flies and vultures. A portion of the body of the person sacrificed was usually eaten by those taking part in the ceremony.

Lepidopterous Insects. In Tro-Cortesianus 28c (fig. 3) is shown a second insect larva with curiously formed mouth parts. It is represented as attacking agave which is springing from the ground as shown by the Caban signs in the codex. Hough (1908, p. 591) has shown this to be the larva of Acentrocneme kollari Felder, “called by the Mexicans guson, and in Nahuatl mescuillin.” This grub, he says, is white, about an inch long, and tunnels the fleshy leaves of the agave. It is greatly prized as an article of food for “gusones to this day are collected in April, boiled, wrapped in the epidermis of the agave, sold on the streets of Mexico, and are eaten with avidity. To all appearances they are nourishing and palatable, and it is said that connoisseurs prefer them to oysters or swallows’ nests.” Hough believes “that the discovery of the sap-yielding quality of the agave was through search for these larvae.”

In the Nuttall Codex occur numerous representations of insects, some of which appear to represent butterflies or moths ( figs. 5-8) but these are quite unidentifiable. That shown[303] in fig. 6 is colored blue in the original, while the others are of various colors. Possibly the round markings on the wings in figs. 5, 8, represent the ocelli on the wings of certain species of moths. In this connection, too, it is interesting to compare the conventionalized butterfly with its single eye and pointed antennae from the Aubin manuscript (fig. 9) with one drawn on the same plan from the Nuttall Codex (, fig. 8).