The Conquest
It is a historic tragedy that the royal chronicles of Spain, carefully transcribed by the priests and the conquistadors, did not provide narrative or illustrative images of the magnificent pre-Columbian cities. The only accounts of the magnificent cities are off-hand references in letters to the Spanish royal court and to King Carlos V. The single reference from Cortés relating to pre-Columbian architecture compared the streets of the Aztec capital of Tenochtitlán to the streets of Madrid, and the high-rise Templo Mayor to the soaring cathedral of Seville. Letters from one of Cortés’s captains, Bernal Díaz del Castillo, described the sacred precinct of Tenochtitlán as a great enclosure of courts that are larger than the Plaza of Salamanca in Spain.
The remarks from Cortes and Del Castillo are the sole reports by the conquistadors relating to a description of pre-Colombian cities. These minimal firsthand accounts formed the total of European images, leading to misconceptions of the configuration of the destroyed Aztec city. Today, it is difficult to believe that sketches or detailed narratives were not prepared to describe images of the most magnificent living city in the New World. However, this lack of interest in art and architecture reflected the skewed mentality of the hard-bitten conquistadors and the overzealous priests who came to rule the Maya world. The correspondence of the conquistadors did not describe or report the existence of ruined Maya cities in the south of New Spain.
Francisco de Montejo, governor and captain general of the Yucatán, and his band of conquistadors had little interest in the ruins of the Maya civilization. The abandoned Maya cities did not contain booty for enriching the Spanish court. The Franciscan priests were well aware of the ancient Maya cities. However, the priests brought their own religion to the Yucatán and were devoted to destroying the religion of the indigenous Maya culture and converting them to Catholicism. The colonizers’ sole interest in the fate of the ruined cities lay in destroying the pagan carvings, demolishing the monumental Maya structures, and using them as stone quarries for the construction of churches and municipal buildings for the cities of New Spain. This use of ancient Maya stones for new building construction was typified at the Maya city of Tho’, now Mérida, the capital of the Yucatán state, and at Izamal, a major Maya religious destination converted by the Spanish to a Christian religious center. The massive Cathedral de San Ildefonso at Mérída and other important structures in these new cities were constructed by Maya masons using their tools of jadeite (Figure C-2).
The lack of interest in the art and architecture of the pre-Columbian cultures was a predictable failing of an uneducated band of soldiers of the king. The Franciscan priests were educated men of God, who should have had some curiosity in the artistic treasures. However, they not only consorted with the conquistadors in the demolition of Maya cities, but went even further in the wanton destruction of Maya books containing the scientific and intellectual legacy of a sophisticated society.
The Franciscan order was granted the spiritual monopoly for the Yucatán by the Spanish Crown. Their goal was to convert the Maya from their indigenous religion to Catholicism. However, the Spanish Inquisition was at its height, and its pitiless and brutal mandates were integrated into the process of converting souls. The Franciscan priests, led by the rabid religious fanatic Bishop Diego de Landa, were sometimes directed to carry out cruel methods to save the souls of the Maya in their care. De Landa would secure his place in history by two acts: the burning of the surviving Maya books at Maní and the writing of the ethnographic masterpiece Relación de las cosas de Yucatán.
The Maya books extant during the 16th century were mostly copies of works originally written during the Classic Period, almost a millennium before the conquest. The books were composed by the Maya literati and were permanent records of the learning, history, and science of the Maya civilization. Those that survived the centuries before the conquest had been protected, copied, and updated by generations of Maya scribes, who were still writing in 1534. The contents of the Maya manuscripts were verified as invaluable records of historical and scientific significance by contemporary Spanish reviewers, including de Landa. Alonso de Zorita wrote in 1540 that he reviewed numerous books that recorded Maya history more than 800 years back and were interpreted for him by elderly Maya, who wrote the script.
