That same year, about the month of September, the famous Dr. Francisco Hernandez, court physician of Philip II., arrived in Mexico. He was a native of Toledo and was born about 1517 or 1518. Nothing is known of his life previous to his journey to New Spain, whither he came by royal commission, to write the natural history of the country, with reference to medicine. He consumed seven years in the discharge of his commission, making continual journeys, meeting obstacles and suffering diseases which brought him to the edge of the grave. It has been generally said thatPhilip II. supplied the expenses of this expedition with regal munificence and that it cost him 20,000 ducats; but documents published in our days, clearly show that Hernandez was given but a modest salary, although we do not know exactly the amount, with no assistance whatever for his extraordinary expenses, not even for those occasioned by his frequent journeys. Nor was he supplied the assistance usual in such cases, and he had no other helper than his own son. In spite of all this he was never discouraged in that great enterprise. In order to devote himself entirely to it, he refused to practice medicine in Mexico, ‘throwing away the opportunity of gaining more than 20,000 pesos by the practice of the healing art, and much more by occupations pursued in this country, on account of employing myself in the service of your majesty and in the consummation of the work’—as he himself says in a letter to the king. Not content with describing and making drawings of the plants and animals of New Spain he caused the efficacy of the medicines to be practically tested in the hospitals, and availing himself of his title ofprotomedico, convoked the practitioners then in the city and urged them to make similar tests and to communicate the results to him. Finally he carried to Spain, 1577, seventeen volumes of text and illustrations, in which was the natural history; and an additional volume containing various writings upon the customs and antiquities of the Indians. Copiesof all were left in Mexico, which have disappeared. He wrote the work in Latin; he translated a part of it into Spanish, and the Indians, under his direction, commenced a translation into Aztec.
Arrived in Spain, Hernandez suffered the severest blow possible for an author—instead of his great work being put promptly to press, as he had expected, it was buried in the shelves of the library of the Escorial; to be sure with all honor, for the volumes were ‘beautifully bound in blue leather and gilded and supplied with silver clasps and corners, heavy and excellently worked.’ However, this magnificent dress did not serve to protect the work, which finally perished, almost a century later, in the great conflagration of the Escorial, which took place the 7th and 8th of June, 1671, nothing being saved except a few drawings, just enough to augment our appreciation of the loss. Dr. Hernandez survived his return little more than nine years, since he died February 28, 1587.
Agustin Rivera was born at Lagos (Jalisco) on February 28, 1824. For a time he studied at the famousColegio de San Nicolas, at Morelia, and, later, at theSeminarioin Guadalajara. In 1848 he was licensed to practice law and in the same year took holy orders. He taught for some time at Guadalajara, and was, for nine years, the attorney of the Ecclesiastical Curia. He finally removed to Lagos, the city of his birth, where he still lives, and where his writings have been published. In 1867, he made a journey to Europe, visiting England, France, Italy, and Russia. His writings have been many, varied, and extensive; the complete list of his books and pamphlets, includes ninety-four titles. Among the best known and most widely mentioned are hisCompendio de la Historia antigua de Mexico(Compend of the Ancient History of Mexico),Principios criticos sobre el vireinato de la Nueva España(Critical Observations upon the Vice-Royalty of New Spain), andLa Filosofía en Nueva España(Philosophy in New Spain). Two pamphlets,Viaje á las Ruinas de Chicomoztoc(Journey to the Ruins of Chicomoztoc) andViaje á las Ruinas del Fuerte del Sombrero(Journey to the Ruins of the Fort of Sombrero), have been widely read and are often mentioned.
Our author is vigorous and clear in thought and expression. Extremely liberal in his views, much of his writing has been polemic. In argument he is shrewd and incisive; in criticism, candid but unsparing. HisPrincipios criticosis a scathing arraignment of the government of New Spain under the viceroys. HisFilosofíais a part of the same discussion. It forms a large octavo volume. It begins with presenting two Latin documents of the eighteenth century, programs of publicactos, given at theSeminarioand theColegio de Santo Tomásin Guadalajara. These serve as the basis for a severe criticism of the philosophical thoughtand teaching in Spain and New Spain during the vice-regal period. Testimonies are cited from many authors and Rivera’s comments upon and inferences from these are strong and original. In the course of the book he summarizes the scientific work really done—and there was some—in Mexico during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. He sums up his argument in eleven corollaries. Our selections are taken from theFilosofía en Nueva Españaand from a curious dialogue regarding the teaching of Indian languages.
On February 28, 1902, after many years of absence, Agustin Rivera was in Guadalajara; his completion of seventy-eight years of life was there celebrated by a large circle of his friends, old students, admirers, and readers, most brilliantly. In October, 1901, a proposition, that the national government should pension the faithful and fearless old man, was unanimously carried by the one hundred and twenty-five votes in the House of Deputies in the City of Mexico. It is pleasant to see these acts of public recognition of the value of a long life usefully spent.
My lack of pecuniary resources does not allow me to give greater bulk to this book by translating Document I. from Latin into Spanish; but those who know the Latin language and philosophywill observe that in the Department of Physics in the College of Santo Tomás in Guadalajara were taughtthe first cause,the properties of secondary causes, supernatural operations, the sacrament of the Lord’s Supper, eternity—everything, in fact, save physics. Neither the wordheat, nor the wordlight, is met with once in the program. The program cited, further accentuates ignorance of modern logic and modern metaphysics. Such was the teaching of philosophy by the Jesuits in the schools of New Spain, until the end of their instruction and existence in this country, since the publicacto, in the College of Santo Tomás, took place in 1764, and three years later they were expelled (June 25, 1767). History proves that the Jesuits were at the front in teaching in the colleges of New Spain, and iftheytaught such things, what could those teach who were in the rear?
