| By Author | [ A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z | Other Symbols ] |
| By Title | [ A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z | Other Symbols ] |
| By Language |
|
Download this book: [ ASCII | HTML | PDF ] Look for this book on Amazon Tweet |
Title: The Works of Hubert Howe Bancroft, Volume 5 - The Native Races, Volume 5, Primitive History
Author: Bancroft, Hubert Howe, 1832-1918
Language: English
As this book started as an ASCII text book there are no pictures available.
*** Start of this LibraryBlog Digital Book "The Works of Hubert Howe Bancroft, Volume 5 - The Native Races, Volume 5, Primitive History" ***
produced from images generously made available by The
Internet Archive)
Transcriber's Note:
Inconsistent hyphenation and spelling in the original document have
been preserved. Obvious typographical errors have been corrected.
Italic text is denoted by _underscores_.
Italics in the footnote citations were inconsistently applied by
the typesetter.
Footnote 1-1 has an un-opened quote ending "a very slow current."
Footnote I-219: Landnama should possibly be Landnáma.
Page 357: Words are possibly missing in the sentence starting, "We
have no further details".
Page 788: A reversed lower case "c" has been replaced with =c=.
Many index entries could not be found in the text. Many index
cross-references could not be found. A complete list of the latter
can be found at the end of this volume.
Alphabetization errors in the index were not corrected.
This volume contains extensive references to the previous four volumes
of this work. They can be found at:
THE WORKS OF HUBERT HOWE BANCROFT.
VOLUME V.
THE NATIVE RACES.
VOL. V. PRIMITIVE HISTORY.
SAN FRANCISCO:
A. L. BANCROFT & COMPANY, PUBLISHERS.
1883.
Entered according to Act of Congress in the Year 1882, by
HUBERT H. BANCROFT.
In the Office of the Librarian of Congress, at Washington.
_All Rights Reserved._
PREFACE TO VOLUME V.
This volume concludes the Native Races of the Pacific States. During
the year in which it has been going through the press, I have received
letters of encouragement from the most eminent scholars of Europe
and America, and flattering commendations from learned societies.
None but an author can know the value of such cheering words. This,
my first attempt, was made in a new field; the scope of the work was
very extensive; the system and machinery by which alone it could be
accomplished were untried; and the subject was not one of great popular
interest. It was not, therefore, without misgivings that I sent it
forth.
That the work had been so planned as to embody practically all
information extant on what I had come to regard as an important
subject, and that the plan had been faithfully executed, I thoroughly
believed. But that others would, to any great extent, share my opinion;
that the subject would interest so many classes of readers; that mine
would be so quickly and cordially recognized by men of science and
letters throughout the world as a work worth doing and well done;
and that it would be at once accorded a place in literature, I had
not dared to hope. The leading journals of England, France, Germany,
and the United States, have deemed the volumes as issued worthy of
extended reviews; and criticism for the most part has been liberal,
and just--save a tendency to what might seem, to a mind less prejudiced
than mine, extravagant praise. Minor defects have been fairly pointed
out; and in the few instances where fault has been found, either with
the plan or its execution, one critic condemns what another approves,
so that I am led to believe no serious error of judgment has been
committed.
I cannot here make proper acknowledgments to all to whom they are due;
but let those who have manifested their kind good-will, and those who
have not, so long as they feel it, accept my grateful thanks.
San Francisco, November, 1875.
CONTENTS OF THIS VOLUME.
CHAPTER I.
ON THE ORIGIN OF THE AMERICANS.
PAGE.
Spirit of Inquiry in the Middle Ages -- Unity of Origin --
Flood Myths -- Aboriginal Traditions of Origin -- Culture
Heroes -- China -- Japan -- Hindustan -- Tartary -- The
Egyptian Theory -- The Phœnicians -- Votan's Travels -- The
Carthaginians -- The Hebrew Theory -- The Mormon Story --
The Visits of the Scandinavians -- Celtic Origin -- The Welsh
-- Scotch -- Irish -- The Greeks and Romans -- The Story of
Atlantis -- The Autochthonic Theory 1
CHAPTER II.
INTRODUCTORY TO ABORIGINAL HISTORY.
Origin and Earliest History of the Americans Unrecorded --
The Dark Sea of Antiquity -- Boundary between Myth and
History -- Primitive Annals of America compared with those
of the Old World -- Authorities and Historical Material --
Traditional Annals and their Value -- Hieroglyphic Records
of the Mayas and Nahuas -- Spanish Writers -- The Conquerors
-- The Missionaries -- The Historians -- Converted Native
Chroniclers -- Secondary Authorities -- Ethnology -- Arts,
Institutions, and Beliefs -- Languages -- Material Monuments
of Antiquity -- Use of Authorities and Method of treating the
Subject 133
CHAPTER III.
THE PRE-TOLTEC PERIOD OF ABORIGINAL HISTORY.
Subdivision of the Subject -- Tzendal Tradition of the Votanic
Empire -- Votan's Book and its Contents as reported by Nuñez
de la Vega, Cabrera, and Ordoñez -- Testimony of Manners and
Customs, Religion, Languages, and Monuments of the Civilized
Nations respecting the Primitive Maya Peoples -- The Quiché
Record, or Popol Vuh -- Civilizing Efforts of Gucumatz
and his Followers -- Exploits of Hunahpu and Xbalanque --
Conquest of Xibalba -- Migration from Tulan Zuiva, the Seven
Caves -- Meaning of the Quiché Tradition -- Nahua Traditions
-- The Toltecs in Tamoanchan according to Sahagun -- The
Codex Chimalpopoca -- Pre-Toltec Nations in Mexico -- Olmecs
and Xicalancas -- The Quinames -- Cholula and Quetzalcoatl --
The Totonacs -- Teotihuacan -- Otomís, Miztecs, Zapotecs, and
Huastecs -- The Toltecs in Huehue Tlapallan -- Migration to
Anáhuac -- The Chichimecs in Amaquemecan -- Ancient Home of
the Nahuatlacas and Aztecs -- Primitive Annals of Yucatan --
Conclusions 156
CHAPTER IV.
THE TOLTEC PERIOD.
The Nahua Occupation of Mexico in the Sixth and Seventh
Centuries -- Condition of Anáhuac -- The Mixcohuas and
Chichimec Culhuas -- The Toltecs at Tulancingo and Tollan
-- Establishment of a Monarchy and Choice of a King,
710-720 A.D. -- Kingdoms of Culhuacan and Quauhtitlan --
The Teoamoxtli -- Prophecies and Death of Hueman -- Birth
of Quetzalcoatl -- Foundation of the Empire, 856 A.D. --
Alliance between Culhuacan, Otompan, and Tollan -- Reign
of Topiltzin Ceacatl Quetzalcoatl at Tollan -- Excesses of
Huemac II., or Tecpancaltzin -- Xochitl, the King's Mistress
-- Fulfillment of the Prophet's Predictions -- Toveyo's
Adventures -- Plagues sent upon the Toltecs -- Famine and
Pestilence -- Reign of Acxitl, or Topiltzin -- Debauchery
of King, Nobles, and Priests -- Tokens of Divine Wrath --
Foreign Invaders -- Final Overthrow of the Toltec Empire 237
CHAPTER V.
THE CHICHIMEC PERIOD.
The Chichimecs in Amaquemecan -- Migration to Anáhuac under
Xolotl -- The Invaders at Chocoyan and Tollan -- Foundation
of Xoloc and Tenayocan -- Xolotl II., Emperor of the
Chichimecs -- Division of Territory -- The Toltecs at
Culhuacan -- Rule of Xiuhtemoc and Nauhyotl III. -- Pochotl,
Son of Acxitl -- Conquest of Culhuacan -- Death of Nauhyotl
-- Huetzin, King of Culhuacan -- Migration and Reception of
the Nahuatlaca Tribes -- The Acolhuas at Coatlichan and the
Tepanecs at Azcapuzalco -- Nonohualcatl, King of Culhuacan
-- Revolt of Yacanex -- Death of Xolotl II. -- Nopaltzin,
King of Tenayocan, and Emperor of the Chichimecs -- Reigns
of Achitometl and Icxochitlanex at Culhuacan -- Tendencies
toward Toltec Culture 289
CHAPTER VI.
THE CHICHIMEC PERIOD. -- CONTINUED.
Migration of the Aztecs -- Nations of Anáhuac at Beginning of
the Thirteenth Century -- The Aztecs submit to the Tepanecs
-- Reign of the Emperor Tlotzin -- Quinantzin, King of
Tezcuco and Chichimec Emperor -- Transfer of the Capital --
Tenancacaltzin usurps the Imperial Throne at Tenayocan -- The
Usurper defeated by Tepanecs and Mexicans -- Acolnahuacatl
proclaimed Emperor -- Quinantzin's Victories -- Battle at
Poyauhtlan -- Quinantzin again Emperor -- Toltec Institutions
at Tezcuco -- Events at Culhuacan -- Mexicans driven from
Chapultepec -- Alliance between Mexicans and Culhuas --
Religious Strife -- Foundation of Mexico -- Reign of the
Emperor Techotl -- Political Changes -- Ruin of the Culhua
Power -- Tezozomoc, King of Azcapuzalco -- Separation of
Mexicans and Tlatelulcas -- Acamapichtli II., King of Mexico
-- Quaquauhpitzahuac, King of Tlatelulco 321
CHAPTER VII.
THE CHICHIMEC PERIOD -- CONCLUDED.
Aztec History -- Reigns of Acamapichtli II. and
Quaquauhpitzahuac -- Rebuilding of Culhuacan -- Huitzilihuitl
II., King of Mexico -- Tlacateotzin, King of Tlatelulco
-- Chimalpopoca Succeeds in Mexico -- Funeral of Techotl
-- Ixtlilxochitl, Emperor of the Chichimecs -- Symptoms
of Discontent -- Plans of Tezozomoc, the Tepanec King
-- Secret Council of Rebels -- Religious Toleration in
Tezcuco -- Conquest of Xaltocan and Cuitlahuac -- Birth of
Nezahualcoyotl -- War between Tezcuco and Azcapuzalco --
Victories of Ixtlilxochitl -- Siege and Fall of Azcapuzalco
-- Treachery of Tezozomoc -- Fall of Tezcuco -- Flight and
Death of Ixtlilxochitl -- Tezozomoc proclaimed Emperor --
Re-organization of the Empire -- Adventures of Nezahualcoyotl
-- Death of Tezozomoc -- Maxtla usurps the Imperial Throne
-- Murder of the Mexican Kings -- Nezahualcoyotl's Victory
-- Itzcoatl, King of Mexico -- Acolhua and Aztec Alliance --
Fall of Azcapuzalco -- The Tri-partite Alliance, or the New
Empire 359
CHAPTER VIII.
THE AZTEC PERIOD.
Outline of the Period -- Revolt of Coyuhuacan -- Nezahualcoyotl
on the Throne of Tezcuco -- Conquest of Quauhtitlan,
Tultitlan, Xochimilco, and Cuitlahuac -- Conquest of
Quauhtitlan -- Destruction of the Records -- Death of
Itzcoatl and Accession of Montezuma I. New Temples at Mexico
-- Defeat of the Chalcas -- Troubles with Tlatelulco --
Conquest of Cohuixco and Mazatlan -- Flood and Six Years'
Famine -- Conquest of Miztecapan -- The Aztecs conquer the
Province of Cuetlachtlan and reach the Gulf Coast -- Final
Defeat of the Chalcas -- Campaign in Cuextlan -- Birth of
Nezahualpilli -- Improvements in Tenochtitlan -- Embassy
to Chicomoztoc -- Death of Montezuma I. and Accession of
Axayacatl -- Raid in Tehuantepec -- Chimalpopoca succeeds
Totoquihuatzin on the Throne of Tlacopan -- Nezahualpilli
succeeds Nezahualcoyotl at Tezcuco -- Revolt of Tlatelulco --
Conquest of Matlaltzinco -- Defeat by the Tarascos -- Death
of Axayacatl 400
CHAPTER IX.
THE AZTEC PERIOD -- CONCLUDED.
Reign of Tizoc -- Nezahualpilli defeats the Huexotzincas
-- Ahuitzotl, King of Mexico -- Campaigns for Captives --
Dedication of Huitzilopochtli's Temple -- Seventy Thousand
Victims -- Totoquihuatzin II., King of Tlacopan -- Mexican
Conquests -- Conquest of Totonacapan -- Aztec Reverses
-- Successful Revolt of Tehuantepec and Zapotecapan --
Conquest of Zacatollan -- Anecdotes of Nezahualpilli--New
Aqueduct, and Inundation of Mexico -- Montezuma II. on the
Throne -- Condition of the Empire -- Montezuma's Policy --
Unsuccessful Invasion of Tlascala -- Famine -- Conquest of
Miztecapan -- Tying-up of the Cycle in 1507 -- Omens of
coming Disaster -- The Spaniards on the Coast of Central
America -- Trouble between Mexico and Tezcuco -- Retirement
and Death of Nezahualpilli -- Cacama, King of Acolhuacan --
Revolt of Ixtlilxochitl -- Final Campaigns of the Aztecs --
The Spaniards on the Gulf Coast -- Arrival of Hernan Cortés 436
CHAPTER X.
HISTORY OF THE EASTERN PLATEAU, MICHOACAN, AND OAJACA.
Early History of the Eastern Plateau -- The Chichimec-Toltecs
-- Arrival of the Teo-Chichimecs in Anáhuac -- They Conquer
and Settle the Eastern Plateau -- Civil Wars -- Miscellaneous
Events -- Wars between Tlascala and the Nations of Anáhuac
-- Early History of Michoacan -- Wars between Wanacaces and
Tarascos -- Founding of Tzintzuntzan -- Metamorphosis of the
Tarasco Princes -- Encroachments of the Wanacaces -- The King
of the Isles -- Murder of Pawacume and Wapeani -- Reigns of
Curatame, Tariacuri, Tangaxoan I., Ziziz Pandacuare, Zwanga,
and Tangaxoan II. -- Origin of the Miztecs and Zapotecs --
Wixipecocha -- Rulers of Oajaca -- The Huaves and Mijes --
Later Kings and History of Oajaca -- Wars with Mexico 483
CHAPTER XI.
THE QUICHÉ-CAKCHIQUEL EMPIRE IN GUATEMALA.
No Chronology in the South -- Outline View -- Authorities
-- Xbalanque at Utatlan -- The Migration from Tulan --
Balam-Quitzé and his Companions -- Sacrifices to Tohil -- The
Quichés on Mount Hacavitz -- The Tamub and Ilocab -- First
Victories -- Qocavib Founds the Monarchy at Izmachi -- The
Toltec Theory -- Imaginary Empire of the East -- Different
Versions of Primitive History -- The Cakchiquel Migration --
Juarros and Fuentes -- Lists of Kings -- Cakchiquels under
Hacavitz -- Reigns of Balam-Conache, Cotuha, and Iztayul,
at Izmachi -- War against the Ilocab -- The Stolen Tribute
-- Gucumatz, Quiché Emperor at Utatlan -- Changes in the
Government -- Reigns of Cotuha II., Tepepul, and Iztayul
II. -- Cakchiquel History -- Conquests of Quicab I. --
Revolt of the Achihab -- Dismemberment of the Empire --
Cakchiquel Conquests -- Reigns of the last Guatemalan Kings
-- Appearance of the Spaniards under Alvarado in 1524 540
CHAPTER XII.
MISCELLANEOUS TRIBES OF CENTRAL AMERICA.
Scarcity of Historical Data -- The Tribes of Chiapas -- The
Founders and Heroes of the Chiapanec Nation -- Wars with
the Aztecs -- The People of the Southern Coast -- They are
vanquished by the Olmecs -- Their Exodus and Journey --
They settle and separate -- Juarros' Account of the Origin
and later History of the Pipiles -- Pipile Tradition -- The
Founding of Mictlan -- Queen Comizahual -- Acxitl's Empire of
the East -- The Cholutecs -- Various Tribes of Nicaragua --
Settlements of the Isthmus 603
CHAPTER XIII.
HISTORY OF THE MAYAS IN YUCATAN.
Aboriginal Names of Yucatan -- The Primitive Inhabitants from
the East and West -- Zamná the Pontiff-King -- The Itzas
at Chichen -- Rules of Cukulcan at Chichen and Mayapan --
His Disappearance on the Gulf Coast -- The Cocome Rule at
Mayapan -- Appearance of the Tutul Xius -- Translation of
the Maya Record by Perez and Brasseur -- Migration from
Tulan -- Conquest of Bacalar and Chichen -- Itza Annals --
Tutul Xius at Uxmal -- Overthrow of the Cocome Dynasty -- The
Confederacy, or Empire, of Tutul Xius, Itzas, and Cheles --
Fable of the Dwarf -- Overthrow of the Tutul Xius -- Final
Period of Civil Wars 614
[Illustration: NATIVE RACES of the PACIFIC STATES Map of CENTRAL MEXICO
_TO ILLUSTRATE_ PRIMITIVE HISTORY.]
[Illustration: NATIVE RACES of the PACIFIC STATES showing the location
of THE CIVILIZED NATIONS]
THE NATIVE RACES OF THE PACIFIC STATES.
PRIMITIVE HISTORY.
CHAPTER I.
ON THE ORIGIN OF THE AMERICANS.
Spirit of Inquiry in the Middle Ages -- Unity of Origin
-- Flood Myths -- Aboriginal Traditions of Origin --
Culture-Heroes -- China -- Japan -- Hindostan -- Tartary --
The Egyptian Theory -- The Phœnicians -- Votan's Travels --
The Carthaginians -- The Hebrew Theory -- The Mormon Story --
The Visits of the Scandinavians -- Celtic Origin -- The Welsh
-- Scotch -- Irish -- The Greeks and Romans -- The Story of
Atlantis -- The Autochthonic Theory.
When it first became known to Europe that a new continent had been
discovered, the wise men, philosophers, and especially the learned
ecclesiastics, were sorely perplexed to account for such a discovery.
A problem was placed before them, the solution of which was not to be
found in the records of the ancients. On the contrary, it looked as
if old-time traditions must give way, the infallibility of revealed
knowledge must be called in question, even the holy scriptures must be
interpreted anew. Another world, upheaved, as it were, from the depths
of the Sea of Darkness, was suddenly placed before them. Strange races,
speaking strange tongues, peopled the new land; curious plants covered
its surface; animals unknown to science roamed through its immense
forests; vast seas separated it from the known world; its boundaries
were undefined; its whole character veiled in obscurity. Such was the
mystery that, without rule or precedent, they were now required to
fathom.
And what were their qualifications to grapple with such a subject?
Learning had been almost exclusively the property of the Church, and
although from its fold many able writers and profound thinkers had
been evolved, yet the teachings of science and the speculations of
philosophy were ever held subordinate to the holy scriptures. Now
and then it is true some gleams of important truth would flash up
in the writings of some philosopher disconnected with the religious
orders illuminating the path of intellectual progress, but such
writings seldom made any permanent impress upon the literature of
the age. It is to the priesthood almost exclusively we have to look
for any advancement for many centuries in literature, science, and
art. The universally adopted view of the structure of the universe
was geocentric, of the world, anthropocentric. To explain such
ordinary phenomena as that of day and night, preposterous schemes
were invented, like that of Cosmas Indicopleustes, who asserted that
in the northern parts of the flat earth there is an immense mountain,
behind which the sun passes and thus produces night.[I-1] Any assertion
that seemed to clash with preconceived notions of the teachings of
holy writ or the writings of the fathers was looked upon with doubt
and disfavor. Indeed the bible was regarded as the all-sufficient
manual of science, containing all that was necessary to be known, and
to inquire further was thought to be prying into the secret things
of the most high.[I-2] The learning of the masses consisted not in the
acquisition of knowledge, but in the blind and meaningless repetition
of prescribed maxims, in forms of rhetoric, in anything except that
which would enlighten the mind and impart true wisdom; it was, in
short, a systematic course of leading men as far as possible away
from the known, and leaving them lost and bewildered in a labyrinth of
uncertainty and doubt.[I-3]
[Sidenote: SCIENCE IN THE MIDDLE AGES.]
When, therefore, the questions arose, whence were these new lands
peopled? how came these strange animals and plants to exist on a
continent cut off by vast oceans from the rest of the world? the wise
men of the time unhesitatingly turned to the sacred scriptures for an
answer. These left them no course but to believe that all mankind were
descended from one pair. This was a premise that must by no means be
disputed. The original home of the first pair was generally supposed
to have been situated in Asia Minor; the ancestors of the people found
in the New World must consequently have originally come from the Old
World, though at what time and by what route was an open question, an
answer to which was diligently sought for both in the sacred prophecies
and in the historical writings of antiquity.[I-4]
But if the more modern writers on this subject have been less hampered
by unanswerable and impassable dogmas; if they have been able to
believe that there may be some difficult questions upon which the Bible
throws no light; if they have felt themselves free to discuss, without
impiety, the possibility of all mankind not having sprung from one
pair, their theories are scarcely less wild, their reasoning is but
little sounder, their tendency to establish maxims by which any given
problem may be solved is no more satisfactory.
[Sidenote: SPIRIT OF INQUIRY.]
Theories in themselves are good things, for they lead us to facts; it
is often through the doubtful or the false that we attain the truth;
as Darwin says: "False facts are highly injurious to the progress of
science, for they often long endure; but false views, if supported by
some evidence, do little harm, as every one takes a salutary pleasure
in proving their falseness; and when this is done, one path towards
error is closed, and the truth is often at the same time opened."[I-5]
But the value of inquiry depends much upon the spirit in which it is
made, and therefore it is that the manner in which most of the writers
who have speculated on the origin of the Americans have conducted their
researches, is greatly to be deplored. Their work does not impress
one as being a steadfast striving to develop unstable postulates into
proven facts, but rather as a reckless rushing, regardless of all
obstacles, to a preconceived conclusion. They do not offer a theory as
a suggestion of what might possibly be, but as a demonstration founded
upon an unassailable basis. Each imagines that he has hit upon the
truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth; he asserts that
the Aztecs were of Hebrew descent--that is settled; to prove this he
clutches at the lightest straws in the way of analogies, and if the
facts obstinately refuse to fit his theory, then--_tant pis pour les
faits_--he warps them till they do fit.
But analogies, even when fairly drawn, are by no means conclusive
evidence. So much depends upon the environment of a people, that
a similarity in that particular is of itself sufficient to account
for most of the resemblances which have been discovered between the
customs, religion, and traditions of the Americans, and those of Old
World nations.[I-6]
For my own part I have no theory upon the subject--would have no
theory. The problem of the origin of the American aborigines is, in my
opinion, enveloped in as much obscurity now as it ever was; and when
I consider the close proximity of the north-western and north-eastern
extremities of America to Asia and Europe; the unthought of and
fortuitous circumstances that may at any time have cast any people upon
the American coasts; the mighty convulsions that may have changed the
whole face of the earth during the uncounted years that man may have
dwelt upon its surface; and lastly, the uncertainty, perhaps I might
say improbability, of the descent of mankind from one pair;--when I
think of all these things it seems to me that the peopling of America
may have been accomplished in so many ways that no more hopeless task
could be conceived than the endeavor to discover the one particular
manner of it.
In the following résumé I wish neither to tear down nor to build up,
but simply to give an account of what has been thought and written
upon the subject, and to show, with as little criticism as possible,
the foundation upon which each theory stands. Of the comparative value
of the opinions the reader must be his own judge. Of the value of this
discussion of the subject there is this to be said; as a curiosity,
showing the color given to mind by its environment, showing the blind
and almost frenzied[I-7] efforts of different men of different epochs,
creeds, and culture, to fathom a hitherto unfathomable mystery,--this,
together with the collateral light thrown upon the subject of
aboriginal America, if there be no other advantage in it, will amply
repay the investigation.
[Sidenote: DESCENDANTS OF NOAH.]
The earliest writers required three propositions to be taken for
granted:[I-8] First, that the entire human race are descended from
one original pair, and from Noah through Shem, Ham, and Japheth;
second, that America was peopled from one of three sources--Asia,
Africa, or Europe; third, that all knowledge arises from one of four
sources--knowledge pure and absolute, from a knowledge of causes;
opinion more or less uncertain; divine faith, sure and infallible,
based upon the holy scriptures as interpreted by the Church; human
faith, dependent upon the statements of men. The first of these four
sources of knowledge throws no light upon the subject; the third is
equally useless here, since the scriptures are silent after the time
of Noah, though, as we shall presently see, huge endeavors have been
made to make them speak; as for the fourth, Europeans, even if they
conjectured the possible existence of an undiscovered continent, were
certain that it was not inhabited,[I-9] while the Americans were entirely
ignorant of the part of the world from which they sprang.
[Sidenote: UNITY OR DIVERSITY OF ORIGIN.]
The first of the three propositions mentioned above, namely, that all
mankind are descended from one original pair, seems to have been taken
for granted by almost all the writers, ancient and modern, who have had
some theory to sustain respecting the origin of the Americans.[I-10] The
question of the unity of the human race, as considered without bias by
modern scientific men, remains, however, undetermined; though it may
be fairly said that the best of the argument is on the side of those
who maintain the primitive diversity of man. It happens that those who
are most earnest in upholding the biblical account of the creation, and
consequently the unity of man, must, to be consistent, also uphold the
biblical system of chronology, which teaches that man has not existed
on the earth for more than six thousand years. This is unfortunate,
since it is evident that the higher we believe the antiquity of man
to be, the easier it is for us to admit the unity of origin of the
strongly marked varieties that now exist.[I-11]
The honor of peopling America has frequently been given to Noah and
his immediate descendants. But even were we sure that the tradition
recorded in the Bible of Noah's strange doings is accurate in every
respect, the narrative does not throw any definite light upon his
subsequent proceedings, and we must invent wonders to add to wonders
if we make anything more out of it. The subject cannot be discussed
intelligently, but I will give some of the opinions that have been held
on the subject.
Noah's ark, says Ulloa, gave rise to a number of such constructions;
and the experience gained during the patriarch's aimless voyage
emboldened his descendants to seek strange lands in the same manner.
Driven to America and the neighboring islands by winds and currents,
they found it difficult to return, and so remained and peopled the
land. He thinks the custom of eating raw fish at the present day among
some American tribes, was acquired during these long sea voyages. That
they came by sea is evident, for the north, if, indeed, the continent
be connected with the old world, must be impassable by reason of
intense cold.[I-12] Ulloa, although he would not for a moment allow that
there could have been more than one general creation, does not attempt
to account for the presence of strange animals and plants in America;
and I may observe here that this difficulty is similarly avoided by all
writers of his class.[I-13] Lescarbot cannot see why "Noah should have
experienced any difficulty in reaching America by sea, when Solomon's
ships made voyages lasting three years."[I-14]
[Sidenote: NOAH'S DESCENDANTS.]
Villagutierre,[I-15] on the contrary, thinks it more probable that Noah's
sons came to America by land; an opinion also held by Thompson, who
believes, however, that the continents were not disconnected until
some time after the flood, by which time America was peopled from the
Old World.[I-16] Orrio remarks that many have supposed that Noah, in
order to be able to people the New World as well as the Old, must,
during his three hundred and fifty years of post-diluvian life, have
had more children than are mentioned in the bible; but in his opinion
there was no necessity for more progenitors, since one woman can
in two hundred and ten years become the ancestor of one million six
hundred and forty-seven thousand and eighty-six persons. He thinks that
Ham was the father of the American race.[I-17] Montanus considers it
quite in accordance with Noah's character and mission that he should
have attended to the peopling of the world during his long life.[I-18]
L'Estrange is of opinion that Shem and his children, who were not
among the builders of Babel, moved gradually eastward, and were,
further, forced in that direction even to America, by the progeny of
Japheth.[I-19] We read in one of the Abbé Domenech's works,[I-20] that
Ophir, one of Noah's descendants, went to Peru and settled there,
ruling those who went with him. Sigüenza and Sister Agnes de la Cruz,
conjectured that the Americans were descended from Naphtuhim, the
son of Mizraim and grandson of Ham, whose descendants left Egypt for
America shortly after the confusion of tongues.[I-21] Piñeda thinks the
same.[I-22] Clavigero considers it proven by the native flood-myths and
traditions of foreign origin that the Americans are descendants of
Noah. He quotes the tradition of Votan,[I-23] who is declared to have
been closely connected with the Babel-builders, the originator of that
enterprise being his uncle.[I-24]
[Sidenote: ABORIGINAL FLOOD-MYTHS.]
