Popol Vuh is a religious text of the Central American Maya indians. Stated more precisely, Popol Vuh is a periconquest oral mythistory (myth + history) of the highland Quiché (K’iche’) Maya. The mythic component comprehends a creation story, a diluvian suggestion, and epic tales of anthropomorphic ancestors. The myth transitions into history through its tale of an eastward ancestral migration to observe the first dawn through which the sojourners acquire fire and evolve distinct languages, tribes, and clans. We are told how the Quichean tribes arrived in the western highlands and there is an anecdotal account of how the Quiché rise to prominence over their Cakchiquel and Tzutuhil relatives. Popol Vuh also describes a society that, anthropologically speaking, seems to depict settlement and intertribal conflict of the terminal late classic period (roughly AD 790 to 1000). Popol Vuh concludes with regnal genealogies leading to the time of the Spanish conquest (AD 1524). Ontologically speaking, Popol Vuh exists as a product of exponential supposition and as a consequence there are really two distinguishable conceptual and physical Popol Vuh entities.
Popol Vuh has been extensively studied since the 1850s as an ethnographic and historiographic source on pre-conquest Indian culture. This is attributable to two main causes. First, physical anthropology did not mature sufficiently until after the Second World War such that it could explain the ancient culture. Second, there was a significant loss of indigenous culture during the early conquest. These two issues effectively reduced all study of the ancient culture to the accounts written by early European colonizers. The late Renaissance period also generated an epistemological predisposition for written records as being fixed, redemonstrable sources of information. Over time, these circumstances eroded popular understanding of Popol Vuh’s conservation.
Popol Vuh survives by way of the seventeenth-century Dominican priest Father Francisco Ximénez whose interest in history and languages led him to author several treatises, one of which contains “Popol Vuh” in parallel Quiché and Spanish columns. Ximénez, however, never refers to the text as “Popol Vuh” but rather “las historias,” which he incorporated into a larger ecclesiastical treatise containing—in this order—a grammar, a doctrinal guide, the historias, and a scholium. We know that Ximénez attempted to publish one of his other works in Spain, but there is no indication that he tried to publish this treatise. On the contrary, Ximénez’s prologues strongly suggest that he intended the work to be read only by clergy. When Ximénez was later commissioned (c.1710) to compile a history of the region, he reincorporated the mythistory into this work, albeit in a more prosaic form with chapters, captions, and commentaries.
After Ximénez’s death in late 1729 or early 1730, his manuscripts remained in the convent of his order. When General Francisco Morazán expelled the clerics a hundred years later, much of the convent’s library transferred to the Universidad de San Carlos. Ximénez’s writings were seen there in 1854 by Carl Scherzer and also in 1855 by Charles Étienne Brasseur de Bourbourg. Brasseur removed Ximénez’s ecclesiastic manuscript back to France and, furthermore, remained very secretive and misleading about his source material. With Brasseur’s death in 1874, his library passed to Alphonse Pinart whom he had met at the 1867 Paris International Exposition. Pinart fell into financial ruin in the 1880s and sold his collection at auction in 1883. The work containing “Popol Vuh” was purchased by or on behalf of Edward E. Ayer for his personal collection which he ultimately donated to The Newberry Library over a period from 1897 to 1911. Ximénez’s manuscript was catalogued as Ayer ms 1515 under the title of its first treatise, Arte de las tres lengvas. In 1941, Guatemalan Ambassador Adrián Recinos (re)discovered Popol Vuh within Ximénez’s manuscript at the Newberry. This in turn paved the way for Recinos to publish the first direct edition in nearly a century. Ximénez’s manuscript is the oldest and only known written account of the narrative and is the principal source for editions.
Distinguishing the popular and historical context of Popol Vuh depends crucially upon an understanding the text’s editorial history as well as the editorial actors themselves (which is extensively reviewed in the first chapter of my thesis). The first two editions of Popol Vuh are arguably the most influential of all. The first published edition of Popol Vuh was in 1857 by Carl Scherzer. The second published edition of Popol Vuh was in 1861 by Charles Étienne Brasseur de Bourbourg who first coined the title “Popol Vuh,” divided the narrative into chapters, and added extensive notes. But whereas Scherzer retained Ximénez’s title (“las historias”) and two of the prologues, Brasseur discarded Ximénez’s paratext and attached his own 262-page prefatory “dissertation sur les mythes” that effectively recontextualized the narrative as an ethnographic work rather than as a missionary endeavor. Brasseur was also very opaque about his source material and after Brasseur died, Ximénez’s manuscript vanished.