Lucas Alaman, Adolfo Llanos, Niceto de Zamacois, Ignacio Aguilar y Marocho, and other writers, open partisans of the colonial government (few indeed in this nineteenth century) to such documents as form the matter of this Dissertation reply: “It was the logic, the metaphysics and the physics of that epoch.” The statement is false and one might say that the writers mentioned were ignorant of history, or that, knowing it, they made sport of the credulity and good faith of their readers, were it not that the intelligence and honesty of the four writers—and of others—is well established, anddid not logic teach us that there are other sources of error in judgment besides ignorance and bad faith; that a great source of errors ispreoccupation, as that of Alaman and Aguilar Marocho—for all that concerns the monarchy and viceroyalty; and a great source of errors ispassion, vehement and uncontrolled, as the love of country which sways Zamacois, Llanos, and other Spanish writers.... The statement is false, I repeat, and, in consequence, the conclusion is nul:nulla solutio. I shall prove it.
The discovery of the New World, the origin of the Americans and their magnificent ruins and antiquities, scattered over the whole country; the Aztec civilization, grand in a material way; their human sacrifices, which in fundamental meaning involved a great genesiac thought and in application were a horrible fanaticism; the Conquest of Mexico, in which present themselves:—Hernan Cortes, the first warrior of modern times, though with indelible stains; Pedro de Alvarado, Gonzalo de Sandoval, Cristobal de Olid, and Diego de Ordaz, with their feats of heroism and their crimes; Cuauhtemotzin, Xicotencatl, Cacamotzin, and the other Indian warriors with their immortal patriotism; the interesting figure of Marina; Bartolomé de Olmedo, Pedro de Gante, Bartolomé de las Casas, Juan de Zumárraga, Toribio de Motolinia, Bernardino de Sahagun, and the other missionaries surrounded by an aureole of light whichbrings posterity to its knees; all the conjunct of the Conquest, as the finest subject for an epic poem; “the Laws of the Indies,” theencomiendas, the Inquisition; Antonio Mendoza, the venerable Palafox, Fray Payo Enriquez de Rivera, the Duke of Linares, Revilla Gigedo the second, and other excellent viceroys; the fecund events of 1808; the Revolution of the Independence, the first and second empires, and many other events in the history of Mexico during its five epochs, have already been treated and ventilated in many books, pamphlets and journals—some sufficiently, others overmuch. Poetry in New Spain has been magnificently treated by my respected friend, the learned Francisco Pimentel, in Volume I. of hisHistoria de la Literatura y de las Ciencias en Mexico. ButPhilosophy in New Spainis a subject that has not been specifically treated by only one. This work has, perhaps, no other merit than novelty, which would be worth nothing without truth, supported by good testimonies. As regards Spain I shall take my testimonies from no foreign authors—lest the bourbonist writers might reject them as disaffected and prejudiced, and so shield themselves—but from Spanish writers; with the exception of one and another Mexican, accepted by all Spaniards as trustworthy, such as Alzate and Beristain.... And among Spaniards I will refrain from citing Emilio Castelar and others of the extreme left.
With regard to the public offices in New Spain, of consequence for the honor connected with them, or because of the fat salary, Señor Zamacois says:
“It has been said, in regard to official positions, that the Mexicans filled only the less important; in this, another error has been committed. The monarchs of Castille considered those born in the American colonies as Spaniards, and madeno distinctionbetween them and Peninsulars; all had equal rights and, therefore, in making an appointment, there was no question whether the person named came from the provinces of America or those of the Peninsula.... The offices and appointments were conferred in equal numbers on the sons of America and Peninsulars.”
By way of digression, I may present a few penstrokes, but they will be sufficient for any intelligent man. Padre Mariana, high authority in history, states this maxim:History takes no sides until shown a clean record. Señor Zamacois shows no clean record for his assertions. I will present mine. There were sixty-two Viceroys of Mexico, and of these fifty-nine were Spaniards of the Peninsula and three were creoles—Luiz de Velasco, native of the City of Mexico, Juan de Acuña, native of Lima, and Revilla Gigedo the second, native of Havana; in consequence, only one wasMexican. There were thirty-three Bishops of Guadalajara and of these twenty-six were Spanish Peninsulars and seven were creoles; these were ...; that is to say, only five were Mexicans. I confess my ignorance; I do not understand Señor Zamacois’s arithmetic—the equality between 26 and 7. There were thirty-four Bishops of Michoacan, and of these there were thirty Spanish Peninsulars and four creoles; these were ...; that is to say, only two were Mexicans. Thirty equals four? Please, Señor Zamacois. There were thirty-one Archbishops of Mexico, of whom twenty-nine were Spanish Peninsulars and two creoles; these were ...; that is to say, only one was Mexican. Twenty-nine Spaniards and two creoles are equal.
* * * *
Adolfo Llanos, in treating this matter, goes (as is his custom farther than Zamacois, saying that the ecclesiastical offices of importance were obtained by the creoles, not equally with the Spaniards, but preponderantly over them.) He says:
“Americans were preferred by the Spanish Kings over Europeans, in the assignment of high ecclesiastical dignities.”
Let us leave Llanos and the other blind defenders of the vice-regal government.
Modern philosophers, notable in European lands (outside of Spain) were numbered by hundreds, and the young Gamarra did nought but glean in so abundant a field. Galileo and Harvey! What brilliant and suitable examples men of great talent furnish! Harvey, in his study, with a frog in his hand. As parallels and comparisons are most useful in understanding a subject, as a recognized rule of law says that placing two opposing views face to face both are more clearly known, I venture to add—after Gamarra’s fashion—a parallel between Harvey and Domingo Soto.A frog!here I have a thing apparently vile and despicable; the Epistles of Saint Paul, here I have a thing infinitely sublime. A film to which the intestines of a frog are attached; what thing meaner? The science of theology; what thing so grand? To soil one’s hands with the blood and secretions of an animal; occupation, to all appearance, vile; to take the pen for explaining the Holy Scriptures; occupation, sacred and sublime. And yet, Domingo Soto with his scholastic commentaries on the Epistle of Saint Paul to the Romans was of no use to humanity; and Harvey, presenting himself in the great theater of the scientific world, with a frog in his hand, discovering the circulation of the blood, rendered an immense service to mankind. Domingo Soto was a Catholic, and one of the Fathers of the Councilof Trent, and Harvey was a Protestant—and yet, without doubt, the Catholic Church does not esteem the commentaries of its son Soto, and, in the Vatican’s council, has sounded the praises of the discovery of the Protestant Harvey.
