An offering of venison is frequently pictured in the manuscripts. Landa (1864, p. 220)[350-†] also furnishes a parallel for this. The haunches of venison arranged as offerings in dishes are realistically seen in a number of representations of religious rites, as in Dresden 28c ([Pl. 31], fig. 14) in the last of the rites of the dominical days, 35a ([Pl. 31], fig. 12) and in Tro-Cortesianus 5a above the serpent enclosing the body of water, 65a in front of god B or D and 105b ([Pl. 31], fig. 13) and 108a ([Pl. 31], fig. 15), both of which are in connection with the bee ceremonies.
The head of the deer, rather than the legs, is also shown as an offering, in Tro-Cortesianus 69b with god B and Tro-Cortesianus 78 ([Pl. 31], fig. 10) in the line of glyphs. The whole deer may be represented as an offering in Tro-Cortesianus 2b ([Pl. 31], fig. 8).[351-*]
There are some examples in the manuscripts where the deer is pictured quite apart from any idea of the hunt or an offering. In Tro-Cortesianus 14b, it is shown on top of the body of one of the large snakes and in Tro-Cortesianus 29c ([Pl. 31], fig. 3), it appears seated on the end of a snake-like curve. The deer occurs in Tro-Cortesianus 30b ([Pl. 30], fig. 6) in connection with the goddess from whose breasts water is flowing. God B appears in Dresden 41c ([Pl. 31], fig. 1) seated on a red deer. The same animal is also to be noted in Dresden 60a ([Pl. 30], fig. 5) in connection with the combat of the planets.[351-†] A deer is seen in Tro-Cortesianus 92d seated on a mat opposite a female figure in the same manner as the armadillo on the same page and a dog on the preceding page. These, as previously noted, probably refer to cohabitation. On [Pl. 32], fig. 9, is a deer from the Peresianus and [Pl. 32], fig. 12, shows another from Stela N, east, from Copan.
The Nahua day Maçatl signifies deer and we naturally find a large number of glyphs representing this animal among the day signs in the Mexican manuscripts ([Pl. 31], fig. 9; [Pl. 32], figs. 8, 10, 11).
Yucatan Peccary (Tayassu angulatum yucatanense; T. ringens). Peccaries (Maya, qeqem) of the T. angulatum group are common in Mexico and Yucatan, and a number of local forms have been named. The white-lipped peccaries also occur, but in the figures it is impossible to distinguish the species. These animals are characterized by their prominent snout, curly tail, bristling dorsal crest, and rather formidable tusks, as well as by the possession of hoofs. By these marks most of the figures are readily identifiable ([Pl. 32], fig. 1; Pl. 33, figs. 1, 2, 4-6, 9). The tail is, however, often omitted as well as the erect line of bristles down the back. The presence of hoofs and the possession of a truncated pig-like snout are sufficiently characteristic. In the Dresden Codex occur several figures of undoubted peccaries. Two of these are pictured in [Pl. 32], figs. 2, 4. In each the hoofs and curly tail appear, and in the latter figure the bristling back is conventionally drawn by a series of serrations. These marks are sufficient to identify the animals. Their heads are further conventionalized, however, by a great exaggeration of the snout beyond that slightly indicated in [Pl. 32], fig. 1, and [Pl. 33], figs. 6, 9. Other representations of the peccary, are shown in [Pl. 32], fig. 5, a man with a peccary’s head, and fig. 7 in which the animal’s hoofs are replaced by human hands and feet. In both cases the form of the head remains characteristic. A curious combination is shown in [Pl. 32], fig. 3, an animal whose head and fore feet are those of a peccary, while the hind feet have five toes, and there is a long tail. The addition of what look like scales is found in a figure from the Dresden ([Pl. 32], fig. 6).
The peccary is found in several different connections in the manuscripts. As deer are found associated with the hunt, so, but to a much more limited extent, the peccary. It is represented pictured as being captured in snares of the familiar “jerk-up” type. Similar drawings show this animal caught by the foreleg and held partially suspended, Tro-Cortesianus 49a ([Pl. 33], fig. 9),[352-*] 49c ([Pl. 33], fig. 1), and 93a ([Pl. 33], fig. 4). Tro-Cortesianus 41b also shows the peccary associated with hunting scenes. Another realistic drawing of this animal in Dresden 62 ([Pl. 33], fig. 6)[352-†] represents him as seated on the open jaws of a serpent connected with a long number series. We are unable to explain the signification of the appearance of the animal in this connection. The peccary is pictured in Tro-Cortesianus 27b ([Pl. 33], fig. 5) seated on the left hand of the goddess from whose breasts water is flowing.
