SOUTH SIDE OF FOURTH PALACE OF MITLA.
The high priest was called “Huiyatoo,” the great sentinel, he who sees all; his power, which was absolute, was even greater than the king’s. No person of low degree could see his face and live. He was the sole mediator between man and the gods; from him flowed all good gifts, both temporal and spiritual.186
It is probable that Burgoa never visited Mitla, for he only mentions one palace, whereas eight were still standing in his time. It seems strange that the Mexican Government should not undertake the exploration of these ruins, which, as they were the burial place of kings and priests, must contain costly robes, jewels, arms, etc., perhaps even manuscripts that would be most valuable for a comparative history of the Zapotecs and Aztecs. This is all the more to be regretted, that there is a stir in the learned world respecting American ruins and American antiquities.
“In a word,” says Orozco, “great divergence is found between the Zapotec and Toltec civilisation; they seem to spring from a common source, their calendar is the same, and their writing nearly so; both had made great progress in architecture and ceramic art. But these differences, seemingly slight, deepen with a maturer study: although based on the same principles, Zapotec writing has different characters, and objects assume other conventional forms; colours are more glaring, and at a first glance it is impossible to confound a Miztec with a Toltec, Acolhuan, or Mexican manuscript.”187
To conclude, although we have visited the ruins of Mitla more than once, we have not made so careful a study of them, as of those in Yucatan and Central America; nevertheless it has been shown that both Torquemada and Orozco see a Toltec influence in these monuments.
THE END.
CHARLES DICKENS AND EVANS, CRYSTAL PALACE PRESS.
NOTES.
Page 269.—Henequen.—Annual fires are run over the country to clear the
ground for the labourers, who then dig holes in the rocky soil and set out the
henequen plants. When of sufficient size, the leaves are cut and carried to the
“scraping machine,” which consists of a large fly-wheel, with strong, blunt knives
carried around on the rapidly revolving wheel. The leaves are pressed by means
of a curved lever, in such a way that the pulpy portion is scraped off, leaving the
fibre. The men feed the machine with astonishing rapidity, pressing the leaf
between the knives and lever with a motion of the leg.
Page 284.—Indians.—The great uprising of the Indians began in 1821, when
Mexico separated from Spain. The large landed proprietors were everywhere
opposed to separation from the mother country, whilst the bulk of the people, who
owned no property, were in favour of it. Later the country was divided in two
parties, in which one wished for an amalgamation with Mexico, whilst the other
was against it. The aborigines cast in their lot with the latter, receiving arms and
promises of independence. After the struggle was over and the Mexicans expelled,
the Indians were dismissed to their homes, and the promises made to them were
not kept.
In 1846 the Indians saw their opportunity; they swept the eastern coast with
fire and sword, and ravaged the country throughout. At last Mexico, having concluded
peace with the United States, sent an army, and the rebels were very slowly
driven back. But it was years ere peace was restored, and even now annual risings
take place, whilst thousands of square miles are desolate, and hundreds of towns
lie in ruins.
By calling in the aid of Mexico, Yucatan lost her autonomy, and became one of
the Confederate States of the Republic.
Page 296.—Stephens (“Incidents and Travels in Yucatan,” vol. ii. p. 441)
says of the third monument, known as the Palacio—palace—the ascent is on the
south side by an immense staircase, 137 feet wide, forming an approach of rude
grandeur, each step 4 feet 5 inches long, and 1 foot 5 inches in height.
Page 427.—It is urged that Yalchilan should be written either Xalchilan or Jalchilan, x and j being convertible letters having a strong aspirate; but as doctors are not agreed, the name is suffered to stand as in the text.
FOOTNOTES:
[1] 3,901 feet.
[2] Clavigero, “Hist. Antigua,” lib. II. p. 53.
[3] 199 feet.
[4] Prescott, “Hist. of the Conquest,” vol. II. p. 8.
[5] Sahagun, “Hist. de Nueva España,” lib. X. cap. xxvii.
[6] 247 feet.