Let us see, now, what these flood-myths are. This I may say first,
however; some of them are doubtless spurious, and few have escaped the
renovating touch of the Spanish priests and chroniclers, who throughout
their writings seem to think it their bounden duty to make the ideas
and history of the New World correspond to those of the Old. And what
the old writers have added or invented, the modern writers are, in
most cases, ready and glad to accept as genuine, without doubt or
question. "It is impossible," says Viscount Kingsborough, "when reading
what Mexican Mythology records of the war in heaven, and of the fall
of Zontemonque and the other rebellious spirits; of the creation of
light by the word of Tonacatecutli, and of the division of the waters;
of the sin of Yztlacoliuhqui, and his blindness and nakedness; of the
temptation of Suchiquecal, and her disobedience in gathering roses
from a tree, and the consequent misery and disgrace of herself and all
her posterity,--not to recognise Scriptural analogies. But the Mexican
tradition of the Deluge is that which bears the most unequivocal marks
of having been derived from a Hebrew source."[I-25]
We have seen in a preceding volume how, according to the common version
of the Mexican flood-myth, Coxcox and his wife Xochiquetzal were the
only human beings who escaped from the great deluge which covered the
face of the earth in the Age of Water. How, when the waters went down,
the ark in which they had saved themselves--the hollow trunk of a bald
cypress--rested upon the Peak of Culhuacan; and how the dumb children
that were born to the rescued pair were taught many languages by a
dove. We have also read the reputed Tarasco legend of Tezpi, which so
closely resembles the biblical legend of the deluge that it cannot be
discussed as a native tradition at all, but must be regarded simply
as the invention of some Spanish writer who thought it his mission to
show that the Hebrew traditions were familiar to the Americans.[I-26]
In Guatemala, among the Miztecs, and in Nicaragua there were also
traditions of great and destructive deluges.[I-27] The Pápagos tell of a
mighty flood that destroyed all life on the earth, except the hero-god
Montezuma and his friend the Coyote who had foretold the deluge. Each
of these made for himself an ark, and when the waters subsided and
they met on the small patch of dry land that first appeared, Montezuma
dispatched the Coyote four times to find out exactly how the sea
lay.[I-28] Very similar is the Pima legend which relates how the prophet
who would not heed the thrice repeated warnings of the Eagle was
destroyed by a flood, and how Szeukha, the son of the Creator, saved
himself by floating on a ball of gum or resin.[I-29] The Mattoles of
California regard Taylor Peak as the point at which their forefathers
took refuge from a destructive flood.[I-30] Other Californian tribes
have a tradition of a deluge from which the Coyote, with his usual
good-fortune, was the only living thing that escaped, if we except an
eagle who was miraculously formed from a single feather that floated
on the face of the waters.[I-31] Lake Tahoe was formed by a flood which
destroyed all mankind but a very small remnant.[I-32] The Thlinkeets
relate that many persons escaped the great deluge by taking refuge in
a great floating building, which, when the waters fell, grounded upon
a rock and was split in twain. From this moment men spake in various
tongues, for there remained in one fragment of the divided ark those
whose descendants speak the Thlinkeet language, and in the other those
whose descendants employ a different idiom.[I-33] The Chipewyan deluge
covered all the earth except the high mountain-tops, upon which many
of the people saved themselves.[I-34] The Isthmians believed that the
world was peopled by a man who with his wife and children escaped
the great flood. The Peruvians had several flood-myths. One of them
relates that the whole face of the earth was changed by a great deluge,
attended by an extraordinary eclipse of the sun which lasted five
days. All living things were destroyed except one man, a shepherd,
with his family and flocks. It happened in this wise. Some time before
the flood this shepherd, while tending his flock of llamas, remarked
that the animals appeared to be oppressed with sadness, and that they
passed the whole night in attentively watching the course of the stars.
Filled with amazement, he interrogated the llamas as to the cause of
their concern. Directing his attention to a group of six stars, massed
closely together, they answered that that was a sign that the world
would shortly be destroyed by a deluge, and counseled him, if he wished
to escape the universal destruction, to take refuge with his family and
flocks on the top of a neighboring mountain. Acting upon this advice,
the shepherd hastily collected his llamas and children and proceeded
with them to the summit of mount Ancasmarca, where a crowd of other
animals had already sought safety. The warning had not come a moment
too soon, for scarcely had they reached the mountain-top, when the sea
burst its bounds and with a terrible roaring rushed over the land. But
as the waters rose higher and higher, filling the valleys and covering
the plains, behold, the mountain of refuge rose with it, floating
upon its surface like a ship upon the waves. This lasted five days,
during which time the sun hid himself and the earth was wrapped in
darkness. On the fifth day the waters began to subside, and the stars
shone out on the desolate world, which was eventually re-peopled by the
descendants of the shepherd of Ancasmarca.
[Sidenote: PERUVIAN FLOOD-MYTHS.]
According to another Peruvian legend, two brothers escaped from a
great deluge which overwhelmed the world in much the same manner, by
ascending a mountain which floated upon the flood. When the waters had
retired, they found themselves alone in the world; and having consumed
all their provisions, they went down into the valleys to seek for more
food. Whether they were successful in their search, the tradition does
not say; but if not, their surprise must indeed have been agreeable
when on returning to the hut which they had built on the mountain, they
found food ready prepared for them by unknown hands. Curious to know
who their benefactor could be, they took counsel together and finally
agreed that one should hide himself in the hut, while the other went
into the valley. The brother who remained concealed himself carefully,
and his patience was soon rewarded by seeing two aras with the faces
of women,[I-35] who immediately set about preparing a meal of bread and
meats. But it was not long before the aras became aware of the presence
of the concealed brother, and they instantly essayed flight; but the
man seized one of them, and she afterwards became his wife. By her
he had six children, three sons and three daughters, from whose union
sprang the tribe of the Cañaris, whose descendants to this day hold the
ara in great veneration.[I-36]
"The Peruvians were acquainted with the Deluge, and believed that
the rainbow was the sign that the earth would not again be destroyed
by water." This somewhat startling announcement is made by Lord
Kingsborough, and he shows that there can be no reasonable doubt on
the subject in an eminently characteristic manner. "This is plain,"
he says, "from the speech which Mango Capac, the reputed founder of
the Peruvian empire, addressed to his companions on beholding the
rainbow rising from a hill; which is thus recorded by Balboa in the
ninth chapter of the third part of his Miscellanea Antarctica: 'They
traveled on until a mountain, at present named Guanacauri, presented
itself to their view, when on a certain morning, they beheld the
rainbow rising above the mountain, with one extremity resting upon it,
when Manco Capac exclaimed to his companions, This is a propitious
sign that the earth will not be again destroyed by water.' ... Proof
having been afforded in the passage quoted from the History of Balboa,
that the Peruvians were acquainted with the history of the rainbow, as
given in the ninth chapter of Genesis, it may be interesting to add,
that according to the account of an anonymous writer, they believed
the rainbow was not only a passive sign that the earth would not be
destroyed by a second deluge, but an active instrument to prevent the
recurrence of such a catastrophe: the latter curious notion proceeded
upon the assumption that as the water of the sea (which, like the Jews,
they believed to encircle the whole earth) would have a tendency to
rise after excessive falls of rain, so the pressure of the extremities
of the rainbow upon its surface would prevent its exceeding its proper
level."[I-37]
[Sidenote: THE TOWER OF BABEL.]
Many of these flood-myths are supplemented with an account of an
attempt to provide against a second deluge, by building a tower of
refuge, resembling more or less closely the biblical legend of the
tower of Babel. Thus a Cholultec legend relates that all the giants who
inhabited the country, save seven, were destroyed by a great flood, and
adds that when the waters were assuaged, one of these seven began to
build an artificial mountain. But the anger of the gods was aroused,
and they slew many of the builders, so the work was stopped.[I-38] In
like manner, in the Pápago legend to which I have referred, Montezuma,
after he and the Coyote had been saved from the flood, so incensed the
Great Spirit by his ingratitude and presumption, that an insect was
sent flying to the east to bring the Spaniards, who, when they came,
utterly destroyed Montezuma. After the deluge spoken of in the Lake
Tahoe myth, the few who escaped built up a great tower, the strong
making the weak do the work. This, it is distinctly stated, they did
that they might have a place of refuge in case of another flood. But
the Great Spirit was filled with anger at their presumption, and amidst
thunderings and lightnings, and showers of molten metal, he seized the
oppressors and cast them into a cavern.[I-39]
These myths have led many writers to believe that the Americans had
a knowledge of the tower of Babel, while some think that they are the
direct descendants of certain of the builders of that tower, who, after
the confusion of tongues, wandered over the earth until they reached
America.[I-40]
Many of the tribes had traditions through which they claim to
have originally come from various directions to their ultimate
settling-place in America. It will be readily seen that such
traditions, even when genuine, are far too vague and uncertain to be
of any value as evidence in any theory of origin. To each tribe its
own little territory was the one important point in the universe; they
had no conception of the real size of the world; most of them supposed
that after a few days' journey the traveler could if he chose jump off
the edge of the earth into nothingness. What their traditions referred
to as a 'country in the far east,' would probably mean a prairie two
hundred miles away in that direction. Nevertheless, as these traditions
have been thought to support this or that theory, it will be well to
briefly review them here.[I-41]
[Sidenote: ORIGIN OF THE TOLTECS.]
The tradition of the Toltecs regarding their travels before they
reached Huehue Tlapallan has been the theme of much speculation,
especially as connected with their descent from the Babel builders.
Ixtlilxochitl writes of this tradition as follows: They say that the
world was created in the year Ce Tecpatl, and this time until the
deluge they call Atonatiuh, which means the age of the sun of water,
because the world was destroyed by the deluge. It is found in the
histories of the Toltecs that this age and first world, as they term
it, lasted seven hundred and sixteen years; that man and all the earth
were destroyed by great showers and by lightnings from heaven, so that
nothing remained, and the most lofty mountains were covered up and
submerged to the depth of _caxtolmoletltli_, or fifteen cubits;[I-42]
and here they add other fables of how men came to multiply again from
the few who escaped the destruction in a _toptlipetlacali_; which word
very nearly signifies a closed chest; and how, after multiplying, the
men built a _zacuali_ of great height, and by this is meant a very
high tower, in which to take refuge when the world should be a second
time destroyed. After this their tongue became confused, and, not
understanding each other, they went to different parts of the world.
The Toltecs, seven in number, with their wives, who understood each
other's speech, after crossing great lands and seas, and undergoing
many hardships, finally arrived in America, which they found to be
a good land, and fit for habitation; and they say that they wandered
one hundred and four years in different parts of the earth before they
arrived at Huehue Tlapallan, which they did in the year Ce Tecpatl,
five hundred and twenty years--or five ages--after the flood.[I-43]
[Sidenote: TRADITIONS OF QUICHÉ ORIGIN.]
The Quiché traditions speak of a country in the far east,[I-44] to reach
which immense tracts of land and water must be crossed. There, they
say, they lived a quiet but uncivilized life, paying no tribute, and
speaking a common language. There they worshiped no graven images, but
observed with respect the rising sun and poured forth their invocations
to the morning star. The principal names of the families and tribes
at that time were, Tepeu, Oloman, Cohah, Quenech, and Ahau.[I-45]
Afterwards, continue the traditions, they left their primitive country
under the leadership of certain chiefs, and finally after a long
journey reached a place called Tula. Where this Tula was is uncertain,
but Brasseur de Bourbourg places it on the 'other side of the sea,' and
asserts that it was the region from which the wanderers came, from time
to time, to the north-western coasts of America, and thence southwards
to Anáhuac and Central America.[I-46]
The Yucatecs are said to have had a tradition that they came originally
from the far east, passing through the sea, which God made dry for
them.[I-47] An Okanagan myth relates that they were descended from a
white couple who had been sent adrift from an island in the eastern
ocean, and who floated ashore on this land, which has grown larger
since then. Their long exposure on the ocean bronzed them to the color
of which their descendants now are.[I-48] The Chilians assert that their
ancestors came from the west. The Chepewyans have a tradition that they
came from a distant land, where a bad people lived, and had to cross a
large narrow lake, filled with islands, where ice and snow continually
existed.[I-49] The Algonquins preserve a tradition of a foreign origin
and a sea voyage. For a long time they offered an annual thank-offering
in honor of their happy arrival in America.[I-50] According to Careri,
the Olmec traditions relate that they came by sea from the east.[I-51]
* * * * *
[Sidenote: AMERICAN CULTURE-HEROES.]
The native traditions concerning the several culture-heroes of
America have also been brought forward by a few writers to show that
American civilization was exotic and not indigenous; but, though these
traditions are far more worthy of serious consideration, and present a
far more fascinating field for study than those which relate merely to
the origin or travels of the people themselves, yet, strangely enough,
they seem to have excited less comment and speculation than any of
those far-fetched and trivial analogies with which all origin-theories
abound.
Although bearing various names and appearing in different countries,
the American culture-heroes all present the same general
characteristics. They are all described as white, bearded men,
generally clad in long robes; appearing suddenly and mysteriously upon
the scene of their labors, they at once set about improving the people
by instructing them in useful and ornamental arts, giving them laws,
exhorting them to practice brotherly love and other Christian virtues,
and introducing a milder and better form of religion; having
accomplished their mission, they disappear as mysteriously and
unexpectedly as they came; and finally, they are apotheosized and held
in great reverence by a grateful posterity. In such guise or on such
mission did Quetzalcoatl appear in Cholula, Votan in Chiapas,
Wixepecocha in Oajaca, Zamná, and Cukulcan with his nineteen
disciples, in Yucatan, Gucumatz in Guatemala,[I-52] Viracocha in
Peru,[I-53] Sumé[I-54] and Paye-Tome[I-55] in Brazil, the mysterious
apostle mentioned by Rosales, in Chili,[I-56] and Bochica in
Columbia.[I-57] Peruvian legends speak of a nation of giants who came
by sea, waged war with the natives, and erected splendid edifices, the
ruins of many of which still remain.[I-58] Besides these, there are
numerous vague traditions of settlements or nations of white men, who
lived apart from the other people of the country, and were possessed
of an advanced civilization.
[Sidenote: CHRISTIANITY IN AMERICA.]
The most celebrated of these are Quetzalcoatl and Votan. The
speculations which have been indulged in regarding the identity of
these mysterious personages, are wild in the extreme. Thus Quetzalcoatl
has been identified by some with St Thomas, by others with the
Messiah. Carlos de Sigüenza y Góngora[I-59] and Luis Becerra Tanco,[I-60]
in support of their opinion that he was no other than the apostle,
allege that the hero-god's proper name Topiltzin Quetzalcoatl closely
resembles in sound and signification that of Thomas, surnamed Didymus;
for _to_ in the Mexican name, is an abbreviation of Thomas, to which
_pilcin_, meaning 'son' or 'disciple,' is added; while the meaning of
Quetzalcoatl is exactly the same as that of the Greek name Didymus,
'a twin,' being compounded of _quetzalli_ a plume of green feathers,
metaphorically signifying anything precious, and _coatl_, a serpent,
metaphorically meaning one of two twins. Boturini tells us that he
possessed certain historical memoranda concerning the preaching of the
gospel in America by the 'glorious apostle' St Thomas. Another proof
in his possession was a painting of a cross which he discovered near
the hill of Tianguiztepetl, which cross was about a cubit in size and
painted by the hands of angels a beautiful blue color, with various
devices, among which were five white balls on an azure shield, 'without
doubt emblems of the five precious wounds of our Savior;' and, what is
more marvelous, although this relic had stood in an exposed position
from the days of heathenism up to the time when it was discovered,
yet the inclemencies of the weather had not been able to affect
its gorgeous hues in the least. But this is not all. Boturini also
possessed a painting of another cross, which was drawn, by means of
a machine made expressly for the purpose, out of an inaccessible cave
in Lower Mizteca, where it had been deposited in the pagan times. Its
hiding-place was discovered by angelic music which issued from the
mouth of the cave on every vigil of the holy apostle. Besides this,
the saint has left the tracks of his holy feet in many parts of New
Spain. There is also a tradition that at the time of his departure he
left a prophecy that in a certain year his sons would come from the
east to preach among the natives; which prophecy, Boturini, following
the track of the native calendars, discovered to have been 'verified to
the letter.'[I-61] After this who can doubt that St Thomas preached the
gospel in America?
Foremost--as being most modern--among those who have thought it
possible to identify Quetzalcoatl with the Messiah, stands Lord
Kingsborough, a writer and enthusiast of whom I shall speak further
when I come to the supposed Hebraic origin of the Americans. To this
point he has devoted an incredible amount of labor and research, to
give any adequate idea of which would require at least more space
than I think, as a question of fact, it deserves. In the first place
it is founded mainly upon obscure passages in the Prophet and other
parts of Holy Writ, as compared with the equally obscure meanings of
American names, religious rites, ancient prophecies, conceptions of
divinity, etc. Now, the day is past when the earnest seeker after facts
need be either afraid or ashamed to assert that he cannot accept the
scriptures as an infallible authority upon the many burning questions
which continually thrust themselves, as it were, upon the present
generation for immediate and fair consideration; nor need his respect
for traditions and opinions long held sacred be lessened one iota by
such an assertion. It is needless to state that the analogies which
Lord Kingsborough finds in America in support of his theory are based
upon no sounder foundation.[I-62]
[Sidenote: VOTAN THE CULTURE-HERO.]
Votan, another mysterious personage, closely resembling Quetzalcoatl
in many points, was the supposed founder of the Maya civilization. He
is said to have been a descendant of Noah and to have assisted at the
building of the Tower of Babel. After the confusion of tongues he led
a portion of the dispersed people to America. There he established the
kingdom of Xibalba and built the city of Palenque.[I-63]
* * * * *
Let us turn now from these wild speculations, with which volumes
might be filled, but which are practically worthless, to the special
theories of origin, which are, however, for the most part, scarcely
more satisfactory.
Beginning with eastern Asia, we find that the Americans, or in some
instances their civilization only, are supposed to have come
originally from China, Japan, India, Tartary, Polynesia. Three
principal routes are proposed by which they may have come, namely:
Bering Strait, the Aleutian Islands, and Polynesia. The route taken by
no means depends upon the original habitat of the emigrants; thus the
people of India may have emigrated to the north of Asia, and crossed
Bering Strait, or the Chinese may have passed from one to the other of
the Aleutian Islands until they reached the western continent. Bering
Strait is, however, the most widely advocated, and perhaps most
probable, line of communication. The narrow strait would scarcely
hinder any migration either east or west, especially as it is
frequently frozen over in winter. At all events it is certain that
from time immemorial constant intercourse has been kept up between the
natives on either side of the strait; indeed, there can be no doubt
that they are one and the same people. Several writers, however, favor
the Aleutian route.[I-64]
[Sidenote: DIFFUSION OF ANIMALS.]
But there is a problem which the possibility of neither of these routes
will help to solve: How did the animals reach America? It is not to be
supposed that ferocious beasts and venomous reptiles were brought over
by the immigrants, nor is it more probable that they swam across the
ocean. Of course such a question is raised only by those who believe
that all living creatures are direct descendants of the animals saved
from the flood in Noah's ark; but such is the belief of the great
majority of our authors. The easiest way to account for this diffusion
of animals is to believe that the continents were at one time united,
though this is also asserted, with great show of probability, by
authors who do not think it necessary to find a solid roadway in order
to account for the presence of animals in America, or even to believe
that the fauna of the New World need ever in any way have come from the
Old World. Again, some writers are inclined to wonder how the tropical
animals found in America could have reached the continent via the polar
regions, and find it necessary to connect America and Africa to account
for this.[I-65]
The theory that America was peopled, or, at least partly peopled, from
eastern Asia, is certainly more widely advocated than any other, and,
in my opinion, is moreover based upon a more reasonable and logical
foundation than any other. It is true, the Old World may have been
originally peopled from the New, and it is also true that the Americans
may have had an autochthonic origin, but, if we must suppose that
they have originated on another continent, then it is to Asia that
we must first look for proofs of such an origin, at least as far as
the people of north-western America are concerned. "It appears most
evident to me," says the learned Humboldt, "that the monuments, methods
of computing time, systems of cosmogony, and many myths of America,
offer striking analogies with the ideas of eastern Asia--analogies
which indicate an ancient communication, and are not simply the result
of that uniform condition in which all nations are found in the dawn
of civilization."[I-66] Prescott's conclusions are, first: "That the
coincidences are sufficiently strong to authorize a belief, that the
civilization of Anahuac was, in some degree, influenced by that of
Eastern Asia. And, secondly, that the discrepancies are such as to
carry back the communication to a very remote period; so remote, that
this foreign influence has been too feeble to interfere materially with
the growth of what may be regarded, in its essential features, as a
peculiar and indigenous civilization."[I-67] "If, as I believe," writes
Dr Wilson, "the continent was peopled from Asia, it was necessarily
by younger nations. But its civilization was of native growth, and
so was far younger than that of Egypt."[I-68] That "immigration was
continuous for ages from the east of Asia," is thought by Col. Smith
to be "sufficiently indicated by the pressure of nations, so far as it
is known in America, being always from the north-west coasts, eastward
and southward, to the beginning of the thirteenth century."[I-69] "That
America was peopled from Asia, the cradle of the human race, can no
longer be doubted," says Dupaix; "but how and when they came is a
problem that cannot be solved."[I-70] Emigration from eastern Asia,
of which there can be no doubt, only "took place," says Tschudi,
"in the latter part of the fifth century of the Christian era; and
while it explains many facts in America which long perplexed our
archæologists, it by no means aids us in determining the origin of our
earliest population."[I-71] "After making every proper allowance," says
Gallatin, "I cannot see any possible reason that should have prevented
those, who after the dispersion of mankind moved towards the east and
northeast, from having reached the extremities of Asia, and passed over
to America, within five hundred years after the flood. However small
may have been the number of those first emigrants, an equal number of
years would have been more than sufficient to occupy, in their own way,
every part of America."[I-72] There are, however, writers who find grave
objections to an Asiatic origin, the principal of which are the absence
of the horse, the "paucity and the poverty of the lactiferous animals,
and the consequent absence of pastoral nations in the New World." For,
adds a writer in the _Quarterly Review_, "we can hardly suppose that
any of the pastoral hordes of Tartars would emigrate across the strait
of Behring or the Aleutian Islands without carrying with them a supply
of those cattle on which their whole subsistence depended."[I-73]
* * * * *
[Sidenote: THEORY OF ORIGIN FROM CHINESE.]
[Sidenote: THE COUNTRY OF FUSANG.]
The theory that western America was originally peopled by the Chinese,
or at least that the greater part of the New World civilization may be
attributed to this people, is founded mainly on a passage in the work
of the Chinese historian Li yan tcheou, who lived at the commencement
of the seventh century of our era. In this passage it is stated that
a Chinese expedition discovered a country lying twenty thousand _li_
to the east of Tahan, which was called Fusang.[I-74] Tahan is generally
supposed to be Kamchatka, and Fusang the north-west coast of America,
California, or Mexico. As so much depends upon what Li yan tcheou has
said about the mysterious country, it will be well to give his account
in full; as translated by Klaproth, it is as follows: In the first
of the years _young yuan_, in the reign of Fi ti of the dynasty of
Thsi, a _cha men_ (buddhist priest), named Hoeï chin, arrived at King
tcheou from the country of Fusang; of this land he says: Fusang is
situated twenty thousand _li_[I-75] to the east of the country of Tahan,
and an equal distance to the east of China. In this place are many
trees called _fusang_,[I-76] whose leaves resemble those of the _Thoung_
(Bignonia tomentosa), and the first sprouts those of the bamboo. These
serve the people of the country for food. The fruit is red and shaped
like a pear. The bark is prepared in the same manner as hemp, and
manufactured into cloth and flowered stuffs. The wood serves for the
construction of houses, for in this country there are neither towns nor
walled habitations. The inhabitants have a system of writing and make
paper from the bark of the fusang. They possess neither arms nor troops
and they never wage war. According to the laws of the kingdom, there
are two prisons, one in the north, the other in the south; those who
have committed trifling faults are sent to the latter, those guilty of
graver crimes to the former, and detained there until by mitigation of
their sentence they are removed to the south.[I-77] The male and female
prisoners are allowed to marry with each other and their children are
sold as slaves, the boys when they are eight years of age, the girls
when they are nine. The prisoners never go forth from their jail alive.
When a man of superior mark commits a crime, the people assemble in
great numbers, seat themselves opposite the criminal, who is placed
in a ditch, partake of a banquet, and take leave of the condemned
person as of one who is about to die. Cinders are then heaped about
the doomed man. For slight faults, the criminal alone is punished, but
for a great crime his children and grandchildren suffer with him; in
some extraordinary cases his sin is visited upon his descendants to the
seventh generation.
The name of the king of this country is Yit khi; the nobles of the
first rank are called Toui lou; those of the second, 'little' Toui
lou; and those of the third, Na tu cha. When the king goes out, he is
accompanied by tambours and horns. He changes the color of his dress at
certain times; in the years of the cycle _kia_ and _y_, it is blue; in
the years _ping_ and _ting_, it is red; in the years _ou_ and _ki_, it
is yellow; in the years _keng_ and _sin_, it is white; and lastly, in
those years which have the characters _jin_ and _kouei_, it is black.
The cattle have long horns, and carry burdens, some as much as one
hundred and twenty Chinese pounds. Vehicles, in this country, are drawn
by oxen, horses, or deer. The deer are raised in the same manner that
cattle are raised in China, and cheese is made from the milk of the
females.[I-78] A kind of red pear is found there which is good at all
seasons of the year. Grape-vines are also plentiful.[I-79] There is no
iron, but copper is met with. Gold and silver are not valued. Commerce
is free, and the people are not given to haggling about prices.
This is the manner of their marriages: When a man wishes to wed a girl,
he erects his cabin just before the door of hers. Every morning and
evening he waters and weeds the ground, and this he continues to do
for a whole year. If by the end of that time the girl has not given
her consent to their union, his suit is lost and he moves away; but
if she is willing, he marries her. The marriage ceremony is almost the
same as that observed in China. On the death of their father or mother,
children fast for seven days; grandparents are mourned for by a fast
of five days, and other relations by a fast of three days' duration.
Images of the spirits of the dead[I-80] are placed on a kind of pedestal,
and prayed to morning and evening.[I-81] Mourning garments are not worn.
The king does not meddle with affairs of government until he has been
three years upon the throne.
In former times the religion of Buddha was unknown in this country, but
in the fourth of the years _ta ming_, in the reign of Hiao wou ti of
the Soung dynasty (A.D. 458), five _pi khieou_ or missionaries, from
the country Ki pin, went to Fusang and there diffused the Buddhist
faith. They carried with them sacred books and images, they introduced
the ritual, and inculcated monastic habits of life. By these means they
changed the manners of the people.
Such is the account given by the historian Li yan tcheou of the
mysterious land. Klaproth, in his critique on Deguignes' theory that
America was known to the Chinese, uses the distances given by the
monk Hoeï chin to show that Fusang, where the laws and institutions
of Buddha were introduced, was Japan, and that Tahan, situated to the
west of the Vinland of Asia, as Humboldt aptly calls Fusang,[I-82] was
not Kamchatka but the island of Tarakai, wrongly named on our maps,
Saghalien. The circumstance that there were grape-vines and horses
in the discovered country is alone sufficient, he says, to show
that it was not situated on the American continent, since both these
objects were given to the New World by the Spaniards. M. Gaubil also
contradicts Deguignes' theory. "Deguignes' paper," he writes to one
of his confrères in Paris, "proves nothing; by a similar course of
reasoning it might be shown that the Chinese reached France, Italy, or
Poland."[I-83]
[Sidenote: CHINESE EXPEDITION TO AMERICA.]
Certain allusions to a Chinese colony, made by Marco Polo and Gonzalo
Mendoza, led Horn, Forster, and other writers to suppose that the
Chinese, driven from their country by the Tartars about the year
1270, embarked to the number of one hundred thousand in a fleet of one
thousand vessels, and having arrived on the coast of America, there
founded the Mexican empire. As Warden justly remarks, however, it is
not probable that an event of such importance would be passed over
in silence by the Chinese historians, who rendered a circumstantial
account of the destruction of their fleet by the Tartars about the year
1278 of our era, as well as of the reduction of their country by the
same people.[I-84]
The strongest proof upon which the Chinese theory rests, is that of
physical resemblance, which, on the extreme north-western coast of
America, is certainly very strong.[I-85] I think there can be no doubt of
the presence of Mongol blood in the veins of the inhabitants of that
region, though it is probably Tartar or Japanese rather than Chinese.
Indeed, when we consider that the distance across Bering Strait is
all that intervenes between the two continents, that this is at times
completely frozen over, thus practically connecting America and Asia,
and that, both by sea and by ice, the inhabitants on both sides of
the strait are known to have had communication with each other from
time immemorial, a lack of resemblance, physical and otherwise, would
be far more strange than its presence. In spite of what may be said
to the contrary, there can be no doubt that the Mongolian type grows
less and less distinct as we go south from Alaska, though, once grant
the Mongols a footing on the continent, and the influence of their
religion, languages, or customs may, for all we know, have extended
even to Cape Horn.
[Sidenote: MONGOLIAN ANALOGIES.]
Analogies have been found, or thought to exist, between the languages
of several of the American tribes, and that of the Chinese. But it is
to Mexico, Central America, and, as we shall hereafter see, to Peru,
that we must look for these linguistic affinities, and not to the
north-western coasts, where we should naturally expect to find them
most evident.[I-86] The similarity between the Otomí and Chinese has
been remarked by several writers.[I-87] A few customs are mentioned as
being common to both Chinese and Americans, but they show absolutely
nothing, and are scarcely worth recounting. For instance, Bossu,
speaking of the Natchez, says, "they never pare their finger nails,
and it is well known that in China long nails on the right hand are
a mark of nobility."[I-88] "It appears plainly" to Mr Carver "that a
great similarity between the Indian and Chinese is conspicuous in that
particular custom of shaving or plucking off the hair, and leaving
only a small tuft on the crown of the head."[I-89] M. du Pratz has "good
grounds to believe" that the Mexicans came originally from China or
Japan, especially when he considers "their reserved and uncommunicative
disposition, which to this day prevails among the people of the eastern
parts of Asia."[I-90] Architectural analogy there is none.[I-91]
[Sidenote: BUDDHISM IN THE NEW WORLD.]
