Chapter 31

[VII-27]Copies of plates inMayer's Obs., p. 32, pl. iii.;Id.,Mex. Aztec, etc., vol. ii., pp. 218-19.[VII-28]Dupaix says of this image: 'Elle participe un peu du style égyptien. Elle est couverte de trois vêtements qui croisent l'un sur l'autre symétriquement, et qui sont bordés de franges. La tête est ornée de tresses qui font deviner le sexe; les oreilles et le cou sont parés de bijoux; enfin toute cette figure est étrange.' 2d exped., p. 49. This image in the opinion of M. Lenoir,Antiq. Mex., tom. ii., div. i., pp. 60-1, represents the Mexican goddess Toci, and the preceding one the god of war, Huitzilopochtli. These images are now in the Mexican Museum, and plates of them were published by Sr Gondra, inPrescott,Hist. Conq. Mex., tom. iii., pp. 90-5, pl. xvii., who by no means agrees with Lenoir's conclusions identifying them with Aztec deities, although he agrees with Dupaix respecting their probable use as chandeliers.[VII-29]Authorities on antiquities of Zachila.Dupaix, 2d exped., pp. 44-51, pl. xlvii., fig. 95-116;Kingsborough, vol. v., pp. 269-78, vol. vi., pp. 458-63, vol. iv., pl. xlvii.-li., fig. 96-117. Kingsborough also attributes fig. 118-19 to Zachila, but according to the official edition the relics represented by those numbers came from Tizatlan in Tlascala.Lenoir, inAntiq. Mex., tom. ii., div. i., pp. 57-63. The aboriginal name of the place was Zaachillatloo.Dupaix, pp. 44-5. Brasseur,Hist. Nat. Civ., tom. iii., p. 47, speaks of a fortress visited by several travelers, built by Zaachila, the great Zapotec conqueror, on the top of a lofty rock 25 leagues east of Oajaca. Mention of ruins and two cuts of figures inIlustracion Mej., tom. iii., pp. 367-8, 480;EscaleraandLlana,Mej. Hist. Descrip., p. 226.[VII-30]EscaleraandLlana,Mej. Hist. Descrip., p. 226;Fossey,Mex., p. 376.[VII-31]Liubá, 'Sepultura;' Miquitlan, 'infierno ó lugar de tristeza.'Dupaix, 2d exped., p. 30. Leoba, or Luiva, 'sépulture;'Miguitlan, 'lieu de désolation, lieu de tristesse.'Humboldt,Vues, tom. ii., pp. 278-9. Yopaa, Lyoba, or Yobaa, 'terre des tombes;' Mictlan, 'séjour des Morts.'Brasseur de Bourbourg,Hist. Nat. Civ., tom. i., pp. 304-5, tom. iii., p. 9. Liobáá, 'place of rest.'Soc. Mex. Geog., Boletin, tom. vii., p. 170.[VII-32]'Uno, llamado Mictlan, que quiere decir infierno ó lugar de muertos, á do hubo en tiempos pasados, (segun hallaron las muestras) edificios mas notables y de ver que en otra parte de la Nueva España. Hubo un templo del demonio y aposentos de sus ministros, maravillosa cosa á la vista, en especial una sala como de artesones, y la obra era labrada de piedra de muchos lazos y labores.'Mendieta,Hist. Ecles., pp. 395-6;Burgoa,Descrip. Geog., tom. ii., fol. 259, etc.[VII-33]'Du haut de la forteresse de Mitla, la vue plonge dans la vallée et se repose avec tristesse sur des roches pelées et des solitudes arides, image de destruction propre à relever l'effet des palais de Liobaa. Un torrent d'eau salée (?), qui se gonfle avec la tempête, coule au milieu des sables poudreux qu'il entraîne avec lui. Les rives sont sèches et sans ombrages; à peine voit-on de distance en distance quelques nopals nains, ou quelques poivriers du Pérou, aussi maigres que le terrain où ils ont pris racine. Seulement, du côté du village, la verdure sombre des magueys et des cactus donne au tableau l'aspect d'un jardin d'hiver planté de buis et de sapins.'Fossey,Mexique, p. 371.[VII-34]Humboldt,Vues, tom. ii., pp. 278-85, pl. xvii-viii., fol. ed., pl. xlix-l;Id., inAntiq. Mex., tom. i., div. ii., pp. 28-30, supl. pl. viii.;Id.,Essai Pol., pp. 263-5. Humboldt speaks of Martin as 'un architecte mexicain très-distingué.'Dupaix, 2d exped., pp. 30-44, pl. xxix-xlvi., fig. 78-93;Kingsborough, vol. v., pp. 255-68, vol. vi., pp. 447-56, vol. iv., pl. xxvii-xli., fig. 81-95;Lenoir, inAntiq. Mex., tom. i., div. ii., pp. 16, 23-4, 52-7. Mühlenpfordt,Mejico, tom. i., pref., p. 5, claims to have been for some time Director of road-construction in the state of Oajaca, and states his intention of publishing at some future time 18 or 20 large copper-plate engravings illustrating the antiquities of Mitla and others. These plates, so far as I know, have never been given to the public. Carriedo accompanied Mühlenpfordt, or Mihelenpforott as he writes the name, and published some of the drawings, perhaps all, in theIlustracion Mejicana, tom. ii., pp. 493-8. Some of the German artists' descriptive text is also quoted from I know not what source.Tempsky's Mitla, pp. 250-3, with plates which must have been made up for the most part from other sources than the author's own observations. García's visit,Soc. Mex. Geog., Boletin, tom. vii., pp. 271-2. Sawkin's exploration, inMayer's Observations, p. 28, et seq., with plates. It will be shown later that Mr Sawkins' drawings are without value to the archæological student. Fossey's account,Mexique, pp. 365-70;Charnay,Ruines Amér., pp. 261-9, phot. ii-xviii.;Viollet-le-Duc, inId., pp. 74-104, with cuts. After Charnay had completed, as he thought, the work of photographing the ruins, all his negatives were spoiled for want of proper varnish. He was therefore compelled to return alone, since he had exhausted the somewhat limited patience of his native assistants, and to work day and night to take a new set of pictures. Müller,Reisen, tom. ii., pp. 279-81, seems also to have made a personal exploration. Other references for Mitla containing no original information are as follows:—Baldwin's Anc. Amer., pp. 117-22, with two cuts from Charnay and two from Tempsky, all given in my text.Gallatin, inAmer. Ethno. Soc., Transact., vol. i., p. 173;Bradford's Amer. Antiq., pp. 85-6;Larenaudière, inNouvelles Annales des Voy., tom. xxxiv., pp. 121-2;Gondra, inPrescott,Hist. Conq. Mex., tom. iii., pp. 90-5, pl. xvii.;Mayer's Mex. as it Was, pp. 251-3;Id.,Mex. Aztec, vol. ii., pp. 213-16;Klemm,Cultur-Geschichte, tom. v., pp. 157-60;Morelet,Voyage, tom. i., pp. 270-1;Id.,Travels, p. 92;Müller,Amerikanische Urreligionen, p. 462;Prescott's Mex., vol. i., p. 14, vol. iii., pp. 404-6;Malte-Brun,Précis de la Géog., tom. vi., p. 463;Mexicanische Zustände, tom. i., pp. 403-4;Wappäus,Mex. Guat., p. 162;Lemprière,Mexique, p. 144;Hassel,Mex. Guat., p. 255;Hermosa,Manual Geog., p. 135;EscaleraandLlana,Mex., pp. 327-32, 225, same as inFossey;Lafond,Voyages, tom. i., p. 139;Bonnycastle's Span. Amer., vol. i., p. 154, vol. ii., p. 233;D'Orbigny,Voyage, p. 356;Conder's Mex. Guat., vol. ii., pp. 130-4;Dally,Races Indig., pp. 16-17;Macgillivray's Life Humboldt, pp. 314-15;Mills' Hist. Mex., p. 158;Mexico in 1842, p. 77;Brasseur de Bourbourg,Hist. Nat. Civ., tom. ii., p. 105;Larenaudière,Mex. Guat., pl. ii-vi., from Dupaix;Delafield's Antiq. Amer., pp. 55, 59-60.[VII-35]Charnay, phot. xvii., gives a general view of the ruins, from which, however, no clear idea can be formed of the arrangement of the structures. The buildings are named or numbered as follows by the different authors; Dupaix numbers them as they are marked on my plan; Carriedo and Mühlenpfordt unite Nos. 1 and 2 under the name of 1st Palace, making No. 3 No. 2, and No. 4 No. 3; Charnay's 1st or grand palace is the northern building of No. 1; his 2d is the eastern building of the same; his 3d and 4th are the northern and western buildings respectively of No. 2. My No. 3 is called by him the House of the Curate, and No. 4 is only mentioned by him without name or number.[VII-36]At the Conquest the ruins covered an immense area, but they now consist of six palaces and three ruined pyramids.Charnay,Ruines Amér., p. 261.[VII-37]Dupaix's ground plan, pl. xxix., fig. 78, represents such a southern building and mound, although very slight, if any, traces remained of the former at the time of his visit. Martin's plan, given by Humboldt, shows two shorter mounds without buildings; while Carriedo's plan locates no structure whatever south of the court, and I have omitted it in my plan.[VII-38]The dimensions are very nearly those of the plans of Martin and Castañeda, who differ only very slightly. The dimensions given by the different authorities are as follows: A. 12½×47½ varas,Castañeda; 13¼×46½ varas,Martin, inHumboldt; 40 mètres long,Charnay; 180 feet long,Tempsky; 132 feet long,Fossey. C. 22×22 varas,CastañedaandMartin;d, 7×35½ varas,Castañeda; 7½×34½ varas,Martin. Walls 1½ to 3½ varas thick,Castañeda; 1½ varas,Martin. Height 5 to 6 mètres,Humboldt; 14 feet,Fossey. The height of the inner columns, to be spoken of later, shows something respecting the original height of the walls.[VII-39]Charnay, p. 264, describes the material of this filling as 'terre battue, mêlée de gros cailloux.' His photographs of walls where the facing has fallen show in some places a mass of large irregular stones, even laid with some regularity in a few instances; in other parts of the ruins there seem to be very few stones, but only a mass of earth or clay; and in still other parts the wall has every appearance of regular adobes. Dupaix, p. 35, says that sand and lime are mixed with the earth. 'El macizo, ó grueso de las paredes se compone de una tierra mezclada y beneficiada con arena y cal.' 'De tierra preparada, hollada ó beneficiada cuando fresca y pastosa.' Tempsky, p. 251, declares the material to be rough boulders in cement. Humboldt,Vues, tom. ii., p. 283, speaks of 'une masse d'argile qui paroît remplir l'intérieur des murs.'[VII-40]'Los compartimientos divididos por unos tableros cuadrilongos, terminados por unas molduras cuadradas que sobresalen á la linea de la muralla, contienen en sus planos unas grecas de alto relieve de una bella invencion, pues sus dibujos presentan unos enlaces complicados arreglados á una exactisima geometría, con una grande union entre las piedras que los componen, las que son de varios gruesos, y configuraciones; ademas se advierte una perfecta nivelacion en toda esta admirable ensambladura.'Dupaix, 2d exped., p. 31. A mosaic of soft sandstone cut in blocks 7×2⅛×1 inches, and all forming a smooth exterior surface.Tempsky's Mitla, pp. 251-2, with a very faulty cut. The statement about the smooth surface is certainly erroneous, as is probably that respecting the size of the blocks. 'Ces arabesques forment une sorte de mosaïque, composée de petites pierres carrées, qui sont placées avec beaucoup d'art, les unes à côté des autres.'Humboldt,Vues, tom. ii., p. 283; with cuts of three styles of this mosaic from Martin. 'Briquettes de différentes grandeurs.' The modern church is built of stone from the ruins. The natives carry away the blocks of mosaic in the belief that they will turn to gold.Charnay,Ruines Amér., p. 252, 263-5. Phot. v-vi., view of southern façade. 22 different styles of grecques on this front.Fossey,Mexique, pp. 367-8. Cuts of 16 different styles inIlustracion Mej., tom. ii., p. 501.[VII-41]An Indian woman was reported to have one of the heads from these holes, built into the walls of her house, but it could not be found.Dupaix, 2d exped., p. 31.[VII-42]Besides the photograph copied above, Charnay's photographs, vii.-viii., present views from the east and west, showing that the same style of construction and ornamentation extends completely round the building. Dupaix's plate xxx. represents this façade, but shows only a small portion of the stone-work. Kingsborough gives in its place a magnificent plate, 1×5 feet, showing the whole front restored in all its details; he gives also the plate fromAntiq. Mex., but refers it to the palace No. 2. pl. xxxi., fig. 85. See description of the walls quoted from Burgoa, inSoc. Mex. Geog., Boletin, tom. vii., pp. 170-3.[VII-43]5.8 mètres high; one third of the height buried in the ground.Humboldt,Vues, tom. ii., p. 282. 