[7] Geronimo Mendieta, Historia Ecclesiastica Indiana, lib. IV. chap. xii.
[8] Clavigero.
[9] According to Bustamente, Netzahualcoyotl was the owner of Chapultepec, and planted the great ahuahuetes, from 1425 to 1440. But it is more logical to suppose that it was a Toltec plantation dating back to the ninth century.
[10] Clavigero, “Historia Antigua,” vol. I. p. 75. Ramirez, chap. iv. p. 120.
[11] Clavigero, vol. I. lib. vii. p. 223. Acosta, “Historia de las Indias,” p. 472. Cortez, “Letters,” p. 79. Torquemada, “Monarquia Indiana,” vol. II. p. 483.
[12] Sahagun. Ramirez. Duran, “Historia de las Indias de Nueva España,” vol. I. chap. xx. Leon y Gama, “Las dos Piedras.” Conquistador Anonimo, “Coleccion de Documentos.” Icazbalceta, vol. I. p. 375.
[13] Torquemada, “Monarquia Indiana,” vol. I. lib. i. p. 82. Diego Duran, chap. lxvi.
[14] Diego Duran, vol. I. chap. xxix. Ixtlilxochitl, “Historia Chichemeca,” chap. xli., etc.
[15] Orozco y Berra, “Historia Antigua,” vol. II. chap. ix. p. 96. He quotes Joseph de Maistre.
[16] Diego Duran, vol. I. chap. xxix.
[17] Antonio de Leon y Gama, “Descripcion Hist. & Cronologico de las Dos Piedras,” pp. 2 and 5.
[18] Clavigero, “Historia Antigua,” vol. I. p. 242; id. notes, p. 6; id. vol. I. chap. vii.
[19] Geronimo Mendieta, “Historia Ecclesiastica Indiana,” vol. IV. chap. xii.
[20] Between the years 1832-1842, copper-mines were worked successively by an Italian of the name of Chialiva, and others.—Transl.
[21] “Anales del Museo de Mejico,” vol. I.; art. by Don Jesus Sanchez.
[22] “Bernal Diaz del Castillo,” lib. I. cap. xvi.
[23] Torquemada, “Monarquia Indiana,” vol. II. p. 560. Ixtlilxochitl, in his fourth Relacion, says that the Toltecs used oblong pieces of copper shaped like hatchets, about the thickness of a real.
[24] Prescott, “History of the Conquest of Mexico. Critical Notes by Jose Ramirez,” vol. II. Cumplido.
[25] Veytia, “Hist. Antigua,” vol. I. chap. i.
[26] Veytia. Ixtlilxochitl says the same thing.
[27] These knots were Chinese; in Peru they were called quipos.
[28] The same as Kab-ul, “the Working Hand,” which we shall see at Izamal.
[29] Guillemin Tarayre, “Archives de la Commission Scientifique du Mexique,” pp. 378, 379.
[30] Veytia, “Hist. Antigua de Mejico,” vol. I. chap. xxv. p. 233.
[31] Sahagun, “Hist. General de las Cosas de la Nueva España,” lib. X. cap. xxix.
[32] Ixtlilxochitl, “Hist. Chichemeca,” cap. II. third and fourth Relaciones
[33] Torquemada, “Monarquia Indiana,” vol. I. chap. xiv.
[34] Clavigero, “Hist. Antigua de Mejico,” vol. I. lib. ii. pp. 51, 52.
[35] Veytia, “Hist. Antigua de Mejico,” tome I. cap. xxv. p. 233.
[36] Torquemada, tome II. lib. vi. cap. xxiii.
[37] Veytia, “Hist. Antigua,” tome I. cap. xxvii.
[38] Tezomoc. Duran. Mendieta. Gomara. Sahagun, append. of lib. III. cap. ix. Clavigero, tome I. p. 151.
[39] Torquemada, tome II. lib. vi. cap. xxiii.
[40] Torquemada, cap. xlv. This author follows the writers whom he quotes in their spelling of proper names, and the result is often great variety.