The mythological evidence upon which this and other east-Asiatic
theories of origin rest, is the similarity between the more advanced
religions of America and Buddhism. Humboldt thinks he sees in the
snake cut in pieces the famous serpent Kaliya or Kalinaga, conquered
by Vishnu, when he took the form of Krishna, and in the Mexican
Tonatiuh, the Hindu Krishna, sung of in the Bhagavata-Purana.[I-92]
Count Stolberg,[I-93] is of opinion that the two great religious sects
of India, the worshipers of Vishnu and those of Siva, have spread over
America, and that the Peruvian cult is that of Vishnu when he appears
in the form of Krishna, or the sun, while the sanguinary religion of
the Mexicans is analogous to that of Siva, in the character of the
Stygian Jupiter. The wife of Siva, the black goddess Kali or Bhavani,
symbol of death and destruction, wears, according to Hindu statues and
pictures, a necklace of human skulls. The Vedas ordain human sacrifices
in her honor. The ancient cult of Kali, continues Humboldt, presents,
without doubt, a marked resemblance to that of Mictlancihuatl, the
Mexican goddess of hell; "but in studying the history of the peoples
of Anáhuac, one is tempted to regard these coincidences as purely
accidental. One is not justified in supposing that there must have been
communication between all semi-barbarous nations who worship the sun,
or offer up human beings in sacrifice."[I-94]
[Sidenote: PHALLIC RELICS.]
Humboldt, who inclines strongly toward the belief that there has
been communication between America and southern Asia, is at a loss to
account for the total absence on the former continent of the phallic
symbols which play such an important part in the worship of India.[I-95]
But he remarks that M. Langlès[I-96] observes that in India the
_Vaichnava_, or votaries of Vishnu, have a horror of the emblem of the
productive force, adored in the temples of Siva and his wife Bhavani,
goddess of abundance. "May not we suppose," he adds, "that among the
Buddhists exiled to the north-east of Asia, there was also a sect that
rejected the phallic cult, and that it is this purified Buddhism of
which we find some slight traces among the American peoples."[I-97] I
think I have succeeded in showing, however, in a previous volume that
very distinct traces of phallic worship have been found in America.[I-98]
An ornament bearing some resemblance to an elephant's trunk, found
on some of the ruined buildings and images in America, chiefly at
Uxmal, has been thought by some writers to support the theory of a
south-Asiatic origin. Others have thought that this hook represents
the elongated snout of the tapir, an animal common in Central America,
and held sacred in some parts. The resemblance to either trunk or snout
can be traced, however, only with the aid of a very lively imagination,
and the point seems to me unworthy of serious discussion.[I-99] The same
must be said of attempts to trace the mound-builders to Hindustan,[I-100]
not because communication between America and southern Asia is
impossible, but because something more is needed to base a theory of
such communication upon than the bare fact that there were mounds in
one country and mounds in the other.
It is very positively asserted by several authors that the civilization
of Peru was of Mongolian origin.[I-101] It is not, however, supposed
to have been brought from the north-western coasts of America, or
to have come to this continent by any of the more practicable routes
of communication, such as Bering Strait or the Aleutian Islands. In
this instance the introduction of foreign culture was the result of
disastrous accident.
[Sidenote: MONGOL CIVILIZATION IN PERU.]
In the thirteenth century, the Mongol emperor, Kublai Khan, sent a
formidable armament against Japan. The expedition failed, and the
fleet was scattered by a violent tempest. Some of the ships, it is
said, were cast upon the coast of Peru, and their crews are supposed to
have founded the mighty empire of the Incas, conquered three centuries
later by Pizarro. Mr John Ranking, who leads the van of theorists
in this direction, has written a goodly volume upon this subject,
which certainly, if read by itself, ought to convince the reader as
satisfactorily that America was settled by Mongols, as Kingsborough's
work that it was reached by the Jews, or Jones' argument that the
Tyrians had a hand in its civilization.
That a Mongol fleet was sent against Japan, and that it was dispersed
by a storm, is matter of history, though historians differ as to
the manner of occurrence and date of the event; but that any of the
distressed ships were driven upon the coast of Peru can be but mere
conjecture, since no news of such an arrival ever reached Asia, and,
what is more important, no record of the deliverance of their fathers,
no memories of the old mother-country from which they had been cut off
so suddenly, seemingly no knowledge, even, of Asia, were preserved by
the Peruvians. Granted that the crews of the wrecked ships were but a
handful compared with the aboriginal population they came among, that
they only taught what they knew and did not people the country, still,
the sole foundation of the theory is formed of analogous customs and
physical appearance, showing that their influence and infusion of blood
must have been very widely extended. If, when they arrived, they found
the natives in a savage condition, as has been stated, this influence
must, indeed, have been all-pervading; and it is ridiculous to suppose
that the Mongol father imparted to his children a knowledge of the arts
and customs of Asia, without impressing upon their minds the story of
his shipwreck and the history of his native country, about which all
Mongols are so precise.
But our theorists scorn to assign the parts of teachers to the wrecked
Mongolians. Immediately after their arrival they gave kings to the
country, and established laws. Ranking narrates the personal history
and exploits of all these kings, or Incas, and even goes so far as
to give a steel-engraved portrait of each; but then he also gives a
"description of two living unicorns in Africa." The name of the first
Inca was Mango, or Manco, which, says Ranking, was also the name
of the brother and predecessor of Kublai Khan, he who sent out the
expedition against Japan. The first Inca of Peru, he believes was the
son of Kublai Khan, and refers the reader to his "portrait of Manco
Capac,[I-102] that he may compare it with the description of Kublai,"
given by Marco Polo. The wife of Manco Capac was named Coya Mama Oella
Huaco; she was also called Mamamchic, "as the mother of her relations
and subjects." Purchas mentions a queen in the country of Sheromogula
whose name was Manchika.[I-103] Thus, putting two and two together,
Ranking arrives at the conclusion that "the names of Mango and his wife
are so like those in Mongolia, that we may fairly presume them to be
the same."[I-104]
[Sidenote: PERUVIAN AND ASIATIC ANALOGIES.]
Let us now briefly review some other analogies discovered by this
writer. The natives of South America had little or no beard, the
Mongols had also little hair on the face. The _Llatu_, or head-dress
of the Incas had the appearance of a garland, the front being decorated
with a flesh-colored tuft or tassel, and that of the hereditary prince
being yellow; it was surmounted by two feathers taken from a sacred
bird. Here again we are referred to the portraits of the Incas and to
those of Tamerlane and Tehanghir, two Asiatic princes, "both descended
from Genghis Khan." The similarity between the head-dresses, is, we
are told, "striking, if allowance be made for the difficulty the Incas
would experience in procuring suitable muslin for the turban." The
plumes are supposed to be in some way connected with the sacred owl of
the Mongols, and yellow is the color of the imperial family in China.
The sun was held an especial object of adoration, as it "has been the
peculiar god of the Moguls, from the earliest times." The Peruvians
regarded Pachacamac as the Sovereign Creator; Camac-Hya was the name
of a Hindu goddess; _haylli_ was the burden of every verse of the
songs composed in praise of the Sun and the Incas. "Ogus, Ghengis'
ancestor, at one year of age, miraculously pronounced the word Allah!
Allah! which was the immediate work of God, who was pleased that his
name should be glorified by the mouth of this tender infant."[I-105]
Thus Mr Ranking thinks "it is highly probable that this (_haylli_) is
the same as the well-known _Halle_lujah." Resemblances are found to
exist between the Peruvian feast of the sun, and other similar Asiatic
festivals. In Peru, hunters formed a circle round the quarry, in the
country of Genghis they did the same. The organization of the army was
much the same in Peru as in the country of the Khans; the weapons and
musical instruments were also very similar. In the city of Cuzco, not
far from the hill where the citadel stood, was a portion of land called
_colcampata_, which none were permitted to cultivate except those of
royal blood. At certain seasons the Incas turned up the sod here, amid
much rejoicing and many ceremonies. "A great festival is solemnized
every year, in all the cities of China, on the day that the sun
enters the fifteenth degree of Aquarius. The emperor, according to the
custom of the ancient founders of the Chinese monarchy, goes himself
in a solemn manner to plough a few ridges of land. Twelve illustrious
persons attend and plough after him."[I-106] In Peruvian as in Chinese
architecture, it is noticeable that great care is taken to render
the joints between the stones as nearly imperceptible as possible. A
similarity is also said to exist between the decorations on the palaces
of the Incas and those of the Khans. The cycle of sixty years was in
use among most of the nations of eastern Asia, and among the Muyscas of
the elevated plains of Bogota. The _quipu_, or knotted reckoning cord
was in use in Peru, as in China. Some other analogies might be cited,
but these are sufficient to show upon what foundation this theory
rests. I may mention here that the Incas possessed a cross of fine
marble, or jasper, highly polished, and all of one piece. It was three
fourths of an ell in length and three fingers in thickness, and was
kept in a sacred chamber of the palace and held in great veneration.
The Spaniards enriched this cross with gold and jewels and placed it in
the cathedral at Cuzco; had it been of plain wood they would probably
have burnt it with curses on the emblem of 'devil-worship.' To account
for this discovery, Mr Ranking says: There were many Nestorians in
the thirteenth century in the service of the Mongols. The conqueror of
the king of eastern Bengal, A.D. 1272, was a Christian. The Mongols,
who were deists, treated all religions with respect, till they became
Mohammedans. It is very probable that a part of the military sent to
conquer Japan, were commanded by Nestorian officers. The mother of
the Grand Khan Mangu, who was brother to Kublai, and possibly uncle to
Manco Capac, the first Inca, was a Christian, and had in her service
William Bouchier, a goldsmith, and Basilicus, the son of an Englishman
born in Hungary. It is therefore highly probable that this cross
accompanied Manco Capac.[I-107]
[Sidenote: PERUVIAN GIANTS.]
I have stated above that the Peruvians preserved no record of having
come originally from China. They had a tradition, however, concerning
certain foreigners who came by sea to their country, which may be worth
repeating; Garcilasso de la Vega gives this tradition as he himself
heard it in Peru. They affirm, he says, in all Peru, that certain
giants came by sea to the cape now called St Helen's, in large barks
made of rushes. These giants were so enormously tall that ordinary men
reached no higher than their knees; their long, disheveled hair covered
their shoulders; their eyes were as big as saucers, and the other parts
of their bodies were of correspondingly colossal proportions. They were
beardless; some of them were naked, others were clothed in the skins of
wild beasts; there were no women with them. Having landed at the cape,
they established themselves at a spot in the desert, and dug deep wells
in the rock, which at this day continue to afford excellent water. They
lived by rapine, and soon desolated the whole country. Their appetites
and gluttony were such that it is said one of them would eat as much
as fifty ordinary persons. They massacred the men of the neighboring
parts without mercy, and killed the women by their brutal violations.
At last, after having for a long time tyrannized over the country
and committed all manner of enormities, they were suddenly destroyed
by fire from heaven, and an angel armed with a flaming sword. As an
eternal monument of divine vengeance, their bones remained unconsumed,
and may be seen at the present day. As for the rest, it is not known
from what place they came, nor by what route they arrived.[I-108]
There is also a native account of the arrival of Manco Capac, in which
he figures simply a culture-hero. The story closely resembles those
told of the appearance and acts of the apostles Cukulcan, Wixepecocha,
and others, and need not be repeated here.[I-109]
[Sidenote: THE CHINESE FROM PERU.]
Mr Charles Wolcott Brooks, Japanese consul in San Francisco, a most
learned gentleman, and especially well versed in Oriental lore, has
kindly presented me with a MS. prepared by himself, in which are
condensed the results of twenty-five years' study of the history
of the eastern Asiatic nations, and their possible communication
with American continent.[I-110] He recognizes many striking analogies
between the Chinese and the Peruvians, but arrives at a conclusion
respecting the relation between the two nations, the exact reverse
of that discussed in the preceding paragraphs. His theory is that the
Chinese came originally from Peru, and not the Peruvians from China.
He uses, to support his argument, many of the resemblances in customs,
etc., of which Ranking and others have availed themselves to prove
an exactly opposite theory, and adds that, as in those early times
the passage of the Pacific could only have been made under the most
favorable circumstances and with the assistance of fair winds, it would
be impossible, owing to the action of the SE. and NE. trade-winds for
such a passage to have been made, either intentionally or accidentally,
from China to Peru, while on the other hand, if a large craft were
placed before the wind and set adrift from the Peruvian coast, there
is a strong probability that it would drive straight on to the southern
coast of China.[I-111]
* * * * *
[Sidenote: JAPANESE WRECKS ON THE AMERICAN COAST.]
A Japanese origin or at least a strong infusion of Japanese blood,
has been attributed to the tribes of the north-west coasts. There is
nothing improbable in this; indeed, there is every reason to believe
that on various occasions small parties of Japanese have reached
the American continent, have married the women of the country, and
necessarily left the impress of their ideas and physical peculiarities
upon their descendants. Probably these visits were all, without
exception, accidental; but that they have occurred in great numbers
is certain. There have been a great many instances of Japanese
junks drifting upon the American coast, many of them after having
floated helplessly about for many months. Mr Brooks gives forty-one
particular instances of such wrecks, beginning in 1782, twenty-eight
of which date since 1850.[I-112] Only twelve of the whole number were
deserted. In a majority of cases the survivors remained permanently
at the place where the waves had brought them. There is no record in
existence of a Japanese woman having been saved from a wreck. A great
many Japanese words are to be found in the Chinook jargon, but in
all cases abbreviated, as if coming from a foreign source, while the
construction of the two languages is dissimilar.[I-113] The reasons for
the presence of Japanese and the absence of Chinese junks are simple.
There is a current of cold water setting from the Arctic ocean south
along the east coast of Asia, which drives all the Chinese wrecks
south. The Kuro Siwo, or 'black stream,' commonly known as the Japan
current, runs northwards past the eastern coast of the Japan islands,
then curves round to the east and south, sweeping the whole west
coast of North America, a branch, or eddy, moving towards the Sandwich
Islands. A drifting wreck would be carried towards the American coast
at an average rate of ten miles a day by this current. To explain
the frequent occurrence of these wrecks Mr Brooks refers to an old
Japanese law. About the year 1630, the Japanese government adopted its
deliberate policy of exclusion of foreigners and seclusion of its own
people. To keep the latter from visiting foreign countries, and to
confine their voyages to smooth water and the coasting trade, a law
was passed ordering all junks to be built with open sterns and large
square rudders unfit to stand any heavy sea. The January monsoons from
the north-east are apt to blow any unlucky coaster which happens to be
out straight into the Kuro Siwo, the huge rudders are soon washed away,
and the vessels, falling into the trough of the sea, roll their masts
overboard. Every January there are numbers of these disasters of which
no record is kept. About one third of these vessels, it seems, drift
to the Sandwich Islands, the remainder to North America, where they
scatter along the coast from Alaska to California. How many years this
has been going on can only be left to conjecture. The information given
by Mr Brooks is of great value, owing to his thorough acquaintance with
the subject, the intelligent study of which has been a labor of love
with him for so many years. And his theory with regard to the Japanese
carries all the more weight, in my opinion, in that he does not attempt
to account for the similarities that exist between that people and the
Americans by an immigration en masse, but by a constant infusion of
Japanese blood and customs through a series of years, sufficient to
modify the original stock, wherever that came from.
I have already stated that traces of the Japanese language have
been found among the coast tribes. There is also some physical
resemblance.[I-114] Viollet-le-Duc points out some striking resemblances
between the temples of Japan and Central America.[I-115] It is asserted
that the people of Japan had a knowledge of the American continent and
that it was marked down on their maps. Montanus tells us that three
ship-captains named Henrik Corneliszoon, Schaep, and Wilhelm Byleveld,
were taken prisoners by the Japanese and carried to Jeddo, where they
were shown a sea chart, on which America was drawn as a mountainous
country adjoining Tartary on the north.[I-116] Of course the natives
have the usual tradition that strangers came among them long before the
advent of the Europeans.[I-117]
The theory that America, or at least the north-western part of it, was
peopled by the 'Tartars' or tribes of north-western Asia, is supported
by many authors. There certainly is no reason why they should not have
crossed Bering Strait from Asia, the passage is easy enough; nor is
there any reason why they should not have crossed by the same route
to Asia, and peopled the north-western part of that continent. The
customs, manner of life, and physical appearance of the natives on both
sides of the straits are almost identical, as a multitude of witnesses
testify, and it seems absurd to argue the question from any point. Of
course, Bering Strait may have served to admit other nations besides
the people inhabiting its shores into America, and in such cases there
is more room for discussion.[I-118]
[Sidenote: THE EGYPTIAN THEORY.]
We may now consider that theory which supposes the civilized peoples
of America to be of Egyptian origin, or, at least, to have derived
their arts and culture from Egypt. This supposition is based mainly
on certain analogies which have been thought to exist between the
architecture, hieroglyphics, methods of computing time, and, to a less
extent, customs, of the two countries. Few of these analogies will,
however, bear close investigation, and even where they will, they can
hardly be said to prove anything. I find no writer who goes so far as
to affirm that the New World was actually peopled from Egypt; we shall,
therefore, have to regard this merely as a culture-theory, the original
introduction of human life into the continent in no way depending upon
its truth or fallacy.
The architectural feature which has attracted most attention is the
pyramid, which to some writers is of itself conclusive proof of an
Egyptian origin. The points of resemblance, as given by those in favor
of this theory, are worth studying. García y Cubas claims the following
analogies between Teotihuacan and the Egyptian pyramids: the site
chosen is the same; the structures are oriented with slight variation;
the line through the centre of the pyramids is in the 'astronomical
meridian;' the construction in grades and steps is the same; in both
cases the larger pyramids are dedicated to the sun; the Nile has a
'valley of the dead,' as at Teotihuacan there is a 'street of the
dead;' some monuments of each class have the nature of fortifications;
the smaller mounds are of the same nature and for the same purpose;
both pyramids have a small mound joined to one of their faces; the
openings discovered in the Pyramid of the Moon are also found in
some Egyptian pyramids; the interior arrangement of the pyramids is
analogous.[I-119]
[Sidenote: EGYPTIAN AND AMERICAN PYRAMIDS.]
The two great pyramids of Teotihuacan, dedicated to the sun and moon,
are surrounded by several hundreds of small pyramids. Delafield remarks
that the pyramids of Gizeh, in Egypt, are also surrounded by smaller
edifices in regular order, and closely correspond in arrangement to
those of Teotihuacan.[I-120] The construction of these two pyramids
recalls to Mr Ranking's mind that of "one of the Egyptian pyramids of
Sakhara, which has six stories; and which, according to Pocock, is a
mass of pebbles and yellow mortar, covered on the outside with rough
stones."[I-121] In some few instances human remains have been found in
American pyramids, though never in such a position as to convey the
idea that the structure had been built expressly for their reception,
as was the case in Egypt. It is but fair to add, however, that no
pyramid has yet been opened to its centre, or, indeed, in any way
properly explored as to its interior, and that a great many of them are
known to have interior galleries and passages, though these were not
used as sepulchres. In one instance, at Copan, a vault was discovered
in the side of a pyramidal structure; on the floor, and in two small
niches, were a number of red earthen-ware vessels, containing human
bones packed in lime; scattered about were shells, cave stalactites,
and stone knives; three heads were also found, one of them "apparently
representing death, its eyes being nearly shut, and the lower features
distorted; the back of the head symmetrically perforated by holes;
the whole of most exquisite workmanship, and cut or cast from a fine
stone covered with green enamel."[I-122] In the great pyramid of Cholula,
also, an excavation made in building the Puebla road, which cut off a
corner of the lower terrace, not only disclosed to view the interior
construction of the pyramid, but also laid bare a tomb containing
two skeletons and two idols of basalt, a collection of pottery, and
other relics. The sepulchre was square, with stone walls, supported
with cypress beams. The dimensions are not given, but no traces of
any outlet were found.[I-123] There are, besides, traditions among the
natives of the existence of interior galleries and apartments of great
extent within this mound. Thus we see that in some instances the dead
were deposited in pyramids, though there is not sufficient evidence to
show that these structures were originally built for this purpose.
[Sidenote: ARCHITECTURAL ANALOGIES.]
Herodotus tells us that in his time the great pyramid of Cheops was
coated with polished stone, in such a manner as to present a smooth
surface on all its sides from the base to the top; in the upper part of
the pyramid of Cephren the casing-stones have remained in their places
to the present day. No American pyramid with smooth sides has as yet
been discovered, and of this fact those who reject the Egyptian theory
have not failed to avail themselves.[I-124] It is nevertheless probable
that many of the American pyramids had originally smooth sides,
though, at the present day, time and the growth of dense tropical
vegetation have rendered the very shape of the structures scarcely
recognizable.[I-125] It is further objected that while the American
pyramids exhibit various forms, all are truncated, and were erected
merely to serve as foundations for other buildings, those of Egypt
are of uniform shape, "rising and diminishing until they come to a
point,"[I-126] and are not known to have ever served as a base for temple
or palace. It is, however, not certain, judging from facts visible at
the present day, that all the Egyptian pyramids did rise to a point.
Again, it is almost certain that the American pyramid was not always
used as a foundation for a superimposed building, but that it was
frequently complete in itself. In many of the ruined cities of Yucatan
one or more pyramids have been found upon the summit of which no traces
of any building could be discovered, although upon the pyramids by
which these were surrounded portions of superimposed edifices still
remained. There is, also, some reason to believe that perfect pyramids
were constructed in America. As has been seen in the preceding volume,
Waldeck found near Palenque two pyramids, which he describes as having
been at the time in a state of perfect preservation, square at the
base, pointed at the top, and thirty-one feet high, their sides forming
equilateral triangles. Delafield[I-127] remarks that a simple mound would
first suggest the pyramid, and that from this the more finished and
permanent structure would grow; which is true enough. But if we are
to believe, as is stated, that the American pyramids grew from such
beginnings as the Mississippi mounds, then what reason can there be in
comparing the pyramids of Teotihuacan with those of Gizeh in Egypt.
For if the Egyptian colonists, at the time of their emigration to
America, had advanced no further toward the perfect pyramid than the
mound-building stage, would it not be the merest coincidence if the
finished pyramidal structures in one country, the result of centuries
of improvement, should resemble those of the other country in any but
the most general features? Finally, pyramidal edifices were common
in Asia as well as in Northern Africa, and it may be said that the
American pyramids are as much like the former as they are like the
latter.[I-128]
In its general features, American architecture does not offer any
strong resemblances to the Egyptian. The upholders of the theory find
traces of the latter people in certain round columns found at Uxmal,
Mitla, Quemada, and other places; in the general massiveness of the
structures; and in the fact that the vermilion dye on many of the ruins
was a favorite color in Egypt.[I-129] Humboldt, speaking of a ruined
structure at Mitla, says: "the distribution of the apartments of this
singular edifice, bears a striking analogy to what has been remarked
in the monuments of Upper Egypt, drawn by M. Denon, and the savans who
compose the institute of Cairo."[I-130]
[Sidenote: SCULPTURE AND HIEROGLYPHICS.]
Between American and Egyptian sculpture, there is, at first sight,
a very striking general resemblance. This, however, almost entirely
disappears upon close examination and comparison. Both peoples
represented the human figure in profile, the Egyptians invariably, the
Americans generally; in the sculpture of both, much the same attitudes
of the body predominate, and these are but awkwardly designed; there
is a general resemblance between the lofty head-dresses worn by the
various figures, though in detail there is little agreement.[I-131]
These are the points of analogy and they are sufficiently prominent
to account for the idea of resemblance which has been so often and so
strongly expressed. But while sculpture in Egypt is for the most part
in intaglio, in America it is usually in relief. In the former country,
the faces are expressionless, always of the same type, and, though
executed in profile, the full eye is placed on the side of the head; in
the New World, on the contrary, we meet with many types of countenance,
some of which are by no means lacking in expression.
If there were any hope of evidence that the civilized peoples of
America were descendants, or derived any of their culture from the
ancient Egyptians, we might surely look for such proof in their
hieroglyphics. Yet we look in vain. To the most expert decipherer of
Egyptian hieroglyphics, the inscriptions at Palenque are a blank and
unreadable mystery, and they will perhaps ever remain so.[I-132]
Resemblances have been found between the calendar systems of Egypt and
America, based chiefly upon the length and division of the year, and
the number of intercalary and complementary days. This, however, is
too lengthy a subject to be fully discussed here. In a previous volume
I have given a full account of the American systems, and must perforce
leave it to the reader to compare them with the Egyptian system.[I-133]
Of course a similarity of customs has to be found to support this
theory, as in the case of others. Consequently our attention is drawn
to embalmment, circumcision, and the division of the people into
castes, which is not quite true of the Americans; some resemblance
is found, moreover, between the religions of Egypt and America, for
instance, certain animals were held sacred in both countries; but all
such analogies are far too slender to be worth anything as evidence;
there is scarcely one of them that would not apply to several other
nations equally as well as to the Egyptians.
* * * * *
[Sidenote: THE PHŒNICIAN THEORY.]
Turning now to Western Asia, we find the honor of first settling
America given to the adventurous Phœnicians. The sailors of Carthage
are also supposed by some writers to have first reached the New World,
but as the exploits of colony and mother-country are spoken of by most
writers in the same breath, it will be the simplest plan to combine
the two theories here. They are based upon the fame of these people
as colonizing navigators more than upon any actual resemblances that
have been found to exist between them and the Americans. It is argued
that their ships sailed beyond the Pillars of Hercules to the Canary
Islands, and that such adventurous explorers having reached that
point would be sure to seek farther. The records of their voyages and
certain passages in the works of several of the writers of antiquity
are supposed to show that the ancients knew of a land lying in the far
west.[I-134]
[Sidenote: VOYAGES OF THE PHŒNICIANS.]
The Phœnicians were employed about a thousand years before the
Christian era, by Solomon, king of the Jews, and Hiram, king of Tyre,
to navigate their fleets to Ophir and Tarshish. They returned, by way
of the Mediterranean, to the port of Joppa, after a three-years'
voyage, laden with gold, silver, precious stones, ivory, cedar, apes,
and peacocks. Several authors have believed that they had two distinct
fleets, one of which went to the land since known as America, and the
other to India. Huet, bishop of Avranches,[I-135] and other authors,
are persuaded that Ophir was the modern Sofala, situated about 21° S.
lat., and that Tarshish comprised all the western coast of Africa and
Spain, but particularly the part lying about the mouth of the Bœtis or
Guadalquivir. According to Arius Montanus, Genebrardus, Vatable, and
other writers, Ophir is the island of Hispaniola. It is said that
Christopher Columbus was induced to adopt this idea by the immense
caverns which he found there, from which he supposed that Solomon must
have obtained his gold. Postel and others have believed that the land
of Ophir was Peru.[I-136] Horn[I-137] claims that the Phœnicians made
three remarkable voyages to America; the first, under the direction of
Atlas, son of Neptune; the second, when they were driven by a tempest
from the coast of Africa to the most remote parts of the Atlantic
ocean, and arrived at a large island to the west of Libya; and the
third, in the time of Solomon, when the Tyrians went to Ophir to seek
for gold. According to those who believe that there were two distinct
fleets, that of Solomon and that of Hiram, the first set out from
Eziongeber, sailed down the Red Sea, doubled Cape Comorin, and went to
Taproban (Ceylon), or some other part of India; this voyage occupied
one year. The other fleet passed through the Mediterranean, stopping
at the various ports along the coasts of Europe and Africa, and
finally, passing out through the straits of Gades, continued its
voyage as far as America, and returned after three years to its
starting-place, laden with gold.
The _Periplus_ of Hanno, a Carthaginian navigator of uncertain date,
contains an account of a voyage which he made beyond the Pillars of
Hercules, with a fleet of sixty ships and thirty thousand men, for
the purpose of founding the Liby-Phœnician towns. He relates that
setting out from Gades, he sailed southwards. The first city he
founded was Thumiaterion,[I-138] near the Pillars of Hercules, probably
in the neighborhood of Marmora. He then doubled the promontory of
Soloeis,[I-139] which Rennel considers to be the same as Cape Cantin, but
other commentators to be the same as Cape Blanco, in 33° N. latitude. A
little to the south of this promontory five more cities were founded.
After passing the mouth of the river Lixus, supposed by Rennel to be
the modern St Cyprian, he sailed for two days along a desolate coast,
and on the third day entered a gulf in which was situated a small
island, which he named Kerne, and colonized. After continuing his
voyage for some days, and meeting with various adventures, he returned
to Kerne, whence he once more directed his course southward, and sailed
along the coast for twelve days. Two days more he spent in doubling a
cape, and five more in sailing about a large gulf. He then continued
his voyage for a few days, and was finally obliged to return from want
of provisions. The authenticity of the _Periplus_ has been doubted by
many critics, but it appears probable from the testimony of several
ancient authors that the voyage was actually performed. But be the
account true or false, I certainly can discover in it no ground for
believing that Hanno did more than coast along the western shore of
Africa, sailing perhaps as far south as Sierra Leone.[I-140]
[Sidenote: VOYAGES OF THE PHŒNICIANS.]