4 varas above surface, 2 varas below, 1 vara diameter.Id., inAntiq. Mex., suppl. pl. viii. Of the material, Humboldt says: 'Quelques personnes, très-instruites en minéralogie, m'ont dit que la pierre est un beau porphyre amphibolique; d'autres m'ont assuré que c'est un granite porphyritique.' 12 feet high, 9½ feet in circumference.Fossey,Mex., pp. 367-8. About 14 feet high,Charnay,Ruines Amér., p. 263; 5½ varas high, 1 vara in diameter, material granite,Dupaix, p. 31. Over 5 varas high.Burgoa, inSoc. Mex. Geog., Boletin, tom. vii., p. 171. 12 feet high, 4 feet diameter.Tempsky's Mitla, p. 253. 10 feet 10½ inches above ground, over 6 feet below, 3⅓ varas in circumference; material porphyry.Ilustracion Mej., tom. ii., pp. 495-6. So large that two men can hardly reach round them, 5 fathoms high.Mendieta,Hist. Ecles., pp. 395-6. Material a porous limestone.Viollet-le-Duc, inCharnay,Ruines Amér., p. 78.[VII-44]SeeCharnay, phot. x.[VII-45]Charnay, phot. vii.-viii.[VII-46]Charnay, phot. xi. Plate inTempsky's Mitla, pp. 252-3, very incorrect, as are nearly all of this author's illustrations.[VII-47]Charnay, phot. ix.[VII-48]Seep. 257of this volume.[VII-49]Murguia, inSoc. Mex. Geog., Boletin, tom. vii., pp. 170-3. 'De grandes dalles, de plus de deux pieds d'épaisseur, reposant sur des piliers d'une hauteur de trois mètres, formaient le plafond de ces palais: au-dessus on voyait une corniche saillante ornée de sculptures capricieuses, dont l'ensemble formait comme une sorte de diadème posé sur le sommet de l'édifice.'Brasseur de Bourbourg,Hist. Nat. Civ., tom. iii., p. 26, Burgoa.[VII-50]As quoted inIlustracion Mej., tom. ii., p. 496.[VII-51]Viollet-le-Duc, inCharnay,Ruines Amér., pp. 78-9.[VII-52]Charnay, phot. xii., p. 264;Dupaix, pp. 31-2, pl. xxxi., fig. 80.[VII-53]In the preceding pages it will be noticed that I have paid no attention to the plates and description by Mr J. G. Sawkins, from an exploration in 1837, as given by Col. Brantz Mayer in hisObservations on Mexican History and Archæology, published among theSmithsonian Contributions to Knowledge. My reasons for disregarding Sawkins' authority are, that the said descriptions and plates are just sufficiently accurate to identify palace No. 1 with the one referred to, but otherwise constitute one of the most bare-faced frauds recorded in the annals of antiquarian exploration in America. The following points are more than sufficient to substantiate what I have said:—1st. Sawkins reverses the cardinal points, respecting which the other authorities agree, placing the principal building on the east of the court instead of the north, etc. To avoid repetition and confusion, I shall in the following remarks, however, correct this error and speak of each building in its proper location. 2d. Sawkins found five standing columns in the eastern building,d, four of which supported parts of a wall, while the other standing apart was taller than the rest; now the columns supporting the wall may have been the piers between the doorways—but onlythreeof these were standing in 1806 (seeDupaix, pl. xxxi.); and the taller column standing apart agrees well enough with the truth, except that there weretwoof them standing in 1859. (SeeCharnay,Ruines Amér., phot. xii.) On the west our explorer correctly found everything obliterated, and the 'crumbling and indistinct walls' which he found on the south may have been part of palace No. 2. 3d. Coming now to the northern building, Sawkins found in the front 4 doorways, so narrow and low that only one person at a time could enter, and that only by stooping; during the next 20 years these doorways grew remarkably in size, and decreased in number, since Charnay's photograph shows 3 doorways with standing human figures in two of them, not obliged to stoop or much pressed for elbow room, as may be seen in the copy I have given. 4th. Sawkins found all the adornments removed from this façade; they were perhaps replaced before Charnay's visit. 5th. In the interior, A of the plan, Sawkins found niches in the end walls not seen by any other visitor. 6th. The six columns represented by Martin and Dupaix as standing in the centre of this apartment, had all been removed (!) at the time of Sawkins' visit. It was a strange freak of the camera to picture them all in place 20 years later. 7th. But Charnay's photographic apparatus had yet other repairs to make, for in the northern wing, C, the walls of the interior apartments had all disappeared, and even the interior surface of the outer walls, which enclosed the quadrangle, had no mosaic work, but the panels presented only 9 long recesses in three tiers on each side. Mr Sawkins' plates are two in number; one of them presents a general view of this palace from the west, and although faulty, indicates that the artist may have actually visited Mitla; the other is a rear view of the northern building, gives a tolerably correct idea of the construction of the walls, and may possibly have been made up from the large plate in Kingsborough's work. I have no more space to devote to Sawkins. He may have been already 'shown up' by some critic whose writings have escaped my notice. It is proper to add that as Col. Mayer apparently consulted only Humboldt's description of Mitla, it is not at all strange that this zealous investigator and usually correct writer was deceived by a pretended explorer.[VII-54]Dupaix, pl. xxxii., fig. 81, where the dimensions are 6½×33½ varas. Carriedo's, or Mühlenpfordt's, plan, pl. ii., makes the court 114×135 feet, and the western building 128.9 feet on the inside; on page 495, and on another plan, it is implied that the eastern mound never bore any building.[VII-55]Ilustracion Mej., tom. ii., p. 495.[VII-56]Müller,Reisen, tom. ii., p. 280.[VII-57]Charnay,Ruines Amér., phot. xiii.-xvi.;Dupaix, p. 33, pl. xxxiii., fig. 82-3;Kingsborough, vol. v., pp. 258-9, vol. vi., pp. 450-1, vol. iv., pl. xxx., fig. 84;Lenoir, inAntiq. Mex., tom. ii., div. i., pp. 53, 16;Mühlenpfordt, inIlustracion Mej., p. 500, pl. vi.;Tempsky's Mitla, pp. 250-1.[VII-58]Dupaix, 2d exped., pp. 32-3, pl. xxxiv.-v., fig. 82;Kingsborough, vol. v., p. 259, vol. vi., p. 451, vol. iv., pl. xxxii.-iii., fig. 86-7, ground plan, and section showing mosaic work;Ilustracion Mej., tom. ii., pp. 495-500, pl. iv., v., ix. Humboldt,Vues, tom. ii., pp. 278-82, places the gallery erroneously under the northern wing of palace No. 1, with an entrance in the floor of the column chamber.Murguia, inSoc. Mex. Geog., Boletin, tom. vii., pp. 170-3, from Burgoa, about the caves on which the palaces were built.Müller,Reisen, tom. ii., p. 280;Tempsky's Mitla, pp. 250-1;Fossey,Mex., p. 369;Charnay,Ruines Amér., pp. 264-5;Mayer's Observations, p. 30, with cuts from Dupaix.Lenoir, inAntiq. Mex., tom. ii., div. i., p. 53. 'Un appartement souterrain qui a 27 mètres de long, et 8 de large.'Humboldt,Essai Pol., p. 264.[VII-59]Charnay,Ruines Amér., p. 263, phot. iii.-iv.;Dupaix, 2d exped., pp. 33, 35-6, pl. xxxvi., fig. 83;Kingsborough, vol. v., p. 259, vol. vi., p. 451, vol. iv., pl. xxxiv., fig. 88, this plan differs from the one given above in making the passagedstraight.Ilustracion Mej., tom. ii., p. 496.[VII-60]Dupaix, pl. xxxvii., fig. 84;Kingsborough, vol. iv., pl. xxxv., fig. 89. The latter plan represents three doorways in each of the buildings fronting on the northern court, C. See also references of preceding note.[VII-61]Dupaix, pp. 34, 39, pl. xxxlx-xl., xliii-iv., fig. 86-7, 91-2;Kingsborough, vol. v., pp. 260-1, vol. vi., pp. 451-3, vol. iv., pl. xxxvii-ix., fig. 91-4;Lenoir, inAntiq. Mex., tom. ii., div. i., pp. 55-6;Charnay, p. 263, phot. ii.;Mühlenpfordt, inIlustracion Mej., tom. ii., p. 496; Fossey,Mexique, pp. 368-9, locates these pyramidal groups east and north, instead of south and west of palace No. 1. He also mentions a granite block, or altar, 4½ feet long and one foot thick.[VII-62]Dupaix, p. 34, pl. xxxviii., fig. 85;Kingsborough, vol. v., p. 259, vol. vi., p. 451, vol. iv., pl. xxxvi., fig. 90. Kingsborough's plate represents the walls as mostly fallen.Lenoir, inAntiq. Mex., tom. ii., div. i., p. 53.[VII-63]Dupaix, pp. 40-1, pl. xliv.-v., fig. 93-4, view of hill, and plan copied above.Kingsborough, vol. v., p. 265, vol. vi., p. 455, vol. iv., pl. xl.-i., fig. 95;Lenoir, p. 56. Dupaix's plates are copied inMosaico Mex., tom. ii., pp. 281-4, andArmin,Alte Mex., p. 290;Fossey,Mex., p. 370. Plate from Sawkins' drawing, different from that of Castañeda, but of course unreliable, inMayer's Observations, p. 32, pl. iv.[VII-64]Dupaix, 2d exped., pp. 41-3;Tylor's Anahuac, p. 139.[VII-65]Dupaix, 2d exped., pp. 37-8, pl. xli.-ii., fig. 88-90;Kingsborough, vol. v., p. 254, vol. vi., p. 447, vol. iv., pl. xxvi., fig. 78-80;Lenoir, inAntiq. Mex., pp. 23-4, 55;Tempsky's Mitla, p. 254.[VII-66]Burgoa,Geog. Descrip., fol. 257-60;Id., inSoc. Mex. Geog., Boletin, tom. vii., p. 170, et seq., pp. 271-2;Id., inIlustracion Mej., tom. ii., p. 494;Id., inBrasseur de Bourbourg,Hist. Nat. Civ., tom. iii., pp. 21-30. Brasseur says that the temple built over a subterranean labyrinth was called Yohopehelichi Pezelao, 'supreme fortress of Pezelao.' Built under Toltec influence.Id., tom. i., pp. 304-5, tom. iii., p. 9. Sacked by the Aztecs about 1494, and the priests carried as captives to Mexico.Id., tom. iii., p. 358;Tylor's Anahuac, p. 139. Buildings of different age.Dupaix, 2d exped., pp. 34-5;Charnay,Ruines Amér., pp. 252-3, 265;Humboldt,Vues, tom. ii., p. 279.[VII-67]Humboldt,Vues, tom. ii., pp. 284-5. 'Les palais funéraires de Mitla reproduisent en certains cas l'ordonnance des demeures chinoises.'Charnay,Ruines Amér., p. iii. The ruins of Mitla 'nous paraissent appartenir à la civilisation quichée, quoique postérieurs à ceux de l'Yucatan. La perfection de l'appareil, les parements verticaux des salles avec leurs épines de colonnes portant la charpente du comple, l'absence complète d'imitation de la construction de bois dans la décoration extérieure ou intérieure, l'ornementation obtenue seulement par l'assemblage des pierres sans sculpture, donnent aux édifices de Mitla un caractère particulier qui les distingue nettement de ceux de l'Yucatan et qui indiquerait aussi une date plus récente.'Viollet-le-Duc, inId., pp. 100-1.[VII-68]Lovato's report was published with two of the nine plates which originally accompanied it in theMuseo Mex., tom. iii., p. 329-35, and, without the plates inDiccionario Univ., tom. ix., pp. 697-700. Müller,Reisen, tom. ii., pp. 251-4, gives an account which seems to have been made up mostly from Lovato's report, although he may have personally visited the ruins. A short description, also from theMuseo Mex., may be found inMayer's Mex. Aztec, vol. ii., p. 217, andId.,Observations, pp. 25-6.[VII-69]Museo Mex., tom. i., p. 136. Lovato's exploration was made by the order of Gen. Leon, and the account furnished for publication by Sr J. M. Tornel. In describing the Temple, the three flights of stairs are said to have 10, 8, and 6 steps, respectively, which does not agree with the plate as copied above. Müller gives the number of small buildings, or dwellings, whose foundations are visible as 120 instead of 130; he also gives in his dimensions mètres instead of varas, which would increase them in English feet in the proportion of 92 to 109. He further states that the structures face the cardinal points.[VII-70]Unda, inSoc. Mex. Geog., Boletin, 2da época, tom. i., p. 30;Museo Mex., tom. i., p. 250.[VII-71]Dupaix, 2d exped., p. 14, pl. xix., fig. 55;Kingsborough, vol. v., p. 244, vol. vi., p. 442, vol. iv., pl. xvii., fig. 55;Lenoir, inAntiq. Mex., tom. ii., div. i., p. 47.