1. Studies never flourished under the Colonial regime.
2. Spain in the seventeenth century and in the first and second thirds of the eighteenth century was poor and backward in philosophy, and New Spain during the same period was in the same predicament.
3. That New Spain was backward in philosophy at that time because such was the philosophy of the epoch, is false.
4. The ideas and impulse in the modern philosophical sciences, which New Spain received during the last years of the eighteenth and the early years of the nineteenth century, did not come mainly from Spain, but from the other principal nations of Europe.
5. It follows, from Spain and New Spain having been backward in philosophy, that they were also backward in theology, jurisprudence, medicine, and in all the sciences, because philosophy is the basis of all.
6. The expression, “Spain taught us what she herself knew,” is not a good excuse or exoneration.
7. The scholastic philosophy is useful; the pseudo-scholastic is prejudicial.
8. The history of the viceroyal government is most useful.
9. This dissertation is a new book.
10. “Not as a spider, nor as an ant, but as a bee.”
11. The union between Spaniards and Mexicans is very useful; but history cannot be silenced by the claim that it is a social union.
“How are you, sir?”
“How are you, Florencito? When did you arrive?”
“Yesterday.”
“I am greatly pleased that you have called to see me. What have you studied this year?”
“The Aztec language; here is the invitation to my public examination. The program was as fine as usual, since my teacher, Señor Don Agustin de la Rosa, spoke splendidly, as every year, of the philosophy and richness of the Aztec tongue.”
“Thank you. And how many students were there in the subject?”
“This year we were so many, last year therewere so many, the year before so many, and the same, more or less, so I have heard, in years gone by.”
“What a pity! They are few, almost nothing in comparison with the necessity that exists in our Republic for men who study the native tongues. But these few, at least, attend the exercises every school day?”
“No, sir; far from it! Some attend, and others not, just as they please.”
“And, the days they do attend, they study the Aztec grammar and hear it explained?”
“No, sir; by no means. Many days the teacher and we occupy ourselves in theLevilon.”
“And what is that?”
“Levilon, levilon, ton, ton.”
“I understand you, even less.”
“It is a sort of a marsellaise against cleanness and neatness of person and dress; that is to say, against politeness.”[2]
“But, man, in a college for the instruction of youth—however, let us return to our subject. In the three years you have studied Aztec, have you learned to speak it?”
“No, sir; by no means.”
“Then, what have you learned?”
“The philosophy and richness of the Aztec tongue.”
“But you must have studied the four divisions of Aztec grammar—analogy, syntax, prosody, and orthography—and by this complete study arrived at an understanding of the philosophy and richness of the language.”
“No, sir.”
“But have you not had a public examination?”
“Yes, sir; but those who were publicly examined in past years, have as little, made a complete study of the grammar, but have also learned the philosophy and richness of the Mexican tongue.”
“Come! let us see. How many years has the chair of the Aztec language been established in the Seminario at Guadalajara?”
“About thirty.”
“And during about thirty years has some priest gone forth from the institution to preach to the Indians in their native language?”
“Why, no sir! During the thirty years what has been, and is, learned is the philosophy and richness of the Aztec language. You must have seen the precious little work, by my professor, upon the beauty and richness of the Aztec language, elegantly bound, which was sent to the Paris Exposition.”
“But man—Florencito,” (rising, pacing, and puffing at my cigar) “really, all this and nothing are much the same. These programs, in which one speaks eloquently of the beauty and richness of the Aztec language are no more than pretty theories. This book upon the richness and beauty of the Aztec language, with all its elegant binding, is but a pretty theory.The practical! The practical!Let me give you my opinion in the matter briefly, and in four propositions:First, the ecclesiastical government and the civil government have the obligation and the mission of civilizing the Indians;second, for this, in each bishopric and in each State there ought to be chairs of the Indian languages spoken in the territory—for example, in the Seminary and in one of the State Colleges of Mexico, there ought to be a chair of the Aztec language; in the Seminary and State College of Queretaro, there ought to be a chair of Otomi; in the Seminary and in the State College of Morelia, there ought to be chairs of Tarascan and Matlazinca; in the Seminary and in the State College of Guadalajara, there ought to be a chair of the Cora language; in the Seminary and State College of San Luis Potosi, there ought to be a chair of the Huastec; in the Seminary and the State College of Puebla, there ought to be a chair of Aztec; in the Seminary and the State College of Jalapa there ought to be a chair of Totonaco; in the Seminary and in the State College of Oaxaca there ought to be chairs of the different indigenous languages spoken in the territory—chiefly the Mixtec and Zapotec, etc.;third, it ought to be, that from the seminaries there shall go forth priests to becurasin the Indian towns of the bishopric, who shallpreach to the Indians and catechize them in their own language;fourth, it ought to be, that from the State Colleges, primary teachers shall go forth to teach the elementary branches to the Indians of the State, in their own idiom—and shall go forthjefes politicos, who shall be able to treat with the Indians, talking to them in their own languages.”
“Sir, these things appear to me impossible.”