Diodorus Siculus relates that the Phœnicians discovered a large island
in the Atlantic Ocean, beyond the Pillars of Hercules, several days'
journey from the coast of Africa. This island abounded in all manner of
riches. The soil was exceedingly fertile; the scenery was diversified
by rivers, mountains, and forests. It was the custom of the inhabitants
to retire during the summer to magnificent country houses, which stood
in the midst of beautiful gardens. Fish and game were found in great
abundance. The climate was delicious, and the trees bore fruit at all
seasons of the year. The Phœnicians discovered this fortunate island
by accident, being driven on its coast by contrary winds. On their
return they gave glowing accounts of its beauty and fertility, and the
Tyrians, who were also noted sailors, desired to colonize it. But the
senate of Carthage opposed their plan, either through jealousy, and a
wish to keep any commercial benefit that might be derived from it for
themselves, or, as Diodorus relates, because they wished to use it as
a place of refuge in case of necessity.
Several authors, says Warden, have believed that this island was
America, among others, Huet, bishop of Avranches. "The statement of
Diodorus," he writes, "that those who discovered this island were cast
upon its shores by a tempest, is worthy of attention; as the east wind
blows almost continually in the torrid zone, it might well happen that
Carthaginian vessels, surprised by this wind, should be carried against
their will to the western islands." Aristotle tells the same story.
Homer, Plutarch, and other ancient writers, mention islands situated
in the Atlantic, several thousand stadia from the Pillars of Hercules,
but such accounts are too vague and mythical to prove that they knew of
any land west of the Canary Islands. Of course they surmised that there
was land beyond the farthest limits of their discovery; they saw that
the sea stretched smoothly away to the horizon, uncut by their clumsy
prows, no matter how far they went; they peopled the Sea of Darkness
with terrors, but they hazarded all manner of guesses at the nature of
the treasure which those terrors guarded. Is it not foolish to invent
a meaning and a fulfillment to fit the vague surmises of these ancient
minds? Are we to believe that Seneca was inspired by a spirit of
prophecy because we read these lines in the second act of his _Medea_:
"Venient annis
Sæcula seris, quibus Oceanus
Vincula rerum laxet, et ingens
Pateat tellus, Thetysque[I-141] novos
Detegat orbes; nec sit terris
Ultima Thule."
Or that Silenus knew of the continent of America because Ælianus makes
him tell Midas, the Phrygian, that there was another continent besides
Europe, Asia, and Africa? A continent whose inhabitants are larger
and live longer than ordinary people, and have different laws and
customs. A country where gold and silver are so plentiful that they are
esteemed no more than we esteem iron. Are we to suppose that St Clement
had visited America when he wrote, in his celebrated epistle to the
Corinthians that there were other worlds beyond the ocean? Might we not
as well argue that America was certainly _not_ known to the ancients,
or Tacitus would never have written: "Trans Sueones aliud mare, pigrum
ac propè immotum ejus cingi cludique terrarum orbem hinc fides." Would
the theological view of the flat structure of the earth have gained
credence for a moment, had antipodes been discovered and believed in?
[Sidenote: VOTAN'S TRAVELS.]
The mysterious traveler, Votan, is once more made to do service for the
theorist here. In his somewhat doubtful manuscript, entitled "Proof
that I am a Serpent," Votan asserts that he is a descendant of Imox,
of the race of Chan, and derives his origin from Chivim. "He states
that he conducted seven families from Valum Votan to this continent
and assigned lands to them; that he is the third of the Votans; that,
having determined to travel until he arrived at the root of heaven,
in order to discover his relations the Culebras (Serpents), and make
himself known to them, he made four voyages to Chivim;[I-142] that he
arrived in Spain, and that he went to Rome; that he saw the great house
of God building;[I-143] that he went by the road which his brethren the
Culebras had bored; that he marked it, and that he passed by the houses
of the thirteen Culebras. He relates that in returning from one of his
voyages, he found seven other families of the Tzequil nation, who had
joined the first inhabitants, and recognized in them the same origin
as his own, that is, of the Culebras. He speaks of the place where they
built their first town, which, from its founders, received the name of
Tzequil; he affirms the having taught them refinement of manners in the
use of the table, table-cloth, dishes, basins, cups, and napkins; that,
in return for these, they taught him the knowledge of God and of his
worship; his first ideas of a king and obedience to him; and that he
was chosen captain of all these united families."[I-144]
[Sidenote: THE TZENDAL TRADITIONS.]
Cabrera supposes Chivim to be the same as Hivim or Givim, which was
the name of the country from which the Hivites, descendants of Heth,
son of Canaan, were expelled by the Philistines some years before
the departure of the Hebrews from Egypt. Some of these settled about
the base of Mount Hermon, and to them belonged Cadmus and his wife
Harmonia. It is probably owing to the fable of their transformation
into snakes, related by Ovid in his Metamorphoses, that the word Givim
in the Phœnician language signifies a snake.[I-145] Tripoli of Syria, a
town in the kingdom of Tyre, was anciently called Chivim. "Under this
supposition, when Votan says he is Culebra, because he is Chivim, he
clearly shows, that he is a Hivite originally of Tripoli in Syria,
which he calls Valum Chivim, where he landed, in his voyages to the
old continent. Here then, we have his assertion, I am Culebra, because
I am Chivim, proved true, by a demonstration as evident, as if he had
said, I am a Hivite, native of Tripoli in Syria, which is Valum Chivim,
the port of my voyages to the old continent, and belonging to a nation
famous for having produced such a hero as Cadmus, who, by his valour
and exploits, was worthy of being changed into a Culebra (snake) and
placed among the gods; whose worship, for the glory of my nation and
race, I teach, to the seven families of the Tzequiles, that I found,
on returning from one of my voyages, united to the seven families,
inhabitants of the American continent, whom I conducted from Valum
Votan, and distributed lands among them."[I-146]
The most enthusiastic supporter of the Phœnician, or Tyrian, theory,
is Mr George Jones. This gentleman has devoted the whole of a goodly
volume to the subject, in which he not only sustains, but conclusively
proves, to his own satisfaction, whatever proposition he pleases. It
is of no use to question, he demolishes by anticipation all possible
objections; he "will yield to none," he says, "in the conscientious
belief in the truth of the startling propositions, and the consequent
historic conclusions." The sum of these propositions and conclusions
is this: that after the taking of the Tyrian capital by Alexander,
B.C. 332, a remnant of the inhabitants escaped by sea to the Fortunate
Islands, and thence to America. The author does not pretend that they
had any positive foreknowledge of the existence of a western continent;
though he believes "that from their knowledge of astronomy, they may
have had the supposition that such might be the case, from the then
known globular character of the earth." But they were mainly indebted
for the success of their voyage to the favoring east winds which bore
them, in the space of a month straight to the coast of Florida.[I-147]
"There arrived in joyous gladness, and welcomed by all the gifts
of nature,--like an heir to a sudden fortune, uncertain where to
rest,--the Tyrians left the shore of Florida and coasted the gulf of
Mexico, and so around the peninsula of Yucatan and into the Bay of
Honduras; they thence ascended a river of shelter and safety, and above
the rapids of which they selected the site of their first city,--now
occupied by the ruins, altars, idols, and walls of Copan!"
The more effectually to preserve the secret of their discovery and
place of refuge, they subsequently destroyed their galleys and passed
a law that no others should be built. At least, this is Mr. Jones'
belief--a belief which, to him, makes the cause "instantly apparent"
why the new-found continent was for so many centuries unknown to
Asiatics or Europeans. It is possible, however, the same ingenious
author thinks, that, upon a final landing, they burned their ships
as a sacrifice to Apollo, "and having made that sacrifice to Apollo,
fanatical zeal may have led them to abhor the future use of means,
which, as a grateful offering, had been given to their deity. Thence
may be traced the gradual loss of nautical practice, on an enlarged
scale; and the great continent now possessed by them, would also
diminish by degrees the uses of navigation."[I-148]
[Sidenote: MR JONES' REASONING.]
Jones ingeniously makes use of the similarities which have been thought
to exist between the American and Egyptian pyramids, and architecture
generally, to prove his Tyrian theory. The general character of
the American architecture is undoubtedly Egyptian, he argues; but
the resemblance is not close enough in detail to allow of its being
actually the work of Egyptian hands; the ancient cities of America
were therefore built by a people who had a _knowledge_ of Egyptian
architecture, and enjoyed constant intercourse with that nation. But
some of the ruins are Greek in style; the mysterious people must also
have been familiar with Greek architecture. Where shall we find such a
people? The cap exactly fits the Tyrians, says Mr Jones, let them wear
it. Unfortunately, however, Mr Jones manufactures the cap himself and
knows the exact size of the head he wishes to place it on. He next goes
on to prove "almost to demonstration that Grecian artists were authors
of the sculpture, Tyrians the architects of the entire edifices,--while
those of Egypt were authors of the architectural bases." The tortoise
is found sculptured on some of the ruins at Uxmal; it was also stamped
upon the coins of Grecian Thebes and Ægina. From this fact it is
brought home at once to the Tyrians, because the Phœnician chief
Cadmus, who founded Thebes, and introduced letters into Greece, without
doubt selected the symbols of his native land to represent the coin of
his new city. The tortoise is, therefore, a Tyrian emblem.[I-149]
The American ruins in some places bear inscriptions written in
vermilion paint; the Tyrians were celebrated for a purple dye.
Carved gems have been found in American tombs; the Tyrians were also
acquainted with gem-carving. The door-posts and pillars of Solomon's
temple were square;[I-150] square obelisks and columns may also be found
at Palenque. But it is useless to multiply quotations; the absurdity of
such reasoning is blazoned upon the face of it.
At Dighton, on the bay of Narraganset, is, or was, an inscription
cut in the rock, which has been confidently asserted to be Phœnician.
Copies of this inscription have been frequently made, but they differ
so materially that no two of them would appear to be intended for the
same design.[I-151]
[Sidenote: INSCRIBED TABLETS.]
In the mountains which extend from the village of Uruana in South
America to the west bank of the Caura, in 7° lat., Father Ramon
Bueno found a block of granite on which were cut several groups of
characters, in which Humboldt sees some resemblance to the Phœnician,
though he doubts that the worthy priest whose copy he saw performed his
work very carefully.[I-152]
The inscribed stone discovered at Grave Creek Mound has excited much
comment, and has done excellent service, if we judge by the number of
theories it has been held to elucidate. Of the twenty-two characters
which are confessedly alphabetic, inscribed upon this stone, ten are
said to correspond, with general exactness, with the Phœnician, fifteen
with the Celtiberic, fourteen with the old British, Anglo Saxon or
Bardic, five with the old northern, or Runic proper, four with the
Etruscan, six with the ancient Gallic, four with the ancient Greek,
and seven with the old Erse.[I-153] An inscribed monument supposed to be
Phœnician was discovered by one Joaquin de Costa, on his estate in New
Granada, some time since.[I-154] The cross, the serpent, and the various
other symbols found among the American ruins, have all been regarded by
different authors as tending to confirm the Phœnician theory; chiefly
because similar emblems have been found in Egypt, and the Phœnicians
are known to have been familiar with Egyptian arts and ideas.[I-155]
Melgar, who thinks there can be no doubt that the Phœnicians built
Palenque, supposes the so-called Palenque medal[I-156] to represent
Hercules in the Garden of the Hesperides, attacked by the dragon. Two
thousand three hundred years before the worship of Hercules was known
in Greece, it obtained in Phœnicia, whither it was brought from Egypt,
where it had flourished for over seventeen thousand years.[I-157]
[Sidenote: THE CARTHAGINIAN THEORY.]
García quotes a number of analogies, giving, after his fashion, the
objections to each by the Spaniards. The builders of the Central
American cities, he says, are reported by tradition to have been of
fair complexion and bearded. The Carthaginians, in common with the
Indians, practiced human sacrifices to a great extent; they worshiped
fire and water, adopted the names of the animals whose skins they wore,
drank to excess, telegraphed by means of fires, decked themselves
in all their finery on going to war, poisoned their arrows, offered
peace before beginning battle, used drums, shouted in battle, were
similar in stratagems and exercised great cruelty to the vanquished.
The objections are that the language of the Indians is not corrupt
Carthaginian; that they have many languages, and could not have sprung
from any one nation; Satan prompted the Indians to learn various
languages in order to prevent the extension of the true faith. But why
are the Indians beardless if they descended from the Carthaginians?
Their beards have been lost by the action of the climate as the
Africans were changed in color. Then why do they not lose their hair as
well, and why do not the Spaniards lose their beard? They may in time.
And so he goes on through page after page.[I-158]
* * * * *
The theory that the Americans are of Jewish descent has been discussed
more minutely and at greater length than any other. Its advocates,
or at least those of them who have made original researches, are
comparatively few; but the extent of their investigations and the
multitude of parallelisms they adduce in support of their hypothesis,
exceed by far anything we have yet encountered.
Of the earlier writers on this subject, García is the most voluminous.
Of modern theorists Lord Kingsborough stands preëminently first, as
far as bulky volumes are concerned, though Adair, who devotes half
of a thick quarto to the subject, is by no means second to him in
enthusiasm--or rather fanaticism--and wild speculation. Mrs Simon's
volume, though pretentious enough to be original, is neither more nor
less than a re-hash of Kingsborough's labors.
García,[I-159] who affirms that he devoted more attention to this
subject than to all the rest of his work,[I-160] deals with the Hebrew
theory by the same systematic arrangement of 'opinions,' 'solutions,'
'objections,' 'replies,' etc., that is found all through his book. A
condensed résumé of his argument will be necessary.
[Sidenote: TEN LOST TRIBES OF ISRAEL.]
The opinion that the Americans are descended from the ten lost tribes
of Israel, he says, is commonly received by the unlettered multitude,
but not by the learned; there are, however, some exceptions to this
rule. The main support of the opinion is found in the fourth book of
Esdras, according to which these tribes, having been carried into
captivity by Salmanassar, separated from the other tribes and went
into a new region, where man had never yet lived, through which they
journeyed for a year and a half, until they came to a land which they
called Arsareth, where they settled and have dwelt ever since.
The most difficult question is: how did they get to America? to which
the most reasonable answer seems to be, that they gradually crossed
northern Asia until they came to the straits of Anian,[I-161] over which
they passed into the land of Anian, whence they journeyed southward by
land through New Mexico into Mexico and Peru.[I-162] That they were able
to make such a long journey is amply attested by parallel undertakings,
of which we have historical proof. It is argued that they would not
travel so far and through so many inhabited countries without finding
a resting-place; but we read in the Scriptures that when they left the
country of the Medes, whither they had been carried by Salmanassar,
they determined to journey beyond all the gentile nations until they
came to an uninhabited land. It is true some learned men assert that
they are still to be found in the cities of the Medes, but a statement
that disagrees with the book of Esdras is unworthy of belief; though
of course some of them may have remained; besides, must not Mexico be
included in the direct declaration of God that he would scatter the
Jews over all the earth? The opinion that the Americans are of Hebrew
origin is further supported by similarities in character, dress,
religion, physical peculiarities, condition, and customs. The Americans
are at heart cowardly, and so are the Jews; the history of both nations
proves this.[I-163] The Jews did not believe in the miracles of Christ,
and for their unbelief were scattered over the face of the earth, and
despised of all men; in like manner the people of the New World did
not readily receive the true faith as preached by Christ's catholic
disciples, and are therefore persecuted and being rapidly exterminated.
Another analogy presents itself in the ingratitude of the Jews for the
many blessings and special favors bestowed on them by God, and the
ingratitude shown by the Americans in return for the great kindness
of the Spaniards. Both Jews and Americans are noted for their want
of charity and kindness to the poor, sick, and unfortunate; both are
naturally given to idolatry; many customs are common to both, such as
raising the hands to heaven when making a solemn affirmation, calling
all near relatives brothers, showing great respect and humility before
superiors, burying their dead on hills and high places without the
city, tearing their clothing on the reception of bad tidings, giving a
kiss on the cheek as a token of peace, celebrating a victory with songs
and dances, casting out of the place of worship women who are barren,
drowning dogs in a well, practicing crucifixion. Both were liars,
despicable, cruel, boastful, idle, sorcerers, dirty,[I-164] swindlers,
turbulent, incorrigible, and vicious. The dress of the Hebrews was
in many points like that of the Americans. Both are fit only for the
lowest kind of labor. The Jews preferred the flesh-pots of Egypt and a
life of bondage to heavenly manna and the promised land; the Americans
liked a life of freedom and a diet of roots and herbs, better than the
service of the Spaniards with good food.[I-165] The Jews were famous for
fine work in stone, as is shown by the buildings of Jerusalem, and
a similar excellence in this art is seen in the American ruins. The
Mexicans have a tradition of a journey undertaken at the command of
a god, and continued for a long time under the direction of certain
high-priests, who miraculously obtained supplies for their support;
this bears a striking resemblance to the Hebrew story of the wandering
in the desert.
[Sidenote: THE JEWS IN AMERICA.]
[Sidenote: JEWISH ANALOGIES.]
It has been argued, in opposition to the Hebrew theory, that the Jews
were physically and intellectually the finest race in the world, while
the Americans are probably the lowest. But in answer to this it may be
stated that the finest among the Jews belonged to the tribes of Judah
and Benjamin, which were not among the so-called lost tribes; though,
even if we admit that the ten tribes were physically and intellectually
equal to these two, may we not fairly suppose that their temperament
and physique would be changed by dwelling for a length of time in
the different environment of America. True, Dr San Juan attempts to
prove that the good effect of the manna on which the Israelites lived
for forty years, was such that it would take four thousand years to
obliterate it; but though this might hold true in the case of those
Jews who went to Spain and other temperate climes, it would probably
be different with those who came to America; it is, besides, likely
that the change in the race was a special act of God.[I-166] In answer to
the assertion that the Americans are an inferior race, it may be said
that there are many exceptions to this rule; for instance, the people
of Mexico and Michoacan were very ingenious, and excelled in painting,
feather-work, and other arts.
Again, it is objected that while the Jews were skilled in letters,
and indeed are said by some to have discovered the art of writing,
the Americans had no such knowledge of letters as they would have
possessed had they been of Hebrew origin. But the same objection would
apply to their descent from any race of Europe, Asia, or Africa. It is
urged that the Americans, if of Jewish descent, would have preserved
the Hebrew ceremonies and laws. It is, however, well known that the
ten tribes from whom they are supposed to be descended were naturally
prone to unbelief and backsliding; it is not strange, therefore, that
when freed from all restraint, they should cease to abide by their
peculiarly strict code. Moreover, many traces of their old laws and
ceremonies are to be found among them at the present day. For instance,
both Jews and Americans gave their temples into the charge of priests,
burned incense, anointed the body, practiced circumcision,[I-167] kept
perpetual fires on their altars, forbade women to enter the temples
immediately after giving birth, and husbands to sleep with their wives
for seven days during the period of menstruation, prohibited marriage
or sexual intercourse between relatives within the second degree,
made fornication with a slave punishable, slew the adulterer, made it
unlawful for a man to dress like a woman, or a woman like a man, put
away their brides if they proved to have lost their virginity, and kept
the ten commandments.
Another objection is, that the Americans do not speak Hebrew. But the
reason for this is that the language has gradually changed, as has
been the case with all tongues. Witness the Hebrew spoken by the Jews
at the present time, which is much corrupted, and very different from
what it originally was. There do actually exist, besides, many Hebraic
traces in the American languages.[I-168] And even if this were not so,
may we not suppose that the Devil prompted the Americans to learn new
and various languages, that they might be prevented in after years from
hearing the Catholic faith? though fortunately the missionaries learned
all these strange tongues, and thus cheated the Evil One.
Acosta questions the authority of Esdras, but, answers García, although
the book of Esdras is certainly apocryphal, it is nevertheless regarded
by the Church as a higher authority than the Doctors. Acosta urges,
moreover, that Esdras, even if reliable, states distinctly that the
ten tribes fled from the Gentiles for the express purpose of keeping
their law and religion, while Americans are given to idolatry; which
is all very true, but might not the Jews have set out with these good
resolutions, and have afterwards changed their minds?
Such is the manner of García's argument; and turning now to
Lord Kingsborough's magnificent folios, do we find anything more
satisfactory? Scarcely. The Spanish father's impartiality and profound
research does not appear in Kingsborough; and moreover, we find that
the work of the former is much more satisfactorily arranged than that
of the latter. García does not pretend to give his own opinions,
but merely aims to present fairly, with all their pros and cons,
the theories of others. Kingsborough has a theory to prove, and to
accomplish his object he drafts every shadow of an analogy into his
service. But though his theory is as wild as the wildest, and his
proofs are as vague as the vaguest, yet Lord Kingsborough cannot be
classed with such writers as Jones, Ranking, Cabrera, Adair, and the
host of other dogmatists who have fought tooth and nail, each for his
particular hobby. Kingsborough was an enthusiast--a fanatic, if you
choose--but his enthusiasm is never offensive. There is a scholarly
dignity about his work which has never been attained by those who have
jeered and railed at him; and though we may smile at his credulity, and
regret that such strong zeal was so strangely misplaced, yet we should
speak and think with respect of one who spent his lifetime and his
fortune, if not his reason, in an honest endeavor to cast light upon
one of the most obscure spots in the history of man.
[Sidenote: KINGSBOROUGH'S ARGUMENTS.]
The more prominent of the analogies adduced by Lord Kingsborough may be
briefly enumerated as follows:
[Sidenote: HEBREW AND AMERICAN ANALOGIES.]
The religion of the Mexicans strongly resembled that of the Jews,
in many minor details, as will be presently seen, and the two were
practically alike, to a certain extent, in their very foundation;
for, as the Jews acknowledged a multitude of angels, archangels,
principalities, thrones, dominions, and powers, as the subordinate
personages of their hierarchy, so did the Mexicans acknowledge the
unity of the Deity in the person of Tezcatlipoca, and at the same
time worship a great number of other imaginary beings. Both believed
in a plurality of devils subordinate to one head, who was called
by the Mexicans Mictlantecutli, and by the Jews Satan. Indeed, it
seems that the Jews actually worshiped and made offerings to Satan
as the Mexicans did to their 'god of hell.' It is probable that the
Toltecs were acquainted with the sin of the first man, committed at
the suggestion of the woman, herself deceived by the serpent, who
tempted her with the fruit of the forbidden tree, who was the origin
of all our calamities, and by whom death came into the world.[I-169]
We have seen in this chapter that Kingsborough supposes the Messiah
and his story to have been familiar to the Mexicans. There is reason
to believe that the Mexicans, like the Jews, offered meat and drink
offerings to stones.[I-170] There are striking similarities between the
Babel, flood, and creation myths of the Hebrews and the Americans.[I-171]
Both Jews and Mexicans were fond of appealing in their adjurations
to the heaven and the earth.[I-172] Both were extremely superstitious,
and firm believers in prodigies.[I-173] The character and history of
Christ and Huitzilopochtli present certain analogies.[I-174] It is very
probable that the Sabbath of the seventh day was known in some parts
of America.[I-175] The Mexicans applied the blood of sacrifices to the
same uses as the Jews; they poured it upon the earth, they sprinkled
it, they marked persons with it, and they smeared it upon walls and
other inanimate things.[I-176] No one but the Jewish high-priest might
enter the Holy of Holies. A similar custom obtained in Peru.[I-177] Both
Mexicans and Jews regarded certain animals as unclean and unfit for
food.[I-178] Some of the Americans believed with some of the Talmudists
in a plurality of souls.[I-179] That man was created in the image of
God was a part of the Mexican belief.[I-180] It was customary among
the Mexicans to eat the flesh of sacrifices of atonement.[I-181] There
are many points of resemblance between Tezcatlipoca and Jehovah.[I-182]
Ablutions formed an essential part of the ceremonial law of the Jews
and Mexicans.[I-183] The opinions of the Mexicans with regard to the
resurrection of the body, accorded with those of the Jews.[I-184] The
Mexican temple, like the Jewish, faced the east.[I-185] "As amongst
the Jews the ark was a sort of portable temple in which the Deity was
supposed to be continually present, and which was accordingly borne on
the shoulders of the priests as a sure refuge and defence from their
enemies, so amongst the Mexicans and the Indians of Michoacan and
Honduras an ark was held in the highest veneration, and was considered
an object too sacred to be touched by any but the priests. The same
religious reverence for the ark is stated by Adair to have existed
among the Cherokee and other Indian tribes inhabiting the banks of
the Mississippi, and his testimony is corroborated by the accounts of
Spanish authors of the greatest veracity. The nature and use of the
ark having been explained, it is needless to observe that its form
might have been various, although Scripture declares that the Hebrew
ark was of the simplest construction." And again: "it would appear
from many passages of the Old Testament, that the Jews believed in the
real presence of God in the ark, as the Roman Catholics believe in the
real presence of Christ in the sacrament, from whom it is probable the
Mexicans borrowed the notion that He, whom the heaven of heavens cannot
contain, and whose glory fills all space, could be confined within
the precincts of a narrow ark and be borne by a set of weak and frail
priests. If the belief of the Mexicans had not been analogous to that
of the ancient Jews, the early Spanish missionaries would certainly
have expressed their indignation of the absurd credulity of those who
believed that their _omnipresent_ god Huitzilopochtli was carried in an
ark on priests' shoulders; but of the ark of the Mexicans they say but
little, fearing, as it would appear, to tread too boldly on the burning
ashes of Mount Sinai."[I-186]
The Yucatec conception of a Trinity resembles the Hebrew.[I-187] It is
probable that Quetzalcoatl, whose proper name signifies 'feathered
serpent,' was so called after the brazen serpent which Moses lifted
up in the wilderness, the feathers perhaps alluding to the rabbinical
tradition that the fiery serpents which god sent against the Israelites
were of a winged species.[I-188]
The Mexicans, like the Jews, saluted the four cardinal points, in their
worship.[I-189] There was much in connection with sacrifices that was
common to Mexicans and Jews.[I-190] It is possible that the myth relating
to Quetzalcoatl's disappearance in the sea, indicates a knowledge of
the book of the prophet Jonah.[I-191]
The Mexicans say that they wrestled at times with Quetzalcoatl,
even as Jacob wrestled with God.[I-192] In various religious rites
and observances, such as circumcision,[I-193] confession,[I-194] and
communion,[I-195] there was much similarity. Salt was an article highly
esteemed by the Mexicans, and the Jews always offered it in their
oblations.[I-196] Among the Jews, the firstling of an ass had to be
redeemed with a lamb, or if unredeemed, its neck was broken. This
command of Moses should be considered in reference to the custom
of sacrificing children which existed in Mexico and Peru.[I-197] The
spectacle of a king performing a dance as an act of religion was
witnessed by the Jews as well as by Mexicans.[I-198] As the Israelites
were conducted from Egypt by Moses and Aaron who were accompanied by
their sister Miriam, so the Aztecs departed from Aztlan under the
guidance of Huitziton and Tecpatzin, the former of whom is named
by Acosta and Herrera, Mexi, attended likewise by their sister
Quilaztli, or, as she is otherwise named Chimalman or Malinalli,
both of which latter names have some resemblance to Miriam, as Mexi
has to Moses.[I-199] In the Mexican language _amoxtli_ signifies flags
or bulrushes, the derivation of which name, from _atl_, water,
and _moxtli_, might allude to the flags in which Moses had been
preserved.[I-200] The painting of Boturini seems actually to represent
Huitzilopochtli appearing in a burning bush in the mountain of
Teoculhuacan to the Aztecs.[I-201] The same writer also relates that when
the Mexicans in the course of their migration had arrived at Apanco,
the people of that province were inclined to oppose their further
progress, but that Huitzilopochtli aided the Mexicans by causing a
brook that ran in the neighborhood to overflow its banks. This reminds
us of what is said in the third chapter of Joshua of the Jordan
overflowing its banks and dividing to let the priests who bore the ark
pass through.[I-202] As Moses and Aaron died in the wilderness without
reaching the land of Canaan, so Huitziton and Tecpatzin died before the
Mexicans arrived in the land of Anáhuac.[I-203] The Mexicans hung up the
heads of their sacrificed enemies; and this also appears to have been
a Jewish practice, as the following quotation from the twenty-fifth
chapter of Numbers will show: "And the Lord said unto Moses, Take all
the heads of the people, _and hang them up before the Lord against
the sun_, that the fierce anger of the Lord may be turned away from
Israel."[I-204] In a Mexican painting in the Bodleian library at Oxford
is a symbol very strongly resembling the jaw-bone of an ass from the
side of which water seems to flow forth, which might allude to the
story of Samson slaying a thousand of the Philistines with such a bone,
which remained miraculously unbroken in his hands, and from which he
afterwards quenched his thirst.[I-205] They were fond of wearing dresses
of scarlet and of showy colors, as were also the Jews. The exclamation
of the prophet, "Who is this that cometh from Bozrah?" and many other
passages of the Old Testament might be cited to show that the Jews
entertained a great predilection for scarlet.[I-206] It is impossible, on
reading what Mexican mythology records of the war in heaven and of the
fall of Tzontemoc and the other rebellious spirits; of the creation of
light by the word of Tonacatecutli, and of the division of the waters;
of the sin of Ytztlacoliuhqui, and his blindness and nakedness; of the
temptation of Suchiquecal, and her disobedience in gathering roses from
a tree, and the consequent misery and disgrace of herself and all her
posterity,--not to recognize Scriptural analogies.[I-207] Other Hebrew
analogies Lord Kingsborough finds in America, in the dress, insignia,
and duties of priests; in innumerable superstitions concerning
dreams, apparitions, eclipses, and other more common-place events; in
certain festivals for rain; in burial and mourning ceremonies; in the
diseases most common among the people; in certain regularly observed
festivals; in the dress of certain nations; in established laws; in
physical features; in architecture; in various minor observances, such
as offering water to a stranger that he might wash his feet, eating
dust in token of humility, anointing with oil, and so forth; in the
sacrifice of prisoners; in manner and style of oratory; in the stories
of giants; in the respect paid to God's name; in games of chance; in
marriage relations; in childbirth ceremonies; in religious ideas of
all sorts; in respect paid to kings; in uses of metals; in treatment of
criminals, and punishment of crimes; in charitable practices; in social
customs; and in a vast number of other particulars.[I-208]
[Sidenote: HEBREW RELICS.]