[VII-72]Museo Mex., tom. i., pp. 249, 401, with plates of the rings and 7 stone relics.[VII-73]Dupaix, 2d exped., pp. 15-16, pl. xix.-xx., fig. 56-63;Kingsborough, vol. v., pp. 244-5, vol. vi., pp. 442-3, vol. iv., pl. xvii.-xviii., fig. 56-63. Respecting the jasper figures M. Dupaix says: 'Le nombre de celles qu'on trouve dans les sépultures de la nation zapotèque est infini. Elles ont deux à trois pouces de haut; elles sont presque toutes de forme triangulaire, quadrangulaire, ou prismatique, et sont sculptées en jaspe vert foncé, ayant invariablement la même attitude semblable à celle d'Iris ou d'Osiris, dont les petites idoles étaient destinées à accompagner les momies égyptiennes.' The hole in the back part of each is drilled in a curved line.Lenoir, inAntiq. Mex., tom. ii., div. i., pp. 47-8.[VII-74]Muñoz,Estadística del Distrito de Hidalgo, inGuerrero,Memoria presentada á la H. Legislatura, por el Gobernador, Fran. O. Arce, 1872, pp. 45, 150, 272.[VIII-1]Mühlenpfordt,Mejico, tom. ii., p. 32;Mexikanische Zustände, tom. i., p. 31.[VIII-2]Soc. Mex. Geog., Boletin, 2da época, tom. i., pp. 292-7, tom. iii., pp. 104-9, with two plates representing the colossal head, and several other relics from some locality not mentioned.[VIII-3]Ottavio, inNouvelles Annales des Voy., 1833, tom. lix., p. 64.[VIII-4]Waldeck,Palenqué, pl. xlix.;Tylor's Anahuac, pp. 230-1.[VIII-5]Antiq. Mex., tom. i., div. ii., p. 35.[VIII-6]Mayer's Mex. as it Was, pp. 93-7;Id.,Mex. Aztec, etc., vol. ii., p. 272, with 3 cuts;Id., inSchoolcraft's Arch., vol. vi., p. 588, pl. vi., fig. 5, 6, 8, 11, 12;Gondra, inPrescott,Hist. Conq. Mex., tom. iii., pp. 82-4, pl. xv., plate of a vase.[VIII-7]Sartorius,Fortificaciones Antiguas, inSoc. Mex. Geog., Boletin, 2da época, tom. i., pp. 818-27.[VIII-8]Finck, inSmithsonian Rept., 1870, pp. 373-5. Mr Tylor, in traveling northward towards Jalapa, speaks of 'numerous remains of ancient Indian mound-forts or temples which we passed on the road.'Anahuac, p. 312.[VIII-9]Brasseur de Bourbourg,Palenqué, p. 33. 'Chalchiuhcuecan, ou le pays des coquilles vertes. On voit encore des débris de la ville de ce nom, sous les eaux qui s'étendent de la ville de la Véra Cruz au château de San-Juan-de-Ulloa.'Id.,Hist. Nat. Civ., tom. i., p. 143. Ruins of the ordinary type are reported outside the triangular area, in the Sierra de Matlaquiahuitl or del Gallego, running south from the Rio Jamapa to San Juan de la Punta.Sartorius, inSoc. Mex. Geog., Boletin, 2da época, tom. i., p. 820.[VIII-10]Dupaix, 1st exped., pp. 7-8, pl. viii., fig. 8;Kingsborough, vol. v., p. 214, vol. vi., p. 425, vol. iv., pl. iv., fig. 10;Lenoir, inAntiq. Mex., p. 28. Kingsborough's text represents this relic as 16 leagues from Orizava instead of Córdova.[VIII-11]Dupaix, 1st exped., p. 7, pl. vi., vii., fig. 6, 7;Kingsborough, vol. v., pp. 213-14, vol. vi., pp. 424-5, vol. iv., pl. iv., fig. 8, 9;Lenoir, inAntiq. Mex., tom. ii., div. i., pp. 22, 27-8.[VIII-12]Dupaix, 1st exped., p. 5, pl. iv-v., fig. 4-5;Kingsborough, vol. v., pp. 212-13, vol. vi., pp. 423-4; vol. iv., pl. iii., fig. 6-7;Lenoir, pp. 18, 22, 26-7.[VIII-13]Historia de Jalapa, Mex. 1869, tom. i., p. 7.[VIII-14]Hakluyt's Voy., vol. iii., p. 453.[VIII-15]Note inCortés,Despatches, p. 39;Rivera,Hist. Jalapa, Mex., 1869, tom. i., p. 39. Cempoala is located on some maps on the coast a few leagues north of Vera Cruz; there is also a town of the name in Mexico.[VIII-16]Esteva, inMuseo Mex., tom. ii., pp. 465-7, with plan and view. Respecting the circumference of the structure, Esteva's text says: 'la media circunferencia de la base, tomada desde el escalon ó cuerpo A. B. C.,(letters which do not appear in his plate)pues mas abajo no se podia tomar con esactitud, es de ciento cincuenta y seis piés castellanos.' I have taken the circumference from the plan. The material Esteva states to be 'cal, arena, y piedras grandes del rio,' but the view indicates that hewn stone is employed, or at least that the whole structure is covered with a smooth coating of cement in perfect preservation. Esteva's account is also published in theDiccionario Univ. de Geog., tom. x., pp. 166-8, and a slight description from the same source inMayer's Mex. Aztec, etc., vol. ii., pp. 203-4.[VIII-17]Lyon's Journal, vol. ii., p. 209;Sartorius, inSoc. Mex. Geog., Boletin, 2da época, tom. i., p. 826. Mühlenpfordt,Mej., tom. ii., p. 89, also mentions the Paso de Ovejas remains.[VIII-18]Iberri, inMuseo Mex., tom. iii., p. 23. Gondra's account inMosaico Mex., tom. ii., pp. 368-72, with two views and a plan. Sartorius' description inSoc. Mex. Geog., Boletin, 2da época, tom. i., pp. 821-2, tom. ii., p. 148, with two views apparently the same as by Gondra, an additional side and front view of a pyramid, and a plan which bears no likeness to Gondra's, representing perhaps a different part of the ruins. According to this author the ruins were first made known in 1829 or 1830. The two accounts are very perplexing to the student, sometimes resembling each other so closely that one is ready to believe that Sartorius was the explorer from whom Gondra obtained his information and drawings, in other parts so different as to indicate that different ruins are referred to. I am inclined to believe that Gondra's information did in part refer to some other ruin in the same region. Gondra's account is also printed inDiccionario Univ. Geog., tom. ix., pp. 565-8. Brief mention inRivera,Hist. Jalapa, Mex. 1869, tom. i., pp. 389-90.[VIII-19]Respecting the first narrow pass, the oval table, and the ditch, Sartorius says nothing. He mentions such a ditch, however, in connection with the ruins of Tlacotepec, as we shall see. It is quite possible that the features mentioned do not belong to Centla at all.[VIII-20]10 varas according to Sartorius; Gondra says 15.[VIII-21]Copied from Sartorius, with the addition of the shading only.[VIII-22]The views given by Gondra and Sartorius are of the pyramid A, from the east, and of the terrace walls at B, from the west. The latter also gives a view of the small pyramidb, from the north. The plan given by Gondra bears no resemblance to the other. It may represent ruins in other parts of the plateau; it may be a faulty representation made up from the explorer's description of the works that have been described; or, what is, I think, more probable, it may refer to some other group of ruins in the vicinity. It represents a collection of pyramids and buildings, bounded on both the east and west by walls, one of which has an entrance close to the brink of the precipice, while the other had no opening till one was made by the modern settlers.[VIII-23]'Ochenta varas en cuadro.' Perhaps it should readfeetinstead of varas. The plate makes the front slightly over 24 varas.[VIII-24]Dupaix, 1st exped., pp. 8-9, pl. ix-xi., fig. 9-12;Kingsborough, vol. v., pp. 215-16, vol. vi., pp. 425-6, vol. iv., pl. v-vi., fig. 11-15. The skull is mentioned and sketched only in Kingsborough's edition.Lenoir, pp. 23, 29. Slight mention of these ruins from Dupaix, inMosaico Mex., tom. ii., pp. 373-4;Klemm,Cultur-Geschichte, tom. v., p. 157;Warden, inAntiq. Mex., tom. ii., pp. 67-8.[VIII-25]Soc. Mex. Geog., Boletin, 2da época, tom. i., p. 821.[VIII-26]Storia Ant. del Messico, tom. ii., p. 150;Bradford's Amer. Antiq., p. 104.[VIII-27]Museo Mex., tom. iii., p. 23.[VIII-28]Soc. Mex. Geog., Boletin, 2da época, tom. i., p. 822;Mosaico Mex., tom. ii., pp. 368, 372;Smithsonian Rept., 1870, p. 374.[VIII-29]This may possibly be the ditch referred to by Gondra in his account of Centla.[VIII-30]Sartorius, inSoc. Mex. Geog., Boletin, 2da época, tom. i., pp. 822-4, with plan and view, the latter giving no information.[VIII-31]Id., p. 824.[VIII-32]Heller,Reisen, pp. 61, 72-3, 76-7, with cut.[VIII-33]Sartorius, inSoc. Mex. Geog., Boletin, 2da época, tom. i., pp. 825-6.[VIII-34]Id., pp. 821, 824-5, with a sketch which amounts to nothing.[VIII-35]Anahuac, p. 297.[VIII-36]Mosaico Mex., tom. i., pp. 102-5. Gondra's account of the location is as follows: 'En la serranía al Norte de Jalapa, y distante de aquella ciudad de diez á once leguas, se encuentra en el canton de Misantla el cerro llamado del Estillero, á cuya falda se descubre una montaña terminada por una meseta muy angosta, de cerca de legua y media de largo, y aislada por barrancos profundos y acantilados, y por despeñaderos inaccessibles; rodeada por los cerros del Estillero, Magdalenilla, el Chamuscado, el Camaron y el Conejo por la parte del Oeste; por el Monte Real ácia el Este, y lo restante por la elevada cuesta de Misantla.... La única parte algo accesible para subir á la meseta de la montaña donde se hallan las ruinas, está ácia la falda del Estillero.... Al comenzar la meseta, bajando por la falda del cerro del Estillero, lo primero que se observa es un paredon demolido hecho de gruesas piedras,' etc. Gondra's account was reprinted in theSoc. Mex. Geog., Boletin, tom. ii., p. 220-3. Iberri's account is found in theMuseo Mex., tom. iii., pp. 21-4. Respecting the location he says:—'El cerro conocido de la Magdalena, degradando su altura en picos porfiríticos que afectan figuras cónicas ó piramidales, ... forma un grupo de montañas sumamente escabrosas, que se dividen como rádios en ramas estrechadas por barrancas profundas y escarpadas de pórfido.... En una de estas ramas se hallan las referidas ruinas, cuya entrada está cerrada por un muro,' etc. Account made up from Gondra, with cut probably from same source inMayer's Mex. Aztec, vol. ii., pp. 200-3;Id.,Mex. as it Was, pp. 250-1. Slight mention by Mühlenpfordt,Mej., tom. ii., p. 88, who thinks the ruin may be identical with that of Tusapan. Same account inMexicanische Zustände, tom. i., p. 142.[VIII-37]Mühlenpfordt,Mej., tom. ii., pp. 88-9;Mexikanische Zustände, tom. i., pp. 142-3.[VIII-38]Gaceta de Mexico, July 12, 1785, tom. i., pp. 349-51. Location 'por el rumbo del Poniente de este pueblo, á dos leguas de distancia, entre un espeso bosque.' This original account was printed later inDiccionario Univ. Geog., tom. x., pp. 120-1; it was also translated into Italian, and printed inMarquez,Due Antichi Monumenti, Rome, 1804, p. 3, also accompanied by the plate.[VIII-39]Humboldt,Vues, tom. i., pp. 102-3;Id.,Essai Pol., p. 274;Id., inAntiq. Mex., tom. i., div. ii., p. 12. Humboldt's account translated by Gondra, inPrescott,Hist. Conq. Mex., tom. iii., pp. 39-40, says it is the forest that is called Tajin, that the ruin was discovered by hunters, and pronounces the plate in theGacetavery faulty.[VIII-40]Nebel,Viage Pintoresco. The drawing is geometric rather than in perspective, and the author's descriptive text in a few details fails to agree exactly with it. José M. Bausa gives a slight description inSoc. Mex. Geog., Boletin, tom. v., p. 411, without stating the source of his information. He locates the ruin 2½ leagues south-west of the pueblo. This author states that Carlos M. Bustamante published a good account of the ruin in 1828, in hisRevoltijo de Nopalitos. Other accounts of Papantla made up from the preceding sources, are as follows:—Mayer's Mex. Aztec, vol. ii., pp. 196-7, with cut after Nebel;Id.,Mex. as it Was, pp. 248-9;Id., inSchoolcraft's Arch., vol. vi., p. 583, pl. xi.;Baldwin's Anc. Amer., pp. 91-2;Conder's Mex. Guat., tom. i., p. 227;Fossey,Mex., pp. 317-18;Hassel,Mex. Guat., pp. 238-9;Larenaudière,Mex. Guat., p. 45;De Bercy,Travels, tom. ii., p. 237;Bradford's Amer. Antiq., pp. 79-80;Mühlenpfordt,Mejico, tom. ii., p. 88;Mexicanische Zustände, p. 142;Bingley's Trav., pp. 259-60;Amer. Antiq. Soc., Transact., vol. i., p. 256;Armin,Heutige Mex., pp. 96-7, with cut;Malte-Brun,Précis de la Géog., tom. vi., p. 462;Müller,Amerikanische Urreligionen, p. 459;Priest's Amer. Antiq., pp. 276-8;Wappäus,Geog. u. Stat., p. 154;Wilson's Mex. and its Religion, pp. 246-7.