The peccary seems to be associated with the sky, as it is seen in a conventionalized form in four instances (Dresden 44b, 45b, ([Pl. 32], fig. 4) coming from a band of constellation signs and in Dresden 68a ([Pl. 32], fig. 2) coming from a similar band with god E sitting underneath.[353-*] Above each of these conventionalized figures occur the corresponding glyph forms ([Pl. 33], figs. 7, 8), which show merely the head with the exaggerated upturned snout. There is a striking resemblance between these snouts and those of the stone mask-like figures so frequently represented as a façade decoration in northern Yucatan. The presence in the mouths of the faces there represented of a recurved tusk in addition to other teeth is a further resemblance to the drawings of peccaries. Stempell (1908, p. 718) has reproduced a photograph of these extraordinary carvings and considers them the heads of mastodons, apparently solely on account of the shape of the upturned snout, whose tip in many of the carvings turns forward. They certainly do not represent the heads of mastodons, but we are not ready to say that the peccary is the prototype of these carvings, although the similarity between the glyphs ([Pl. 33], figs. 7, 8) and the masks is worthy of note. One point which does not favor this explanation is the fact that on the eastern façade of the Monjas at Chichen Itza where the mask-like panel is seen at its best, we find a realistic drawing of a peccary ([Pl. 33], fig. 2) on the band of glyphs over the doorway, and it in no way suggests the head on the panel and is quite different from the head already noted as the glyph of the peccary in the codices.
Baird’s Tapir (Tapirella bairdi). No undoubted representations of tapirs occur in the manuscripts here considered. Possibly tapirs did not live in the country occupied by the Maya peoples. At the present time they are found only to the south of Yucatan. In Central America Baird’s and Dow’s tapirs are native, the latter, however, more on the Pacific coast. We have included a drawing of an earthenware vessel ([Pl. 28], fig. 1) that represents a tapir, about whose neck is a string of Oliva shells. The short prehensile trunk of the tapir is well made and the hoofs are likewise shown. A greatly elongated nose is found in many of the drawings of the deities, but it does not seem clear that these represent trunks of tapirs, or, as suggested by Stempell, mastodons! Two such heads are shown in [Pl. 39], figs. 7, 9. These offer a considerable superficial resemblance to that of a tapir, but as no other drawings that might be considered to represent this animal are found, it seems very questionable if the long noses are other than parts of grotesque masks. The superficial resemblance of the curious nose pieces of the masks on the panel of the Maya façades to elephants’ trunks does not seem to us especially significant, as otherwise the carvings are quite unlike elephants. They have no great tusks as an elephant should, but, instead, short recurved teeth similar to those representing peccary tusks, as already pointed out.
Rabbit (Sylvilagus or Lepus). Rabbits and hares from their familiarity, their long ears, and their peculiar method of locomotion, seem always to attract the notice of primitive peoples. Several species occur in Mexico, including the Marsh rabbit (Sylvilagus truei; S. insonus), various races of the Cottontail rabbit (S. floridanus connectens; S. f. chiapensis, S. f. yucatanicus; S. aztecus; S. orizabae, etc.) and several Jack rabbits (Lepus alleni pallitans; L. callotis flavigularis, L. asellus). It is, of course, quite impossible to determine to which of these species belong the few representations found. Several drawings, shown in [Pl. 30], figs. 3, 4, 7, 8, are at once identifiable as rabbits from their long ears, round heads, and the presence of the prominent gnawing teeth.[354-*] In two of the figures ([Pl. 30], figs. 7, 8), the entire animal is shown, sitting erect on its haunches, the first with one ear in advance of the other, a trait more characteristic of the jack rabbit than of the short-eared rabbits. For convenience of comparison, we have placed beside these two figures one of a deer in much the same position. It is at once distinguished, however, by its long head, longer bushy tail, and by the marks at each end of the eye. What at first sight appear to be two gnawing teeth of the rabbit seem to be the incisors of the lower jaw. This is the animal identified by Stempell as a dog.
The animal shown to be a rabbit in Dresden 61 ([Pl. 30], fig. 8) is pictured seated on the open jaws of a serpent in the same way as the peccary on the following page. These two animals, together with two representations of god B and the black god (Dresden 61), are each clearly connected with the serpents on which they are sitting.