Following Brasseur, all editions until 1947 are indirect works based on Brasseur and Scherzer (and to a lesser extent, Ximénez’s monolingual redaction found in Historia de la provinçia). One of the more recognized works was by Georges Raynaud in 1925. One of Raynaud’s students at the Sorbonne was Miguel Ángel Asturias who collaborated on the edition and produced a Spanish translation in 1927. Asturias, in turn, brought Popol Vuh back into the literary consciousness through his novel, Hombres de maíz.
In 1941, Guatemalan diplomat Adrián Recinos (re)discovered Ximénez’s manuscript in The Newberry Library and prepared the first direct edition in nearly eighty years. Since then, editions can reasonably be assumed to be based principally on Ximénez’s manuscript. Brasseur’s influence is still evident in the perpetuation of his “Popol Vuh” moniker and in the chapter divisions. Some editors have attempted to versify the Quiché text. The following table gives the prominent editions of Popol Vuh.
|1857||Scherzer, Carl. Las Historias del Origen de Los Indios. (There are two imprints on Scherzer’s edition, Vienna and London)|
|1861||Brasseur de Bourbourg, Charles Étienne. Popol vuh. Le livre sacré et les mythes de l’antiquité américaine.|
|1872||Gavarrete, Juan. El Popol Buj. Versión española de la traducción de Brasseur de Bourbourg comparada con la de Ximénez, con notas tomadas de ambos comentadores y concordancias con las Santas Escrituras.|
|1908||Spence, Lewis. The Popol Vuh. The Mythic and Heroic Sagas of the Kichés of Central America.|
|1913||Pohorilles, Noah Elieser. Das Popol Wuh. Die mystische Geschichte des Kicé-Volkes von Guatemala nach dem Original-Texte übersetz und bearbeitet.|
|1925||Raynaud, Georges. Les dieux, les héros et les hommes de l’ancien Guatémala d’après le Livre du Conseil. [based on Brasseur’s edition]|
|1927||Asturias, Miguel Ángel. Los dioses, los héroes y los hombres de Guatemala antigua o el Libro del Consejo. Popol Vuh de los indios quichés.[translation of Raynaud]|
|1927||Villacorta, José Antonio Villacorta. Manuscrito de Chichicastenango. El Popol Vuj. Estudio sobre las antiguas tradiciones del Pueblo Quiché.|
|1944||Schultze Jena, Leonhard S. Popol Vuh: Das heilige Buch der Quiché-Indianer von Guatemala.|
|1947||Recinos, Adrián. Popol vuh. Las antiguas historias del Quiché|
|1950||Goetz, Delia, and Sylvanus G. Morley. Popol Vuh: The Sacred Book of the Ancient Quiche Maya. [English translation of Recinos]|
|1971||Edmonson, Munro S. The Book of Counsel: The Popol Vuh of the Quiche Maya of Guatemala.|
|1973||Estrada Monroy, Augustín. Empiezan las historias del origen de los indios de esta provincia de Guatemala. Popol Vuh. [“Edición Facsimilar”]|
|1985||Tedlock, Dennis. Popol Vuh: The Mayan Book of the Dawn of Life.
|1999||Colop, Sam. Popol Wuj: Versi6n Poetica K’iche’.|
|2003||Christenson, Allen J. Popol Vuh: The Sacred Book of the Maya.|
All of the editions between 1861 and 1947 are derivative editions based on Brasseur, Scherzer, and Gavarrete. Gavarrete was a librarian/archivist in Guatemala who copied part of Ximénez’s Historia de la provinçia (which it will be recalled contained a monolingual redaction of what is found in his ecclesiastic treatise). Gavarrete’s copy created some confusion as to the “original,” which is now believed to be the one in Berlin. Brasseur’s version gained a lot of traction through Georges Raynaud and his student Miguel Ángel Asturias. Asturias in turn seeded Popol Vuh into the Indianista literary movement of the twentieth century effectively adding another transatlantic dimension.
Ximénez’s Historia de la provincia served as the source a minor edition by José Antonio Villacorta in the 1930s.
|1927||José Antonio Villacorta C.||Manuscrito de Chichicastenango. El Popol Vuj. Estudio sobre las antiguas tradiciones del Pueblo Quiché.|