“Yes, I know that there can be given but two answers to my proposition and my arguments. The first is the ‘non possumus,’ ‘we cannot.’[3]One can preach in cathedrals and other magnificent temples, to an elegant gathering, afterward print the sermon and distribute copies liberally to select society; but to subject one’s self to the task of learning an indigenous tongue, and to go to preach to the Indians—that, one cannot do. One can be ajefe politicoin a city, where comforts abound, and draw a fat salary; but the abnegation and patriotism of exercising the administrative power in an Indian town—a despicable thing! Sad reply. Unhappy Mexican nation during the colonial epoch! and, unhappy Mexican nation, still, in 1891, because you yet preserve many—even very many—remnants of the colonial education, and this is theprincipalhindrance to your progress and well-being. We Mexicans, because of the education which we received from the Spanish, are muchgiven to scholastic disputes, to beautiful discourses, pretty poems, enthusiastic toasts, quixotic proclamations, projects, laws, decrees, programs of scientific education, plans of public amelioration, in Andalusian style and well-rounded periods; but, as for the practical—the Spanish sloth, the Spanish fanaticism for thestatu quo, the Indian idleness and cowardice, do but little. In theories we have the boldness of Don Quixote, and in practice we have the pusillanimity, the inability to conquer obstacles, and the phlegm of Sancho Panza.”
“My teacher, Don Agustin,” said Florencito, “has told us that Padre Sahagun and many other missionaries of the sixteenth century dedicated themselves to the study of the native tongues because they found them highly philosophical and adapted to express even metaphysical ideas.”
“That is true,” I replied, “but the Padre Sahagun and the other missionary philologists of the sixteenth century dedicated themselves to the study of the Indian languages of the country, not to detain themselves ... (in) the philosophy and richness of the Aztec language, without moving a peg to go and teach some Indian; but in order that they might use them as means for thepractical—to wit, to preach, to catechize, and to teach the Indians the civilizing truths of Christianity.”
Few men are better known throughout Mexico today than Alfredo Chavero. As a lawyer, a politician, a man of affairs and a writer, he has been eminently successful. He was born in the City of Mexico, February 1, 1841. He studied law, and began the practice of the profession at the age of twenty years. In 1862 he was elected Deputy to Congress. A Liberal in politics, he was associated with Juarez throughout the period of the French intervention. After the downfall of the Empire in 1867, he entered journalism and began his careerin letters. During the administration of Lerdo de Tejada he was in Europe, but when that government fell, he returned to Mexico and was appointed to the second position in the department of foreign affairs. He has occupied other important government positions, among them that of City Treasurer and Governor of the Federal District and has for many years been a member of the House of Deputies, of which he has at times been the presiding officer.
Señor Chavero is, probably, the foremost living Mexican authority upon the antiquities of that country. He is also an eminent historian. In both archæology and history he has written important works. At the quadricentennial celebration of the discovery of America, he was the chief member of a commission, which among other things published a great work—Antigüedades Mexicanas—which was largely devoted to facsimile reproduction of ancient Mexican picture manuscripts, before unpublished; the accompanying explanatory text was written by Chavero himself. Among other archæological works he has writtenLos dioses astronomicos de los antiguos Mexicanos(the Astronomical Gods of the Ancient Mexicans)—and studies upon thestone of the sun, and thestone of hunger. He has lately published theWheel of Years, andHieroglyphic Paintings. He was the author of the first volume of the great workMéxico á traves de los Siglos,(Mexico, Through the Centuries), a history of Mexico in five large quarto volumes. Each of these volumes dealt with a distinct epoch of Mexican history and was written by a specialist. Chavero’s volume treated Prehistoric Mexico in a masterly fashion. In biography Chavero’s lives ofSahagun,Siguenza, andBoturinideal with Spanish-Mexicans, hisItzcoatlandMontezumawith natives. He has edited, with scholarly annotation, the works ofIxtlilxochitland Muñoz Camargo’sHistoria de Tlaxcala.
But Alfredo Chavero has also written in the field of dramatic literature, some of his plays having been well received.Xochitl,QuetzalcoatlandLos Amores de Alarcon(The Loves of Alarcon) are among the best known. InXochitlandQuetzalcoatl, the romantic events of the days of the Conquest and the life of the Indians, furnish his material. In all his writing, Chavero is simple, direct, and strong; his style is graceful and his treatment interesting.
Our quotations are drawn fromMéxico á traves de los SiglosandXochitl.
Still, among the first writers of the colonial epoch we shall encounter some authentic material regarding the ancient Indians. Some chroniclers based their narratives upon hieroglyphs, which theydid not limit themselves to interpreting, but which also served them as a foundation for more extended records; contemporaries of the Conquest, they had heard from the conquered themselves, their traditional history. Others, without availing themselves of the assistance of the paintings, simply recorded the traditions in their works—and we must remember that, on account of the inadequacy of their hieroglyphic writing, the Mexicans were ever accustomed to carry the glorious deeds of their race in memory, which they taught their children, in song and story, that they might not be forgotten. Without doubt, the first works of the chroniclers suffered from the natural vagueness which is felt in expressing new ideas. They are not, and could not be, complete treatises because each wrote merely what he himself could gather. The most important personages of the vanquished people dead, in fighting for their country, few remained who knew the secrets of their history, and the greater number of these did not lend themselves to their revelation. The chroniclers, themselves, concealed something of what they learned, especially if it related to the gods and the religious calendar, for fear of reawakening the barely dormant idolatry. Also from the very first, the desire to harmonize the beliefs of the Indians, and their traditions, with the Biblical narrative, was, in part, responsible for the confusion in their writings; a desire very natural in that epoch, and which mustbe taken into account in reading the chronicles, in order to get rid of false judgments born from it. But whatever may be their defects, it cannot be denied that they constitute a most precious material, in which, seeking discreetly and logically, abundant historic treasures are encountered. We present, therefore, some discussion of the principal chroniclers and their relative importance and examine impartially the works of our historians.
