"The third house, that of Ahau Quiché, had only four chinamital with the following titles: I. Ahtzic Winak Ahau, 'great lord of givers;' II. Lolmet Ahau, 'grand receiver;' III. Nim Chocoh Ahau, 'lord grand elect;' IV. Ahau Gagawitz, 'lord of Gagawitz' (one of the gods of the Quiché trinity)."[916]
PIPILES AND NICARAGUANS.
Respecting the Chiapanecs, who are not generally considered as the descendants of the peoples who inhabited the country in Votan's time, we have no knowledge of their government save a probably unfounded statement by García that they were ruled by two chiefs, elected each year by the priests, and never had a king.[917] The Pipiles in Salvador, although traditionally among the partially civilized nations, seem to have been governed in the sixteenth century by local chieftains only, like most of the wild tribes already described. These chiefs handed down their power, however, to their sons or nearest relatives. Palacio tells us that to regulate marriages and the planting of crops was among the ruler's duties. Squier concludes that all these petty chiefs were more or less allied politically, and acted together in matters affecting the common interests.[918]
Nicaragua, when first visited by Europeans, was divided into many provinces, inhabited by several nations linguistically distinct one from another, one of them, at least, speaking the Aztec tongue; but in respect to their government and other institutions, the very meagre information preserved by Oviedo enables us to make little or no distinction between the different tribes. In many of the provinces we are told the people lived in communities, or little republics, governed by certain huehues, or 'old men,' who were elected by the people. These elective rulers themselves elected a captain-general to direct their armies in time of war, which official they had no hesitation in putting to death when he exhibited any symptoms of insubordination or acquired a power over the army which seemed dangerous to the public good. In other and probably in most provinces a chieftain, or teite, ruled the people of his domain with much the same powers and privileges as we have noticed in Yucatan and Guatemala. These teites had their petty vassals and lords to execute their orders, and to accompany them in public displays, but it seems they could claim no strictly personal services in their palaces from any but members of their own household. Peter Martyr speaks of a 'throne adorned with rich and princely furniture.' These rulers affected great state, and insisted on a strict observance of court etiquette. They would receive no message, however pressing the occasion, except through the regularly appointed officials; and one of them, in an interview with the Spaniards, would not condescend to open his royal mouth to the leader until a curtain was held between him and his foreign hearers. On several occasions they met the Spaniards in a procession of men and women gaily decked in all their finery, marching to the sound of shell trumpets, and bearing in their hands presents for the invaders. But even in the provinces nominally ruled by the teites, all legislative power was in the hands of a council called monexico, composed of old men, who were elected every four moons. Without the consent of the monexico the chief could take action in no public matter whatever, not even in war. The council could decide against the teite, but he had the right to assemble or dissolve it, and to be present at all its meetings. The decisions of the monexico were made known in the market-place by a crier, whose badge of office was a rattle. The lords also, in sending an ambassador or messenger on any public business, gave him a fan, bearing which credential he was implicitly trusted wherever he might go. Two members of the council were chosen as executive officers, and one of them must be always present in the market-place to regulate all dealings of the buyers and sellers. Squier says that the council-houses were called grepons, and its corridors or porticos galpons; Oviedo in one place terms the buildings galpones, and in another applies the name to a class of vassal chiefs.[919]
THE MAYA PRIESTHOOD.
It is only of the priesthood as connected with the government, as an order of nobility, as a class of the community, that a mention is required here: In their quality of priests proper, religious teachers, oracles of the gods, leaders of ceremonious rites, confessors, and sacrificers, they will be treated of elsewhere. Their temporal power, directly exercised, or indirectly through their influence upon kings and chieftains, was perhaps even greater than we have found it among the Nahua nations. Votan, Zamná, Cukulcan, and all the other semi-mythical founders of the Maya civilization, united in their persons the qualities of high-priest and king, and from their time to the coming of the Spaniards ecclesiastical and secular authority marched hand in hand. In Yucatan, the Itzas at Chichen were ruled in the earlier times by a theocratic government, and later the high-priest of the empire, of the royal family of the Cheles, became king of Izamal, which became the sacred city and the headquarters of ecclesiastical dignitaries. The gigantic mounds still seen at Izamal are traditionally the tombs of both kings and priests. The office of chief priest was hereditary, the succession being from father to son—since priests and even the vestal virgins were permitted to marry—but regulated apparently by the opinions of kings and nobles, as well as of ecclesiastical councils. The king constantly applied to the high-priest for counsel in matters of state, and in turn gave rich presents to the head of the church; the security of the temples was also confided to the highest officers of the state. The rank of Ixnacan Katun, or superior of the vestals, was founded by a princess of royal blood.
In Guatemala the high-priests who presided over the temples of the Quiché trinity, Tohil, Awilix, and Gucumatz, were all princes of the three royal families; their titles have been given in the lists of the Quiché nobility; and one of the most powerful kings is said to have created two priestly titles for the family of Zakik, to each of which he attached a province for its support. Ximenez tells us that in Vera Paz the chief priest, next in power to the king, was elected from a certain lineage by the people. In the province of Chiquimula, Mictlan is described as a great religious centre, and a shrine much visited by pilgrims. Here the power was in the hands of a sacerdotal hierarchy, hereditary in one family, whose chief bore the title Teoti and was aided by an ecclesiastical council of five members, which controlled all the priesthood, and from whose number a successor to the Teoti was appointed by the chief of the Pipiles, or, as some authorities state, was chosen by lot.
Thus we see that while the priesthood had great power over even the highest secular rulers in all the Maya nations, yet the system by which the high-priests were members of the royal families, rendered their power a support to that of royalty rather than a cause of fear. The fear which kings experienced towards the priests seems consequently to have been altogether superstitious on account of their supernatural powers, and not a jealous fear of any possible rivalry. Ordinary priests were appointed by the higher authorities of the church, but whether the choice was confined to certain families, we are not informed. It is altogether probable, however, that such was the case in nations whose lowest secular officers must be of noble blood.[920]
PLEBEIANS AND SLAVES.
In the south as in the north, the status of the lower classes, or plebeians, has received no attention at the hands of the Spanish observers. We know that in Yucatan the nobles were obliged to support from their revenues such of the lower classes as from sickness, old age, or other disabling cause were unable to gain a livelihood. It has been seen also that none of plebeian blood could hold any office, the only exception noted being the attempt of one of the Quiché kings to humiliate the aristocracy by raising plebeian soldiers to the new rank of Achihab, 'men' or 'heroes.' The lower classes of freemen were doubtless for the most part farmers, each tilling the portion of land allotted him in the domain of a noble; and beyond the obligation to pay a certain tax from the product of their labor, and to render military service in case of necessity, they were probably independent, and often wealthy.[921]