Relics unmistakeably Hebrew have been very rarely found in America. I
know of only two instances of such a discovery, and in neither of these
cases is it certain or even probable that the relic existed in America
before the Conquest. The first and best known instance is related by
Ethan Smith, according to Priest,[I-209] as follows:
"Joseph Merrick, Esq., a highly respectable character in the church at
Pittsfield, gave the following account: That in 1815, he was levelling
some ground under and near an old wood-shed, standing on a place of
his, situated on _Indian Hill_. He ploughed and conveyed away old chips
and earth, to some depth. After the work was done, walking over the
place, he discovered, near where the earth had been dug the deepest,
a black strap, as it appeared, about six inches in length, and one
and a half in breadth, and about the thickness of a leather trace
to a harness. He perceived it had, at each end, a loop, of some hard
substance, probably for the purpose of carrying it. He conveyed it to
his house, and threw it into an old tool box. He afterwards found it
thrown out at the door, and again conveyed it to the box.
"After some time, he thought he would examine it; but in attempting to
cut it, found it as hard as bone; he succeeded, however, in getting
it open, and found it was formed of two pieces of thick raw-hide,
sewed and made water tight with the sinews of some animal, and gummed
over; and in the fold was contained _four_ folded pieces of parchment.
They were of a dark yellow hue, and contained some kind of writing.
The neighbors coming in to see the strange discovery, tore one of the
pieces to atoms, in the true Hun and Vandal style. The other three
pieces Mr. Merrick saved, and sent them to Cambridge, where they were
examined, and discovered to have been written with a pen, in _Hebrew_,
plain and legible. The writing on the three remaining pieces of
parchment, was quotations from the Old Testament."[I-210]
[Sidenote: HEBREW TABLETS.]
The other discovery was made in Ohio, and was seen by my father, Mr
A. A. Bancroft, who thus describes it: "About eight miles south-east
of Newark there was formerly a large mound composed of masses of
free-stone, which had been brought from some distance and thrown into
a heap without much placing or care. In early days, stone being scarce
in that region, the settlers carried away the mound piece by piece to
use for building-purposes, so that in a few years there was little
more than a large flattened heap of rubbish remaining. Some fifteen
years ago, the county surveyor (I have forgotten his name), who had for
some time been searching ancient works, turned his attention to this
particular pile. He employed a number of men and proceeded at once to
open it. Before long he was rewarded by finding in the centre and near
the surface a bed of the tough clay generally known as pipe-clay, which
must have been brought from a distance of some twelve miles. Imbedded
in the clay was a coffin, dug out of a burr-oak log, and in a pretty
good state of preservation. In the coffin was a skeleton, with quite
a number of stone ornaments and emblems, and some open brass rings,
suitable for bracelets or anklets. These being removed, they dug down
deeper, and soon discovered a stone dressed to an oblong shape, about
eighteen inches long and twelve wide, which proved to be a casket,
neatly fitted and completely water-tight, containing a slab of stone
of hard and fine quality, an inch and a half thick, eight inches long,
four inches and a half wide at one end, and tapering to three inches
at the other. Upon the face of the slab was the figure of a man,
apparently a priest, with a long flowing beard, and a robe reaching to
his feet. Over his head was a curved line of characters, and upon the
edges and back of the stone were closely and neatly carved letters.
The slab, which I saw myself, was shown to the episcopalian clergyman
of Newark, and he pronounced the writing to be the ten Commandments in
ancient Hebrew."[I-211]
[Sidenote: MORMON DOCTRINE OF ORIGIN.]
The account given by the Book of Mormon, of the settlement of America
by the Jews, is as follows:[I-212]
After the confusion of tongues, when men were scattered over the whole
face of the earth, the Jaredites, a just people, having found favor
in the sight of the Eternal, miraculously crossed the ocean in eight
vessels, and landed in North America, where, they built large cities
and developed into flourishing and highly civilized nations. But their
descendants did evil before the Lord, in spite of repeated prophetic
warnings, and were finally destroyed for their wickedness, about
fifteen hundred years after their arrival, and six hundred before the
birth of Christ.
These first inhabitants of America were replaced by an emigration
of Israelites, who were miraculously brought from Jerusalem in the
first year of the reign of Zedekiah, king of Judah. For some time
they traveled in a south-easterly direction, following the coast of
the Red Sea; afterwards they took a more easterly course, and finally
arrived at the borders of the Great Ocean. Here, at the command of God,
they constructed a vessel, which bore them safely across the Pacific
Ocean to the western coast of South America, where they landed. In
the eleventh year of the reign of this same Zedekiah, when the Jews
were carried captive to Babylon, some descendants of Judah came from
Jerusalem to North America, whence they emigrated to the northern
parts of South America. Their descendants were discovered by the first
emigrants about four hundred years afterwards.
The first emigrants, almost immediately after their arrival, separated
themselves into two distinct nations. The people of one of these
divisions called themselves Nephites, from the prophet Nephi, who had
conducted them to America. These were persecuted, on account of their
righteousness, by the others, who called themselves Lamanites, from
Laman, their chief, a wicked and corrupt man. The Nephites retreated to
the northern parts of South America, while the Lamanites occupied the
central and southern regions. The Nephites possessed a copy of the five
books of Moses, and of the prophets as far as Jeremiah, or until the
time when they left Jerusalem. These writings were engraved on plates
of brass. After their arrival in America they manufactured similar
plates, on which they engraved their history and prophetic visions. All
these records, kept by men inspired of the Holy Ghost, were carefully
preserved, and transmitted from generation to generation.
God gave them the whole continent of America as the promised land,
declaring that it should be a heritage for them and for their children,
provided they kept his commandments. The Nephites, blessed by God,
prospered and spread east, west, and north. They dwelt in immense
cities, with temples and fortresses; they cultivated the earth, bred
domestic animals, and worked mines of gold, silver, lead, and iron.
The arts and sciences flourished among them, and as long as they kept
God's commandments, they enjoyed all the benefits of civilization and
national prosperity.
[Sidenote: NEPHITES AND LAMANITES.]
The Lamanites, on the contrary, by reason of the hardness of their
hearts, were from the first deserted of God. Before their backsliding
they were white and comely as the Nephites; but in consequence of the
divine curse, they sank into the lowest barbarism. Implacable enemies
of the Nephites, they waged war against that people, and strove by
every means in their power to destroy them. But they were gradually
repulsed with great loss, and the innumerable tumuli which are still
to be seen in all parts of the two Americas, cover the remains of the
warriors slain in these bloody conflicts.
The second colony of Hebrews, mentioned above, bore the name of
Zarahemla. They also had many civil wars, and as they had not brought
any historical records with them from Jerusalem, they soon fell into a
state of atheism. At the time when they were discovered by the Nephites
they were very numerous, but lived in a condition of semi-barbarism.
The Nephites, however, united themselves with them, and taught them
the sacred Scriptures, so that before long the two nations became as
one. Shortly afterwards the Nephites built several vessels, by means
of which they sent expeditions towards the north, and founded numerous
colonies. Others emigrated by land, and in a short time the whole of
the northern continent was peopled. At this time North America was
entirely destitute of wood, the forests having been destroyed by the
Jaredites, the first colonists, who came from the tower of Babel; but
the Nephites constructed houses of cement and brought wood by sea from
the south; taking care, besides, to cultivate immense plantations.
Large cities sprang up in various parts of the continent, both among
the Lamanites and the Nephites. The latter continued to observe the
law of Moses; numerous prophets arose among them; they inscribed their
prophecies and historical annals on plates of gold or other metal, and
upon various other materials. They discovered also the sacred records
of the Jaredites, engraved on plates of gold; these they translated
into their own language, by the help of God and the Urim Thummim. The
Jaredite archives contained the history of man from the creation of the
world to the building of the tower of Babel, and from that time to the
total destruction of the Jaredites, embracing a period of thirty-four
or thirty-five centuries. They also contained the marvelous prophecies
which foretold what would happen in the world until the end of all
things, and the creation of a new heaven and a new earth.
[Sidenote: THE BOOK OF MORMON.]
The Nephites were informed of the birth and death of Christ by certain
celestial and terrestrial phenomena, which had long before been
predicted by their prophets. But in spite of the numerous blessings
which they had received, they fell at length from grace, and were
terribly punished for their ingratitude and wickedness. A thick
darkness covered the whole continent; earthquakes cast mountains into
valleys; many towns were swallowed up, and others were destroyed by
fire from heaven. Thus perished the most perverse among the Nephites
and Lamanites, to the end that the blood of the saints and prophets
might no longer cry out from the earth against them. Those who survived
these judgments received a visit from Christ, who, after his ascension,
appeared in the midst of the Nephites, in the northern part of South
America. His instructions, the foundation of a new law, were engraved
on plates of gold, and some of them are to be found in the Book of
Mormon; but by far the greater part of them will be revealed only to
the saints, at a future time.
When Christ had ended his mission to the Nephites, he ascended to
heaven, and the apostles designated by him went to preach his gospel
throughout the continent of America. In all parts the Nephites and
Lamanites were converted to the Lord, and for three centuries they
lived a godly life. But toward the end of the fourth century of
the Christian era, they returned to their evil ways, and once more
they were smitten by the arm of the Almighty. A terrible war broke
out between the two nations, which ended in the destruction of the
ungrateful Nephites. Driven by their enemies towards the north and
north-west, they were defeated in a final battle near the hill of
Cumorah,[I-213] where their historical tablets have been since found.
Hundreds of thousands of warriors fell on both sides. The Nephites were
utterly destroyed, with the exception of some few who either passed
over to the enemy, escaped by flight, or were left for dead on the
field of battle. Among these last were Mormon and his son Moroni, both
upright men.
Mormon had written on tablets an epitome of the annals of his
ancestors, which epitome he entitled the Book of Mormon. At the command
of God he buried in the hill of Cumorah all the original records in his
possession, and at his death he left his own book to his son Moroni,
who survived him by some years, that he might continue it. Moroni
tells us in his writings that the Lamanites eventually exterminated
the few Nephites who had escaped the general slaughter at the battle
of Cumorah, sparing those only who had gone over to their side. He
himself escaped by concealment. The conquerors slew without mercy all
who would not renounce Christ. He tells, further, that the Lamanites
had many dreadful wars among themselves, and that the whole land was a
scene of incessant murder and violence. Finally, he adds that his work
is a complete record of all events that happened down to the year 420
of the Christian era, at which time, by divine command, he buried the
Book of Mormon in the hill of Cumorah, where it remained until removed
by Joseph Smith, September 22, 1827.[I-214]
* * * * *
[Sidenote: SCANDINAVIAN THEORY.]
Much has been written to prove that the north-western part of America
was discovered and peopled by Scandinavians long before the time
of Columbus. Although a great part of the evidence upon which this
belief rests, is unsatisfactory and mixed up with much that is vague
and undoubtedly fabulous, yet it seems to be not entirely destitute
of historical proof. Nor is there any improbability that such daring
navigators as the Northmen may have visited and colonized the coasts
of Greenland, Labrador, and Newfoundland. I find in this opinion an
almost exact parallel to the so-called 'Tartar theory.' It is true the
distance between Europe and north-eastern America is much greater than
that between Asia and north-western America, but would not the great
disparity between the maritime enterprise and skill of the Northmen
and Asiatics, make the North Atlantic as navigable for the former as
Bering Strait for the latter? It is certain that Iceland was settled
by the Northmen from Norway at a very early date; there is little
reason to doubt that Greenland was in turn colonized from Iceland
in the tenth century; if this be conceded, then the question whether
the Northmen did actually discover the country now known as America,
certainly ceases to wear any appearance of improbability, for it would
be unreasonable to suppose that such renowned sailors could live for
a great number of years within a short voyage of a vast continent and
never become aware of its existence. It would be absurd, however, to
believe that the entire continent of America was peopled by Northmen,
because its north-eastern borders were visited or even colonized by
certain adventurous sea-rovers.
All that is known of the early voyages of the Northmen, is contained
in the old Icelandic Sagas. The genuineness of the accounts relating
to the discovery of America has been the subject of much discussion.
Mr B. F. De Costa, in a carefully studied monograph on the subject,
assures us that there can be no doubt as to their authenticity, and
I am strongly inclined to agree with him. It is true that no less
eminent authors than George Bancroft and Washington Irving have
expressed opinions in opposition to De Costa's views, but it must be
remembered that neither of these distinguished gentlemen made a very
profound study of the Icelandic Sagas, indeed Irving directly states
that he "has not had the means of tracing this story to its original
sources;" nor must we forget that neither the author of the 'Life of
Columbus,' nor he of the 'History of the Colonization of the United
States,' could be expected to willingly strip the laurels from the brow
of his familiar hero, Christopher Columbus, and concede the honor of
the 'first discovery' to the northern sea-kings, whose exploits are so
vaguely recorded.[I-215]
[Sidenote: THE ICELANDIC SAGAS.]
De Costa's defence of the genuineness of the accounts referred to is
simple and to the point. "Those who imagine," he writes, "that these
manuscripts, while of pre-Columbian origin, have been tampered with and
interpolated, show that they have not the faintest conception of the
state of the question. The accounts of the voyages of the Northmen to
America form the _framework_ of Sagas which would actually be destroyed
by the elimination of the narratives. There is only one question
to be decided, and that is the _date_ of these compositions." "That
these manuscripts," he adds, "belong to the pre-Columbian age, is as
capable of demonstration as the fact that the writings of Homer existed
prior to the age of Christ. Before intelligent persons deny either of
these points they must first succeed in blotting out numberless pages
of well-known history. The manuscripts in which we have versions of
all the Sagas relating to America is found in the celebrated _Codex
Flatöiensis_, a work that was finished in the year 1387, or 1395 at
the latest. This collection, made with great care, and executed in
the highest style of art, is now preserved in its integrity in the
archives of Copenhagen. These manuscripts were for a time supposed to
be lost, but were ultimately found safely lodged in their repository
in the monastery library of the island of Flatö, from whence they
were transferred to Copenhagen with a large quantity of other literary
material collected from various localities. If these Sagas which refer
to America were interpolations, it would have early become apparent,
as abundant means exist for detecting frauds; yet those who have
examined the whole question do not find any evidence that invalidates
their historical statements. In the absence, therefore, of respectable
testimony to the contrary, we accept it as a fact that the Sagas
relating to America are the productions of men who gave them in their
present form nearly, if not quite, an entire century before the age of
Columbus."[I-216]
The accounts of the voyages as given in the original manuscripts are
too numerous and prolix to be reproduced in their entirety here; but I
will endeavor to give a résumé of them, following, to a great extent,
an 'abstract of the historical evidence for the discovery of America
by the Scandinavians in the tenth century,' given in the Journal of the
Royal Geographical Society.[I-217]
Eric the Red, in the spring of 986,[I-218] emigrated from Iceland to
Greenland, and founded a settlement there. One of his companions
was Heriulf Bardson, whose son, Biarne, was at that time absent on a
trading voyage to Norway. Biarne, on his return to Iceland, resolved
"still to spend the following winter, like all the preceding ones,
with his father," and to that end set sail for Greenland. But, owing
to the northerly winds and fogs, and to the fact that neither he nor
any of his followers had ever navigated these seas before, Biarne lost
his way. When the weather cleared up they found themselves in sight
of a strange land, which they left to larboard. After two days' sail
they again sighted land; and once more standing out to sea, they, after
three days, saw land a third time, which proved to be an island. Again
they bore away, and after four days' sailing reached Greenland.
[Sidenote: VOYAGES OF THE NORTHMEN.]
Some time after this, Leif, a son of Eric the Red, having heard of
Biarne's discoveries, bought his ship, manned it with a crew of thirty
men, and set out from Greenland, about the year 1000. The first land
they sighted was that which Biarne had seen last; this they named
Helluland.[I-219] They put out to sea and soon came to another land,
which they named Markland.[I-220] Again they stood out to sea, and after
two days came to an island. They then sailed westward, and afterwards
went on shore at a place where a river, issuing from a lake, fell into
the sea. Bringing their ship up the river, they anchored in the lake.
Here they settled for a time, and finding vines in the country, they
named it Vinland.[I-221] In the spring they returned to Greenland.
This expedition to Vinland was much talked of, and Thorwald, Leif's
brother, thought that the new country had not been thoroughly enough
explored. Then Leif lent his ship to Thorwald, who set out for Vinland
about the year 1002. There he and his crew wintered, and about the
year 1004 they set sail to the eastward. On this voyage Thorwald was
killed by the natives. At his request his followers returned to Vinland
and buried his remains there. In 1005 they sailed again to Greenland,
bearing the sad news of his brother's death to Leif.
Thorstein, Eric's third son, soon afterwards set out in the same ship
for Vinland, to fetch his brother's body. He was accompanied by his
wife Gudrida, and twenty-five strong men, but after tossing about on
the ocean during the whole summer, they finally landed again on the
Greenland coast, where Thorstein died during the winter.
The next voyage to Vinland was made by one Thorfinn Karlsefne, a
man of noble lineage, who occupied his time in merchant voyages and
was thought a good trader. In the summer of 1006 he fitted out his
ship in Iceland for a voyage to Greenland, attended by one Snorre
Thorbrandson and a crew of forty men. At the same time another ship was
fitted out for the same destination by Biarne Grimolfson and Thorhall
Gamlason, and manned with a crew of forty men also. All being ready,
the two ships put out to sea, and both arrived safely at Ericsfiord in
Greenland, where Leif and Gudrida, the widow of Leif's late brother,
Thorstein, dwelt. Here Thorfinn fell in love with the fair Gudrida, and
with Leif's consent, married her that winter.
The discovery of Vinland was much talked of among the settlers,
for they all believed that it was a good country, and that a voyage
there would be very profitable; and Thorfinn was urged and at length
persuaded to undertake the adventure. Accordingly, in the spring
of 1007 he fitted out his ship, and Biarne Grimolfson and Thorhall
Gamlason did the same with theirs. A third ship, commanded by one
Thorward, also joined the expedition. And on Thorward's ship a man
named Thorhall, 'commonly called the hunter,' who had been the huntsman
of Eric in the summer, and his steward in the winter, also went.
[Sidenote: THE NORTHMEN AND SKRELLINGS.]
As this is probably the most important of all the Northmen's voyages to
America, I will give it in full: "They sailed first to the Westerbygd,
and afterwards to Biarney. From thence they sailed in a southerly
direction to Helluland, where they found many foxes. From thence
they sailed again two days in a southerly direction to Markland, a
country overgrown with wood, and plentifully stocked with animals.
Leaving this, they continued sailing in a S.W. direction for a long
time, having the land to starboard, until they at length came to
Kialarnes,[I-222] where there were trackless deserts and long beaches
and sands, called by them Furdustrandir. When they had past these, the
land began to be indented by inlets. They had two Scots with them, Hake
and Hekia, whom Leif had formerly received from the Norwegian King
Olaf Tryggvason, and who were very swift of foot. They put them on
shore, recommending them to proceed in a S.W. direction, and explore
the country. After the lapse of three days they returned bringing
with them some grapes and some ears of wheat, which grew wild in that
region. They continued their course until they came to a place where
a firth penetrated far into the country. Off the mouth of it was an
island past which there ran strong currents, which was also the case
farther up the firth. On the island there were an immense number of
eyderducks, so that it was scarcely possible to walk without treading
on their eggs. They called the island Straumey (Stream-Isle), and
the firth Straumfiördr (Stream-Firth).[I-223] They landed on the shore
of this firth, and made preparations for their winter residence. The
country was extremely beautiful. They confined their operations to
exploring the country. Thorhall afterwards wished to proceed in a N.
direction in quest of Vineland. Karlsefne chose rather to go to the
S.W. Thorhall, and along with him eight men, quitted them, and sailed
past Furdustrandir and Kialarnes, but they were driven by westerly
gales to the coast of Ireland, where, according to the accounts of
some traders, they were beaten and made slaves. Karlsefne, together
with Snorre and Biarne, and the rest of the ships' companies, in all
151 (CXXXI.) men, sailed southwards, and arrived at the place, where
a river falls into the sea from a lake. Opposite to the mouth of the
river were large islands. They steered into the lake, and called the
place Hóp (_í Hópe_). On the low grounds they found fields of wheat
growing wild, and on the rising grounds vines. While looking about
one morning they observed a great number of canoes. On exhibiting
friendly signals the canoes approached nearer to them, and the natives
in them looked with astonishment at those they met there. These people
were sallow-coloured or ill-looking, had ugly heads of hair, large
eyes, and broad cheeks. After they had gazed at them for a while,
they rowed away again to the S.W. past the cape. Karlsefne and his
company had erected their dwelling-houses a little above the bay; and
there they spent the winter. No snow fell, and the cattle found their
food in the open field. One morning early, in the beginning of 1008,
they descried a number of canoes coming from the S.W. past the cape.
Karlsefne having held up a white shield as a friendly signal, they
drew nigh and immediately commenced bartering. These people chose in
preference red cloth, and gave furs and squirrel skins in exchange.
They would fain also have bought swords and spears, but these Karlsefne
and Snorre prohibited their people from selling them. In exchange for
a skin entirely gray the Skrellings took a piece of cloth of a span in
breadth, and bound it round their heads. Their barter was carried on
this way for some time. The Northmen then found that their cloth was
beginning to grow scarce, whereupon they cut it up in smaller pieces,
not broader than a finger's breadth; yet the Skrellings gave as much
for these smaller pieces as they had formerly given for the larger
ones, or even more. Karlsefne also caused the women to bear out milk
soup, and the Skrellings relishing the taste of it, they desired to
buy it in preference to everything else, so they wound up their traffic
by carrying away their bargains in their bellies. Whilst this traffic
was going on, it happened that a bull, which Karlsefne had brought
along with him, came out of the wood and bellowed loudly. At this the
Skrellings got terrified and rushed to their canoes, and rowed away
southwards. About this time Gudrida, Karlsefne's wife, gave birth to a
son, who received the name of Snorre. In the beginning of the following
winter the Skrellings came again in much greater numbers; they showed
symptoms of hostility, setting up loud yells. Karlsefne caused the
red shield to be borne against them, whereupon they advanced against
each other, and a battle commenced. There was a galling discharge of
missiles. The Skrellings had a sort of war slings. They elevated on a
pole a tremendously large ball, almost the size of a sheep's stomach,
and of a bluish colour; this they swung from the pole upon land over
Karlsefne's people, and it descended with a fearful crash. This struck
terror into the Northmen, and they fled along the river. Freydisa came
out and saw them flying; she thereupon exclaimed, 'How can stout men
like you fly from these miserable caitifs, whom I thought you could
knock down like cattle? If I had only a weapon, I ween I could fight
better than any of you.' They heeded not her words. She tried to keep
pace with them, but the advanced state of her pregnancy retarded her.
She however followed them into the wood. There she encountered a dead
body. It was Thorbrand Snorrason; a flat stone was sticking fast in his
head. His naked sword lay by his side. This she took up, and prepared
to defend herself. She uncovered her breasts, and dashed them against
the naked sword. At this sight the Skrellings became terrified, and
ran off to their canoes. Karlsefne and the rest now came up to her and
praised her courage. Karlsefne and his people were now become aware
that, although the country held out many advantages, still the life
that they would have to lead here would be one of constant alarm from
the hostile attacks of the natives. They therefore made preparations
for departure, with the resolution of returning to their own country.
They sailed eastward, and came to Streamfirth. Karlsefne then took one
of the ships, and sailed in quest of Thorhall, while the rest remained
behind. They proceeded northwards round Kialarnes, and after that were
carried to the north-west. The land lay to larboard of them. There
were thick forests in all directions, as far as they could see, with
scarcely any open space. They considered the hills at Hope and those
which they now saw as forming part of one continuous range. They spent
the third winter at Streamfirth. Karlsefne's son Snorre was now three
years of age. When they sailed from Vineland they had a southerly
wind, and came to Markland, where they met with five Skrellings. They
caught two of them (two boys), whom they carried away along with them,
and taught them the Norse language, and baptised them; these children
said that their mother was called Vethilldi and their father Uvæge;
they said that the Skrellings were ruled by chieftains (kings), one of
whom was called Avalldamon, and the other Valdidida; that there were
no houses in the country, but that the people dwelled in holes and
caverns. Biarne Grimolfson was driven into the Irish Ocean, and came
into waters that were so infested by worms, that their ship was in
consequence reduced to a sinking state. Some of the crew, however, were
saved in the boat, as it had been smeared with seal-oil tar, which is a
preventive against the attack of worms. Karlsefne continued his voyage
to Greenland, and arrived at Ericsfiord."
During the same summer that Karlsefne returned from Vinland, a ship
arrived at Greenland from Norway, commanded by two brothers, Helge and
Finnboge. And Freydisa, she who had frightened the Skrellings, went to
them and proposed they should make a voyage to Vinland, and she offered
to go with them on condition that an equal share of what they obtained
there should be hers; and they agreed to this. It was arranged between
the brothers and Freydisa that each should have thirty fighting men,
besides women. But Freydisa secretly brought away five men more than
the allotted number. They reached Vinland and spent the winter there.
During their stay Freydisa prevailed on her husband to slay the two
brothers and their followers; the women that were with them she killed
with her own hand. In the spring of the next year they returned to
Greenland.[I-224]
In the latter part of the tenth century,[I-225] one Are Marson, of
Iceland, was driven by storms to Hvitramannaland, or Land of the
Whitemen. This country, which was also called Great Ireland, has been
thought to be "probably that part of the Coast of North America which
extends southwards from Chesapeak Bay, including North and South
Carolina, Georgia, and Florida."[I-226] Here, also, one Biörn Asbrandson
is said to have ended his days.[I-227]
I do not propose to give here all that has been said about these
voyages, as it would not be pertinent to the question which we are
reviewing, namely, the origin of the Americans. Indeed, the entire
subject of the Northmen's voyages and colonization, might almost be
said to be without our province, as it is not asserted that they were
actually the first inhabitants of the New World.
The relics that have been thought to prove their former presence in
the continent, are neither numerous nor important. One of these is
the Dighton Rock, of which I have had occasion to speak before, in
connection with the Phœnician theory.[I-228] In 1824, a stone engraved
with Runic characters was found on the island of Kingiktorsoak, on the
western coast of Greenland.[I-229]
[Sidenote: SCANDINAVIAN THEORY.]
Priest is strongly inclined to believe that a glass bottle about the
size of a common junk bottle, "having a stopple in its nuzzle," an
iron hatchet edged with steel, the remains of a blacksmith's forge, and
some ploughed-up crucibles, all found in the town of Pompey, Onondaga
County, New York, are of Scandinavian origin.[I-230]
Brasseur de Bourbourg has found many words in the languages of Central
America which bear, he thinks, marked Scandinavian traces; little
can be proven by this, however, since he finds as many other words
that as strongly resemble Latin, Greek, English, French, and many
other languages. The learned Abbé believes, moreover, that some of
the ancient traditions of the Central American nations point to a
north-east origin.[I-231] Viollet-le-Duc is struck with the similarity
that existed between the religious customs and ideas of the ancient
Northmen and of the Quichés as expressed in the Popol Vuh.[I-232]
[Sidenote: A WELSH COLONY IN AMERICA.]
We come now to the theory that the Americans, or at least part of them,
are of Celtic origin. In the old Welsh annals there is an account of
a voyage made in the latter half of the twelfth century,[I-233] by one
Madoc, a son of Owen Gwynedd, prince of North Wales. The story goes,
that after the death of Gwynedd, his sons contended violently for
the sovereignty. Madoc, who was the only peaceable one among them,
determined to leave his disturbed country and sail in search of some
unknown land where he might dwell in peace. He accordingly procured an
abundance of provisions and a few ships and embarked with his friends
and followers. For many months they sailed westward without finding a
resting-place; but at length they came to a large and fertile country,
where, after sailing for some distance along the coast in search of a
convenient landing-place, they disembarked, and permanently settled.
After a time Madoc, with part of his company, returned to Wales, where
he fitted out ten ships with all manner of supplies, prevailed on a
large number of his countrymen to join him, and once more set sail
for the new colony, which, though we hear no more about him or his
settlement, he is supposed to have reached safely.[I-234]
[Sidenote: THE AMERICANS OF WELSH ORIGIN.]
The exact location of Madoc's colony has only been guessed at. Baldwin
says it is supposed that he settled 'somewhere in the Carolinas.'
Caradoc, in his history of Wales,[I-235] has no doubt that the country
where Madoc established his colony was Mexico; this he thinks is shown
by three facts: first, the Mexicans believed that their ancestors
came from a beautiful country afar off, inhabited by white people;
secondly, they adored the cross; and thirdly, several Welsh names
are found in Mexico. Peter Martyr affirms that the aborigines of
Virginia, as well as those of Guatemala, celebrate the memory of an
ancient and illustrious hero, named Madoc. Harcourt, in the preface
to the account of his voyage to Guiana,[I-236] says that that part
of America was discovered and possessed by the Welsh prince, Madoc.