[41] Burgoa. Botturini. Tarabal. Clavigero, “Hist. Ant.,” tome I. p. 152.
[42] Fergusson’s “History of Indian Architecture,” introd. p. 41.
[43] Ixtlilxochitl, fourth “Relacion.”
[44] Sahagun, “Historia de las Cosas de la Nueva España,” lib. VII. cap. x. to xiii.
[45] Torquemada, “Monarquia Indiana,” lib. II. cap. xii.
[46] Veytia, tome I. chap, xxxiv.
[47] Veytia, tome I. chap. xxxiv.
[48] Mariano Veytia, tome I. chap, xxviii.
[49] Humboldt, “Vue des Cordillères,” p. 29.
[50] Id. p. 27.
[51] Clavigero, tome I. lib. vii. p. 224.
[52] Veytia, tome II. chap. i.
[53] Ibid. chap. ii.
[54] Similar spindles, with whorls attached, have been found in Egypt and the Swiss Lakes.
[55] Sahagun, “Hist. de las Cosas de España,” lib. IX. cap. v.
[56] Mendieta, “Hist. Eccles. Indiana,” lib. II. cap. v.
[57] Cuauhtitlan’s Annals, translated by Sanchez Solis, “Annals of the Mexican Museum.”
[58] Veytia, tome I. chap. ix.
[59] Juarros, “Compendio de la Hist. de la Ciudad de Guatemala,” tome I. p. 87.
[60] Veytia, tome II. chap. iii.
[61] Sahagun, lib. VI. cap. xix.
[62] Sahagun, lib. VI. cap. xxi.
[63] Sahagun, lib. VI. cap. viii.
[64] Veytia, tome I. chap. xxix.
[65] Veytia, tome I. chap. xxxiii.
[66] Ibid.
[67] Ixtlilxochitl, “Relaciones,” Kingsborough, tome IX. pp. 332 and 333.
[68] Clavigero, tome I. lib. ii. p. 54.
[69] Torquemada, “Monarquia Indiana,” tome I. lib. i. cap. xvi.
[70] Ixtlilxochitl, ut supra.
[71] Veytia, tome II. chaps. ii., iii.
[72] Mariano Veytia, tome II. chap. x.
[73] Ibid. chap. xii.
[74] Hostelries.
[75] Sheets of mica were used by Red Indians to cover human bones when falling into dust.
[76] Sahagun, “Hist. de las Cosas de España.”
[77] Sahagun, Appendix to lib. III. cap. i.
[78] Sahagun, Appendix to lib. III. cap. i.
[79] Ramirez Manuscript, “Hist. Mexicana,” p. 75.
[80] Father Duran, “Hist. de las Indias,” tome II. Plate xxv.
[81] Juarros, “Hist. de Guatemala,” tome II. p. 249, 1809.
[82] Torquemada, tome II. lib. vi. cap. xxiii.
[83] Stephens, “Incidents of Travels,” vol. II. p. 316.
[84] Diaz del Castillo, tome I. chaps. xxiii. and xxxi.
[85] Herrera, “Hist. General,” Decade III. lib. VII. chap. iii. Torquemada, “Monarquia Indiana,” tome I. lib. iv. chap. xi.
[86] Cogolludo, tome I. lib. i. chap. ix.
[87] Mendieta, “Hist. Ecclesiastica Indiana,” lib. III. cap. xxi.
[88] Ibid.
[89] Herrera, “Hist. Gen.,” Decade III. lib. VII. cap. iii.
[90] Motolinia, “Icazbalceta,” treatise I.. chap. i.
[91] Sahagun, “Hist. General de las Cosas de la Nueva España,” lib. I. cap. v., and lib. II. cap. i.
[92] Bernal Diaz, “Conquest of New Spain,” tome II. chap. clxxiv.
[93] Cogolludo, “Hist. de Yucatan,” tome I. chaps, xiii., xiv., xv.
[94] Bernal Diaz, tome II. chaps, clxxv., clxxvi., clxxvii.