[VIII-41]The dimensions in Nebel's text are, 120 feet square and 85 feet high, which must be an error, since the author says that the stairway in the plate may be used as a scale, each step being a foot; and measuring the structure by that scale it would be something over 90 feet square at the base and about 54 feet high. TheGacetasays that the base is 30 varas (83 English feet) square, and the steps in sight were 57 in number. Humboldt calls the pyramid 25 mètres (82 feet) square and 18 mètres (59 feet) high, or, inEssai Pol., 16 to 20 mètres. Bausa,Soc. Mex. Geog., Boletin, tom. v., p. 411, calls the height 93 feet, with 53 steps.[VIII-42]Bausa says the pyramid faces the north. TheGacetaaccount represents the stairway as 10 or 12 varas wide. The plate represents the lateral narrow stairways as single instead of double, and the niches as not extending entirely across the wide central stairway. Only six stories are shown in the plate, terminating in a summit platform on which stand two small altar-like structures at the head of the lateral stairways. Nebel speaks simply of a 'double stairway.' Humboldt agrees with the plate in theGaceta.[VIII-43]TheGaceta'stext says 342, but its own figures correctly added make the number 378 as is pointed out by Marquez; and the plate accompanying the same account makes the number 309. Fossey says 360 niches. Humboldt made the number 378, which he supposed to relate to the signs of the Toltec civil calendar.[VIII-44]Nebel,Viage Pintoresco;Cassel, inNouvelles Annales des Voy., 1830, tom. xlv., pp. 336-7;Mayer's Mex. Aztec, vol. ii., p. 198;Id.,Mex. as it Was, pp. 246-7.[VIII-45]Nebel,Viage Pintoresco;Mayer's Mex. Aztec, vol. ii., pp. 199-200;Id.,Mex. as it Was, pp. 247-8;Armin,Alte Mex., p. 43; Bausa, inSoc. Mex. Geog., Boletin, tom. v., pp. 411-12, locates Tusapan 14 leagues south-west of Papantla.[VIII-46]The original of this report I have not seen; a translation, however, was published in theSan Francisco Evening Bulletin, of Feb. 20, 1866.[VIII-47]Mex., Mem. del Ministro del Fomento, 1865, p. 234, etc. It was also published in a separate pamphlet.Almaraz,Mem. acerca de los Terrenos de Metlaltoyuca, pp. 28-33. Mention by García y Cubas, a companion of Almaraz, inSoc. Mex. Geog., Boletin, 2da época, tom. i., p. 37.[VIII-48]Chimalpopoca, inAlmaraz,Mem., p. 28;Linares, inSoc. Mex. Geog., Boletin, 3ra época, tom. i., p. 103.[VIII-49]The analysis is as follows:—quartzy sand, 31.00; silex, 13.00; aluminia and iron, 2.60; carbonate of lime, 48.00; magnesia, 2.50; moisture, 2.00; loss, 0.90.Almaraz,Mem., p. 30.[VIII-50]'De las dimensiones que usan hoy para hacer los árboles de tierra.' I am unable to say what such dimensions amount to in English measurement.[VIII-51]A plate showing these paintings is given by Almaraz.[VIII-52]Burkart,Mexiko, tom. i., p. 51.[VIII-53]Vetch, inLond. Geog. Soc., Jour., vol. vii., pp. 1-11, with plate.[VIII-54]Lyon's Journal, vol. i., pp. 57-61.[VIII-55]Norman's Rambles by Land and Water, pp. 145-51, 164;Mayer's Mex. Aztec, tom. i., pp. 193-6.[VIII-56]Lyon's Journal, vol. i., pp. 61-2;Norman's Rambles, pp. 149-50. Slight mention of relics in this region, inMühlenpfordt,Mejico, tom. ii., p. 72;Bradford's Amer. Antiq., pp. 112-13.[IX-1]Dupaix, 2d exped., p. 14, pl. xviii., fig. 53-4;Kingsborough, vol. v., p. 243, vol. vi., p. 442, vol. iv., pl. xvi., fig. 53-4;Lenoir, inAntiq. Mex., tom. ii., div. i., p. 47.[IX-2]'No subsisten de él sino unas grandes ruinas de templo y caserías de cal y canto, situadas en ladera de unos cerritos.'Dupaix, 1st exped., p. 5;Kingsborough, vol. v., p. 211, vol. vi., p. 423.[IX-3]Dupaix, 1st exped., p. 4, pl. iii., fig. 3;Kingsborough, vol. v., p. 211, vol. vi., p. 422, vol. iv., pl. ii., fig. 5. 'On y monte, du côté de l'ouest, par une rampe tracée de gauche à droite pour le premier étage, de droite à gauche pour le second, et ainsi de suite jusqu'au dernier.'Lenoir, inAntiq. Mex., tom. ii., div. i., p. 26;Klemm,Cultur-Geschichte, tom. v., p. 157.[IX-4]Dupaix, 3d exped., p. 5, pl. i., ii., fig. 1-3;Kingsborough, vol. v., pp. 285-6, vol. vi., p. 467, vol. iv., pl. i., ii., fig. 1-3. According to Dupaix's plate the sides and summit platform are covered with plaster. Kingsborough's plate omits the coating of plaster and shows the remains of a ninth story. A scale attached to the latter plate would indicate that the pyramid has a base of 150 feet and is about 75 feet high.Lenoir, p. 69.[IX-5]Dupaix, 1st exped., pp. 3-4, pl. i.-ii., fig. 1, 2; 2d exped., p. 51, pl. lxi., fig. 117;Kingsborough, vol. v., pp. 209-10, vol. vi., pp. 421-2, vol. iv., pl. i., fig. 1-4;Lenoir, inAntiq. Mex., tom. ii., div. i., pp. 22, 25-6, 63.[IX-6]Dupaix, 1st exped., p. 10, pl. xii., fig. 13;Kingsborough, vol. v., p. 217, vol. vi., p. 426, vol. iv., pl. vi., fig. 16;Lenoir, p. 30. Kingsborough's plate makes the blocks of stone much smaller than the other, shows no plaster, and represents the walls of the summit building as still standing. Kingsborough also incorrectly translates 'antes de San Andrés,' 'formerly San Andrés.'Klemm,Cultur-Geschichte, tom. v., p. 157.[IX-7]Dupaix, 1st exped., pp. 12-13, pl. xvii-xxii., fig. 19-24;Kingsborough, vol. v., pp. 219-20, vol. vi., pp. 427-8, vol. iv., pl. ix.-xi., fig. 21-4;Lenoir, pp. 31-3.[IX-8]Dupaix, p. 11, pl. xvii., fig. 18, not in Kingsborough.[IX-9]Dupaix, 1st exped., p. 13, pl. xxiii.-iv., fig. 25-6;Kingsborough, vol. v., p. 220, vol. vi., p. 428, vol. iv., pl. xii., fig. 25-6;Lenoir, p. 33.[IX-10]On the building and history of the pyramid, see, among many others,Veytia,Hist. Ant. Mej., tom. i., pp. 18-19, 155-6, 199-205;Brasseur de Bourbourg,Hist. Nat. Civ., tom. iv., pp. 182-3.[IX-11]Clavigero,Storia Ant. del Messico, tom. ii., pp. 33-4;Humboldt,Essai Pol., pp. 239-40;Id.,Vues, tom. i., pp. 96-124, pl. iii. (fol. ed. pl. vii., viii.);Id., inAntiq. Mex., suppl. pl. ii.;Dupaix, 1st exped., p. ii., pl. xvi., fig. 17;Kingsborough, vol. v., p. 218, vol. iv., pl. viii., fig. 20. It is to be noted that there is not the slightest resemblance between the two editions of Castañeda's drawing.Nebel,Viage Pintoresco, with large colored plate. Other visitors to Cholula, whose accounts contain more or less original information, are:—Poinsett, 1822,Notes, pp. 57-9; Bullock, 1823,Mexico, pp. 111-15—no plate, although the author made a drawing; Ward, 1825,Mexico, vol. ii., p. 269; Beaufoy, 1826,Mexican Illustr., pp. 193-5, with cuts; Latrobe, 1834,Rambler in Mex., p. 275; Mayer, 1841,Mexico as it Was, p. 26;Mex. Aztec, vol. ii., p. 228, with cut;Id., inSchoolcraft's Arch., vol. vi., p. 582; Thompson, 1842,Recollections of Mex., p. 30; Tylor, 1856,Anahuac, pp. 274-7; Evans, 1869,Our Sister Republic, pp. 428-32, with cut. Still other references on the subject, containing for the most part nothing except what is gathered from the preceding works, are:—Robertson's Hist. Amer.(8vo. ed. 1777), vol. i., p. 268;Gondra, inPrescott,Hist. Conq. Mex., tom. iii., pp. 37-45, pl. vi.;Antiq. Mex., tom. i., div. ii., p. 70;Lafond,Voyages, tom. i., pp. 137-8;Armin,Heutige Mex., pp. 63, 68, 72;Wilson's Mex. and her Religion, pp. 95-9;Amer. Antiq. Soc., Transact., vol. i., p. 256, etc., fromHumboldt, with cut;Baldwin's Anc. Amer., p. 90;Baril,Mex., p. 193;Beltrami,Mexique, tom. ii., pp. 283-8;DeBercy,L'Europe et L'Amér., tom. ii., p. 235, etc.;Brackett's Brigade in Mex., pp. 154-5;Bradford's Amer. Antiq., pp. 76-7;Brasseur de Bourbourg,Hist. Nat. Civ., tom. i., p. 301, et seq.;Calderon de la Barca's Life in Mex., vol. ii., p. 97;Chevalier,Mex., pp. 55-6;Id.,Mex. Ancien et Mod., pp. 174-9;Combier,Voyage, pp. 385-6;Dally,Sur les Races Indig., p. 17;Davis' Anc. Amer., p. 9;Donnavan's Adven., p. 98;D'Orbigny,Voyage, p. 331;Fossey,Mex., p. 111;Hassel,Mex. Guat., p. 246;Heller,Reisen, pp. 131-2;Nouvelles Annales des Voy., 1835, tom. lxv., pp. 363-4;Delafield's Antiq. Amer., p. 57;Jourdanet,Mexique, p. 20;Larenaudière,Mex. Guat., pp. 24, 45-6, plate from Dupaix;Löwenstern,Mexique, pp. 48-9;Malte-Brun,Précis de la Géog., tom. vi., pp. 461-2;Marmier,Voyageurs, tom. iii., pp. 328-9;Mexico, Country, etc., p. 14;Mex. in 1842, pp. 80-1;Mexico, A Trip to, pp. 59-60;Mill's Hist. Mex., p. 140;Mühlenpfordt,Mejico, tom. ii., pp. 232-3, 236;Müller,Amerikanische Urreligionen, pp. 458-9, 581;Pagés,Nouveau Voy., tom. ii., pp. 385-7;Prescott's Mex., vol. i., p. 60, vol. ii., pp. 6-8, 26, vol. iii., p. 380;Shepard's Land of the Aztecs, p. 128;Saturday Mag., vol. v., pp. 175-6;Scherr,Trauerspiel, pp. 29-30;Stapp's Prisoners of Perote, pp. 107-8;Thümmel,Mexiko, pp. 261-2;Tudor's Nar., vol. ii., pp. 208-9;Vigneaux,Souv. Mex., p. 531;Wappäus,Geog. u. Stat., pp. 32, 36, 180, 182;Warden,Recherches, pp. 66-7;Willson's Amer. Hist., pp. 60-1, 73;Yonge's Mod. Hist., p. 38;Frost's Pict. Hist., pp. 37-8;Hermosa,Manual Geog., pp. 140-1;Taylor's Eldorado, vol. ii., p. 181;Wortley's Trav., pp. 230-1, etc.;McCulloh's Researches in Amer., p. 252;Gemelli Careri, inChurchill,Col. Voy., vol. iv., p. 519;EscaleraandLlana,Méj. Hist. Descrip., pp. 205-6;Klemm,Cultur-Geschichte, tom. v., p. 156;Alcedo,Diccionario, tom. i., p. 550;Democratic Review, vol. xxvii., p. 425, vol. xxvi., pp. 546-7, vol. xi., p. 612;Mansfield's Mex. War, p. 207;Macgillivray's Life Humboldt, pp. 292, 312-13;Conder's Mex. Guat., vol. i., pp. 258-9, plate from Humboldt;Prichard's Nat. Hist. Man, vol. ii., p. 509.[IX-12]'The large mound of earth at Cholula which the Spaniards dignified with the name of temple, still remains, but without any steps by which to ascend, or any facing of stone. It appears now like a natural mount, covered with grass and shrubs, and possibly it was never anything more.'Robertson's Hist. Amer., vol. i., p. 269. 'A le voir de loin, on seroit en effet tenté de le prendre pour une colline naturelle couverte de végétation.' 'Elle est très-bien conservée du côte de l'ouest, et c'est la face occidentale que présente la gravure que nous publions.'Humboldt,Vues, tom. i., pp. 104-5.[IX-13]The dimensions of base, height, and summit platform respectively, as given by different authorities, are as follows: 439×54×64¾ mètres,Humboldt; 530×66 varas,Nebel; 1069×204×165 feet,Mayer, according to a careful measurement by a U. S. official in 1847; 40 varas square by actual measurement!Dupaix; 1423×177×208 feet,Prescott; 1425×177×175 feet,Latrobe; 1301×162×177 feet,Poinsett; About 200 feet high,Tylor; 1310×205 feet,Wilson; 1335×172 feet,Foster's Pre-Hist. Races, p. 345; 1355×170 feet,Ampère,Promenade, tom. ii., pp. 374-80; 1388×170 feet, summit 13285 sq. feet,Heller,Reisen, pp. 131-2; said to cover an area of over 43 acres and to be 179 feet high, but it seems much smaller and higher.Evans' Our Sister Rep., pp. 428-32.[IX-14]Veytia,Hist. Ant. Mej., tom. i., pp. 155-6.[IX-15]Heller,Reisen, pp. 131-2.[IX-16]Humboldt,Vues, tom. i., pp. 127-8.[IX-17]Foster,Pre-Hist. Races, p. 345, believes, on the contrary, that the pyramid was erected with the sole object of enshrining in an interior chamber of stone two corpses, showing that 'the industry of the great mass of the population was at the absolute command of the few.'[IX-18]Wilson's Mex. and its Relig., pp. 95, 99. See a restoration of Cholula, by Mothes, inArmin,Heutige Mex., pp. 63, 68, 72.[IX-19]Ampère,Promenade, tom. ii., pp. 373, 380. 'On découvre encore, du côté occidental, vis-a-vis du Cerro de Tecaxete et de Zapoteca, deux masses parfaitement prismatiques. L'une de ces masses porte aujourd'hui le nom d'Alcosac ou d'Istenenetl, l'autre celui du Cerro de la Cruz; la dernière, construite en pisé, n'est élevée que de 15 mètres.'Humboldt,Essai Pol., pp. 240-1.