The Franciscans considered the Maya books the works of the devil. Untold numbers of books were seized and burned by zealous priests from 1562 to 1697, when the last Maya stronghold fell. The Maya world did not fall easily before the force of Spanish arms; it was a long and fierce fight. The last Maya city fell in 1697, in Tayasal, Guatemala, some 180 years after Hernán Cortés landed at Veracruz, Mexico, and at that time the scribes were still literate. However, after the Maya were defeated, all the Maya books in the defeated city were burned. The city was razed, and its stones used as a quarry to build the churches and buildings of Flores, Guatemala, situated on the site of Tayasal. There is no method of estimating the number of Maya books that were burned in the name of Christianity, but only four Maya books, now known as codices, are known to have survived the zealous priests.
In the summer of 1562, de Landa (Figure 2-1) oversaw the most notorious of incidents related to the burning of Maya books. In the month of May of that year, Franciscan priests at the Yucatán town of Maní discovered that certain Maya had reverted to their traditional religion. The friars instituted methods of the Inquisition that included interrogating suspected heretics using various means of torture. De Landa soon arrived in Maní and took charge of the proceedings, instituting an “episcopal” inquisition. In July, de Landa conducted an auto da fe, or act of faith, during which he burned all the Maya codices he could find as well as 5,000 works of art. He reported that 27 scrolls were burned, but other witnesses stated that 99 times as many were destroyed (Figure 2-2).
Figure 2-1: Bishop Diego de Landa persecuted the Maya, but his writings assisted in breaking the Maya writing code. Image in public domain.
After the incident at Maní, de Landa continued his fanatical religious activities through the destruction of books, and the torture and execution of Maya by burning them alive, hanging, and drowning. Contemporary Spanish observers were troubled by de Landa’s widespread use of torture. The Church also became concerned that de Landa had exceeded his authority by conducting an illegal inquisition. In 1563, Bishop Francisco de Toral sent de Landa back to Spain to stand trial and defend his actions before the Council of the Indies. The pace of the trial went slowly, and nine years passed. De Landa was strongly condemned by the Council of the Indies. Eventually, a committee of doctors was assembled by the Church to judge the actions of de Landa. The committee investigated de Landa’s alleged crimes, determined that he was not guilty, and absolved him of the charges.
During the nine years he spent in Spain defending himself against the charges of his accusers, de Landa wrote the classic work Relación de las cosas de Yucatán (Account of the Affairs of Yucatán). Despite his overt acts of cruelty to his converts, de Landa had a great interest for the Maya culture. He developed intimate relationships with the Maya, and they were willing to teach him some of the secrets inscribed in their books. He gained their confidence and extensively interviewed learned Maya. He became familiar with the Maya hieroglyphic script, calendars, and other facets of their culture. He obviously kept notes from his interviews and collected other material that was used to write his manuscript. It has been conjectured that he had secreted a Maya codex in his file of source material, which he transported back to Spain on the sea voyage to answer his accusers.
The existing copies of de Landa’s manuscript are considered to be the most important document written that deals with all the aspects of everyday Maya life in the Yucatán. He describes in narrative and hieroglyphic format the 260-day Maya calendar with the names of the days of the month, as well as the hieroglyphic names of the months of the solar year of 360 days. More importantly, this treatise included an explanation of the logic of the Maya writing system. Aft
er de Landa was declared innocent, he was elevated to the title of the fourth Bishop of the Yucatán, where he returned to live out his days.
The place of de Landa in history is both famous and infamous; his infamy stems from the destruction of Maya codices, and his fame was earned for Relación de las cosas de Yucatán, which would one day help revolutionize the study of the ancient Maya and assist in breaking the Maya hieroglyphic code. However, fate entered the attempt to solve the riddle of the Maya: De Landa’s manuscript was filed away in the un-catalogued clutter of the Royal Academy in Madrid and was lost for three centuries.
Figure 2-2: Maya codices, such as the Dresden Codex shown here, were written in artistic Maya script. Image in public domain.
The Xenophobia of New Spain and the Beginnings of Discovery
During the 16th, 17th, and 18th centuries, several volumes were published in Europe describing travel adventures in New Spain. The volumes contain erroneous narrative and fanciful depictions of pre-Columbian architecture. The artists who illustrated the works had not traveled to the New World and did not have firsthand experience. Their images reflected Greek, Roman, and French art and architectural influence in the carved details of pre-Columbian cities. Spain’s xenophobia deterred exploration of the colonies, and travel by foreigners to the ports of New Spain was all but forbidden. Entrance to New Spain was totally forbidden to Protestants. The imagery of pre-Colombian art and architecture in European publications were reflections of the minimal descriptions of pre-Columbian cities derived from the letters and accounts of conquistadores. They pursued the concept that pre-Colombian civilizations had European roots.