At dawn Sandoval proceeded, with the brigantines to take possession of the lakelet; Alavardo was to advance from the market, and Cortes sallied from his camp, with the three iron cannon, certain that their balls would compel the besieged to surrender and would do them less damage than the fury of the allies. In his march he met many men almost dead, weakened women, and emaciated children, on their way to the Spanish camp. Some miserable beings, in order to escape from their last hold, had thrown themselves into the canals, or had fallen into them, pushed from behind by others, and were drowned. Cortes issued orders that no harm should be done them, but the allies robbed them and killed more than fifteen thousand persons. The priests and warriors, thin with hunger and worn with labor, armed with their weapons and bearing their standards, passivelyawaited the attack, on top of the temple, on house roofs, or standing in their canoes. Cortes ascended also to the roof of a house near the lake, that he might oversee the operations. He again offered peace to those who were in the canoes, and insisted that some one should go to speak with Cuauhtemoc. Twoprincipalesagreed to go and, after a long time theCihuacoatlreturned with them to say that his king did not care to speak of peace. Some five hours having passed in these transactions, Cortes commanded to open fire with the cannons. It was three in the afternoon, when Cuauhtemoc’s shell-horn was heard for the last time; the Mexicans on the east and south precipitated themselves upon their opponents and the canoes attacked the brigantines.
Cuauhtemoc, when it was no longer in human power to resist, preferred flight to surrender, and in order to succeed, distracted the attention of his opponents. While these, battling and routing the Mexicans, penetrated into their last refuge from the south and east, and while Sandoval was destroying the fleet of canoes, Cuauhtemoc, with Tecuichpoch and the chief dignitaries, sallied in canoes from Tlacochcalco—gained the western canal, whence, by great labor, he reached the lake. He directed himself toward the opposite shore, to seek refuge in Cuauhtlalpan.
But Garcia Holguin saw the canoes of the fugitives and setting the sails of his brigantine,gave chase; already he had them within range and the gunners were in the prow, ready to shoot, when Cuauhtemoc rose and said—‘Do not shoot; I am the king of Mexico; take me and lead me to Malintzin, but let no one harm the queen.’ With Cuauhtemoc were ..., the only dignitaries, high-priests, andprincipales, who had survived. All were transferred to the brigantine.... Cortes, as we have said, was upon the roof of a house in the quarter of Amaxac, a house belonging to aprincipal, named Aztacoatzin. He caused it to be decorated with rich mantles and brightly colored mattings, for the reception of the imperial captive. By his side were Marina and Aguilar, Pedro de Alavardo and Cristobal de Olid. The prisoners arrived led by Sandoval and Holguin. Cortes rose and, with the noble respect of a conqueror for the unfortunate hero, embraced Cuauhtemoc tenderly. Tears came to the eyes of the captive and, placing his hand upon the hilt of the conqueror’s poignard, said to him the following words with which at once succumbed a king, his race, his native land, and his gods—‘Malintzin, after having done what I could in defense of my city and my nation, I come, perforce and a prisoner, before thy person and thy power; take, now, this dagger and kill me.’
* * * *
Xochitlis a fair example of Chavero’s dramas. It comprises three acts and is in verse. There arebut five actors—Cortes, Marina (his Indian interpreter and mistress), Xochitl (a beautiful Indian girl, supposed to be Marina’s sister), Bernal Diaz del Castillo (faithful soldier of Cortes and best chronicler of the Conquest), and Gonzalo Alaminos (brought, though a mere youth, from Spain, by Cortes, as a page). Xochitl is, really, an Aztec maiden who, when the Spaniards first appeared, was serving in the temple; Gonzalo, wounded, was brought a prisoner to the temple, where he is nursed by Xochitl, between whom and himself ardent love arises. After the capture of the city, they are separated and Xochitl is sent, as a slave to Tabasco, a present to Marina’s unknown sister. Marina summons her sister to Mexico; she starts but dies upon the journey and Xochitl, substituted for her, reaches the city and is taken at once into Cortes’ house, by her supposed sister. Cortes, having tired of Marina, falls in love with Xochitl; his affection is not reciprocated. Marina, knowing that the love of Cortes has cooled, though she does not know the new object of his love, remorseful for her treachery to her own people and smarting under the contempt of Indian and Spaniard both, is ever complaining and querulous. Xochitl, terrified at Cortes’ love, consults Bernal and makes known the facts to Gonzalo. They plan to flee and set an hour for meeting. Cortes, anxious to rid himself of Marina, determines to send her to Orizaba, to wed Jaramillo; sending for Gonzalohe orders him to accompany her and arranges the departure at the very time set for elopement, by the lovers. The moment is one of public tumult. Gonzalo keeps his appointment but, at the critical moment, Xochitl’s courage fails. Marina appears and Gonzalo abruptly leaves; he is shot in the tumult. Meantime the two women converse; Xochitl narrates the story of her life, her substitution for Marina’s sister, her love for Gonzalo and Cortes’ love for her. They separate in anger. Cortes entering, announces Gonzalo’s death, and mourns him, confessing him to be his natural son. Xochitl, in her agony, tells Cortes of the love there had been between Gonzalo and herself; Marina, appearing at this moment, hands the unhappy girl the weapon with which she kills herself. As she dies, she reveals her complete identity, she is the last survivor of the royal house, the sister of Cuauhtemoc. Cortes overwhelmed by grief for Gonzalo, loss of Xochitl, and weariness of Marina, sends the latter at once to Orizaba, in Bernal’s care.
Bernal and Gonzalo, meeting, discuss the recent conquest of Nueva Galicia by the infamous Nuño de Guzman.