[VII-27]Copies of plates inMayer's Obs., p. 32, pl. iii.;Id.,Mex. Aztec, etc., vol. ii., pp. 218-19.

[VII-28]Dupaix says of this image: 'Elle participe un peu du style égyptien. Elle est couverte de trois vêtements qui croisent l'un sur l'autre symétriquement, et qui sont bordés de franges. La tête est ornée de tresses qui font deviner le sexe; les oreilles et le cou sont parés de bijoux; enfin toute cette figure est étrange.' 2d exped., p. 49. This image in the opinion of M. Lenoir,Antiq. Mex., tom. ii., div. i., pp. 60-1, represents the Mexican goddess Toci, and the preceding one the god of war, Huitzilopochtli. These images are now in the Mexican Museum, and plates of them were published by Sr Gondra, inPrescott,Hist. Conq. Mex., tom. iii., pp. 90-5, pl. xvii., who by no means agrees with Lenoir's conclusions identifying them with Aztec deities, although he agrees with Dupaix respecting their probable use as chandeliers.

[VII-29]Authorities on antiquities of Zachila.Dupaix, 2d exped., pp. 44-51, pl. xlvii., fig. 95-116;Kingsborough, vol. v., pp. 269-78, vol. vi., pp. 458-63, vol. iv., pl. xlvii.-li., fig. 96-117. Kingsborough also attributes fig. 118-19 to Zachila, but according to the official edition the relics represented by those numbers came from Tizatlan in Tlascala.Lenoir, inAntiq. Mex., tom. ii., div. i., pp. 57-63. The aboriginal name of the place was Zaachillatloo.Dupaix, pp. 44-5. Brasseur,Hist. Nat. Civ., tom. iii., p. 47, speaks of a fortress visited by several travelers, built by Zaachila, the great Zapotec conqueror, on the top of a lofty rock 25 leagues east of Oajaca. Mention of ruins and two cuts of figures inIlustracion Mej., tom. iii., pp. 367-8, 480;EscaleraandLlana,Mej. Hist. Descrip., p. 226.

[VII-30]EscaleraandLlana,Mej. Hist. Descrip., p. 226;Fossey,Mex., p. 376.

[VII-31]Liubá, 'Sepultura;' Miquitlan, 'infierno ó lugar de tristeza.'Dupaix, 2d exped., p. 30. Leoba, or Luiva, 'sépulture;'Miguitlan, 'lieu de désolation, lieu de tristesse.'Humboldt,Vues, tom. ii., pp. 278-9. Yopaa, Lyoba, or Yobaa, 'terre des tombes;' Mictlan, 'séjour des Morts.'Brasseur de Bourbourg,Hist. Nat. Civ., tom. i., pp. 304-5, tom. iii., p. 9. Liobáá, 'place of rest.'Soc. Mex. Geog., Boletin, tom. vii., p. 170.

[VII-32]'Uno, llamado Mictlan, que quiere decir infierno ó lugar de muertos, á do hubo en tiempos pasados, (segun hallaron las muestras) edificios mas notables y de ver que en otra parte de la Nueva España. Hubo un templo del demonio y aposentos de sus ministros, maravillosa cosa á la vista, en especial una sala como de artesones, y la obra era labrada de piedra de muchos lazos y labores.'Mendieta,Hist. Ecles., pp. 395-6;Burgoa,Descrip. Geog., tom. ii., fol. 259, etc.

[VII-33]'Du haut de la forteresse de Mitla, la vue plonge dans la vallée et se repose avec tristesse sur des roches pelées et des solitudes arides, image de destruction propre à relever l'effet des palais de Liobaa. Un torrent d'eau salée (?), qui se gonfle avec la tempête, coule au milieu des sables poudreux qu'il entraîne avec lui. Les rives sont sèches et sans ombrages; à peine voit-on de distance en distance quelques nopals nains, ou quelques poivriers du Pérou, aussi maigres que le terrain où ils ont pris racine. Seulement, du côté du village, la verdure sombre des magueys et des cactus donne au tableau l'aspect d'un jardin d'hiver planté de buis et de sapins.'Fossey,Mexique, p. 371.

[VII-34]Humboldt,Vues, tom. ii., pp. 278-85, pl. xvii-viii., fol. ed., pl. xlix-l;Id., inAntiq. Mex., tom. i., div. ii., pp. 28-30, supl. pl. viii.;Id.,Essai Pol., pp. 263-5. Humboldt speaks of Martin as 'un architecte mexicain très-distingué.'Dupaix, 2d exped., pp. 30-44, pl. xxix-xlvi., fig. 78-93;Kingsborough, vol. v., pp. 255-68, vol. vi., pp. 447-56, vol. iv., pl. xxvii-xli., fig. 81-95;Lenoir, inAntiq. Mex., tom. i., div. ii., pp. 16, 23-4, 52-7. Mühlenpfordt,Mejico, tom. i., pref., p. 5, claims to have been for some time Director of road-construction in the state of Oajaca, and states his intention of publishing at some future time 18 or 20 large copper-plate engravings illustrating the antiquities of Mitla and others. These plates, so far as I know, have never been given to the public. Carriedo accompanied Mühlenpfordt, or Mihelenpforott as he writes the name, and published some of the drawings, perhaps all, in theIlustracion Mejicana, tom. ii., pp. 493-8. Some of the German artists' descriptive text is also quoted from I know not what source.Tempsky's Mitla, pp. 250-3, with plates which must have been made up for the most part from other sources than the author's own observations. García's visit,Soc. Mex. Geog., Boletin, tom. vii., pp. 271-2. Sawkin's exploration, inMayer's Observations, p. 28, et seq., with plates. It will be shown later that Mr Sawkins' drawings are without value to the archæological student. Fossey's account,Mexique, pp. 365-70;Charnay,Ruines Amér., pp. 261-9, phot. ii-xviii.;Viollet-le-Duc, inId., pp. 74-104, with cuts. After Charnay had completed, as he thought, the work of photographing the ruins, all his negatives were spoiled for want of proper varnish. He was therefore compelled to return alone, since he had exhausted the somewhat limited patience of his native assistants, and to work day and night to take a new set of pictures. Müller,Reisen, tom. ii., pp. 279-81, seems also to have made a personal exploration. Other references for Mitla containing no original information are as follows:—Baldwin's Anc. Amer., pp. 117-22, with two cuts from Charnay and two from Tempsky, all given in my text.Gallatin, inAmer. Ethno. Soc., Transact., vol. i., p. 173;Bradford's Amer. Antiq., pp. 85-6;Larenaudière, inNouvelles Annales des Voy., tom. xxxiv., pp. 121-2;Gondra, inPrescott,Hist. Conq. Mex., tom. iii., pp. 90-5, pl. xvii.;Mayer's Mex. as it Was, pp. 251-3;Id.,Mex. Aztec, vol. ii., pp. 213-16;Klemm,Cultur-Geschichte, tom. v., pp. 157-60;Morelet,Voyage, tom. i., pp. 270-1;Id.,Travels, p. 92;Müller,Amerikanische Urreligionen, p. 462;Prescott's Mex., vol. i., p. 14, vol. iii., pp. 404-6;Malte-Brun,Précis de la Géog., tom. vi., p. 463;Mexicanische Zustände, tom. i., pp. 403-4;Wappäus,Mex. Guat., p. 162;Lemprière,Mexique, p. 144;Hassel,Mex. Guat., p. 255;Hermosa,Manual Geog., p. 135;EscaleraandLlana,Mex., pp. 327-32, 225, same as inFossey;Lafond,Voyages, tom. i., p. 139;Bonnycastle's Span. Amer., vol. i., p. 154, vol. ii., p. 233;D'Orbigny,Voyage, p. 356;Conder's Mex. Guat., vol. ii., pp. 130-4;Dally,Races Indig., pp. 16-17;Macgillivray's Life Humboldt, pp. 314-15;Mills' Hist. Mex., p. 158;Mexico in 1842, p. 77;Brasseur de Bourbourg,Hist. Nat. Civ., tom. ii., p. 105;Larenaudière,Mex. Guat., pl. ii-vi., from Dupaix;Delafield's Antiq. Amer., pp. 55, 59-60.

[VII-35]Charnay, phot. xvii., gives a general view of the ruins, from which, however, no clear idea can be formed of the arrangement of the structures. The buildings are named or numbered as follows by the different authors; Dupaix numbers them as they are marked on my plan; Carriedo and Mühlenpfordt unite Nos. 1 and 2 under the name of 1st Palace, making No. 3 No. 2, and No. 4 No. 3; Charnay's 1st or grand palace is the northern building of No. 1; his 2d is the eastern building of the same; his 3d and 4th are the northern and western buildings respectively of No. 2. My No. 3 is called by him the House of the Curate, and No. 4 is only mentioned by him without name or number.

[VII-36]At the Conquest the ruins covered an immense area, but they now consist of six palaces and three ruined pyramids.Charnay,Ruines Amér., p. 261.

[VII-37]Dupaix's ground plan, pl. xxix., fig. 78, represents such a southern building and mound, although very slight, if any, traces remained of the former at the time of his visit. Martin's plan, given by Humboldt, shows two shorter mounds without buildings; while Carriedo's plan locates no structure whatever south of the court, and I have omitted it in my plan.

[VII-38]The dimensions are very nearly those of the plans of Martin and Castañeda, who differ only very slightly. The dimensions given by the different authorities are as follows: A. 12½×47½ varas,Castañeda; 13¼×46½ varas,Martin, inHumboldt; 40 mètres long,Charnay; 180 feet long,Tempsky; 132 feet long,Fossey. C. 22×22 varas,CastañedaandMartin;d, 7×35½ varas,Castañeda; 7½×34½ varas,Martin. Walls 1½ to 3½ varas thick,Castañeda; 1½ varas,Martin. Height 5 to 6 mètres,Humboldt; 14 feet,Fossey. The height of the inner columns, to be spoken of later, shows something respecting the original height of the walls.

[VII-39]Charnay, p. 264, describes the material of this filling as 'terre battue, mêlée de gros cailloux.' His photographs of walls where the facing has fallen show in some places a mass of large irregular stones, even laid with some regularity in a few instances; in other parts of the ruins there seem to be very few stones, but only a mass of earth or clay; and in still other parts the wall has every appearance of regular adobes. Dupaix, p. 35, says that sand and lime are mixed with the earth. 'El macizo, ó grueso de las paredes se compone de una tierra mezclada y beneficiada con arena y cal.' 'De tierra preparada, hollada ó beneficiada cuando fresca y pastosa.' Tempsky, p. 251, declares the material to be rough boulders in cement. Humboldt,Vues, tom. ii., p. 283, speaks of 'une masse d'argile qui paroît remplir l'intérieur des murs.'

[VII-40]'Los compartimientos divididos por unos tableros cuadrilongos, terminados por unas molduras cuadradas que sobresalen á la linea de la muralla, contienen en sus planos unas grecas de alto relieve de una bella invencion, pues sus dibujos presentan unos enlaces complicados arreglados á una exactisima geometría, con una grande union entre las piedras que los componen, las que son de varios gruesos, y configuraciones; ademas se advierte una perfecta nivelacion en toda esta admirable ensambladura.'Dupaix, 2d exped., p. 31. A mosaic of soft sandstone cut in blocks 7×2⅛×1 inches, and all forming a smooth exterior surface.Tempsky's Mitla, pp. 251-2, with a very faulty cut. The statement about the smooth surface is certainly erroneous, as is probably that respecting the size of the blocks. 'Ces arabesques forment une sorte de mosaïque, composée de petites pierres carrées, qui sont placées avec beaucoup d'art, les unes à côté des autres.'Humboldt,Vues, tom. ii., p. 283; with cuts of three styles of this mosaic from Martin. 'Briquettes de différentes grandeurs.' The modern church is built of stone from the ruins. The natives carry away the blocks of mosaic in the belief that they will turn to gold.Charnay,Ruines Amér., p. 252, 263-5. Phot. v-vi., view of southern façade. 22 different styles of grecques on this front.Fossey,Mexique, pp. 367-8. Cuts of 16 different styles inIlustracion Mej., tom. ii., p. 501.

[VII-41]An Indian woman was reported to have one of the heads from these holes, built into the walls of her house, but it could not be found.Dupaix, 2d exped., p. 31.

[VII-42]Besides the photograph copied above, Charnay's photographs, vii.-viii., present views from the east and west, showing that the same style of construction and ornamentation extends completely round the building. Dupaix's plate xxx. represents this façade, but shows only a small portion of the stone-work. Kingsborough gives in its place a magnificent plate, 1×5 feet, showing the whole front restored in all its details; he gives also the plate fromAntiq. Mex., but refers it to the palace No. 2. pl. xxxi., fig. 85. See description of the walls quoted from Burgoa, inSoc. Mex. Geog., Boletin, tom. vii., pp. 170-3.

[VII-43]5.8 mètres high; one third of the height buried in the ground.Humboldt,Vues, tom. ii., p. 282. 4 varas above surface, 2 varas below, 1 vara diameter.Id., inAntiq. Mex., suppl. pl. viii. Of the material, Humboldt says: 'Quelques personnes, très-instruites en minéralogie, m'ont dit que la pierre est un beau porphyre amphibolique; d'autres m'ont assuré que c'est un granite porphyritique.' 12 feet high, 9½ feet in circumference.Fossey,Mex., pp. 367-8. About 14 feet high,Charnay,Ruines Amér., p. 263; 5½ varas high, 1 vara in diameter, material granite,Dupaix, p. 31. Over 5 varas high.Burgoa, inSoc. Mex. Geog., Boletin, tom. vii., p. 171. 12 feet high, 4 feet diameter.Tempsky's Mitla, p. 253. 10 feet 10½ inches above ground, over 6 feet below, 3⅓ varas in circumference; material porphyry.Ilustracion Mej., tom. ii., pp. 495-6. So large that two men can hardly reach round them, 5 fathoms high.Mendieta,Hist. Ecles., pp. 395-6. Material a porous limestone.Viollet-le-Duc, inCharnay,Ruines Amér., p. 78.