[95] “Origin of American Indians,” book II. chap. i. p. 46. Madrid, 1729.
[96] Juarros, “Compend. de la Hist. de la Ciudad de Guatemala,” tome I. chap. iv.
[97] Ant. Tello, “Hist. de la Nueva Galicia.” “Coleccion Icazbalceta,” tome 11. Mexico, 1866.
[98] Torquemada, “Monarquia Indiana,” lib. XIV. cap. xxiv.
[99] Ibid. cap. xxv.
[100] Clavigero, “Hist. Antig. de Mejico y de su Conquista,” tome I. lib. vii. p. 245.
[101] There were fewer in Yucatan, where they were imported.
[102] It was only cultivated towards Bacalar lagoon, nearly 100 leagues from the north coast.
[103] Landa, “Relacion de las Cosas de Yucatan,” sec. 2.
[104] From data obtained from Pablo Moreno, and a letter of the Jesuit Don Domingo, dated 1805, we can give the following list of objects destroyed by Landa:
| 5,000 | idols of various form and dimensions; |
| 13 | huge stones, which were used as altars; |
| 22 | smaller, of various shapes; |
| 27 | manuscripts on deer skins; |
| 197 | of all shapes and sizes. |
To this should be added the auto-da-fé at Mani, in which numerous manuscripts were consumed. Cogolludo, tome I. appendix to book iv. p. 479. Campeche, 1842.
[105] See Landa, “Relacion de las Cosas de Yucatan,” sec. 42, p. 333 and following.
[106] Lorenzo Bienvenida, in a letter to the King of Spain (1548), says that the monuments were deserted and the pyramids covered with large trees, and that the natives of the place lived in straw huts. The city, therefore, had been destroyed a few years before, as Mayapan had been, of which no trace was visible, whereas the monuments at T-hoo were entire, but its history has been lost.
[107] The types we give are pure Indian and not Meztizas.
[108] “The tribes who from Aztlan established themselves in Yucatan and Guatemala, had reached a certain degree of civilisation.”—Humbolt.
[109] Bernal Diaz, “Hist. de la Conquista de la Nueva España,” tome I. chap. iv.
[110] Landa, “Relacion de las Cosas de Yucatan,” sec. xx.
[111] See note at end.
[112] Cogolludo, tome I. lib. ii. caps. v. and vi.
[113] See note at end.
[114] Lizana, “Hist. de Nuestra Señora de Izamal,” published by the Abbé Brasseur.
[115] Extract from P. Lizana’s “Hist. de Nuestra Señora de Izamal,” published by the Abbé Brasseur.
[116] Diego Landa, chap. ix. p. 57.
[117] Lizana, “Hist. de Nuestra Señora de Izamal,” published by the Abbé Brasseur.
[118] Stephens, “Incidents of Travels in Yucatan,” tome II. p. 434.
[119] Cogolludo, tome I. lib. iv. cap. iii.
[120] Landa, vol. XXII. p. 125.
[121] Landa, “Relacion de las Cosas de Yucatan,” sec. xv. p. 91.
[122] Cogolludo, tome I. lib. iv. cap. xiv. Campeche Edition, 1842.
[123] Herrera, “Hist. Gen.,” Decade IV. lib. X. cap. ii.
[124] Ibid. lib. VII. cap. iv.
[125] Landa says nearly the same.
[126] Sahagun, Appendix to book II. p. 196; book VI. chaps. xxxix. to xl.
[127] Clavigero, tome I. lib. vii. pp. 165, 166, 167.
[128] That it was a temple may be inferred from Landa, sec. vi. p. 34, where he says that the main edifice at Chichen was called Cukulcan, after a prince who had come from the west.
[129] Landa, “Relacion de las Cosas de Yucatan,” sec. xlii. p. 343.
[130] Garnier, “Voyage d’Exploration dans l’Indo-Chine,” tome I. chap. iv. p. 71.
[131] By a curious coincidence, a sculptured fish having a human head is found on a Romance capital in the Church of St. Germain-des-Prés.