Gonzalo. “If to lay waste fields and towns,If to assassinate war captives,If to violate pledged faith,Is to be Christian, I admitThat Don Nuño de GuzmanIs of Christians, the very type.The Tlaxcallans complain,Who have been our faithful allies,That, like beasts of burden,He has led them overHard roads, not fighting—As they were led to expect—But, bearing on their shouldersGreat, heavy burdens;And that those, who, from fatigue,Bernal, could go no further,Were instanter thrown to the dogs,Or left, without assistance,In the forests. Their shouldersCovered with wounds, I have seen;Upon frightful chafed spots,The memory of which appals me,They carried our provisions;Meantime, Don Nuño, tranquil,Sought renown in war,Or enriched himself,By plundering defenseless villages.Imagine, friend Bernal,If he mistreats our allies,What he would do to enemies.”
Gonzalo. “If to lay waste fields and towns,If to assassinate war captives,If to violate pledged faith,Is to be Christian, I admitThat Don Nuño de GuzmanIs of Christians, the very type.The Tlaxcallans complain,Who have been our faithful allies,That, like beasts of burden,He has led them overHard roads, not fighting—As they were led to expect—But, bearing on their shouldersGreat, heavy burdens;And that those, who, from fatigue,Bernal, could go no further,Were instanter thrown to the dogs,Or left, without assistance,In the forests. Their shouldersCovered with wounds, I have seen;Upon frightful chafed spots,The memory of which appals me,They carried our provisions;Meantime, Don Nuño, tranquil,Sought renown in war,Or enriched himself,By plundering defenseless villages.Imagine, friend Bernal,If he mistreats our allies,What he would do to enemies.”
Gonzalo. “If to lay waste fields and towns,If to assassinate war captives,If to violate pledged faith,Is to be Christian, I admitThat Don Nuño de GuzmanIs of Christians, the very type.The Tlaxcallans complain,Who have been our faithful allies,That, like beasts of burden,He has led them overHard roads, not fighting—As they were led to expect—But, bearing on their shouldersGreat, heavy burdens;And that those, who, from fatigue,Bernal, could go no further,Were instanter thrown to the dogs,Or left, without assistance,In the forests. Their shouldersCovered with wounds, I have seen;Upon frightful chafed spots,The memory of which appals me,They carried our provisions;Meantime, Don Nuño, tranquil,Sought renown in war,Or enriched himself,By plundering defenseless villages.Imagine, friend Bernal,If he mistreats our allies,What he would do to enemies.”
* * * *
Xochitl confers with Bernal as to what she ought to do:
(Pause.)
(She departs.)
* * * *
Cortes communicates his plans for Marina—first to Gonzalo, then to Marina, herself.(Pause.)
* * * *
In 1882, General Riva Palacio, author and statesman, published a little bookLos Ceros(The Zeros), under thenom-de-plumeof Cero. It was a good natured criticism of contemporary authors, written in a satirical vein. We will close with some quotations from it regarding Chavero.
“Well, then, let us study Chavero upon his two weak sides, that is to say upon his strong sides, because, it is a curious thing, that we always say—‘this is my forte,’ when we are speaking of somepenchant, while common opinion at once translates, ‘this is his weakness’; strength is the impregnable side, but we call the more vulnerable, the strong side.
“Archæology and the drama! Does it seem to you the title of a comedy? But no, dear sir, these are the passions of our friend, Alfredo Chavero.
“True, archæologists and dramatists are lacking in this land so full of antiques and comicalities; but theatrical management is difficult and the way is sown—worse than with thorns—almost with bayonets.
“Alfredo has produced good dramas, but nobly dominated by the patriotic spirit, he has wished to place upon the boards, such personages as the Queen Xochitl, and Meconetzin, and with these personages no one gains a reputation here in Mexico.... Our society, our nation, has no love for its traditions. Perhaps those writers are to blame for this, who ever seek for the actors in their story, personages of the middle ages, who love and fight in fantastic castles on the banks of the Rhine, or ladies and knights of the times of Orgaz and Villamediana; those novelists, who disdain the slightest reference in their works, to the banquets, dress, and customs of our own society; who long to give aristocratic flavor to their novels, by picturing Parisian scenes in Mexico and sketching social classes, which they have seen through the pages of Arrsenne Houssaye, Emile Zola, Henri Bourger, or Paison de Terrail; and our poets, who ever speak of nightingales and larks, gazelles and jacinths, without ever venturing to give place, in their doleful ditties, to thecuitlacoche, nor thezentzontl, nor thecocomitl, nor theyoloxochitl.”
“As the Arabs have their Hegira, the Christians their era, and the Russians their calendar without the Gregorian correction, so Chaverito[4]has his personal era and chronology. The eolithic or neolithic ages signify nought to him, nor the jurassic nor the cretaceous periods; he counts and divides his periods in a manner peculiar to himself and comprehensible to us, the ignoramuses in geology, archæology, and palæontology.
“Thus, for example, treating of archæology he says: ‘in Manuel Payno’s boyhood’—when he refers to preadamite man; of men like Guillermo Prieto, he says ‘they are of the geological horizon of Guillermo Valle’; soldiers, like Corona, he calls ‘volcanic formations’; the customs’ house receipts he names ‘marine sediments’; ‘the stone age,’ in his nomenclature, signifies the time before he was elected Deputy;—when he says ‘before the creation,’ it is understood that he refers to days when he had not yet been Governor of the Federal District; and if he says ‘after Christ,’ he must be supposed to speak of an epoch posterior to his connection with the State Department; and it is claimed, that he is so skilled in understanding hieroglyphs, that he has deciphered the whole history of Xochimilco, in the pittings left by small-pox, on the face of a son of that pueblo.”
“Suppose, dear reader, you encounter one of those stones, so often found in excavating in Mexico, a fragment on which are to be seen, coarsely cut, some engravings, or horrible reliefs, or shapeless figures—have it washed, and present it to Chavero.