[VII-44]SeeCharnay, phot. x.

[VII-45]Charnay, phot. vii.-viii.

[VII-46]Charnay, phot. xi. Plate inTempsky's Mitla, pp. 252-3, very incorrect, as are nearly all of this author's illustrations.

[VII-47]Charnay, phot. ix.

[VII-48]Seep. 257of this volume.

[VII-49]Murguia, inSoc. Mex. Geog., Boletin, tom. vii., pp. 170-3. 'De grandes dalles, de plus de deux pieds d'épaisseur, reposant sur des piliers d'une hauteur de trois mètres, formaient le plafond de ces palais: au-dessus on voyait une corniche saillante ornée de sculptures capricieuses, dont l'ensemble formait comme une sorte de diadème posé sur le sommet de l'édifice.'Brasseur de Bourbourg,Hist. Nat. Civ., tom. iii., p. 26, Burgoa.

[VII-50]As quoted inIlustracion Mej., tom. ii., p. 496.

[VII-51]Viollet-le-Duc, inCharnay,Ruines Amér., pp. 78-9.

[VII-52]Charnay, phot. xii., p. 264;Dupaix, pp. 31-2, pl. xxxi., fig. 80.

[VII-53]In the preceding pages it will be noticed that I have paid no attention to the plates and description by Mr J. G. Sawkins, from an exploration in 1837, as given by Col. Brantz Mayer in hisObservations on Mexican History and Archæology, published among theSmithsonian Contributions to Knowledge. My reasons for disregarding Sawkins' authority are, that the said descriptions and plates are just sufficiently accurate to identify palace No. 1 with the one referred to, but otherwise constitute one of the most bare-faced frauds recorded in the annals of antiquarian exploration in America. The following points are more than sufficient to substantiate what I have said:—1st. Sawkins reverses the cardinal points, respecting which the other authorities agree, placing the principal building on the east of the court instead of the north, etc. To avoid repetition and confusion, I shall in the following remarks, however, correct this error and speak of each building in its proper location. 2d. Sawkins found five standing columns in the eastern building,d, four of which supported parts of a wall, while the other standing apart was taller than the rest; now the columns supporting the wall may have been the piers between the doorways—but onlythreeof these were standing in 1806 (seeDupaix, pl. xxxi.); and the taller column standing apart agrees well enough with the truth, except that there weretwoof them standing in 1859. (SeeCharnay,Ruines Amér., phot. xii.) On the west our explorer correctly found everything obliterated, and the 'crumbling and indistinct walls' which he found on the south may have been part of palace No. 2. 3d. Coming now to the northern building, Sawkins found in the front 4 doorways, so narrow and low that only one person at a time could enter, and that only by stooping; during the next 20 years these doorways grew remarkably in size, and decreased in number, since Charnay's photograph shows 3 doorways with standing human figures in two of them, not obliged to stoop or much pressed for elbow room, as may be seen in the copy I have given. 4th. Sawkins found all the adornments removed from this façade; they were perhaps replaced before Charnay's visit. 5th. In the interior, A of the plan, Sawkins found niches in the end walls not seen by any other visitor. 6th. The six columns represented by Martin and Dupaix as standing in the centre of this apartment, had all been removed (!) at the time of Sawkins' visit. It was a strange freak of the camera to picture them all in place 20 years later. 7th. But Charnay's photographic apparatus had yet other repairs to make, for in the northern wing, C, the walls of the interior apartments had all disappeared, and even the interior surface of the outer walls, which enclosed the quadrangle, had no mosaic work, but the panels presented only 9 long recesses in three tiers on each side. Mr Sawkins' plates are two in number; one of them presents a general view of this palace from the west, and although faulty, indicates that the artist may have actually visited Mitla; the other is a rear view of the northern building, gives a tolerably correct idea of the construction of the walls, and may possibly have been made up from the large plate in Kingsborough's work. I have no more space to devote to Sawkins. He may have been already 'shown up' by some critic whose writings have escaped my notice. It is proper to add that as Col. Mayer apparently consulted only Humboldt's description of Mitla, it is not at all strange that this zealous investigator and usually correct writer was deceived by a pretended explorer.

[VII-54]Dupaix, pl. xxxii., fig. 81, where the dimensions are 6½×33½ varas. Carriedo's, or Mühlenpfordt's, plan, pl. ii., makes the court 114×135 feet, and the western building 128.9 feet on the inside; on page 495, and on another plan, it is implied that the eastern mound never bore any building.

[VII-55]Ilustracion Mej., tom. ii., p. 495.

[VII-56]Müller,Reisen, tom. ii., p. 280.

[VII-57]Charnay,Ruines Amér., phot. xiii.-xvi.;Dupaix, p. 33, pl. xxxiii., fig. 82-3;Kingsborough, vol. v., pp. 258-9, vol. vi., pp. 450-1, vol. iv., pl. xxx., fig. 84;Lenoir, inAntiq. Mex., tom. ii., div. i., pp. 53, 16;Mühlenpfordt, inIlustracion Mej., p. 500, pl. vi.;Tempsky's Mitla, pp. 250-1.

[VII-58]Dupaix, 2d exped., pp. 32-3, pl. xxxiv.-v., fig. 82;Kingsborough, vol. v., p. 259, vol. vi., p. 451, vol. iv., pl. xxxii.-iii., fig. 86-7, ground plan, and section showing mosaic work;Ilustracion Mej., tom. ii., pp. 495-500, pl. iv., v., ix. Humboldt,Vues, tom. ii., pp. 278-82, places the gallery erroneously under the northern wing of palace No. 1, with an entrance in the floor of the column chamber.Murguia, inSoc. Mex. Geog., Boletin, tom. vii., pp. 170-3, from Burgoa, about the caves on which the palaces were built.Müller,Reisen, tom. ii., p. 280;Tempsky's Mitla, pp. 250-1;Fossey,Mex., p. 369;Charnay,Ruines Amér., pp. 264-5;Mayer's Observations, p. 30, with cuts from Dupaix.Lenoir, inAntiq. Mex., tom. ii., div. i., p. 53. 'Un appartement souterrain qui a 27 mètres de long, et 8 de large.'Humboldt,Essai Pol., p. 264.

[VII-59]Charnay,Ruines Amér., p. 263, phot. iii.-iv.;Dupaix, 2d exped., pp. 33, 35-6, pl. xxxvi., fig. 83;Kingsborough, vol. v., p. 259, vol. vi., p. 451, vol. iv., pl. xxxiv., fig. 88, this plan differs from the one given above in making the passagedstraight.Ilustracion Mej., tom. ii., p. 496.

[VII-60]Dupaix, pl. xxxvii., fig. 84;Kingsborough, vol. iv., pl. xxxv., fig. 89. The latter plan represents three doorways in each of the buildings fronting on the northern court, C. See also references of preceding note.

[VII-61]Dupaix, pp. 34, 39, pl. xxxlx-xl., xliii-iv., fig. 86-7, 91-2;Kingsborough, vol. v., pp. 260-1, vol. vi., pp. 451-3, vol. iv., pl. xxxvii-ix., fig. 91-4;Lenoir, inAntiq. Mex., tom. ii., div. i., pp. 55-6;Charnay, p. 263, phot. ii.;Mühlenpfordt, inIlustracion Mej., tom. ii., p. 496; Fossey,Mexique, pp. 368-9, locates these pyramidal groups east and north, instead of south and west of palace No. 1. He also mentions a granite block, or altar, 4½ feet long and one foot thick.

[VII-62]Dupaix, p. 34, pl. xxxviii., fig. 85;Kingsborough, vol. v., p. 259, vol. vi., p. 451, vol. iv., pl. xxxvi., fig. 90. Kingsborough's plate represents the walls as mostly fallen.Lenoir, inAntiq. Mex., tom. ii., div. i., p. 53.

[VII-63]Dupaix, pp. 40-1, pl. xliv.-v., fig. 93-4, view of hill, and plan copied above.Kingsborough, vol. v., p. 265, vol. vi., p. 455, vol. iv., pl. xl.-i., fig. 95;Lenoir, p. 56. Dupaix's plates are copied inMosaico Mex., tom. ii., pp. 281-4, andArmin,Alte Mex., p. 290;Fossey,Mex., p. 370. Plate from Sawkins' drawing, different from that of Castañeda, but of course unreliable, inMayer's Observations, p. 32, pl. iv.

[VII-64]Dupaix, 2d exped., pp. 41-3;Tylor's Anahuac, p. 139.

[VII-65]Dupaix, 2d exped., pp. 37-8, pl. xli.-ii., fig. 88-90;Kingsborough, vol. v., p. 254, vol. vi., p. 447, vol. iv., pl. xxvi., fig. 78-80;Lenoir, inAntiq. Mex., pp. 23-4, 55;Tempsky's Mitla, p. 254.

[VII-66]Burgoa,Geog. Descrip., fol. 257-60;Id., inSoc. Mex. Geog., Boletin, tom. vii., p. 170, et seq., pp. 271-2;Id., inIlustracion Mej., tom. ii., p. 494;Id., inBrasseur de Bourbourg,Hist. Nat. Civ., tom. iii., pp. 21-30. Brasseur says that the temple built over a subterranean labyrinth was called Yohopehelichi Pezelao, 'supreme fortress of Pezelao.' Built under Toltec influence.Id., tom. i., pp. 304-5, tom. iii., p. 9. Sacked by the Aztecs about 1494, and the priests carried as captives to Mexico.Id., tom. iii., p. 358;Tylor's Anahuac, p. 139. Buildings of different age.Dupaix, 2d exped., pp. 34-5;Charnay,Ruines Amér., pp. 252-3, 265;Humboldt,Vues, tom. ii., p. 279.

[VII-67]Humboldt,Vues, tom. ii., pp. 284-5. 'Les palais funéraires de Mitla reproduisent en certains cas l'ordonnance des demeures chinoises.'Charnay,Ruines Amér., p. iii. The ruins of Mitla 'nous paraissent appartenir à la civilisation quichée, quoique postérieurs à ceux de l'Yucatan. La perfection de l'appareil, les parements verticaux des salles avec leurs épines de colonnes portant la charpente du comple, l'absence complète d'imitation de la construction de bois dans la décoration extérieure ou intérieure, l'ornementation obtenue seulement par l'assemblage des pierres sans sculpture, donnent aux édifices de Mitla un caractère particulier qui les distingue nettement de ceux de l'Yucatan et qui indiquerait aussi une date plus récente.'Viollet-le-Duc, inId., pp. 100-1.

[VII-68]Lovato's report was published with two of the nine plates which originally accompanied it in theMuseo Mex., tom. iii., p. 329-35, and, without the plates inDiccionario Univ., tom. ix., pp. 697-700. Müller,Reisen, tom. ii., pp. 251-4, gives an account which seems to have been made up mostly from Lovato's report, although he may have personally visited the ruins. A short description, also from theMuseo Mex., may be found inMayer's Mex. Aztec, vol. ii., p. 217, andId.,Observations, pp. 25-6.

[VII-69]Museo Mex., tom. i., p. 136. Lovato's exploration was made by the order of Gen. Leon, and the account furnished for publication by Sr J. M. Tornel. In describing the Temple, the three flights of stairs are said to have 10, 8, and 6 steps, respectively, which does not agree with the plate as copied above. Müller gives the number of small buildings, or dwellings, whose foundations are visible as 120 instead of 130; he also gives in his dimensions mètres instead of varas, which would increase them in English feet in the proportion of 92 to 109. He further states that the structures face the cardinal points.

[VII-70]Unda, inSoc. Mex. Geog., Boletin, 2da época, tom. i., p. 30;Museo Mex., tom. i., p. 250.

[VII-71]Dupaix, 2d exped., p. 14, pl. xix., fig. 55;Kingsborough, vol. v., p. 244, vol. vi., p. 442, vol. iv., pl. xvii., fig. 55;Lenoir, inAntiq. Mex., tom. ii., div. i., p. 47.

[VII-72]Museo Mex., tom. i., pp. 249, 401, with plates of the rings and 7 stone relics.

[VII-73]Dupaix, 2d exped., pp. 15-16, pl. xix.-xx., fig. 56-63;Kingsborough, vol. v., pp. 244-5, vol. vi., pp. 442-3, vol. iv., pl. xvii.-xviii., fig. 56-63. Respecting the jasper figures M. Dupaix says: 'Le nombre de celles qu'on trouve dans les sépultures de la nation zapotèque est infini. Elles ont deux à trois pouces de haut; elles sont presque toutes de forme triangulaire, quadrangulaire, ou prismatique, et sont sculptées en jaspe vert foncé, ayant invariablement la même attitude semblable à celle d'Iris ou d'Osiris, dont les petites idoles étaient destinées à accompagner les momies égyptiennes.' The hole in the back part of each is drilled in a curved line.Lenoir, inAntiq. Mex., tom. ii., div. i., pp. 47-8.

[VII-74]Muñoz,Estadística del Distrito de Hidalgo, inGuerrero,Memoria presentada á la H. Legislatura, por el Gobernador, Fran. O. Arce, 1872, pp. 45, 150, 272.

[VIII-1]Mühlenpfordt,Mejico, tom. ii., p. 32;Mexikanische Zustände, tom. i., p. 31.

[VIII-2]Soc. Mex. Geog., Boletin, 2da época, tom. i., pp. 292-7, tom. iii., pp. 104-9, with two plates representing the colossal head, and several other relics from some locality not mentioned.

[VIII-3]Ottavio, inNouvelles Annales des Voy., 1833, tom. lix., p. 64.

