The macuahuitl and
macana
The Aztec macuahuitl
(mak-WAH-weetl) was a melee weapon: a large broadsword or club wielded in close
combat (Hassig, 2016, p. 8; Pohl, 2001, p. 19). The broad, flat wooden shaft,
probably of a strong hardwood like oak, had grooved edges inset with obsidian
blades secured by resin or other mastic. These armaments were apparently of
varying sizes: most about one meter long, brandished with one hand while the
other held a shield; others were larger, necessitating two hands (Cervera
Obregón, 2006, p. 128, Figures 1, 14, 2007; Pohl, 2001, p. 19, 21; Taube, 1991,
Figures 4, 5).
Effective in blunt-force slashing
and chopping, macuahuitls are illustrated in native pictorial books
(Figure 1; Cervera Obregón, 2006: Figures 1, 14; Taube, 1991: Figures 4, 5).
Spanish chroniclers described them, perhaps with some hyperbole, as having
“sharp blades of flint, set into opposite sides of a club, and … so fierce that
… with one blow [the Aztecs] could chop off a horse’s head, cutting right
through the neck” or “split a man in two with a single blow” (Cervera Obregón,
2006, p. 134; quoting Acosta, 1589/2003, p. 233 and Hernández de Córdoba, 1959,
p. 407). Similarly, fray Francisco de Aguilar (1561/1963, p. 140) claimed that
“One Indian at a single stroke cut open the whole neck of Cristóbal de Olid’s
horse, killing the horse.” If death were not instantaneous from the blow
itself, heavy bleeding from the wound would have quickly brought about the same
end. These arms were “primarily restricted to nobles and professionals who had
access to the necessary training” to use them (Hassig, 1992, p. 160).
A similar weapon was employed by
the lowland Maya of the Yucatan Peninsula. In addition to bows and arrows and
spears, Spaniards involved in early battles with the Maya reported that their
opponents’ armaments included “[s]words that appeared to be two-handed ones”
(Díaz del Castillo, 1568/1998, p. 9) and “twohanded swords of very strong wood
(set with) obsidian” (Cogolludo, in Tozzer, 1941, p. 49n240). Two sizes were
noted (Tejeda Monroy, 2012, p. 150): one about 83 cm (31.5 in) long, and the
other approximately 104 × 5 cm (also Barrera Vásquez, 1991, p. 184; Hassig,
1992, pp. 256–257; Roys, 1943, p. 66). The Spaniards called this weapon a
“macana,” a term they learned from the Taino in the Caribbean (Hassig, 2016, p.
8), or sometimes a “machete.” Some sources reported that the affixed blades
were chert (Barrera Vásquez, 1991, p. 184; Roys, 1943, p. 66; Tejeda Monroy,
2012, pp. 150–151), but their sizes and shapes are not described. Known as a hadzab
or hats’ab in Yucatecan Mayan, it had a shaft of strong chulul
wood: Apoplanesia paniculata, a small (6–9 m/20–30 ft.) flowering tree.
. . .
Mayapan, Yucatan, Mexico
Although the Late Postclassic
northern Yucatan Peninsula was ostensibly unified by the League of Mayapan, it
was plagued by conflict, conspiracies, and roaming bands of guerrillas (see
Edmonson, 1986, pp. 38–39). Early excavations at Mayapan recovered about 1,700
obsidian blade fragments (Proskouriakoff, 1962, pp. 368–369), primarily “pieces
broken at both ends” (i.e. medial segments) with evidence of “heavy use” on the
edges. Perplexingly, however, the possibility of macana weaponry was dismissed
because analysts found “no suggestion in the range of sizes” of these segments,
and small “flake-blades” and fragments were identified as scrapers
(Proskouriakoff, 1962, p. 369, Figure 35o, p). In more recent work, “almost
all” the obsidian artifacts at Mayapan were found to be blade fragments (Masson
& Lope, 2014, p. 363). However, there is only oblique reference to
armaments: “wooden swords with ‘flint’ (perhaps obsidian) edges” obtained “from
beyond the Maya area” (Masson & Lope, 2014, p. 280). Study of cranial trauma
on human remains from another site in the northwestern peninsula revealed
small, oval wounds to the left frontal and parietal bones, especially in the
Postclassic period. These suggest injuries from a right-handed combatant
wielding a “wooden club with protruding points … a specialized weapon” (Serafin
et al., 2014, p. 148). That is, a macana or hadzab. (Prudence M. Rice, “Macanas
in the Postclassic Maya Lowlands? A Preliminary Look,” Lithic Technology
44, no. 22 [2022], 314-15, 318)