“Alfredo will wrinkle his forehead, take a pinch of snuff, join his hands behind him, and displaying so much of his paunch as possible, will spit out for your benefit, a veritable discourse:
“‘The passage which this stone represents is well known; it figures in an episode in the great war between the Atepocates,[5]warlike population of southern Anahuac, and the Escuimiles, their rivals, in which the latter were finally conquered. The person standing is Chilpocle XI, of the dynasty of the Chacualoles, who, by the death of his father Chichicuilote III, inherited the throne, being in his infancy, and his mother, the famous Queen Apipisca II, the Semiramis of Tepachichilco, was regent during his youth. The person kneeling is Chayote V, unfortunate monarch of the vanquished, who owed the loss of his kingdom to the treachery of his councillor, Chincual, who is behind him. The two persons near the victor are his son, who was afterward the celebrated conqueror Cacahuatl II, and his councillor, the illustrious historian and philosopher Guajalote, nicknamed Chicuase, for the reason that he had six fingers on his left hand, and who was the chronicler of the revolt and destruction of the tribes ofthe Mestlapiques. The two-pointed star-symbols, which are seen above, are the arms of the founder of the dynasty, Chahiustl the Great, and this stone was sculptured during the golden age of the arts of the Atepotecas, when, among their sculptors figured the noted Ajoloth, among their painters the most famous Tlacuil, and among their architects the celebrated Huasontl.’”
Julio Zárate was born April 12, 1844, at Jalapa, in the State of Vera Cruz, where he received his education. Since he was twenty-three years of age he has been continuously in public life. In 1867 he was elected to the Chamber of Deputies, of which he remained a member for twenty-five years, being, at times, president, vice-president, or secretary of the body. In 1879 and 1880 he wasthe Assistant Secretary of Foreign Affairs for the Republic, in 1884 to 1886 Secretary of State of the State of Vera Cruz, and from 1896 to the present time he has been a Justice of the Supreme Court of Mexico.
Through all this long period of active public service, he has found time for literary work. From 1870 to 1875 was an editor ofEl Siglo XIX(The Nineteenth Century), in its time one of the most important journals of the Mexican capital. He wrote the third volume of the great work on national history—México á traves de los Siglos(Mexico Through the Centuries), treating of the War of Independence. For twenty years past, from 1883, he has been Professor of General History in the National Normal School. He has written two text-books, one a compend of general history, the other of the history of Mexico. He has also been a contributor to various literary journals. While in the Chamber of Deputies he was known for his oratorical ability and his speeches were often notable for form and thought. He is a member of many learned societies at home and abroad—amiembro de numeroof theSociedad Mexicana de Geografía y Estadistica(Mexican Society of Geography and Statistics).
Our selections are fromMéxico á traves de los Siglos.
Supporting himself on the opinion of the Assessor Bracho, the Commandant General, Don Nicolás Salcedo had already, since the 26th, ordered the execution. After the degradation (from the priestly office) had been concluded, the sentence of death and confiscation of his goods was made known to Hidalgo on the same day—the 29th—and he was told to select a confessor to impart to him the last religious consolations. The illustrious promulgator of independence selected Friar José Mariá Rojas, who had been notary of the ecclesiastical process instituted by the Bishop of Durango. In his prison, which was the room under the tower of the chapel of the Royal Hospital, he received kind and compassionate treatment from his two guards, Ortega and Guaspe (a Spaniard), alcaldes of that prison, to whom he showed his gratitude in two ten-line poems written by himself with a piece of coal upon the wall, the evening of his death.
The 30th of July, the last day of his life, dawned and in his last hours he showed the greatest calmness. “He noticed,” says Bustamente, “that at breakfast they had given him less milk than usual, and asked for more, saying that it ought not to beless, just because it waslast.... At the moment of marching to the place of execution, he remembered that he had left some sweets under his pillow; he returned for them and dividedthem among the soldiers, who were to shoot him.” At seven in the morning he was taken to a place behind the hospital, where the sentence was executed; he did not die at the first discharge, but after falling to the ground received numerous bullets. His body found sepulchre in the Chapel of San Antonio of the Convent of San Francisco, and his head and those of Allende, Aldama and Jiménez were carried to Guanajuato and placed in cages of iron at each one of the corners of the Alhondiga[6]of Granaditas, where they remained until 1821, when they were taken to the Ermita de San Sebastian. On the door of the Alhondiga, by order of the Intendant, Fernando Pérez Marañón, the following inscription was placed:
“The heads of Miguel Hidalgo, Ignacio Allende, Juan Aldama, and Mariano Jiménez, notorious deceivers and leaders of the revolution; they sacked and stole the treasures of God’s worship and of the royal treasury; they shed, with the greatest atrocity, the blood of faithful priests and just magistrates; and, they were the cause of all the disasters, misfortunes, and calamities which we here experience and which afflict, and are deplored by, all the inhabitants of this, so integral, part of the Spanish nation.
“Placed here by order of the Señor Brigadier, Felix María Calleja del Rey, illustrious conqueror of Aculco, Guanajuato and Calderon, and Restorerof the Peace in this America. Guanajuato, 14 of October, 1811.”
But, the hour of reparation, though tardy, arrived; one of the first acts of the independent and liberated nation was to consecrate the memory of its martyrs and to reward the efforts of its loyal sons, and on the thirteenth anniversary of the gloriousGrito de Dolores(The Cry of Dolores, i. e., the motto of independence) the heads of Hidalgo, Allende, Aldama, and Jiménez, slowly become fleshless in the cages of Granaditas, and their other remains buried in the humble cemetery of Chihuahua, were received with solemn pomp at the Capital city and a grateful people bore them to rest forever in the magnificent sepulchre, before destined for the Spanish viceroys; the names of those heroes and of other eminent leaders, were inscribed in letters of gold in the Hall of Congress, and those of all will remain in indestructible characters in Mexican hearts.
Still fresh the laurels just gained in San Agustin, the valiant youth proceeded to the province which had been assigned to him as the seat of his campaign, and early in September advanced with three thousand men to Medellin, after attacking a Royalist convoy at the Puente del Rey and taking ninety prisoners of the troops that guarded it.There Bravo was to cover himself with an immortal glory, without counterpart in history.