The Bourbon Dynasty has ruled Spain from 1700 to the present day, with inconsistent results. However, nearly 250 years after the conquest, King Charles III (1759–1788) became ruler of Spain and set out on a policy of enlightenment with administrative reform that reversed the decline of Spain as a colonial power. He had a great interest in learning and science, and found scientific significance in the culture of indigenous peoples in the Spanish colonies. Furthermore, he encouraged exploration of his colonies and exploitation of their natural resources to increase the crown’s revenue. This interest in the culture of New Spain led to the first exploration of ancient Maya cities.
Reports of a large abandoned city, near the village of Palenque, in the providence of Ciudad Real of Chiapas, resulted in the formation of an expedition to the site led by a local priest. Father Ramon Ordoñez de Agilar explored the site in 1773 and submitted a report on his findings to the Royal Audiencia of Guatemala. (Politically, Chiapas was part of Guatemala until it was ceded to Mexico in 1824.) Word of the discovery of a lost city in the rainforest traveled to the Royal Court in Madrid and reached the ears of King Charles III. This discovery attracted his interest and was just the type of scientific issue that held the possibility of treasures while fostering the enlightened atmosphere of seeking scientific truths during his reign. The royal court directed the colonial authorities to conduct an investigation of the ruined city.
In response to the king’s wishes, Joseph Estachería, president of the Royal Audiencia, ordered detailed explorations to be carried out of the Maya classic city of Santo Domingo de Palenque. The initial report in 1784, prepared by José Antonio Calderón, was considered unsatisfactory. In 1785, Estachería dispatched the Royal Architect, Antonio Bernasconi, to Palenque for further investigation. The narratives and illustrations included in the report of the second expedition apparently were seriously flawed and were also considered unsatisfactory. In 1786, Estachería had a stroke of luck and commissioned a Captain of the Dragoons, Don Antonio del Rio, along with a capable Guatemalan artist named Ricardo Almendáriz, to explore the site and prepare a comprehensive report. Through his choice of this talented team, Estachería enhanced the chances of a successful effort. He used the classic combination of a talented writer and an insightful artist to prepare an accurate report of the investigations.
Commissioned by Royal Order of King Charles III, the expedition led by Captain del Rio reached the site on May 3, 1787. The negotiation of the site was difficult due to dense fog and the impenetrable rainforest that covered the ruined buildings. Del Rio commandeered 79 men from the nearby village of Tumbala to clear the site. The survey commenced as the team of workers used axes to fell the trees and uncover the buildings of the ruined city.
During his stay at the site, del Rio encountered a Franciscan priest, Father Thomas de Soza. During conversations, the priest described other ruined cities that he had observed during his travels in the Yucatán. Captain del Rio made note of these other lost cities in his report. Though his report was a clear narrative of his observations of the ruins, his imagination strayed when he compared some of the art figures to Greek prototypes. However, he made a leap of consciousness while describing specific symbology carved into the monuments. He surmised that these symbols were hieroglyphics that had significance in the language of the original natives. His observations correctly recognized the symbols as a written language and they were the work of indigenous peoples.
The result of this expedition to Palenque included a collection of artifacts from the site and an insightful report that contained accurate narrative descriptions of the city and its monuments written by del Rio, accompanied by the drawings prepared by Ricardo Almendáriz. The drawings, however, strayed from accuracy and reflected the classical education of Almendáriz by introducing classical European art and architecture into his illustrations.
The report and artifacts, dated June 24, 1787, were submitted to Estachería. Various copies were made and deposited in the appropriate places in the Madrid and Guatemala City archives. Once more, the xenophobic and isolationist policy of Spanish bureaucrats caused the report to be buried deep in the archives. Captain del Rio’s erudite report represented the first attempt to accurately assess a Maya classic city. It was also the first to suggest that the symbology carved on the ruins represented a written script, to attribute the source of the art and architecture to an indigenous culture, and to report the existence of other lost cities of the Maya.