[VIII-4]Waldeck,Palenqué, pl. xlix.;Tylor's Anahuac, pp. 230-1.

[VIII-5]Antiq. Mex., tom. i., div. ii., p. 35.

[VIII-6]Mayer's Mex. as it Was, pp. 93-7;Id.,Mex. Aztec, etc., vol. ii., p. 272, with 3 cuts;Id., inSchoolcraft's Arch., vol. vi., p. 588, pl. vi., fig. 5, 6, 8, 11, 12;Gondra, inPrescott,Hist. Conq. Mex., tom. iii., pp. 82-4, pl. xv., plate of a vase.

[VIII-7]Sartorius,Fortificaciones Antiguas, inSoc. Mex. Geog., Boletin, 2da época, tom. i., pp. 818-27.

[VIII-8]Finck, inSmithsonian Rept., 1870, pp. 373-5. Mr Tylor, in traveling northward towards Jalapa, speaks of 'numerous remains of ancient Indian mound-forts or temples which we passed on the road.'Anahuac, p. 312.

[VIII-9]Brasseur de Bourbourg,Palenqué, p. 33. 'Chalchiuhcuecan, ou le pays des coquilles vertes. On voit encore des débris de la ville de ce nom, sous les eaux qui s'étendent de la ville de la Véra Cruz au château de San-Juan-de-Ulloa.'Id.,Hist. Nat. Civ., tom. i., p. 143. Ruins of the ordinary type are reported outside the triangular area, in the Sierra de Matlaquiahuitl or del Gallego, running south from the Rio Jamapa to San Juan de la Punta.Sartorius, inSoc. Mex. Geog., Boletin, 2da época, tom. i., p. 820.

[VIII-10]Dupaix, 1st exped., pp. 7-8, pl. viii., fig. 8;Kingsborough, vol. v., p. 214, vol. vi., p. 425, vol. iv., pl. iv., fig. 10;Lenoir, inAntiq. Mex., p. 28. Kingsborough's text represents this relic as 16 leagues from Orizava instead of Córdova.

[VIII-11]Dupaix, 1st exped., p. 7, pl. vi., vii., fig. 6, 7;Kingsborough, vol. v., pp. 213-14, vol. vi., pp. 424-5, vol. iv., pl. iv., fig. 8, 9;Lenoir, inAntiq. Mex., tom. ii., div. i., pp. 22, 27-8.

[VIII-12]Dupaix, 1st exped., p. 5, pl. iv-v., fig. 4-5;Kingsborough, vol. v., pp. 212-13, vol. vi., pp. 423-4; vol. iv., pl. iii., fig. 6-7;Lenoir, pp. 18, 22, 26-7.

[VIII-13]Historia de Jalapa, Mex. 1869, tom. i., p. 7.

[VIII-14]Hakluyt's Voy., vol. iii., p. 453.

[VIII-15]Note inCortés,Despatches, p. 39;Rivera,Hist. Jalapa, Mex., 1869, tom. i., p. 39. Cempoala is located on some maps on the coast a few leagues north of Vera Cruz; there is also a town of the name in Mexico.

[VIII-16]Esteva, inMuseo Mex., tom. ii., pp. 465-7, with plan and view. Respecting the circumference of the structure, Esteva's text says: 'la media circunferencia de la base, tomada desde el escalon ó cuerpo A. B. C.,(letters which do not appear in his plate)pues mas abajo no se podia tomar con esactitud, es de ciento cincuenta y seis piés castellanos.' I have taken the circumference from the plan. The material Esteva states to be 'cal, arena, y piedras grandes del rio,' but the view indicates that hewn stone is employed, or at least that the whole structure is covered with a smooth coating of cement in perfect preservation. Esteva's account is also published in theDiccionario Univ. de Geog., tom. x., pp. 166-8, and a slight description from the same source inMayer's Mex. Aztec, etc., vol. ii., pp. 203-4.

[VIII-17]Lyon's Journal, vol. ii., p. 209;Sartorius, inSoc. Mex. Geog., Boletin, 2da época, tom. i., p. 826. Mühlenpfordt,Mej., tom. ii., p. 89, also mentions the Paso de Ovejas remains.

[VIII-18]Iberri, inMuseo Mex., tom. iii., p. 23. Gondra's account inMosaico Mex., tom. ii., pp. 368-72, with two views and a plan. Sartorius' description inSoc. Mex. Geog., Boletin, 2da época, tom. i., pp. 821-2, tom. ii., p. 148, with two views apparently the same as by Gondra, an additional side and front view of a pyramid, and a plan which bears no likeness to Gondra's, representing perhaps a different part of the ruins. According to this author the ruins were first made known in 1829 or 1830. The two accounts are very perplexing to the student, sometimes resembling each other so closely that one is ready to believe that Sartorius was the explorer from whom Gondra obtained his information and drawings, in other parts so different as to indicate that different ruins are referred to. I am inclined to believe that Gondra's information did in part refer to some other ruin in the same region. Gondra's account is also printed inDiccionario Univ. Geog., tom. ix., pp. 565-8. Brief mention inRivera,Hist. Jalapa, Mex. 1869, tom. i., pp. 389-90.

[VIII-19]Respecting the first narrow pass, the oval table, and the ditch, Sartorius says nothing. He mentions such a ditch, however, in connection with the ruins of Tlacotepec, as we shall see. It is quite possible that the features mentioned do not belong to Centla at all.

[VIII-20]10 varas according to Sartorius; Gondra says 15.

[VIII-21]Copied from Sartorius, with the addition of the shading only.

[VIII-22]The views given by Gondra and Sartorius are of the pyramid A, from the east, and of the terrace walls at B, from the west. The latter also gives a view of the small pyramidb, from the north. The plan given by Gondra bears no resemblance to the other. It may represent ruins in other parts of the plateau; it may be a faulty representation made up from the explorer's description of the works that have been described; or, what is, I think, more probable, it may refer to some other group of ruins in the vicinity. It represents a collection of pyramids and buildings, bounded on both the east and west by walls, one of which has an entrance close to the brink of the precipice, while the other had no opening till one was made by the modern settlers.

[VIII-23]'Ochenta varas en cuadro.' Perhaps it should readfeetinstead of varas. The plate makes the front slightly over 24 varas.

[VIII-24]Dupaix, 1st exped., pp. 8-9, pl. ix-xi., fig. 9-12;Kingsborough, vol. v., pp. 215-16, vol. vi., pp. 425-6, vol. iv., pl. v-vi., fig. 11-15. The skull is mentioned and sketched only in Kingsborough's edition.Lenoir, pp. 23, 29. Slight mention of these ruins from Dupaix, inMosaico Mex., tom. ii., pp. 373-4;Klemm,Cultur-Geschichte, tom. v., p. 157;Warden, inAntiq. Mex., tom. ii., pp. 67-8.

[VIII-25]Soc. Mex. Geog., Boletin, 2da época, tom. i., p. 821.

[VIII-26]Storia Ant. del Messico, tom. ii., p. 150;Bradford's Amer. Antiq., p. 104.

[VIII-27]Museo Mex., tom. iii., p. 23.

[VIII-28]Soc. Mex. Geog., Boletin, 2da época, tom. i., p. 822;Mosaico Mex., tom. ii., pp. 368, 372;Smithsonian Rept., 1870, p. 374.

[VIII-29]This may possibly be the ditch referred to by Gondra in his account of Centla.

[VIII-30]Sartorius, inSoc. Mex. Geog., Boletin, 2da época, tom. i., pp. 822-4, with plan and view, the latter giving no information.

[VIII-31]Id., p. 824.

[VIII-32]Heller,Reisen, pp. 61, 72-3, 76-7, with cut.

[VIII-33]Sartorius, inSoc. Mex. Geog., Boletin, 2da época, tom. i., pp. 825-6.

[VIII-34]Id., pp. 821, 824-5, with a sketch which amounts to nothing.

[VIII-35]Anahuac, p. 297.

[VIII-36]Mosaico Mex., tom. i., pp. 102-5. Gondra's account of the location is as follows: 'En la serranía al Norte de Jalapa, y distante de aquella ciudad de diez á once leguas, se encuentra en el canton de Misantla el cerro llamado del Estillero, á cuya falda se descubre una montaña terminada por una meseta muy angosta, de cerca de legua y media de largo, y aislada por barrancos profundos y acantilados, y por despeñaderos inaccessibles; rodeada por los cerros del Estillero, Magdalenilla, el Chamuscado, el Camaron y el Conejo por la parte del Oeste; por el Monte Real ácia el Este, y lo restante por la elevada cuesta de Misantla.... La única parte algo accesible para subir á la meseta de la montaña donde se hallan las ruinas, está ácia la falda del Estillero.... Al comenzar la meseta, bajando por la falda del cerro del Estillero, lo primero que se observa es un paredon demolido hecho de gruesas piedras,' etc. Gondra's account was reprinted in theSoc. Mex. Geog., Boletin, tom. ii., p. 220-3. Iberri's account is found in theMuseo Mex., tom. iii., pp. 21-4. Respecting the location he says:—'El cerro conocido de la Magdalena, degradando su altura en picos porfiríticos que afectan figuras cónicas ó piramidales, ... forma un grupo de montañas sumamente escabrosas, que se dividen como rádios en ramas estrechadas por barrancas profundas y escarpadas de pórfido.... En una de estas ramas se hallan las referidas ruinas, cuya entrada está cerrada por un muro,' etc. Account made up from Gondra, with cut probably from same source inMayer's Mex. Aztec, vol. ii., pp. 200-3;Id.,Mex. as it Was, pp. 250-1. Slight mention by Mühlenpfordt,Mej., tom. ii., p. 88, who thinks the ruin may be identical with that of Tusapan. Same account inMexicanische Zustände, tom. i., p. 142.

[VIII-37]Mühlenpfordt,Mej., tom. ii., pp. 88-9;Mexikanische Zustände, tom. i., pp. 142-3.

[VIII-38]Gaceta de Mexico, July 12, 1785, tom. i., pp. 349-51. Location 'por el rumbo del Poniente de este pueblo, á dos leguas de distancia, entre un espeso bosque.' This original account was printed later inDiccionario Univ. Geog., tom. x., pp. 120-1; it was also translated into Italian, and printed inMarquez,Due Antichi Monumenti, Rome, 1804, p. 3, also accompanied by the plate.

[VIII-39]Humboldt,Vues, tom. i., pp. 102-3;Id.,Essai Pol., p. 274;Id., inAntiq. Mex., tom. i., div. ii., p. 12. Humboldt's account translated by Gondra, inPrescott,Hist. Conq. Mex., tom. iii., pp. 39-40, says it is the forest that is called Tajin, that the ruin was discovered by hunters, and pronounces the plate in theGacetavery faulty.

[VIII-40]Nebel,Viage Pintoresco. The drawing is geometric rather than in perspective, and the author's descriptive text in a few details fails to agree exactly with it. José M. Bausa gives a slight description inSoc. Mex. Geog., Boletin, tom. v., p. 411, without stating the source of his information. He locates the ruin 2½ leagues south-west of the pueblo. This author states that Carlos M. Bustamante published a good account of the ruin in 1828, in hisRevoltijo de Nopalitos. Other accounts of Papantla made up from the preceding sources, are as follows:—Mayer's Mex. Aztec, vol. ii., pp. 196-7, with cut after Nebel;Id.,Mex. as it Was, pp. 248-9;Id., inSchoolcraft's Arch., vol. vi., p. 583, pl. xi.;Baldwin's Anc. Amer., pp. 91-2;Conder's Mex. Guat., tom. i., p. 227;Fossey,Mex., pp. 317-18;Hassel,Mex. Guat., pp. 238-9;Larenaudière,Mex. Guat., p. 45;De Bercy,Travels, tom. ii., p. 237;Bradford's Amer. Antiq., pp. 79-80;Mühlenpfordt,Mejico, tom. ii., p. 88;Mexicanische Zustände, p. 142;Bingley's Trav., pp. 259-60;Amer. Antiq. Soc., Transact., vol. i., p. 256;Armin,Heutige Mex., pp. 96-7, with cut;Malte-Brun,Précis de la Géog., tom. vi., p. 462;Müller,Amerikanische Urreligionen, p. 459;Priest's Amer. Antiq., pp. 276-8;Wappäus,Geog. u. Stat., p. 154;Wilson's Mex. and its Religion, pp. 246-7.

[VIII-41]The dimensions in Nebel's text are, 120 feet square and 85 feet high, which must be an error, since the author says that the stairway in the plate may be used as a scale, each step being a foot; and measuring the structure by that scale it would be something over 90 feet square at the base and about 54 feet high. TheGacetasays that the base is 30 varas (83 English feet) square, and the steps in sight were 57 in number. Humboldt calls the pyramid 25 mètres (82 feet) square and 18 mètres (59 feet) high, or, inEssai Pol., 16 to 20 mètres. Bausa,Soc. Mex. Geog., Boletin, tom. v., p. 411, calls the height 93 feet, with 53 steps.

[VIII-42]Bausa says the pyramid faces the north. TheGacetaaccount represents the stairway as 10 or 12 varas wide. The plate represents the lateral narrow stairways as single instead of double, and the niches as not extending entirely across the wide central stairway. Only six stories are shown in the plate, terminating in a summit platform on which stand two small altar-like structures at the head of the lateral stairways. Nebel speaks simply of a 'double stairway.' Humboldt agrees with the plate in theGaceta.

[VIII-43]TheGaceta'stext says 342, but its own figures correctly added make the number 378 as is pointed out by Marquez; and the plate accompanying the same account makes the number 309. Fossey says 360 niches. Humboldt made the number 378, which he supposed to relate to the signs of the Toltec civil calendar.