Herbert, according to Martyr, says that the land discovered by the
prince was Florida or Virginia.[I-237] Catlin is inclined to believe
that Madoc entered the Mississippi at Balize and made his way up the
river, or that he landed somewhere on the Florida coast. He thinks
the colonists pushed into the interior and finally settled on the Ohio
river; afterwards, being driven from that position by the aboriginal
tribes, they advanced up the Missouri river to the place where they
have been known for many years by the name of Mandans, "a corruption or
abbreviation, perhaps, of Madawgwys, the name applied by the Welsh to
the followers of Madawc." The canoes of the Mandans, Mr Catlin tells
us, which are altogether different from those of all other tribes,
correspond exactly to the Welsh _coracle_,[I-238] the peculiarity of
their physical appearance was such that when he first saw them he "was
under the instant conviction that they were an amalgam of a native,
with some civilized race," and the resemblance that exists between
their language and Welsh, is, in his opinion, very striking.[I-239] There
have been several reports that traces of the Welsh colony and of their
language have been discovered among the native tribes, but none of
them seem entitled to full credit. The best known report of this kind,
and the one that claims, perhaps, the most respectful consideration,
is that of the Rev. Morgan Jones, written in 1686, and published in
the _Gentleman's Magazine_ for the year 1740. In 1660 the reverend
gentleman, with five companions, was taken prisoner by the Tuscarora
tribe, who were about to put him to death when he soliloquized aloud in
Welsh; whereupon they spared him and his companions, and treated them
very civilly. After this Mr Jones stayed among them for four months,
during which time he conversed with them familiarly in the Welsh
language, "and did preach to them in the same language three times a
week."[I-240]
A certain Lieutenant Roberts states that in 1801 he met an Indian chief
at Washington, who spoke Welsh "as fluently as if he had been born and
brought up in the vicinity of Snowdon." He said it was the language
of his nation, the Asguaws, who lived eight hundred miles north-west
of Philadelphia. He knew nothing of Wales, but stated that his people
had a tradition that their ancestors came to America from a distant
country, which lay far to the east, over the great waters. Amongst
other questions, Lieutenant Roberts asked him how it was that his
nation had preserved their original language so perfect; he answered
that they had a law which forbade any to teach their children another
tongue, until they were twelve years old.[I-241]
Another officer, one Captain Davies, relates that while stationed at a
trading-post, among the Illinois Indians, he was surprised to find that
several Welshmen who belonged to his company, could converse readily
with the aborigines in Welsh.[I-242] Warden tells a story of a Welshman
named Griffith, who was taken prisoner by the Shawnee tribe about the
year 1764. Two years afterwards, he and five Shawnees, with whom he
was traveling about the sources of the Missouri, fell into the hands
of a white tribe, who were about to massacre them when Griffith spoke
to them in Welsh, explaining the object of their journey; upon this
they consented to spare him and his companions. He could learn nothing
of the history of these white natives, except that their ancestors had
come to the Missouri from a far distant country. Griffith returned to
the Shawnee nation, but subsequently escaped and succeeded in reaching
Virginia.[I-243] There are many other reports of a similar kind, but
these will be sufficient to show on what manner of foundation the Welsh
theory rests, and to justify in a measure the outspoken opinion of Mr
Fiske, that "Welch Indians are creatures of the imagination."[I-244]
[Sidenote: SCOTCH AND IRISH THEORIES.]
Lord Monboddo, a Scotchman, who wrote in the seventeenth century,
quotes several instances to show that the language of the native
Highlanders was spoken in America. In one of the English expeditions
to discover the North Pole, he relates, there were an Eskimo and
a Scotchman, who, after a few days practice, were able to converse
together readily. He also states "that the Celtic language was spoken
by many of the tribes of Florida, which is situated at the north end of
the gulf of Mexico; and that he was well acquainted with a gentleman
from the Highlands of Scotland, who was several years in Florida, in
a public character, and who stated that many of the tribes with whom
he had become acquainted, had the greatest affinity with the Celtic in
their language."[I-245]
Claims have also been put in for an Irish discovery of the New
World; St Patrick is said to have sent missionaries to the 'Isles
of America,'[I-246] and early writers have gravely discussed the
probability of Quetzalcoatl having been an Irishman. There is no great
improbability that the natives of Ireland may have reached, by accident
or otherwise, the north-eastern coasts of the new continent, in very
early times, but there is certainly no evidence to prove that they
did.[I-247]
* * * * *
The nations of southern Europe have not been entirely forgotten by
the theorists on the question of origin. Those who have claimed for
them the honor of first settling or civilizing America, are not many,
however; nor is the evidence they adduce of a very imposing nature.
Lafitau supposes the Americans to be descended from the ancient
inhabitants of the Grecian archipelago, who were driven from their
country by the subjects of Og, King of Bashan. In every particular, he
says, the people of the New World resemble the Hellenes and Pelagians.
Both were idolators; used sacred fire; indulged in Bacchanalian revels;
held formal councils; strong resemblances are to be found in their
marriage customs, system of education, manner of hunting, fishing, and
making war, in their games and sports, in their mourning and burial
customs, and in their manner of treating the sick.[I-248] García knew a
man in Peru who knew of a rock on which was what looked very much like
a Greek inscription. The same writer says that the Athenians waged
war with the inhabitants of Atlantis, and might therefore have heard
of America. That the Greeks were navigators in very early times is
shown by Jason's voyage in search of the Golden Fleece. Both Greeks
and Americans bored their ears and sang the deeds of their ancestors;
besides which, many words are common to both peoples.[I-249] Like García,
Mr Pidgeon also knew a man--a farmer of Montevideo, in Brazil--who
in 1827 discovered in one of his fields a flat stone, upon which was
engraven a Greek inscription, which, as far as it was legible, read as
follows: "During the dominion of Alexander, the son of Philip, King of
Macedon, in the sixty-third Olympiad, Ptolemaios." Deposited beneath
the stone were found two ancient swords, a helmet, and a shield. On
the handle of one of the swords was a portrait of Alexander; on the
helmet was a beautiful design representing Achilles dragging the
corpse of Hector round the walls of Troy. "From this discovery, it is
evident"--to Mr Pidgeon--"that the soil of Brazil was formerly broken
by Ptolemaios, more than a thousand years before the discovery by
Columbus."[I-250] Brasseur de Bourbourg seeks to identify certain of the
American gods with Greek deities.[I-251] Jones finds that the sculpture
at Uxmal very closely resembles the Greek style.[I-252]
The vastness of some of the cities built by the civilized Americans,
the fine roads they constructed, their fondness for gladiatorial
combats, and a few unreliable accounts that Roman coins have been found
on the continent, constitute about all the evidence that is offered to
show that the Romans ever visited America.[I-253]
* * * * *
[Sidenote: THE ANCIENT ATLANTIS.]
The story of Atlantis, that is, of a submerged, lost land that once
lay to the west of Europe, is very old. It was communicated to Solon,
according to Plutarch, by the Egyptian priests of Psenophis, Sonchis,
Heliopolis, and Saïs; and if we may believe Plato, Solon did not
hear of the events until nine thousand Egyptian years after their
occurrence. Plato's version is as follows:
"Among the great deeds of Athens, of which recollection is preserved
in our books, there is one which should be placed above all others.
Our books tell that the Athenians destroyed an army which came across
the Atlantic Sea, and insolently invaded Europe and Asia; for this sea
was then navigable, and beyond the strait where you place the Pillars
of Hercules there was an island larger than Asia (Minor) and Libya
combined. From this island one could pass easily to the other islands,
and from these to the continent which lies around the interior sea. The
sea on this side of the strait (the Mediterranean) of which we speak,
resembles a harbor with a narrow entrance; but there is a genuine sea,
and the land which surrounds it is a veritable continent. In the island
of Atlantis reigned three kings with great and marvelous power. They
had under their dominion the whole of Atlantis, several other islands,
and some parts of the continent. At one time their power extended
into Libya, and into Europe as far as Tyrrhenia, and, uniting their
whole force, they sought to destroy our countries at a blow; but their
defeat stopped the invasion and gave entire independence to all the
countries this side of the Pillars of Hercules. Afterward, in one day
and one fatal night, there came mighty earthquakes and inundations,
which ingulfed that warlike people; Atlantis disappeared beneath the
sea, and then that sea became inaccessible, so that navigation ceased
on account of the quantity of mud which the ingulfed island left in its
place."[I-254]
It is only recently that any important signification has been attached
to this passage. It was previously regarded rather as one of those
fabulous accounts in which the works of the writers of antiquity
abound, than as an actual statement of facts. True, it had been
frequently quoted to show that the ancients had a knowledge more or
less vague of the continent of America, but no particular value was
set upon the assertion that the mysterious land was ages ago submerged
and lost in the ocean. But of late years it has been discovered that
traditions and records of cataclysms similar to that referred to by
the Egyptian priests, have been preserved among the American nations;
which discovery has led several learned and diligent students of New
World lore to believe that after all the story of Atlantis, as recorded
by Plato, may be founded upon fact, and that in bygone ages there
did actually exist in the Atlantic Ocean a great tract of inhabited
country, forming perhaps part of the American continent, which by some
mighty convulsion of nature was suddenly submerged and lost in the sea.
[Sidenote: BRASSEUR DE BOURBOURG'S THEORIES.]
Foremost among those who have held and advocated this opinion stands
the Abbé Brasseur de Bourbourg. This distinguished Américaniste goes
farther than his fellows, however, in that he attempts to prove that
all civilization originated in America, or the Occident, instead of in
the Orient, as has always been supposed. This theory he endeavors to
substantiate not so much by the Old World traditions and records as by
those of the New World, using as his principal authority an anonymous
manuscript written in the Nahua language, which he entitles the _Codex
Chimalpopoca_. This work purports to be on the face of it a 'History of
the Kingdoms of Culhuacan and Mexico,' and as such it served Brasseur
as almost his sole authority for the Toltec period of his _Histoire
des Nations Civilisées_. At that time the learned Abbé regarded
the Atlantis theory, at least so far as it referred to any part of
America, as an absurd conjecture resting upon no authentic basis.[I-255]
In a later work, however, he more than retracts this assertion;
from a sceptic he is suddenly transformed into a most devout and
enthusiastic believer, and attempts to prove by a most elaborate course
of reasoning that that which he before doubted is indubitably true.
The cause of this sudden change was a strange one. As, by constant
study, he became more profoundly learned in the literature of ancient
America, the Abbé discovered that he had entirely misinterpreted the
_Codex Chimalpopoca_. The annals recorded so plainly upon the face
of the mystic pages were intended only for the understanding of the
vulgar; the stories of the kings, the history of the kingdoms, were
allegorical and not to be construed literally; deep below the surface
lay the true historic record--hidden from all save the priests and
the wise men of the West--of the mighty cataclysm which submerged
the cradle of all civilization.[I-256] Excepting a dozen, perhaps, of
the kings who preceded Montezuma, it is not a history of men, but of
American nature, that must be sought for in the Mexican manuscripts and
paintings. The Toltecs, so long regarded as an ancient civilized race,
destroyed in the eleventh century by their enemies, are really telluric
forces, agents of subterranean fire, the veritable smiths of Orcus
and of Lemnos, of which Tollan was the symbol, the true masters of
civilization and art, who by the mighty convulsions which they caused
communicated to men a knowledge of minerals.[I-257]
I know of no man better qualified than was Brasseur de Bourbourg to
penetrate the obscurity of American primitive history. His familiarity
with the Nahua and Central American languages, his indefatigable
industry, and general erudition, rendered him eminently fit for such
a task, and every word written by such a man on such a subject is
entitled to respectful consideration. Nevertheless, there is reason to
believe that the Abbé was often rapt away from the truth by excess of
enthusiasm, and the reader of his wild and fanciful speculations cannot
but regret that he has not the opportunity or ability to intelligently
criticise by comparison the French savant's interpretation of the
original documents. At all events it is certain that he honestly
believed in the truth of his own discovery; for when he admitted that,
in the light of his better knowledge, the Toltec history, as recorded
in the _Codex Chimalpopoca_, was an allegory--that no such people as
the Toltecs ever existed, in fact--and thereby rendered valueless his
own history of the Toltec period, he made a sacrifice of labor, unique,
I think, in the annals of literature.
Brasseur's theory supposes that the continent of America occupied
originally the Gulf of Mexico and the Caribbean Sea, and extended in
the form of a peninsula so far across the Atlantic that the Canary
islands may have formed part of it. All this extended portion of the
continent was many ages ago engulfed by a tremendous convulsion of
nature, of which traditions and written records have been preserved
by many American peoples.[I-258] Yucatan, Honduras, and Guatemala, were
also submerged, but the continent subsequently rose sufficiently to
rescue them from the ocean. The testimony of many modern men of science
tends to show that there existed at one time a vast extent of dry land
between Europe and America.[I-259]
It is not my intention to enter the mazes of Brasseur's argument here;
once in that labyrinth there would be small hope of escape. His _Quatre
Lettres_ are a chaotic jumble of facts and wild speculations that would
appal the most enthusiastic antiquarian; the materials are arranged
with not the slightest regard for order; the reader is continually
harassed by long rambling digressions--literary no-thoroughfares, as it
were, into which he is beguiled in the hope of coming out somewhere,
only to find himself more hopelessly lost than ever; for mythological
evidence, the pantheons of Phœnicia, Egypt, Hindostan, Greece, and
Rome, are probed to their most obscure depths; comparative philology is
as accommodating to the theorist as ever, which is saying a great deal;
the opinions of geologists who never dreamed of an Atlantis theory, are
quoted to show that the American continent formerly extended into the
Atlantic in the manner supposed.
I have presented to the reader the bare outline of what Brasseur
expects to prove, without giving him the argument used by that learned
writer, for the reason that a partial résumé of the _Quatre Lettres_
would be unfair to the Abbé, while an entire résumé would occupy more
space than I can spare. I will, however, deviate from the system I have
hitherto observed, so far as to express my own opinion of the French
savant's theory.
Were the original documents from which Brasseur drew his data
obtainable, we might, were we able to read and understand them, know
about how far his enthusiasm and imagination have warped his calmer
judgment; as it is, the Atlantis theory is certainly not proved, and
we may therefore reasonably decline to accept it. In my opinion there
is every reason to believe that his first interpretation of the _Codex
Chimalpopoca_ was the true one, and that the 'double meaning' had no
existence save in his own distorted fancy.[I-260]
* * * * *
[Sidenote: AUTOCHTHONIC ORIGIN.]
It only remains now to speak of the theory which ascribes an
autochthonic origin to the Americans. The time is not long past when
such a supposition would have been regarded as impious, and even
at this day its advocates may expect discouragement if not rebuke
from certain quarters.[I-261] It is, nevertheless, an opinion worthy
of the gravest consideration, and one which, if we may judge by the
recent results of scientific investigation, may eventually prove to
be scientifically correct. In the preceding pages it will have been
remarked that no theory of a foreign origin has been proven, or even
fairly sustained. The particulars in which the Americans are shown to
resemble any given people of the Old World are insignificant in number
and importance when compared with the particulars in which they do
_not_ resemble that people.
As I have remarked elsewhere, it is not impossible that stray ships of
many nations have at various times and in various places been cast upon
the American coast, or even that adventurous spirits, who were familiar
with the old-time stories of a western land, may have designedly sailed
westward until they reached America, and have never returned to tell
the tale. The result of such desultory visits would be exactly what
has been noticed, but erroneously attributed to immigration en masse.
The strangers, were their lives spared, would settle among the people,
and impart their ideas and knowledge to them. This knowledge would
not take any very definite shape or have any very decided effect,
for the reason that the sailors and adventurers who would be likely
to land in America under such circumstances, would not be thoroughly
versed in the arts or sciences; still they would know many things
that were unknown to their captors, or hosts, and would doubtless be
able to suggest many improvements. This, then, would account for many
Old World ideas and customs that have been detected here and there in
America, while at the same time the difficulty which arises from the
fact that the resemblances, though striking, are yet very few, would
be satisfactorily avoided. The foreigners, if adopted by the people
they fell among, would of course marry women of the country and beget
children, but it cannot be expected that the physical peculiarities
so transmitted would be perceptible after a generation or two of
re-marrying with the aboriginal stock. At the same time I think it
just as probable that the analogies referred to are mere coincidences,
such as might be found among any civilized or semi-civilized people
of the earth. It may be argued that the various American tribes and
nations differ so materially from each other as to render it extremely
improbable that they are derived from one original stock, but, however
this may be, the difference can scarcely be greater than that which
apparently exists between many of the Aryan branches.[I-262]
[Sidenote: CONCLUSIONS.]
Hence it is many not unreasonably assume that the Americans are
autochthones until there is some good ground given for believing
them to be of exotic origin.[I-263] To express belief, however, in a
theory incapable of proof appears to me idle. Indeed, such belief is
not belief; it is merely acquiescing in or accepting a hypothesis or
tradition until the contrary is proved. No one at the present day can
tell the origin of the Americans; they may have come from any one, or
from all the hypothetical sources enumerated in the foregoing pages,
and here the question must rest until we have more light upon the
subject.
FOOTNOTES:
[I-1] He affirms (in a work entitled _Christian Topography_) that,
according to the true orthodox system of geography, the earth is a
quadrangular plane, extending four hundred days' journey east and
west, and exactly half as much north and south; that it is inclosed by
mountains, on which the sky rests; that one on the north side, huger
than the others, by intercepting the rays of the sun, produces night;
and that the plane of the earth is not set exactly horizontally, but
with a little inclination from the north: hence the Euphrates, Tigris,
and other rivers, running southward, are rapid; but the Nile, having
to run up-hill, has necessarily a very slow current.' _Draper's
Conflict between Religion and Science_, p. 65.
[I-2] In answer to the question: 'What was God doing before he made
the heaven and the earth? for, if at any particular moment he began to
employ himself, that means time, not eternity. In eternity nothing
happens--the whole is present.' St Augustine caustically remarks: 'I
will not answer this question by saying that he was preparing hell for
pryers into his mysteries.'
[I-3] The teachings of the Church were beyond controversy, the
decisions of the Church were final; and not only in religion but in
legislation and in science 'the pervading principle was a blind
unhesitating credulity.' See _Buckle's Civilization_, vol. i., p. 307.
The Bishop of Darien once quoted Plato in the presence of Las Casas.
"Plato," Las Casas replied, "was a Gentile, and is now burning in
hell, and we are only to make use of his doctrine as far as it is
consistent with our holy Faith and Christian customs." _Helps' Life of
Las Casas_, p. 120.
[I-4] As an example of the intolerance displayed by these early
writers, and of the bitterness with which they attacked those few
thinkers who dared to theorize without letting theological dogmas
stand in their way, I translate the following passage from García, who
is one of the most comprehensive writers upon the origin of the
Americans: 'We would like not even to remember the unworthy opinions
of certain veritable blasphemers, more barbarous than the Indians,
which do not even deserve the name of opinions, but rather of follies:
namely, that, perhaps, the first Indians might have been generated
from the earth, or from its putrefaction, aided by the sun's heat, as
(Avicena allowing this production to be easy in men) Andres Cisalpino
attempted to make credible, giving them less perfection than
Empedocles, who said that men had been born like the wild amaranth, if
we believe Marcus Varron.... Of the formation of man, though of straw
and mud, the people of Yucatan, had light; which nonsense is not
inferior to the attempts of those who made men by means of chemistry,
or magic (described by Solorcano) giving it to be understood that
there may be others besides the descendants of Adam, contrary to the
teachings of scripture: for which reason Taurelo feels indignant
against Cisalpino, whose attempt would be reprehensible even as a
paradox. Not less scandalous was the error of the ignorant Paracelso,
according to Reusnero and Kirchero, who left to posterity an account
of the creation of two Adams, one in Asia, and another in the West
Indies; an inexcusable folly in one who had (though corruptly)
information of the Catholic doctrine. Not less erroneous is the
opinion of Isaac de La Peyrere, who placed people on the earth before
Adam was created, from whom, he said, descended the heathen; from
Adam, the Hebrews; which folly was punished with eternal contempt by
Felipe Priorio, Juan Bautista Morino, Juan Hilperto, and others,
Danhavero giving it the finishing stroke by an epitaph, as Dicterico
relates: although some of the parties named state that La Peyrere
became repentant and acknowledged his error, and did penance, which
the Orientals, from whom he took that absurdity, have not done. These,
and others of the same nature, may not be held as opinions, but as
evidences of blindness published by men of doubtful faith, wise, in
their own esteem, and deceivers of the world, who, with lies and
fraud, oppose the divine word, as St Clemens Alexandrinus says,
closing their ears to truth, and blindfolding themselves with their
vices, for whom contempt is the best reward.' _Orígen de los Ind._, p.
248. García spent nine years in Peru, devoting himself to the study of
three points: the history of the natives before the arrival of the
Spaniards, the origin of the natives, and the question as to whether
the apostles preached the gospel in America. On his return to Spain,
he concluded to write only upon the second topic, leaving the others
for a future time.
[I-5] _Descent of Man_, vol. ii., p. 368.
[I-6] The value of proof by analogy has been questioned by many
eminent authors. Humboldt writes: 'On n'est pas en droit de supposer
des communications partout où l'on trouve, chez des peuples à demi
barbares, le culte du soleil, ou l'usage de sacrifier des victimes
humaines.' _Vues_, tom. i., p. 257. 'The instances of customs, merely
arbitrary, common to the inhabitants of both hemispheres, are, indeed,
so few and so equivocal, that no theory concerning the population of
the New World ought to be founded upon them.' As regards religious
rites, 'the human mind, even where its operations appear most wild and
capricious, holds a course so regular, that in every age and country
the dominion of particular passions will be attended with similar
effects.' _Robertson's Hist. Amer._, vol. i., p. 269. Warden remarks
that nations known to be distinct, to have had no intercourse, breed
similar customs--these, therefore, grow from physical and moral
causes. _Recherches_, p. 205. 'In attempting to trace relations
between them and the rest of mankind, we cannot expect to discover
proofs of their derivation from any particular tribe or nation of the
Old Continent.' _Prichard's Nat. Hist. Man_, vol. ii., p. 494. 'To
tell an inquirer who wishes to deduce one population from another that
certain distant tribes agree with the one under discussion in certain
points of resemblance, is as irrelevant as to tell a lawyer in search
of the next of kin to a client deceased, that though you know of no
relations, you can find a man who is the very picture of him in
person--a fact good enough in itself, but not to the purpose.'
_Latham's Man and his Migrations_, pp. 74-5.
[I-7] Certainly many of the writers must have been either fools or
demented, if we judge them by their work and arguments.
[I-8] _Garcia_, _Origen de los Ind._, pp. 7-12.
[I-9] When De Gama established the globular form of the earth by his
voyage round the Cape of Good Hope, in 1497-8, 'the political
consequences that at once ensued placed the Papal Government in a
position of great embarrassment. Its traditions and policy forbade it
to admit any other than the flat figure of the earth, as revealed in
the Scriptures.' In 1520 Magellan discovered the strait which now
bears his name, and 'henceforth the theological doctrine of the
flatness of the earth was irretrievably overthrown.' _Draper's
Conflict_, pp. 163-5. St Augustin affirmed that the world beyond the
tropic of cancer was uninhabited. 'Ea vero veterum sententia,
perspicua atque inuicta, vt ipsis videbatur, ratione nitebatur. Nam vt
quæque regio ad meridiem propius accedit, ita solis ardoribus magis
expositam animaduerterant, idque adeo verum est, vt in eadem Italiæ
prouincia Apuliam Liguria, & in nostra Hispania Bæticam Cantabria
vsque adeo feruentiorem nota re liceat, vt per gradus vixdum octo
grande frigoris & æstus discrimen sit.' _Acosta_, _De Natura Novi
Orbis_, fol. 27. 'Lactantius Firmianus, and St. Austin, who strangely
jear'd at as ridiculous, and not thinking fit for a Serious Answer the
Foolish Opinion of Antipodes, or another Habitable World beyond the
Equator: At which, Lactantius Drolling, says, what, Forsooth, here is
a fine Opinion broach'd indeed; an Antipodes! heigh-day! People whose
Feet tread with ours, and walk Foot to Foot with us; their Heads
downwards, and yet drop not into the Sky! There, yes, very likely, the
Trees loaden with Fruit grow downwards, and it Rains, Hails, and Snows
upwards; the Roofs and Spires of Cities, tops of Mountains, point at
the Sky beneath them, and the Rivers revers'd topsi-turvy, ready to
flow into the Air out of their Channels.' _Ogilby's America_, pp. 6-7.
The ancients believed a large portion of the globe to be uninhabitable
by reason of excessive heat, which must have greatly deterred
discovery.
[I-10] Touching the question whether the Americans and the people of
the old world are of common origin, see: _Brasseur de Bourbourg_,
_Hist. Nat. Civ._, tom. i., pp. 1-31; _Tylor's Anahuac_, p. 104;
_Clavigero_, _Storia Ant. del Messico_, tom. iv., pp. 14-24;
_Torquemada_, _Monarq. Ind._, tom. i., pp. 1-31; _Ramirez_, in _Soc.
Mex. Geog., Boletin_, 2da época, tom. iv., p. 54; _M'Culloh's
Researches on Amer._, pp. 175-8; _Mayer's Mex. as it Was_, p. 260;
_Domenech's Deserts_, vol. i., pp. 66-80; _Prescott's Mex._, vol.
iii., p. 389; _Bradford's Amer. Antiq._, pp. 237-49, 351, 354, 420-35;
_Charlevoix_, quoted in _Carver's Trav._, pp. 197-8; _Fontaine's How
the World was Peopled_, p. 17, et seq.; _Crowe's Cent. Amer._, p. 61;
_Williams' Enquiry into Tradition_; _Chevalier_, _Mexique_, p. 134;
_Wilson's Pre-Hist. Man_, pp. 611-14, 485-6; _Carli_, _Cartas_, pt i.,
p. 16; _Chamisso_, in _Kotzebue's Voyage_, vol. ii., pp. 405-6;
_Prichard's Researches_, vol. v., pp. 541-6; _Humboldt_, _Vues_, tom.
i., pp. 22, 31. Innumerable other speculations have been made on this
point, but in most cases by men who were but poorly qualified to deal
with a subject requiring not only learning, but a determination to
investigate fairly and without bias. Adair's reasoning in this
connection will serve to illustrate: 'God employed six days, in
creating the heavens, this earth, and the innumerable species of
creatures, wherewith it is so amply furnished. The works of a being,
infinitely perfect, must entirely answer the design of them: hence
there could be no necessity for a second creation; or God's creating
many pairs of the human race differing from each other, and fitted for
different climates; because, that implies imperfection, in the grand
scheme, or a want of power, in the execution of it--Had there been a
prior, or later formation of any new class of creatures, they must
materially differ from those of the six days work; for it is
inconsistent with divine wisdom to make a vain, or unnecessary
repetition of the same act. But the American Indians neither vary from
the rest of mankind, in their internal construction, nor external
appearance, except in colour; which, as hath been shewn, is either
entirely accidental, or artificial. As the Mosaic account declares a
completion of the manifestation of God's infinite wisdom and power in
creation, within that space of time; it follows, that the Indians have
lineally descended from Adam, the first, and the great parent of all
the human species.' _Amer. Ind._, pp. 11-12. To the works of those
modern scientists, such as Lyell, Darwin, and others, who have treated
of the unity of the human species at large, I need not refer the
reader here. An excellent résumé of the subject will, however, be
found in _Foster's Pre-Hist. Races_, pp. 353-67.
[I-11] 'We find on the earliest Egyptian monuments,' says Sir John
Lubbock, 'some of which are certainly as ancient as 2400 B.C., two
great distinct types, the Arab on the east and west of Egypt, the
Negro on the south. These distinct types still predominate in Egypt
and the neighbouring countries. Thus, then, says Mr. Poole, in this
immense interval we do not find "the least change in the Negro or the
Arab; and even the type which seems to be intermediate between them is
virtually as unaltered. Those who consider that length of time can
change a type of man, will do well to consider the fact that three
thousand years give no ratio on which a calculation could be
founded."' Crawfurd, also says: the millions '"of African Negroes that
have during three centuries been transported to the New World and its
islands, are the same in colour as the present inhabitants of the
parent country of their forefathers. The Creole Spaniards, who have
for at least as long a time been settled in tropical America, are as
fair as the people of Arragon and Andalusia, with the same variety of
colour in the hair and eye as their progenitors. The pure Dutch Creole
colonists of the Cape of Good Hope, after dwelling two centuries among
black Caffres, and yellow Hottentots, do not differ in colour from the
people of Holland."' _Pre-Hist. Times_, pp. 587-8. We find 'upon
Egyptian monuments, mostly of the thirteenth, fourteenth, and
fifteenth centuries before the Christian Era, representations of
individuals of numerous nations, African, Asiatic, and European,
differing in physical characteristics as widely as any equal number of
nations of the present age that could be grouped together; among these
being negroes of the true Nigritian stamp, depicted with a fidelity as
to color and features, hardly to be surpassed by a modern artist. That
such diversities had been produced by natural means in the interval
between that remote age and the time of Noah, probably no one versed
in the science of anatomy and physiology will consider credible.'
_Foster's Pre-Hist. Races_, p. 357.
[I-12] _Noticias Americanas_, pp. 391-5, 405-7. On pages 286-304, he
has an argument, backed by geological evidences, to show that America
is the oldest continent.