In 1807, King Charles IV commissioned the most extensive surveys of pre-Columbian cities to date and the last such effort by the Spanish crown. Three expeditions were carried out in response to the king’s desire to know more about the colony of New Spain and its history and natural resources. These expeditions were led by Captain Guillermo Dupaix, who was accompanied by artist Jose Luciano Castañeda. They made an excellent team; Dupaix was a passionate aficionado of pre-Colombian architecture, and Castañeda was the artist for the National Museum in Mexico City.
The expeditions visited Palenque, Mitla, Tula, and Monte Alban. Though Dupaix’s narratives were confined to visual evidence, he opined that the cities were the work of a culture previously unknown to European scholars. His report stated that the ancient cultures produced works endowed with their own genius, their own force of imagination, without the help of foreigners. Castañeda rendered the illustrations of the sites with an accuracy that surpassed that of previous artists. His efforts produced 150 drawings that constituted the most complete visualization of pre-Columbian art and architecture yet assembled. However, Castañeda was also a victim of his classical education, and his works were often distorted and inaccurate by reflecting classic European influence.
Dupaix did not credit the indigenous peoples living in the area of the sites with the construction of the ruined cities. He asserted that the monuments were built by a long-vanished people. As Dupaix completed the report, he lamented that he had ended his exploration with conjecture relative to the source of the ruins. However, his insistence that peoples of independent American origin constructed the ruined cities served as the entrée for the investigations of future explorers. The report was completed in 1808, and was sent to the archives in the National Museum of Mexico City. There it gathered dust until it was reported to have been lost in the chaos of the Mexican Revolution. Fortunately, the report was rediscovered in 182
8.
The control of Spain over its colonies began to falter in 1810, and by September 1821, the Spanish crown admitted defeat and, with the signing of the Treaty of Cordoba, recognized Mexico as an independent nation. The collapse of the Spanish rule opened the way for exploration of the country, investigation of its ruins, and the publishing of pre-Colombian scholarship. In 1822, nearly 40 years after the completion of Captain del Rio’s report, a copy of the report was secreted away from the royal archives in Guatemala City and found its way to British publisher Henry Berthoud. Berthoud claimed that the report was not stolen from Guatemala, but was rescued from the oblivion of the archives and had been legitimately secured. He published the report in 1822 under the title “Description of the Ruins of an Ancient City.” Captain del Rio’s report was translated into English and was largely re-written, the contents barely resembling the original document. The volume also included a fanciful essay by Doctor Paul Felix Cabrera, of Guatemala, who proposed that America’s first colonists were either from Mount Hebron or Mount Olympus. The volume contained 17 engraved plates, which were taken from Almendáriz’s illustrations in the original report. It is of note that nine of the engravings bear the initials “JFW” and were prepared by the flamboyant Jean Frederick Waldeck. This volume, with its narrative and engravings, constitutes the first published illustrations of Maya art and the inscriptions carved into their monumental buildings.
In 1830, fate took a hand in the final disposition of the Dupaix report. This report reached Europe by a route of devious means. The manuscript was spirited away from the archives of the National Museum of Mexico and found its way into the Parisian library of Frenchman Francois Latour-Allard. The manuscript then found its way into the collection of Englishman Edward King, Lord Kingsborough. Lord Kingsborough included all the then-known reports in his nine-volume work entitled Antiquities of Mexico. The series appeared between 1830 and 1848, and include works relating to ancient Mexico. This series published, among other matters, all known works relating to pre-Columbian art and architecture. The works included the Maya Dresden Codex, the Aztec Mendoza and Telleriano-Remensis codices, the Aztec Florentine Codex prepared under 16th-century Franciscan friar Bernardino de Sahagun, selections from Humboldt’s Picturesque Atlas, and scholarly works by Kingsborough and other intellectuals. The scholarly chapters in Kingsborough’s volumes supported his belief that ancient Mexican civilization had been founded by the lost tribes of Israel.
The Lost Secrets of Maya Technology Page 4