[VIII-44]Nebel,Viage Pintoresco;Cassel, inNouvelles Annales des Voy., 1830, tom. xlv., pp. 336-7;Mayer's Mex. Aztec, vol. ii., p. 198;Id.,Mex. as it Was, pp. 246-7.

[VIII-45]Nebel,Viage Pintoresco;Mayer's Mex. Aztec, vol. ii., pp. 199-200;Id.,Mex. as it Was, pp. 247-8;Armin,Alte Mex., p. 43; Bausa, inSoc. Mex. Geog., Boletin, tom. v., pp. 411-12, locates Tusapan 14 leagues south-west of Papantla.

[VIII-46]The original of this report I have not seen; a translation, however, was published in theSan Francisco Evening Bulletin, of Feb. 20, 1866.

[VIII-47]Mex., Mem. del Ministro del Fomento, 1865, p. 234, etc. It was also published in a separate pamphlet.Almaraz,Mem. acerca de los Terrenos de Metlaltoyuca, pp. 28-33. Mention by García y Cubas, a companion of Almaraz, inSoc. Mex. Geog., Boletin, 2da época, tom. i., p. 37.

[VIII-48]Chimalpopoca, inAlmaraz,Mem., p. 28;Linares, inSoc. Mex. Geog., Boletin, 3ra época, tom. i., p. 103.

[VIII-49]The analysis is as follows:—quartzy sand, 31.00; silex, 13.00; aluminia and iron, 2.60; carbonate of lime, 48.00; magnesia, 2.50; moisture, 2.00; loss, 0.90.Almaraz,Mem., p. 30.

[VIII-50]'De las dimensiones que usan hoy para hacer los árboles de tierra.' I am unable to say what such dimensions amount to in English measurement.

[VIII-51]A plate showing these paintings is given by Almaraz.

[VIII-52]Burkart,Mexiko, tom. i., p. 51.

[VIII-53]Vetch, inLond. Geog. Soc., Jour., vol. vii., pp. 1-11, with plate.

[VIII-54]Lyon's Journal, vol. i., pp. 57-61.

[VIII-55]Norman's Rambles by Land and Water, pp. 145-51, 164;Mayer's Mex. Aztec, tom. i., pp. 193-6.

[VIII-56]Lyon's Journal, vol. i., pp. 61-2;Norman's Rambles, pp. 149-50. Slight mention of relics in this region, inMühlenpfordt,Mejico, tom. ii., p. 72;Bradford's Amer. Antiq., pp. 112-13.

[IX-1]Dupaix, 2d exped., p. 14, pl. xviii., fig. 53-4;Kingsborough, vol. v., p. 243, vol. vi., p. 442, vol. iv., pl. xvi., fig. 53-4;Lenoir, inAntiq. Mex., tom. ii., div. i., p. 47.

[IX-2]'No subsisten de él sino unas grandes ruinas de templo y caserías de cal y canto, situadas en ladera de unos cerritos.'Dupaix, 1st exped., p. 5;Kingsborough, vol. v., p. 211, vol. vi., p. 423.

[IX-3]Dupaix, 1st exped., p. 4, pl. iii., fig. 3;Kingsborough, vol. v., p. 211, vol. vi., p. 422, vol. iv., pl. ii., fig. 5. 'On y monte, du côté de l'ouest, par une rampe tracée de gauche à droite pour le premier étage, de droite à gauche pour le second, et ainsi de suite jusqu'au dernier.'Lenoir, inAntiq. Mex., tom. ii., div. i., p. 26;Klemm,Cultur-Geschichte, tom. v., p. 157.

[IX-4]Dupaix, 3d exped., p. 5, pl. i., ii., fig. 1-3;Kingsborough, vol. v., pp. 285-6, vol. vi., p. 467, vol. iv., pl. i., ii., fig. 1-3. According to Dupaix's plate the sides and summit platform are covered with plaster. Kingsborough's plate omits the coating of plaster and shows the remains of a ninth story. A scale attached to the latter plate would indicate that the pyramid has a base of 150 feet and is about 75 feet high.Lenoir, p. 69.

[IX-5]Dupaix, 1st exped., pp. 3-4, pl. i.-ii., fig. 1, 2; 2d exped., p. 51, pl. lxi., fig. 117;Kingsborough, vol. v., pp. 209-10, vol. vi., pp. 421-2, vol. iv., pl. i., fig. 1-4;Lenoir, inAntiq. Mex., tom. ii., div. i., pp. 22, 25-6, 63.

[IX-6]Dupaix, 1st exped., p. 10, pl. xii., fig. 13;Kingsborough, vol. v., p. 217, vol. vi., p. 426, vol. iv., pl. vi., fig. 16;Lenoir, p. 30. Kingsborough's plate makes the blocks of stone much smaller than the other, shows no plaster, and represents the walls of the summit building as still standing. Kingsborough also incorrectly translates 'antes de San Andrés,' 'formerly San Andrés.'Klemm,Cultur-Geschichte, tom. v., p. 157.

[IX-7]Dupaix, 1st exped., pp. 12-13, pl. xvii-xxii., fig. 19-24;Kingsborough, vol. v., pp. 219-20, vol. vi., pp. 427-8, vol. iv., pl. ix.-xi., fig. 21-4;Lenoir, pp. 31-3.

[IX-8]Dupaix, p. 11, pl. xvii., fig. 18, not in Kingsborough.

[IX-9]Dupaix, 1st exped., p. 13, pl. xxiii.-iv., fig. 25-6;Kingsborough, vol. v., p. 220, vol. vi., p. 428, vol. iv., pl. xii., fig. 25-6;Lenoir, p. 33.

[IX-10]On the building and history of the pyramid, see, among many others,Veytia,Hist. Ant. Mej., tom. i., pp. 18-19, 155-6, 199-205;Brasseur de Bourbourg,Hist. Nat. Civ., tom. iv., pp. 182-3.

[IX-11]Clavigero,Storia Ant. del Messico, tom. ii., pp. 33-4;Humboldt,Essai Pol., pp. 239-40;Id.,Vues, tom. i., pp. 96-124, pl. iii. (fol. ed. pl. vii., viii.);Id., inAntiq. Mex., suppl. pl. ii.;Dupaix, 1st exped., p. ii., pl. xvi., fig. 17;Kingsborough, vol. v., p. 218, vol. iv., pl. viii., fig. 20. It is to be noted that there is not the slightest resemblance between the two editions of Castañeda's drawing.Nebel,Viage Pintoresco, with large colored plate. Other visitors to Cholula, whose accounts contain more or less original information, are:—Poinsett, 1822,Notes, pp. 57-9; Bullock, 1823,Mexico, pp. 111-15—no plate, although the author made a drawing; Ward, 1825,Mexico, vol. ii., p. 269; Beaufoy, 1826,Mexican Illustr., pp. 193-5, with cuts; Latrobe, 1834,Rambler in Mex., p. 275; Mayer, 1841,Mexico as it Was, p. 26;Mex. Aztec, vol. ii., p. 228, with cut;Id., inSchoolcraft's Arch., vol. vi., p. 582; Thompson, 1842,Recollections of Mex., p. 30; Tylor, 1856,Anahuac, pp. 274-7; Evans, 1869,Our Sister Republic, pp. 428-32, with cut. Still other references on the subject, containing for the most part nothing except what is gathered from the preceding works, are:—Robertson's Hist. Amer.(8vo. ed. 1777), vol. i., p. 268;Gondra, inPrescott,Hist. Conq. Mex., tom. iii., pp. 37-45, pl. vi.;Antiq. Mex., tom. i., div. ii., p. 70;Lafond,Voyages, tom. i., pp. 137-8;Armin,Heutige Mex., pp. 63, 68, 72;Wilson's Mex. and her Religion, pp. 95-9;Amer. Antiq. Soc., Transact., vol. i., p. 256, etc., fromHumboldt, with cut;Baldwin's Anc. Amer., p. 90;Baril,Mex., p. 193;Beltrami,Mexique, tom. ii., pp. 283-8;DeBercy,L'Europe et L'Amér., tom. ii., p. 235, etc.;Brackett's Brigade in Mex., pp. 154-5;Bradford's Amer. Antiq., pp. 76-7;Brasseur de Bourbourg,Hist. Nat. Civ., tom. i., p. 301, et seq.;Calderon de la Barca's Life in Mex., vol. ii., p. 97;Chevalier,Mex., pp. 55-6;Id.,Mex. Ancien et Mod., pp. 174-9;Combier,Voyage, pp. 385-6;Dally,Sur les Races Indig., p. 17;Davis' Anc. Amer., p. 9;Donnavan's Adven., p. 98;D'Orbigny,Voyage, p. 331;Fossey,Mex., p. 111;Hassel,Mex. Guat., p. 246;Heller,Reisen, pp. 131-2;Nouvelles Annales des Voy., 1835, tom. lxv., pp. 363-4;Delafield's Antiq. Amer., p. 57;Jourdanet,Mexique, p. 20;Larenaudière,Mex. Guat., pp. 24, 45-6, plate from Dupaix;Löwenstern,Mexique, pp. 48-9;Malte-Brun,Précis de la Géog., tom. vi., pp. 461-2;Marmier,Voyageurs, tom. iii., pp. 328-9;Mexico, Country, etc., p. 14;Mex. in 1842, pp. 80-1;Mexico, A Trip to, pp. 59-60;Mill's Hist. Mex., p. 140;Mühlenpfordt,Mejico, tom. ii., pp. 232-3, 236;Müller,Amerikanische Urreligionen, pp. 458-9, 581;Pagés,Nouveau Voy., tom. ii., pp. 385-7;Prescott's Mex., vol. i., p. 60, vol. ii., pp. 6-8, 26, vol. iii., p. 380;Shepard's Land of the Aztecs, p. 128;Saturday Mag., vol. v., pp. 175-6;Scherr,Trauerspiel, pp. 29-30;Stapp's Prisoners of Perote, pp. 107-8;Thümmel,Mexiko, pp. 261-2;Tudor's Nar., vol. ii., pp. 208-9;Vigneaux,Souv. Mex., p. 531;Wappäus,Geog. u. Stat., pp. 32, 36, 180, 182;Warden,Recherches, pp. 66-7;Willson's Amer. Hist., pp. 60-1, 73;Yonge's Mod. Hist., p. 38;Frost's Pict. Hist., pp. 37-8;Hermosa,Manual Geog., pp. 140-1;Taylor's Eldorado, vol. ii., p. 181;Wortley's Trav., pp. 230-1, etc.;McCulloh's Researches in Amer., p. 252;Gemelli Careri, inChurchill,Col. Voy., vol. iv., p. 519;EscaleraandLlana,Méj. Hist. Descrip., pp. 205-6;Klemm,Cultur-Geschichte, tom. v., p. 156;Alcedo,Diccionario, tom. i., p. 550;Democratic Review, vol. xxvii., p. 425, vol. xxvi., pp. 546-7, vol. xi., p. 612;Mansfield's Mex. War, p. 207;Macgillivray's Life Humboldt, pp. 292, 312-13;Conder's Mex. Guat., vol. i., pp. 258-9, plate from Humboldt;Prichard's Nat. Hist. Man, vol. ii., p. 509.

[IX-12]'The large mound of earth at Cholula which the Spaniards dignified with the name of temple, still remains, but without any steps by which to ascend, or any facing of stone. It appears now like a natural mount, covered with grass and shrubs, and possibly it was never anything more.'Robertson's Hist. Amer., vol. i., p. 269. 'A le voir de loin, on seroit en effet tenté de le prendre pour une colline naturelle couverte de végétation.' 'Elle est très-bien conservée du côte de l'ouest, et c'est la face occidentale que présente la gravure que nous publions.'Humboldt,Vues, tom. i., pp. 104-5.

[IX-13]The dimensions of base, height, and summit platform respectively, as given by different authorities, are as follows: 439×54×64¾ mètres,Humboldt; 530×66 varas,Nebel; 1069×204×165 feet,Mayer, according to a careful measurement by a U. S. official in 1847; 40 varas square by actual measurement!Dupaix; 1423×177×208 feet,Prescott; 1425×177×175 feet,Latrobe; 1301×162×177 feet,Poinsett; About 200 feet high,Tylor; 1310×205 feet,Wilson; 1335×172 feet,Foster's Pre-Hist. Races, p. 345; 1355×170 feet,Ampère,Promenade, tom. ii., pp. 374-80; 1388×170 feet, summit 13285 sq. feet,Heller,Reisen, pp. 131-2; said to cover an area of over 43 acres and to be 179 feet high, but it seems much smaller and higher.Evans' Our Sister Rep., pp. 428-32.

[IX-14]Veytia,Hist. Ant. Mej., tom. i., pp. 155-6.

[IX-15]Heller,Reisen, pp. 131-2.

[IX-16]Humboldt,Vues, tom. i., pp. 127-8.

[IX-17]Foster,Pre-Hist. Races, p. 345, believes, on the contrary, that the pyramid was erected with the sole object of enshrining in an interior chamber of stone two corpses, showing that 'the industry of the great mass of the population was at the absolute command of the few.'

[IX-18]Wilson's Mex. and its Relig., pp. 95, 99. See a restoration of Cholula, by Mothes, inArmin,Heutige Mex., pp. 63, 68, 72.

[IX-19]Ampère,Promenade, tom. ii., pp. 373, 380. 'On découvre encore, du côté occidental, vis-a-vis du Cerro de Tecaxete et de Zapoteca, deux masses parfaitement prismatiques. L'une de ces masses porte aujourd'hui le nom d'Alcosac ou d'Istenenetl, l'autre celui du Cerro de la Cruz; la dernière, construite en pisé, n'est élevée que de 15 mètres.'Humboldt,Essai Pol., pp. 240-1.

Back to IndexNext