[I-13] 'Were we to admit,' say some ethnologists, 'a unity of origin
of such strongly-marked varieties as the Negro and European, differing
as they do in colour and bodily constitution, each fitted for distinct
climates, and exhibiting some marked peculiarities in their
osteological, and even in some details of cranial and cerebral
conformation, as well as in their average intellectual
endowments,--if, in spite of the fact that all these attributes have
been faithfully handed down unaltered for hundreds of generations, we
are to believe that, in the course of time, they have all diverged
from one common stock, how shall we resist the argument of the
transmutationist, who contends that all closely allied species of
animals and plants have in like manner sprung from a common
parentage?' _Lyell's Antiq. of Man_, pp. 433-4.
[I-14] _Lescarbot_, _Hist. Nouv. France_, lib. i., cap. iii.
[I-15] _Hist. Conq. Itza_, pp. 26-8.
[I-16] _Pamphleteer_, 1815. Thompson calculates the spreading of
Noah's children up to the time of Peleg, when the Bible declares the
earth to have been divided. He also shows that this division happened
earlier than is generally supposed.
[I-17] _Orrio_, _Solucion_, p. 41, et seq. Torquemada also believes
Ham to have been the father of the race. _Monarq. Ind._, tom. i., pp.
21-30.
[I-18] _Nieuwe Weereld_, p. 37.
[I-19] _L'Estrange_, _Americans no Jewes_.
[I-20] _Deserts_, vol. i., p. 26. 'The Peruvian language,' writes
Ulloa, 'is something like the Hebrew, and Noah's tongue was doubtless
Hebrew.' _Noticias Americanas_, p. 384.
[I-21] _Clavigero_, _Storia Ant. del Messico_, tom. iv., p. 17.
[I-22] In _Soc. Mex. Geog., Boletin_, 2da época, tom. iii., p. 343.
[I-23] See vol. iii. of this work, p. 450, et seq.
[I-24] _Storia Ant. del Messico_, tom. iv., p. 15. Heredia y Sarmiento
follows Clavigero. _Sermones_, p. 84.
[I-25] _Mex. Antiq._, vol. vi., p. 401. Priest, _Amer. Antiq._, pp.
142-3, thinks that an ivory image representing a mother and child
found in Cincinnati, may have been taken to Britain by the Greeks or
Romans, who knew of the prophecies concerning the Virgin and Child
Jesus, and thence brought to America. See, also, concerning religious
belief, baptism, circumcision, and other Christian-like rites in the
New World: _Tylor's Anahuac_, pp. 279-80; _Prescott's Mex._, vol.
iii., pp. 378-85; _Schoolcraft's Arch._, vol. i., pp. 17-18;
_M'Culloh's Researches on Amer._, pp. 111-40; _Latrobe's Rambler_, pp.
205-6.
[I-26] See vol. iii., pp. 66-9, and comments in accompanying notes.
[I-27] _Id._, pp. 72-5.
[I-28] _Id._, p. 76.
[I-29] _Id._, pp. 78-9.
[I-30] _Id._, p. 86.
[I-31] _Id._, p. 88.
[I-32] _Id._, p. 89.
[I-33] _Id._, p. 103.
[I-34] _Mackenzie's Voyages_, p. cxviii.
[I-35] 'Ou plutôt deux femmes, portant le nom d'Ara,' says Brasseur de
Bourbourg; I prefer, however, the original reading. The Ara is a kind
of parroquet, common in South America, and so called because it
continually repeats the cry _ara, ara_. Beings half bird, half woman,
are as likely to figure in such a legend as the above as not. Besides,
shortly afterwards the narrative speaks of 'les deux oiseaux,'
referring to the aras.
[I-36] For both of these flood-myths see: _Brasseur de Bourbourg_, in
_Landa_, _Relacion_, pp. xxx-xxxii. Herrera, _Hist. Gen._, dec. v.,
lib. iii., cap. vi., gives a native tradition which relates that long
before the time of the Incas there was a great deluge, from which some
of the natives escaped by fleeing to the mountain-tops. The mountain
tribes assert, however, that only six persons escaped this flood in a
balsa.
[I-37] _Kingsborough's Mex. Antiq._, vol. viii., p. 25.
[I-38] See vol. iii., p. 67.
[I-39] See vol. iii., pp. 77, 89.
[I-40] According to Ixtlilxochitl, the Toltec tradition relates that
after the confusion of tongues the seven families who spoke the Toltec
language set out for the New World, wandering one hundred and four
years over large extents of land and water. Finally they arrived at
Huehue Tlapallan in the year 'one flint,' five hundred and twenty
years after the flood. _Relaciones_, in _Kingsborough's Mex. Antiq._,
vol. ix., p. 322. See also another account, p. 450; _Boturini_, _Crón.
Mex._, pt ii., pp. 5-8; _Id._, _Idea_, pp. 111-27; _Veytia_, _Hist.
Ant. Mej._, tom. i., pp. 24, 145, 212-13; _Mendieta_, _Hist. Ecles._,
p. 145; _Hist. y Antig._, in _Soc. Mex. Geog., Boletin_, tom. i., p.
284; _Juarros_, _Hist. Guat._, (Guat. 1857) tom. ii., pp. 55-6;
_Delafield's Antiq. Amer._, p. 34; _Humboldt_, _Vues_, tom. i., pp.
114-15; _Prescott's Mex._, vol. iii., pp. 380-1; _Davis' Anc. Amer._,
p. 31; _Tylor's Anahuac_, p. 277.
[I-41] They had also, as we have seen in the third volume, a great
many curious ideas as to the way in which man was created, and as in
attempting to prove their theories many writers are apt to draw
analogies in this particular, I give a brief résumé of the
creation-myths here for the reader's convenience: The grossest
conceptions of the mystery of the beginning of man are to be found
among the rude savages of the north, who, however, as they are quite
content, in many instances, to believe that their earliest progenitor
was a dog or a coyote, seem entitled to some sympathy from the latest
school of modern philosophy, though it is true that their process of
development was rather abrupt, and that they did not require very many
links in their chain of evolution. But as we advance farther south,
the attempts to solve the problem grow less simple and the direct
instrumentality of the gods is required for the formation of man. The
Aleuts ascribe their origin to the intercourse of a dog and a bitch,
or, according to another version, of a bitch and a certain old man who
came from the north to visit his brute-bride. From them sprang two
creatures, male and female, each half man, half fox; and from these
two the human race is descended. Others of the Aleuts believe that
their canine progenitor fell from heaven. The Tinneh also owe their
origin to a dog; though they believe that all other living creatures
were called into existence by an immense bird. The Thlinkeet account
of the creation certainly does not admit of much caviling or dispute
concerning its chronology, method, or general probability, since it
merely states that men were "placed on the earth," though when, or
how, or by whom, it does not presume to relate. According to the
Tacully cosmogony, a musk-rat formed the dry land, which afterwards
became peopled, though whether by the agency of that industrious
rodent or not, is not stated. Darwinism is reversed by many of the
Washington tribes, who hold that animals and even some vegetables are
descended from man. The human essence from which the first Ahts were
formed, was originally contained in the bodies of animals, who upon
being suddenly stampeded from their dwellings left this mysterious
matter behind them. Some of the Ahts contend, however, that they are
the direct descendants of a shadowy personage named Quawteaht and a
gigantic Thunder Bird. The Chinooks were created by a Coyote, who,
however, did his work so badly and produced such imperfect specimens
of humanity, that but for the beneficent intervention and assistance
of a spirit called Ikánam the race must have ended as soon as it
began. Some of the Washington tribes originated from the fragments of
a huge beaver, which was slain and cut in pieces by four giants at the
request of their sister who was pining away for some beaver-fat. The
first Shasta was the result of a union between the daughter of the
Great Spirit and a grizzly bear. The Cahrocs believe that Chareya, the
Old Man Above, created the world, then the fishes and lower animals,
and lastly man. The Potoyantes were slowly developed from Coyotes. The
Big Man of the Mattoles created first the earth, bleak and naked, and
placed but one man upon it; then, on a sudden, in the midst of a
mighty whirlwind and thick darkness, he covered the desolate globe
with all manner of life and verdure. One of the myths of Southern
California attributes the creation of man and the world to two divine
beings. The Los Angeles tribes believe their one god Quaoar brought
forth the world from chaos, set it upon the shoulders of seven giants,
peopled it with the lower forms of animal life, and finally crowned
his work by creating a man and a woman out of earth. Still farther
south, the Cochimís believe in a sole creator; the Pericúis call the
maker of all things Niparaja, and say that the heavens are his
dwelling-place; the Sinaloas pay reverence to Viriseva the mother of
Vairubi, the first man. According to the Navajos, all mankind
originally dwelt under the earth, in almost perpetual darkness, until
they were released by the Moth-worm, who bored his way up to the
surface. Through the hole thus made the people swarmed out on to the
face of the earth, the Navajos taking the lead. Their first act was to
manufacture the sun and the moon, and with the light came confusion of
tongues. The Great Father and Mother of the Moquis created men in nine
races from all manner of primeval forms. The Pima creator made man and
woman from a lump of clay, which he kneaded with the sweat of his own
body, and endowed with life by breathing upon it. The Great Spirit of
the Pápagos made first the earth and all living things, and then men
in great numbers from potter's clay. The Miztecs ascribe their origin
to the act of the two mighty gods, the male Lion Snake and the female
Tiger Snake, or of their sons, Wind of the Nine Snakes and Wind of the
Nine Caves. The Tezcucan story is that the sun cast a dart into the
earth at a certain spot in the land of Aculma. From this hole issued a
man imperfectly formed, and after him a woman, from which pair mankind
are descended. The Tlascaltecs asserted that the world was the effect
of chance, while the heavens had always existed. The most common
Mexican belief was, that the first human beings, a boy and a girl,
were produced from the blood-besprinkled fragments of the bone
procured from hades by the sixteen hundred fallen gods sprung from the
flint-knife of which the goddess Citlalicue had been delivered.
According to the Chimalpopoca manuscript the creator produced his work
in successive epochs, man being made on the seventh day from dust or
ashes. In Guatemala there was a belief that the parents of the human
race were created out of the earth by the two younger sons of the
divine Father and Mother. The Quiché creation was a very bungling
affair. Three times and of three materials was man made before his
makers were satisfied with their work. First of clay, but he lacked
intelligence; next of wood, but he was shriveled and useless; finally
of yellow and white maize, and then he proved to be a noble work. Four
men were thus made, and afterwards four women.
[I-42] 'This nice agreement with the Mosaic account of the height
which the waters of the Deluge attained above the summits of the
highest mountains is certainly extraordinary; since we read in the
twentieth verse of the seventh chapter of Genesis: "_Fifteen cubits
upward_ did the waters prevail, and the mountains were covered."'
_Kingsborough's Mex. Antiq._, vol. viii., p. 25.
[I-43] _Relaciones_, in _Kingsborough's Mex. Antiq._, vol. ix., pp.
321-2.
[I-44] 'Un orient lointain,' says Brasseur de Bourbourg; but he must
either mean what we call in English the Orient, the East, or
contradict himself--which, by the way, he is very prone to do--because
he afterwards asserts that Tula is the place 'on the other side of the
sea,' from which the Quiché wanderers came to the north-west coast of
America.
[I-45] _Brasseur de Bourbourg_, _Hist. Nat. Civ._, tom. i., pp.
105-6.
[I-46] _Id._, pp. 167-8.
[I-47] _Cogolludo_, _Hist. Yuc._, p. 178; _Montanus_, _Nieuwe
Weereld_, p. 258.
[I-48] _Ross' Adven._, pp. 287-8.
[I-49] _Warden_, _Recherches_, p. 190.
[I-50] _Domenech's Deserts_, vol. ii., p. 4; _Schoolcraft's Arch._,
vol. i., p. 19.
[I-51] _Warden_, _Recherches_, p. 213.
[I-52] The reader will recollect that the story of each of these
heroes has been told at length in vol. iii. of this work.
[I-53] The legend of Viracocha, or Ticeviracocha, as he is sometimes
called, and his successor, is, according to Herrera, as follows:
'Cuentan tambien los Indios, segun lo tienen por tradicion de sus
antepassados, y parece por sus cantares, que en su antiguedad
estuuieron mucho tiempo sin ver Sol, y que por los grandes votos, y
plegarias que hazian â sus dioses, saliô el Sol de la laguna Titicaca,
y de la Isla, que estâ en ella, que es en el Collao, y que pareciô
luego por la parte de medio dia vn hõbre blanco de gran cuerpo, y de
veneranda presencia, que era tan poderoso, que baxaua las sierras,
crecia los valles, y sacaua fuentes de las piedras, al qual por su
gran poder llamauan: Principio de todas las cosas criadas, y padre del
Sol, porque dio ser a los hombres, y animales, y por su mano les vino
notable beneficio, y que obrando estas marauillas, fue de largo hâzia
el Norte, y de camino yua dando orden de vida â las gentes, hablando
con mucho amor, amonestando que fuessen buenos, y se amassen vnos â
otros, al qual hasta los vltimos tiempos de los Ingas llamauã
Ticeuiracocha, y en el Collao Tuapaca, y en otras partes Arnauâ, y que
le hizieron muchos Templos, y bultos en ellos â su semejança, â los
quales sacrificauan. Dizen tambien, que passados algunos tiempos
oyeron dezir â sus mayores, que pareciô otro hombre semejante al
referido, que sanaua los enfermos, daua vista â los ciegos, y que en
la prouincia de los Cañas, queriendo locamente apedrearle, lo vieron
hincado de rodillas, alçadas las manos al Cielo, inuocando el diuino
fauor, y que pareciô vn fuego del Cielo que los espantô tanto, que con
grandes gritos, y clamores le pedian, que los librasse de aquel
peligro, pues las venia aquel castigo por el pecado, que auian
cometido, y que luego cessô el fuego, quedando abrasadas las piedras,
y oy dia se ven quemadas, y tan liuianas, que aunque grandes se
leuantan como corcho, y dizen, que desde alli se fue â la mar, y
entrando en ella sobre su manto tendido nunca mas se vio, por lo qual
le llamaron Viracocha, que quiere dezir espuma de la mar, nõbre que
despues mudô signification, y que luego le hizieron vn Templo, en el
pueblo de Cacha, y algunos Castellanos solo por su discurso han dicho,
que este deuia de ser algun Apostol: pero los mas cuerdos lo tienen
por vanidad, porque en todos estos Templos se sacrificaua al demonio,
y hasta que los Castellanos entraron en los Reynos del Pirû, no fue
oìdo, ni predicado el santo Euangelio, ni vista la Santissima señal de
la Cruz.' _Hist. Gen._, dec. v., lib. iii., cap. vi.; _Acosta_, _Hist.
de las Ynd._, p. 82.
[I-54] Sumé was a white man with a thick beard, who came across the
ocean from the direction of the rising sun. He had power over the
elements, and could command the tempest. At a word from him the trees
of the densest forest receded from their places to make a path for
him; the most ferocious animals crouched submissive at his feet; the
treacherous surface of lake and river presented a solid footing to his
tread. He taught the people agriculture, and the use of maize. The
Caboclos, a Brazilian nation, refused to listen to his divine
teachings, and even sought to kill him with their arrows, but he
turned their own weapons against them. The persecuted apostle then
retired to the banks of a river, and finally left the country
entirely. The tradition adds that the prints of his feet are still to
be seen on the rocks and in the sand of the coast. _Warden_,
_Recherches_, p. 189.
[I-55] Paye-Tome was another white apostle. His history so closely
resembles that of Sumé that it is probable they are the same person.
_Id._
[I-56] 'In former times, as they (the Chilians) had heard their
fathers say, a wonderful man had come to that country, wearing a long
beard, with shoes, and a mantle such as the Indians carry on their
shoulders, who performed many miracles, cured the sick with water,
caused it to rain, and their crops and grain to grow, kindled fire at
a breath, and wrought other marvels, healing at once the sick, and
giving sight to the blind,' and so on. 'Whence it may be inferred that
this man was some apostle whose name they do not know.' Quoted from
Rosales' inedited _History of Chili_, in _Kingsborough's Mex. Antiq._,
vol. vi., p. 419.
[I-57] Bochica, the great law-giver of the Muyscas, and son of the
sun, a white man, bearded, and wearing long robes, appeared suddenly
in the people's midst while they were disputing concerning the choice
of a king. He advised them to appoint Huncahua, which they immediately
did. He it was who invented the calendar and regulated the festivals.
After living among the Muyscas for two thousand years, he vanished on
a sudden near the town of Hunca. _Warden_, _Recherches_, p. 187;
_Klemm_, _Cultur-Geschichte_, tom. v., p. 174, quoting _Stevenson's
Travels in South America_, vol. i., p. 397.
[I-58] _Torquemada_, _Monarq. Ind._, tom. i., p. 35; _Acosta_, _Hist.
de las Ynd._, pp. 67-8; _Montanus_, _Nieuwe Weereld_, p. 13.
[I-59] In a work entitled _Fenix del Occidente_.
[I-60] _Felicidad de Mej._, Mex. 1685, fol. 55.
[I-61] _Boturini_, _Catálogo_, in _Idea_, pp. 43, 50-2. Although the
opinion that Quetzalcoatl was St Thomas, 'appears to be rather
hazardous, yet one cannot help being astonished at the extent of the
regions traversed by St. Thomas; it is true that some writers do not
allow of his having gone beyond Calamita, a town in India, the site of
which is doubtful; but others assert that he went as far as Meliapour,
on the other side of the Coromandel, and even unto Central America.'
_Domenech's Deserts_, vol. i., p. 50. 'Apud Iaiaobæ Indos in Occidenti
tradita per avos viget memoria S. Apostoli Thomæ, quam retinent a
transitu ejus per illas plagas, cujus non levia extant indicia:
præcipuè quædam semita in illis solitudinibus hactenus perseverat, in
quâ non oritur herba nisi valdè humilis et parvula, cum utrumque latus
herbescat ultra modum; eo itinere dicunt Apostolum incessisse, et inde
profectum in Peruana regna. Apud Brasilienses quoque traditio est, ibi
prædicasse. Apud alios barbaros, etiam in regionem Paraguay venisse,
postquam descendit per fluvium Iguazu, deinde in Paranam per Aracaium,
ubi observatur locus in quo sedit defessus Apostolus, et fertur
prædixisse, ut a majoribus acceptum est, post se illuc adventuros
homines qui posteris eorum annuntiarent fidem veri Dei, quod non leve
solatium et animos facit nostræ religionis prædicatoribus, ingentes
labores inter illos barbaros pro dilatione Ecclesiæ perpetientibus.'
_Nieremberg_, _Historiæ Naturæ_, lib. xiv., cap. cxvii.
[I-62] Following are a few points of Lord Kingsborough's elaborate
argument: 'How truly surprising it is to find that the Mexicans, who
seem to have been quite unacquainted with the doctrines of the
migration of the soul and the metempsychosis, should have believed in
the incarnation of the _only_ son of their supreme god Tonacatecutle.
For Mexican mythology speaking of no other son of that god except
Quecalcoatle, who was born of Chimalman the Virgin of Tula, without
connection with man, and by his breath alone, (by which may be
signified his _word_ or his will, announced to Chimalman by word of
mouth of the celestial messenger, whom he dispatched to inform her
that she should conceive a son,) it must be presumed that Quecalcoatle
was his only son. Other arguments might be adduced to show, that the
Mexicans believed that Quecalcoatle was both god and man, that he had
previously to his incarnation existed from all eternity, that he had
created both the world and man, that he descended from heaven to
reform the world by penance, that he was born with the perfect use of
reason, that he preached a new law, and, being king of Tula, was
crucified for the sins of mankind, as is obscurely insinuated by the
interpreter of the Vatican Codex, plainly declared in the traditions
of Yucatan, and mysteriously represented in the Mexican paintings.' If
the promise of the angel Gabriel to the Virgin Mary,--The Holy Ghost
shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow
thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall
be called the Son of God--be couched in the language of ancient
prophecy, 'it is not improbable that the head of the dragon which
forms the crest of three of the female figures (in one of the Mexican
pieces of sculpture), as it may also be presumed it did of the fourth
when entire, (if it be not a symbol which Chimalman borrowed from her
son's _name_,) was intended to denote that she had been overshadowed
by the power of Huitzilopuchtli, whose device, as we are informed by
Sahagun in the first chapter of the first book of his History of New
Spain, was the head of a dragon.' _Kingsborough's Mex. Antiq._, vol.
vi., pp. 507-8. See, more especially, his elaborate discussion of
Quetzalcoatl's crucifixion and identity with the Messiah, vol. viii.,
pp. 5-51. As we have seen in a preceding volume, Quetzalcoatl is
compared with the heathen deities of the old world, as well as with
the Messiah of the Christians. See vol. iii., chap. vii.
[I-63] See vol. iii., p. 450, et seq.
[I-64] Though the presumption may be in favor of communication by
Bering Strait, yet the phenomena in the present state of our
knowledge, favors the Aleutian route. _Latham's Comp. Phil._, p. 384.
The Aleutian archipelago is 'probably the main route by which the old
continent must have peopled the new. Behring's Straits, though ...
they were doubtless one channel of communication, just as certainly as
if their place had been occupied by solid land, were yet, in all
likelihood, only of subordinate utility in the premises, when compared
with the more accessible and commodious bridge towards the south.'
_Simpson's Nar._, vol. ii., p. 225. 'There is no improbability that
the early Asiatics reached the western shores of America through the
islands of the Pacific.' The trace of the progress of the red and
partially civilized man from Oriental Asia was left on these islands.
_Willson's Amer. Hist._, pp. 92-3. The first discoveries were made
along the coast and from island to island; the American immigrants
would have come by the Aleutian Isles. _Brasseur de Bourbourg_, _Hist.
Nat. Civ._, tom. i., p. 10. To come by Aleutian islands presents not
nearly so great a difficulty as the migrations among Pacific Islands.
_Prescott's Mex._, vol. iii., p. 374. Immigration from Asia 'appears
to have taken place mostly by the Aleuthian islands.' _Smith's Human
Species_, p. 238.
[I-65] Some of the early writers were of course ignorant of the
existence of any strait separating America from Asia; thus Acosta--who
dares not assume, in opposition to the Bible, that the flood did not
extend to America, or that a new creation took place there--accounts
for the great variety of animals by supposing that the new continent
is in close proximity to if not actually connected with the Old World
at its northern and southern ends, and that the people and animals
saved in the ark spread gradually by these routes over the whole land.
_Hist. de las Ynd._, pp. 68-73, 81; _West und Ost Indischer Lustgart_,
pt i., pp. 8-9. See also _Montanus_, _Nieuwe Weereld_, pp. 38-42;
_Gottfriedt_, _Newe Welt_, p. 4; _Villagutierre_, _Hist. Conq. Itza_,
pp. 26-8. Clavigero produces instances to show that upheavals,
engulfings, and separations of land have been quite common, and thinks
that American traditions of destructions refer to such disasters. He
also shows that certain animals could have passed only by a tropic,
others only by an arctic road. He accordingly supposes that America
was formerly connected with Africa at the latitude of the Cape Verde
islands, with Asia in the north, and perhaps with Europe by Greenland.
_Storia Ant. del Messico_, tom. iv., pp. 27-44. The great objection to
a migration by way of the cold latitude of Bering Strait, says a
writer in the _Historical Magazine_, vol. i., p. 285, is that tropic
animals never could have passed that way. He apparently rejects or has
never heard of the theory of change in zones. See farther, concerning
joining of continents, and communication by Bering Strait: _Warden_,
_Recherches_, pp. 202, 221; _Humboldt_, _Exam. Crit._, tom. ii., p.
68, et seq.; _Snowden's Hist. N. and S. Amer._, p. 198; _Taylor_, in
_Cal. Farmer_, Sept. 12, 1862; _Priest's Amer. Antiq._, pp. 62-3,
82-3; _Valois_, _Mexique_, p. 197; _Adair's Amer. Ind._, p. 219.
Bradford denies emphatically that there ever was any connection
between America and Asia. 'It has been supposed,' he writes, 'that a
vast tract of land, now submerged beneath the waters of the Pacific
Ocean, once connected Asia and America.... The arguments in favor of
this opinion are predicated upon that portion of the Scriptures,
relating to the "division" of the earth in the days of Peleg, which is
thought to indicate a physical division,--upon the analogies between
the Peruvians, Mexicans and Polynesians ... and upon the difficulty of
accounting in any other manner for the presence of some kinds of
animals in America.' After demolishing these three bases of opinion,
he adds: 'this conjectured terrestrial communication never existed, a
conclusion substantiated, in some measure, by geological testimony.'
_Amer. Antiq._, pp. 222-8. Mr Bradford's argument, in addition to
being thoughtful and ingenious, is supported by facts, and will amply
repay a perusal.
[I-66] _Exam. Crit._, tom. ii., p. 68.
[I-67] _Mex._, vol. iii., p. 418.
[I-68] _Prehist. Man_, p. 615.
[I-69] _Human Species_, p. 238.
[I-70] _Rel., 2de expéd._, p. 28.
[I-71] _Peruvian Antiq._, p. 24. America was probably first peopled
from Asia, but the memory of that ancient migration was lost. Asia was
utterly unknown to the ancient Mexicans. The original seats of the
Chichimecs were, as they thought, not far to the north-west. They
placed Aztlan not in a remote country, but near Michoacan. _Gallatin_,
in _Amer. Ethno. Soc., Transact._, vol. i., pp. 158-9, 174. There are
strong resemblances in all things with Asiatic nations; less in
language than other respects, but more with Asia than with any other
part of the world. Anatomical resemblances point the same way.
_Carbajal Espinosa_, _Hist. Mex._, tom. i., pp. 196-203. The Americans
most probably came from Asia soon after the dispersion and confusion
of tongues; but there has been found no clear notice among them of
Asia, or of their passage to this continent. Nor in Asia of any such
migration. The Mexican histories do not probably go so far back.
_Venegas_, _Noticia de la Cal._, tom. i., pp. 72-3. If a congregation
of twelve representatives from Malacca, China, Japan, Mongolia,
Sandwich Islands, Chili, Peru, Brazil, Chickasaws, Comanches, &c.,
were dressed alike, or undressed and unshaven, the most skillful
anatomist could not from their appearance separate them. _Fontaine's
How the World was Peopled_, pp. 147-9, 244-5. The people of Asia seem
to have been the only men who could teach the Mexicans and Peruvians
to make bronze, and could not teach them to smelt and work iron, one
thousand or one thousand five hundred years before the Spanish
Conquest. _Tylor's Researches_, p. 209. It is almost proved that long
before Columbus, Northern India, China, Corea, and Tartary, had
communication with America. _Chateaubriand_, _Lettre aux Auteurs_, p.
87. See also: _Smithsonian Rept._, 1866, p. 345; _Veytia_, _Hist. Ant.
Mej._, tom. i., p. 20; _Brasseur de Bourbourg_, _Hist. Nat. Civ._,
tom. i., pp. 23-4; _Simpson's Nar._, vol. i., p. 190; _Gregg's Com.
Prairies_, vol. ii., pp. 250-1; _Macfie's Vanc. Isl._, pp. 426-7;
_Saint-Amant_, _Voyages_, p. 245; _Malte-Brun_, _Précis de la Géog._,
tom. vi., pp. 290, 295-6; _Warden_, _Recherches_, pp. 118-36;
_Macgregor's Progress of Amer._, vol. i., p. 24; _Mühlenpfordt_,
_Mejico_, tom. i., p. 230; _Dodge_, in _Ind. Aff. Rept._, 1869, p.
590; _Whymper's Alaska_, pp. 278-85; _Prichard's Nat. Hist. Man_, vol.
ii., p. 519; _Mitchill_, in _Amer. Antiq. Soc., Transact._, vol. i.,
pp. 325-32; _Vigne's Travels_, vol. ii., p. 36; _Latham's Man and his
Migrations_, p. 122; _Sampson_, in _Hist. Mag._, vol. v., p. 213.
_Robertson's Hist. Amer._, vol. i., pp. 280-1; _Snowden's Hist. N. and
S. Amer._, p. 200; _Stratton's Mound-Builders_, MS.; _Bradford's Amer.
Antiq._, pp. 208, 215-16, 432; _Pickering's Races of Man_, in _U. S.
Ex. Ex._, vol. ix., pp. 287-8; _Carver's Trav._, pp. 209-13;
_Kennedy's Probable Origin_; _Davis' Discovery of New Eng._;
_Hellwald_, in _Smithsonian Rept._, 1866, p. 334. Herrera argued that
as there were no natives in America of a color similar to those of the
politer nations of Europe, they must be of Asiatic origin; that it is
unreasonable to suppose them to have been driven thither by stress of
weather; that the natives for a long time had no king, therefore no
historiographer, therefore they are not to be believed in this
statement, or in any other. The clear conclusions drawn from these
pointed arguments is, that the Indian race descended from men who
reached America by the nearness of the land. 'Y asi mas verisimilmente
se concluye que la generacion, y poblacion de los Indios, ha procedido
de hombres que passaron a las Indias Ocidentales, por la vezindad de
la tierra, y se fueron estendiendo poco a poco;' but from whence they
came, or by what route the royal historiographer offers no conjecture.
_Hist. Gen._, dec. i., lib. i., cap. vi.
[I-72] _Amer. Ethno. Soc., Transact._, vol. i., p. 179.