His father, General Leonardo Bravo, since the month of May prisoner of the Royalists, had been condemned to death in Mexico—and to the same fate were destined José María Piedras and Luciano Pérez, apprehended at the same time, after the sally from Cuautla. The viceroy had suspended the execution of the sentence, in the hope that the prisoner might influence his sons, Nicolás and his brothers, to desert the files of the Independents and to ask for pardon, under which condition he offered him his life. But the youthful leader, although authorized by Morelos to save his father by accepting the pardon offered by the viceroyal government, believed he ought not to trust in the pledges given, since he remembered that some time before, the brothers Orduñas were victims of the Royalist Colonel José Antonio Andrade, who had promised them pardon but, when he had them in his power, commanded their execution.
Morelos then wrote to the viceroy, Vanegas, offering the surrender of eight hundred prisoners, mostly Spanish, as the price of Leonardo Bravo’s life. The viceroyal government, in turn, refused this proposition and on September 13, 1812, General Bravo and his fellow prisoners, Piedras and Pérez, suffered, in Mexico, the penalty of the garrote, the former displaying, in his last moments, that calm and valor, of which he had given somany proofs in battle. In communicating this sad news to Nicolás Bravo, Morelos ordered him to put all the Spanish prisoners he held—some three hundred in number—to the knife. Let us hear the hero himself narrate his noble action, with the simplicity of one of Plutarch’s characters:
“In effect, he said to me in the proposition made to me in Cuernavaca, that the Viceroy Vanegas offered me amnesty and the life of my father, if I would yield myself.... When Morelos was in Tehuacan he appointed me General-in-chief of the forces, which were operating in the province of Vera Cruz.... I commenced to fight him (Labaqui) and, after an action lasting forty-eight hours, gained a complete victory, making two hundred prisoners, whom I sent under escort to the province of Vera Cruz, and returned with all my wounded to Tehuacan to give account of the action of arms confided to me. In the interview which I had with Morelos, he told me that he was about to send a communication to the viceroy, Vanegas, offering him, for my father’s life, eight hundred Spanish prisoners, and that he would inform me of the result. I immediately returned to the Province of Vera Cruz, where, five days after leaving Tehuacan, I had another favorable action near Puente Nacional, attacking a convoy, which was proceeding to Jalapa with supplies; I took ninety prisoners and betook myself to Medellin, where I established my headquarters and fromwhere I threatened the city of Vera Cruz, with the three thousand men who were under my command. After a few days Morelos notified me that the proposition which he had made to the viceroy had not been accepted and that he (the viceroy) had, on the contrary, commanded that my father be put to the garrote and that he was already dead; he commanded me at the same time to order that all the Spanish prisoners in my power be put to the knife, and informed me that he had ordered the same to be done with the four hundred, who were in Zacatula and other points; I received this notice at four in the afternoon and it moved me so much that I commanded the nearly three hundred that I had at Medellin to prepare for death and ordered the chaplain (a monk named Sotomayor) to aid them; but during the night, not being able to sleep, I reflected, that the reprisals I was about to practice would greatly diminish the credit of the cause which I defended, and that by adopting a conduct contrary to the viceroy’s I would secure better results, an idea which pleased me far more than my first resolution; then there presented itself the difficulty of palliating my disobedience to the order I had received, if I carried my resolve into effect; with these thoughts, I occupied myself the whole night until four o’clock in the morning, when I resolved to pardon them in a public manner, which should produce the desired effects in favor of the cause of independence; with this end in view, Iwithheld my decision until eight in the morning, when I ordered my troops to draw up in the form usual in cases of execution; the prisoners were brought out and placed in the centre, where I informed them that the viceroy, Vanegas, had exposed them to death that day, in not having accepted the proposition made in their favor for the life of my father, whom he had given to the garrote in the Capital; that I, not caring to parallel such conduct, had determined, not only to spare their lives for the moment, but to give them entire freedom to go where they pleased. To this, filled with joy they replied, that no one desired to leave, that all remained at the service of my division, which they did, with the exception of five merchants of Vera Cruz, who on account of business interests were given passports for that city; among these was a Senor Madariaga who, afterward, in union with his companions, sent me, in appreciation, the gift of sufficient cloth to make clothing for a full battalion.”
Never, in past times nor in modern ages, could history record in its pages so noble an action; and never has human magnanimity expressed its lofty deeds with more sublime simplicity than that of the Mexican hero in the document, which we have just copied. In the midst of that war of extermination, Bravo displays the noble sentiment of forgiveness as a supreme protest of humanity whose laws were being disregarded and trampled under foot; he condemns the barbarous system of reprisals; heteaches the conquerors, who immolated without exception so many prisoners as fell into their hands, to respect the life of the conquered; in contrast to Venegas, Calleja, Cruz (Alaman’s hero), Trujillo, Llano, Porlier, Castillo Bustamente, and so many others, stained with Mexican blood and thirsting for vengeance, he presents the spotless figure of the patriot giving life and liberty to the prisoners in his power; and, he does this when he knows that his noble father, after a prolonged captivity, has succumbed under a punishment reserved for thieves and assassins; and he forgives, when his feared and respected leader orders him to punish. He restrains his great grief and in the reflections to which he yields himself, on the receipt of that order, he does not think of the blood of his father, yet warm; he thinks only of his country’s interests,he believes that the reprisals which he is ordered to practice will greatly diminish the credit of the cause of independence and that, by observing a conduct contrary to that of the viceroy, he would secure better results; he encounters but the one difficultythat he cannot palliate his responsibility in disobeying the order which he has received; and, after meditating all night, he resolves to pardon the prisonersin a public manner, in order that the pardon may secure all the good results desirable in favor of the cause of independence. Bravo, on that day, conquered, for his country, titles of universal respect and rehabilitated human dignity in that period of unbridled cruelty.