[I-73] _Quarterly Review_, vol. xxi., pp. 334-5. The communication
between Anáhuac and the Asiatic continent was merely the contact of
some few isolated Asiatics who had lost their way, and from whom the
Mexicans drew some notions of science, astrology, and some cosmogonic
traditions; and these Asiatics did not return home. _Chevalier_,
_Mexique_, pp. 59, 56-8; _Viollet-le-Duc_, in _Charnay_, _Ruines
Amér._, pp. 87-9; _Fossey_, _Mexique_, pp. 120-1; _Democratic Review_,
vol. xi., p. 617; _Lafond_, _Voyages_, p. 133.
[I-74] Deguignes writes: 'Les Chinois ont pénétré dans les pays
très-éloignés du côté de l'orient; j'ai examiné leur mesures, et elles
m'ont conduit vers les côtes de la Californie; j'ai conclu de-là
qu'ils avoient connu l'Amérique l'an 458 J. C.' He also attributes
Peruvian civilization to the Chinese. _Recherches sur les Navigations
des Chinois du côté de l'Amérique_, in _Mémoires de l'Académie des
Inscriptions_, tom. xvii. Paravey, in 1844, attempted to prove that
the province of Fousang was Mexico. _Domenech's Deserts_, vol. i., p.
51. 'In Chinese history we find descriptions of a vast country 20,000
le to the eastward across the great ocean, which, from the description
given, must be California and Mexico.' _Taylor_, in _Cal. Farmer_,
Sept. 12, 1862. 'L'histoire postérieure des Chinois donne à penser
qu'ils ont eu autrefois des flottes qui ont pu passer au Mexique par
les Phillippines.' _Farcy_, _Discours_ p. 46, in _Antiq. Mex._, tom.
i., div. i.
[I-75] A Chinese li is about one third of a mile.
[I-76] '_Fou sang_, en chinois et selon la prononciation japonaise
_Fouts sôk_, est l'arbrisseau que nous nommons _Hibiscus rosa
chinensis_,' _Klaproth_, _Recherches sur le pays de Fou Sang_, in
_Nouvelles Annales des Voy._, 1831, tom. li., p. 55, note. Others
suppose the fusang to be the maguey, and, indeed, it was used for much
the same purposes. It was, however, most probably, the mulberry;
_fu-soh_, the Japanese equivalent for the Chinese _fusang_, being
compounded of _fu_, to aid, and _soh_, the mulberry, a tree which
abounds in a wild state in the province of Yesso, and which has been
cultivated by royal command in other parts of Japan, where, as the
reader will presently see, Fusang was probably situated. Mr Brooks,
Japanese Consul in San Francisco, also tells me that Fu Sang is a name
used in Chinese poetry to mean Japan. In Japan it is also thus used,
and also used in trade marks, as 'first quality of Fu Sang silk
cocoons,' meaning Japanese cocoons.
[I-77] I follow Deguignes in this sentence; Klaproth has it: 'Ceux qui
peuvent recevoir leur grace sont envoyés à la première (méridionale),
ceux au contraire auxquels on ne veut pas l'accorder sont détenus dans
la prison du nord.' _Recherches_, in _Nouvelles Annales des Voy._,
1831, tom. li., p. 55.
[I-78] Deguignes translates: 'des habitants élèvent des biches comme
en Chine, et ils en tirent du beurre.'
[I-79] 'Il y a dans l'original _To Phou thao_. Deguignes ayant
décomposé le mot _Phou tao_, traduit: "on y trouve une grande quantité
de glayeuls et de pêches." Cependant le mot _Phou_ seul ne signifie
jamais _glayeul_, c'est le nom des joncs et autres espèces de roseaux
de marais, dont on se sert pour faire des nattes. _Thao_ est en effet
le nom de la pêche, mais le mot composé _Phou tao_ signifie en chinois
la vigne.' _Klaproth_, _Recherches_, in _Nouvelles Annales des Voy._,
1831, tom. li., pp. 57-8.
[I-80] 'Les images des Esprits,' &c.; _Id._, p. 59.
[I-81] 'Deguignes traduit: 'Pendant leurs prières ils exposent l'image
du défunt.' Le texte parle de _chin_ ou génies et non pas des ames des
défunts.' _Id._
[I-82] 'C'est une analogie curieuse qu'offre le pays à vignes de
Fousang (l'Amérique chinoise de Deguignes) avec le Vinland des
premières découvertes scandinaves sur les côtes orientales de
l'Amérique.' _Exam. Crit._, tom. ii., p. 63, note.
[I-83] _Nouv. Jour. Asiatique_, 1832, p. 335, quoted by _Humboldt_,
_Exam. Crit._, tom. ii., pp. 65-6.
[I-84] _Warden_, _Recherches_, p. 123.
[I-85] It is enough to look at an Aleut to recognize the Mongol.
_Wrangel_, in _Nouvelles Annales des Voy._, 1853, tom. cxxxvii., p.
213. 'The resemblance between north-west coast Indians and Chinese is
rather remarkable.' _Deans' Remains in B. Col._, MS. 'I have
repeatedly seen instances, both men and women, who in San Francisco
could readily be mistaken for Chinese--their almond-shaped eyes, light
complexion and long braided black hair giving them a marked
similarity.... An experience of nearly nine years among the coast
tribes, with a close observation and study of their characteristics,
has led me to the conclusion that these northern tribes (B. Col. and
surrounding region) are the only evidence of any exodus from the
Asiatic shore ever having reached our borders.' _Taylor_, in _Cal.
Farmer_, July 25, 1862. Grant, _Ocean to Ocean_, p. 304, says that the
Chinese and Indians resemble one another so much that were it not for
the queue and dress they would be difficult to distinguish. 'The
Pacific Indian is Mongolian in size and complexion, in the shape of
the face, and the eyes,' and he wants many of the manly
characteristics of the Eastern Indians. Morelet, _Voyage_, tom. i., p.
148, says of the Yucatan Indians, 'leur teint cuivré et quelquefois
jaunâtre présente un ensemble de caractères qui rapproche
singulièrement leur race de celle des tribus d'origine mongole.' This
point of physical resemblance is, however, denied by several writers;
thus Kneeland, _Wonders_, p. 53, says that though Americans have
generally been accepted as Mongolians, yet if placed side by side with
Chinese, hardly any resemblance will be found in physical character,
except in the general contour of their faces and in their straight
black hair; their mental characteristics are entirely opposite. Adair
writes: 'Some have supposed the Americans to be descended from the
_Chinese_: but neither their religion, laws, customs, &c., agree in
the least with those of the Chinese: which sufficiently proves that
they are not of that line.' He goes on to say that distance, lack of
maritime skill, etc., all disprove the theory. He also remarks that
the prevailing winds blow with little variation from east to west, and
therefore junks could not have been driven ashore. _Amer. Ind._, pp.
12-13. 'Could we hope that the monuments of Central and South America
might attract the attention and excite the interest of more American
scholars than hitherto, the theory of the Mongol origin of the Red-men
would soon be numbered among exploded hypotheses.' _Nott and Gliddon's
Indig. Races_, p. 188. 'MM. Spix et Martius ont remarqué la
ressemblance extraordinaire qui existe entre la physionomie des colons
Chinois et celle des Indiens. La figure des Chinois est, il est vrai,
plus petite. Ils ont le front plus large, les lèvres plus fines, et en
général les traits plus délicats et plus doux que ceux des sauvages de
l'Amérique. Cependant, en considérant la conformation de leur tête,
qui n'est pas oblongue, mais angulaire, et plutôt pointue, leur crâne
large, les sinus frontaux proéminents, le front bas, les os des joues
très saillants, leurs yeux petits et obliques, le nez
proportionnellement petit et épaté, le peu de poils garnissant leur
menton et les autres parties du corps, leur chevelure moins longue et
plate, la couleur jaunâtre ou cuivrée de leur peau, on retrouve les
traits physiques communs aux deux races.' _Warden_, _Recherches_, p.
123. The Americans certainly approach the Mongols and Malays in some
respects, but not in the essential parts of cranium, hair, and
profile. If we regard them as a Mongol branch, we must suppose that
the slow action of climate has changed them thus materially during a
number of centuries. _Malte-Brun_, _Précis de la Géog._, tom. vi., p.
289.
[I-86] This will be best shown by referring to Warden's comparison of
American, Chinese, and Tartar words. _Recherches_, pp. 125-6. The
Haidahs, are said, however, to have used words known to the Chinese.
_Deans' Remains in B. Col._, MS. Mr Taylor writes: 'The Chinese accent
can be traced throughout the Indian (Digger) language,' and
illustrates his assertion with a comparative vocabulary of Indian and
Chinese. _Cal. Farmer_, Sept. 12, 1862. The Chinese in California 'are
known to be able to converse with them (the Indians) in their
respective languages.'! _Cronise's California_, p. 31.
[I-87] Warden, _Recherches_, pp. 127-9, gives a long list of these
resemblances. See also _Ampère_, _Prom. en Amér._, tom. ii., p. 301;
_Prescott's Mex._, vol. iii., p. 396; _Faliés_, _Études Hist. sur les
Civilisations_, tom. i., pp. 380-1. Molina found (in Chili?)
inscriptions resembling Chinese. _M'Culloh's Researches on Amer._, pp.
171-2. Bossu found some similarity between the language of the Natchez
of Louisiana, and the Chinese. _Nouveaux Voyages aux Indes
Occidentales_, tom. i., let. xviii.; cited by _Warden_, _Recherches_,
p. 121. The last mentioned author also quotes a long list of analogies
between the written language of the Chinese and the gesture language
of the northern Indians, from a letter written by Wm Dunbar to the
Philosophical Society of Philadelphia, and comments thereon.
_Recherches_, p. 176. Of the value of these philological proofs the
reader may judge by the following fair sample: 'the Chinese call a
slave, shungo; and the Naudowessie Indians, whose language from their
little intercourse with the Europeans is the least corrupted, term a
dog, shungush. The former denominate one species of their tea,
shousong; the latter call their tobacco, shousassau.' _Carver's
Trav._, p. 214. The supposition of Asiatic derivation is assumed by
Smith Barton on the strength of certain similarities of words, but
Vater remarks, these prove only partial migrations. _Malte-Brun_,
_Précis de la Géog._, tom. vi., p. 290. 'On the whole, more analogies
(etymol.) have been found with the idioms of Asia, than of any other
quarter. But their amount is too inconsiderable to balance the
opposite conclusion inferred by a total dissimilarity of structure.'
_Prescott's Mex._, vol. iii., p. 396. Barton, _New Views_, gives a
comparative vocabulary to show that Asiatic traces have been
discovered in the languages of South as well as North America. Latham,
_Man and His Migrations_, p. 185, has proofs that 'the Kamskadale, the
Koriak, the Aino-Japanese, and the Korean are the Asiatic languages
most like those of America.' 'Dans quatre-vingt-trois langues
américaines examinées par MM. Barton et Vater, on en a reconnu environ
cent soixante-dix dont les racines semblent être les mêmes; et il est
facile de se convaincre que cette analogie n'est pas accidentelle,
qu'elle ne repose pas simplement sur l'harmonie imitative, ou sur
cette égalité de conformation dans les organes, qui rend presque
identiques les premiers sons articulés par les enfans. Sur cent
soixante-dix mots qui ont des rapports entre eux, il y en a trois
cinquièmes qui rappellent le mantchou, le tungouse, le mongol et le
samojède, et deux cinquièmes qui rappellent les langues celtique et
tschoude, le basque, le copte et le congo.' _Humboldt_, _Vues_, tom.
i., pp. 27-8. Prichard, _Nat. Hist. Man_, vol. ii., pp. 512-13, thinks
that the Otomí monosyllabic language may belong to Chinese and
Indo-Chinese idioms; but Latham, _Varieties of Man_, p. 408, doubts
its isolation from other American tongues, and thinks that it is
either anaptotic or imperfectly agglutinate.
[I-88] _Nouveaux Voyages aux Indes Occidentales_, tom. i., lettre
xviii. Cited by _Warden_, _Recherches_, p. 121.
[I-89] _Trav._, p. 213.
[I-90] _Hist. of Louisiana_, London 1774.
[I-91] Speaking of the ruins of Central America, Stephens says: 'if
their (the Chinese) ancient architecture is the same with their
modern, it bears no resemblance whatever to these unknown ruins.'
_Cent. Amer._, vol. ii., p. 438.
[I-92] _Humboldt_, _Vues_, tom. i., p. 236. Speaking of the Popol Vuh,
Viollet-le-Duc says: 'Certains passages de ce livre ont avec les
histoires héroïques de l'Inde une singulière analogie.' In _Charnay_,
_Ruines Amér._, p. 40. See also, _Brasseur de Bourbourg_, _Quatre
Lettres_, pp. 212-13, 236-42.
[I-93] _Geschichte der Religion Jesu Christi_, tom. i., p. 426. Quoted
in _Humboldt_, _Vues_, tom. i., p. 256.
[I-94] _Vues_, tom. i., p. 257. Tschudi, again, writes: 'As among the
East Indians, an undefined being, Bramah, the divinity in general, was
shadowed forth in the Trimurti, or as a God under three forms, viz.,
_Bramah_, _Vishnu_, and _Sciva_; so also the Supreme Being was
venerated among the Indians of Mexico, under the three forms of _Ho_,
_Huitzilopoctli_, and _Tlaloc_, who formed the Mexican Trimurti. The
attributes and worship of the Mexican goddess Mictanihuatl preserve
the most perfect analogy with those of the sanguinary and implacable
Kali; as do equally the legends of the Mexican divinity Teayamiqui
with the formidable Bhavani; both these Indian deities were wives of
Siva-Rudra. Not less surprising is the characteristic likeness which
exists between the pagodas of India and the Teocallis of Mexico, while
the idols of both temples offer a similitude in physiognomy and
posture which cannot escape the observation of any one who has been in
both countries. The same analogy is observed between the oriental
Trimurti and that of Peru; thus Con corresponds to Bramah, Pachacamac
to Vishnu, and Huiracocha to Siva. The Peruvians never dared to erect
a temple to their ineffable God, whom they never confounded with other
divinities; a remarkable circumstance, which reminds us of similar
conduct among a part of the inhabitants of India as to Bramah, who is
the Eternal, the abstract God. Equally will the study of worship in
the two hemispheres show intimate connection between the existence and
attributes of the _devadasis_ (female servants of the Gods) and the
Peruvian virgins of the Sun.
All these considerations, and many others, which from want of space we
must omit, evidently prove that the greater part of the Asiatic
religions, such as that of _Fo_, in China, of _Buddha_, in Japan, of
_Sommono-Cadom_, in India, the _Lamaism_ of Thibet, the doctrine of
_Dschakdschiamuni_ among the Mongols and Calmucs; as well as the
worship of _Quetzalcoatl_, in Mexico, and of _Manco-Capac_, in Peru,
are but so many branches of the same trunk; whose root the labors of
archæology and modern philosophy have not been able to determine with
certainty, notwithstanding all the discussion, perseverance, sagacity,
and boldness of hypothesis, among the learned men who have been
occupied in investigating the subject.' After remarking upon the
marvelous analogy between Christianity and Buddhism as found to exist
by the first missionaries to Thibet, he goes on: 'Not less, however,
was the surprise of the first Spanish ecclesiastics, who found, on
reaching Mexico, a priesthood as regularly organized as that of the
most civilized countries. Clothed with a powerful and effective
authority which extended its arms to man in every condition and in all
the stages of his life, the Mexican priests were mediators between man
and the Divinity; they brought the newly born infants into the
religious society, they directed their training and education, they
determined the entrance of the young men into the service of the
State, they consecrated marriage by their blessing, they comforted the
sick and assisted the dying.' Finally, Tschudi finds it necessary to
'insist on this point, that Quetzalcoatl and Mango Capac were both
missionaries of the worship of Bramah or Buddha, and probably of
different sects.' _Peruvian Antiq._, pp. 17-20. Domenech, _Deserts_,
vol. i., p. 52, has this passage, nearly word for word the same as
Tschudi, but does not mention the latter author's name. There is 'a
remarkable resemblance between the religion of the Aztecs and the
Buddhism of the Chinese.' _Gentleman's Magazine_; quoted in
_Washington Standard_, Oct. 30, 1869. In Quetzalcoatl may be
recognized one of the austere hermits of the Ganges, and the custom of
lacerating the body, practiced by so many tribes, has its counterpart
among the Hindoos. _Priest's Amer. Antiq._, p. 211. Quetzalcoatl, like
Buddha, preached against human sacrifice. _Humboldt_, _Vues_, tom. i.,
p. 265.
[I-95] 'Il est très-remarquable aussi que parmi les hiéroglyphes
mexicains on ne découvre absolument rien qui annonce le symbole de la
force génératrice, ou le culte du _lingam_, qui est répandu dans
l'Inde et parmi toutes les nations qui ont eu des rapports avec les
Hindoux.' _Vues_, tom. i., p. 275.
[I-96] _Recherches Asiatiques_, tom. i., p. 215.
[I-97] _Vues_, tom. i., p. 276.
[I-98] See vol. iii., p. 501, et seq.; see also _Brasseur de
Bourbourg_, _Quatre Lettres_, pp. 202-8.
[I-99] See vol. iv., p. 163, for cut of this ornament. 'D'abord j'ai
été frappé de la ressemblance qu'offrent ces étranges figures des
édifices mayas avec la tête de l'éléphant. Cet appendice, placé entre
deux yeux, et dépassant la bouche de presque toute sa longueur, m'a
semblé ne pouvoir être autre chose que l'image de la trompe d'un
proboscidien, car le museau charnu et saillant du tapir n'est pas de
cette longueur. J'ai observé aussi que les édifices placés à l'Est des
autres ruines offrent, aux quatre coins, trois têtes symboliques
armées de trompes tournées en l'air; or, le tapir n'a nullement la
faculté d'élever ainsi son museau allongé; cette dernière
considération me semble décisive.' _Waldeck_, _Voy. Pitt._, p. 74.
'There is not the slightest ground for supposing that the Mexicans or
Peruvians were acquainted with any portion of the Hindoo mythology;
but since their knowledge of even one species of animal peculiar to
the Old Continent, and not found in America, would, if distinctly
proved, furnish a convincing argument of a communication having taken
place in former ages between the people of the two hemispheres, we
cannot but think that the likeness to the head of a rhinoceros, in the
thirty-sixth page of the Mexican painting preserved in the collection
of Sir Thomas Bodley; the figure of a trunk resembling that of an
elephant, in other Mexican paintings; and the fact, recorded by Simon,
that what resembled the rib of a camel (la costilla de un camello) was
kept for many ages as a relic, and held in great reverence, in one of
the provinces of Bogota,--are deserving of attention. _Kingsborough's
Mex. Antiq._, vol. viii., p. 27. 'On croit reconnoître, dans le masque
du sacrificateur (in one of the groups represented in the _Codex
Borgianus_) la trompe d'un éléphant ou de quelque pachyderme qui s'en
rapproche par la configuration de la tête, mais dont la mâchoire
supérieure est garnie de dents incisives. Le groin du tapir se
prolonge sans doute un peu plus que le museau de nos cochons; mais il
y a bien loin de ce groin du tapir à la trompe figurée dans le _Codex
Borgianus_. Les peuples d'Aztlan, originaires d'Asie, avoient-ils
conservé quelques notions vagues sur les éléphans, ou, ce qui me
paroît bien moins probable, leurs traditions remontoient-elles jusqu'à
l'époque où l'Amérique étoit encore peuplée de ces animaux
gigantesques, dont les squelettes pétrifiés se trouvent enfouis dans
les terrains marneux, sur le dos même des Cordillères mexicaines?
Peut-être aussi existe-t-il, dans la partie nord-ouest du nouveau
continent, dans des contrées qui n'ont été visitées ni par Hearne, ni
par Mackensie, ni par Lewis, un pachyderme inconnu, qui, par la
configuration de sa trompe, tient le milieu entre l'éléphant et le
tapir.' _Humboldt_, _Vues_, tom. i., pp. 254-5.
[I-100] _Squier's Observations on Memoirs of Dr Zestermann_, in _Amer.
Ethno. Soc., Transact._, April, 1851; _Atwater_, in _Amer. Antiq.
Soc., Transact._, vol. i., pp. 196-267.
[I-101] In this, as in all other theories, but little distinction is
made between the introduction of foreign culture, and the actual
origin of the people. It would be absurd, however, to suppose that a
few ships' crews, almost, if not quite, without women, cast
accidentally ashore in Peru in the thirteenth century, should in the
fifteenth be found to have increased to a mighty nation, possessed of
a civilization quite advanced, yet resembling that of their mother
country so slightly as to afford only the most faint and far-fetched
analogies.
[I-102] Manco 'afterwards received from his subjects the title of
"Capac," which means sole Emperor, splendid, rich in virtue.'
_Ranking's Hist. Researches_, p. 56. He cites for this, _Garcilasso de
la Vega_, book i., chap. xxvi., a work on which he relies for most of
his information.
[I-103] _A relation of two Russe Cossacks trauailes, out of Siberia to
Catay_, &c., in _Purchas his Pilgrimes_, vol. iii., p. 798.
[I-104] _Ranking's Hist. Researches_, pp. 171-2.
[I-105] Quoted by Ranking, _Hist. Researches_, p. 183, from Abul Ghazi
Bahadur, _History of the Turks, Moguls, and Tartars_, vol. i., p. 11.
[I-106] _Du Halde_, _Empire of China_, vol. i., p. 275. Quoted by
Ranking, _Hist. Researches_, p. 197-8.
[I-107] Concerning the Mongolian origin of the Peruvians, see:
_Ranking's Hist. Researches_. Almost all other writers who have
touched on this subject, are indebted to Mr Ranking for their
information and ideas. See also _Humboldt_, _Exam. Crit._, tom. ii.,
p. 67, et seq.; _Malte-Brun_, _Précis de la Géog._, tom. vi., pp.
293-4; _Forster's Voyage Round the World_. Grotius thinks that the
Peruvians must be distinct from other American people, since they are
so acute, and believes them, therefore, to be descended from the
Chinese. Wrecks of Chinese junks have been found on the coast. Both
adore the sun, and call the king the 'son of the sun.' Both use
hieroglyphics which are read from above downwards. Manco Capac was a
Chinaman who gave these settlers a government founded on the Chinese
system. _Montanus_, _Nieuwe Weereld_, pp. 32-3. De Laet, replying to
these arguments, considers that the acuteness of the Peruvians does
not approach that of the Chinese. Nowhere in Peru have the cunning and
artistic works of Chinese artificers been seen. The Chinese junks were
too frail to withstand a storm that could drive them across the
Pacific. And if the voyage were intentional they would have sought
nearer land than the coasts of Mexico or Peru. The religion of the two
countries differs materially; so does their writing. Manco Capac was a
native Peruvian who ruled four hundred years before the coming of the
Spaniards. _Novus Orbis_, in _Id._, pp. 33-4. Mr Cronise, in his
_Natural Wealth of California_, p. 28, et seq., is more positive on
this subject than any writer I have yet encountered. I am at a loss to
know why this should be, because I have before me the works that he
consulted, and I certainly find nothing to warrant his very strong
assertions. I quote a few passages from his work. 'The investigations
of ethnologists and philologists who have studied the Hindoo, Chinese,
and Japanese annals during the present century, have brought to light
such a chain of evidence as to place beyond doubt that the inhabitants
of Mexico and California, discovered by the Spaniards, were of
Mongolian origin.' Hindoo, Chinese, and Japanese annals all agree that
the fleet of Kublai Khan, son of Genghis Khan, was wrecked on the
coast of America. 'There are proofs clear and certain, that Mango
Capac, the founder of the Peruvian nation, was the son of Kublai Khan
... and that the ancestors of Montezuma, of Mexico, who were from
Assam, arrived about the same time.... Every custom of the Mexicans,
described by their Spanish conquerors, proves their Asiatic origin....
The strange hieroglyphics found in so many places in Mexico, and from
California to Canada, are all of Mongolian origin'.... 'Humboldt, many
years ago, conjectured that these hieroglyphics were of Tartar origin.
It is now positively known that they are.... The armor belonging to
Montezuma, which was obtained by Cortez and is now in the museum at
Madrid, is known to be of Asiatic manufacture, and to have belonged to
one of Kublai Khan's generals.' It is unnecessary to multiply
quotations, or to further criticise a work so grossly misleading. The
following unique assertion is a fair specimen of Mr Cronise's vagaries
when treading on unfamiliar ground: '"Alta," the prefix which
distinguishes Upper from Lower California, is a word of Mongolian
origin, signifying "gold."' The most superficial knowledge of Spanish
or of the history of California, would have told Mr Cronise that
'alta' simply means 'high,' or 'upper,' and that the name was applied
to what was originally termed 'New' California, in contradistinction
to 'Baja' or 'Lower' California.
[I-108] This relation, says Ranking, 'has naturally enough been
considered by Robertson and others as a ridiculous fable; and any
reader would be inclined to treat it as such, were it not accounted
for by the invasion of Japan, and the very numerous and convincing
proofs of the identity of the Mongols and the Incas.' _Hist.
Researches_, p. 55. He thinks that the giants were the Mongolian
invaders, mounted upon the elephants which they brought with them.
'The elephants,' he says, 'would, no doubt, be defended by their usual
armor on such an extraordinary occasion, and the space for the eyes
would appear monstrous. The remark about the beards, &c., shows that
the man and the elephant were considered as one person. It is a new
and curious _folio_ edition of the Centaurs and Lapithæ; and we cannot
wonder that, on such a novel occasion, Cape St. Helen's did not
produce an American Theseus.' _Id._, pp. 53-4.
[I-109] See _Ranking's Hist. Researches_, p. 56, et seq.; _Warden_,
_Recherches_, pp. 187-9.
[I-110] _Origin of the Japanese Race, and their Relation to the
American Continent_, MS.
[I-111] See report of a lecture read by Charles Wolcott Brooks before
the California Academy of Science, in _Daily Alta California_, May 4,
1875; _San Francisco Evening Bulletin_, same date.
[I-112] See report of paper submitted by Mr Brooks to the California
Academy of Sciences, in _San Francisco Evening Bulletin_, March 2,
1875. In this report the details and date of each wreck are given. The
author of the paper assures me that he has records of over one hundred
such disasters. Every one of these wrecks, when examined, proved to be
Japanese, and not one Chinese. See also _Irving's Bonneville's
Adven._, p. 427; _Smith's Human Species_, p. 239; _Roquefeuil_, in
_Nouvelles Annales des Voy._, 1823, tom. xviii., pp. 248-9;
_Anderson_, in _Hist. Mag._, vol. vii., pp. 80-1; _Lassepas_, _Baja
Cal._, pp. 45-6.
[I-113] _Id._ _Lord's Nat._, vol. ii., pp. 216-7. 'Looking only at the
_forms_ and endings of the words, their _ring_ and _sounds_ when
uttered, we could not but notice the striking similarity, in these
respects, between the proper names as found on the map of Japan, and
many of the names given to places, rivers, etc., in this country.'
(America.) _Rockwell_, in _Hist. Mag._, n. s., vol. iii., p. 141.
[I-114] There were in California at the time of the Conquest, Indians
of various races, some of the Japanese type. _Vallejo_, _Hist. Cal._,
MS., tom. i., p. 3; _Vallejo_, _Remin. Cal._, MS., p. 6. The Aleutian
Islanders resemble the Japanese in various respects. _Simpson's Nar._,
vol. ii., p. 228. Priest, _Amer. Antiq._, p. 214, thinks that
Quetzalcoatl may be regarded as a Japanese, as comparatively white and
bearded.
[I-115] Introduction to _Charnay_, _Ruines Amér._, pp. 28-31.
[I-116] _Nieuwe Weereld_, p. 39.
[I-117] _Lord's Nat._, vol. ii., p. 217.
[I-118] See: _Ampère_, _Prom. en Amér._, tom. ii., pp. 300-4;
_Atwater_, in _Amer. Antiq. Soc., Transact._, vol. i., pp. 212-14,
338-42; _Montanus_, _Nieuwe Weereld_, pp. 38-42; _Priest's Amer.
Antiq._, pp. 58-9; _Religious Cer. and Cust._, vol. iii., pp. 4-10;
_Robertson's Hist. Amer._, vol. i., pp. 277-81; _Vigne's Travels_,
vol. ii., pp. 37-8; _Gage's New Survey_, p. 162; _Domenech's Deserts_,
vol. i., pp. 7-9; _Farcy_, _Discours_, in _Antiq. Mex._, tom. i., div.
i., p. 45; _Humboldt_, _Essai Pol._, tom. i., pp. 79-80; _Adair's
Amer. Ind._, pp. 12-13; _Norman's Rambles by Land and Water_, pp.
215-16; _Humboldt_, _Vues_, tom. i., p. 267; _Vater_, _Ueber Amer.
Bevölkerung_, pp. 155-69, cited in _Humboldt_, _Vues_, tom. i., p.
175; _Laplace_, _Circumnav._, tom. vi., p. 156; _Warden_,
_Recherches_, pp. 201-2; _Josselyn's Two Voyages_; _Williamson's
Observations on Climate_; _Hill's Antiq. of Amer._; _Ixtlilxochitl_,
_Relaciones_, in _Kingsborough's Mex. Antiq._, vol. ix., pp. 392-3,
450; _Foster's Pre-Hist. Races_, pp. 334-5; _Volney's View_; _Bossu_,
_Nouveaux Voy._; _Slight's Indian Researches_; _Carver's Trav._, pp.
187-96, 208-19; _Fontaine's How the World was Peopled_, pp. 241-5;
_Las Casas_, _Hist. Apologética_, cap. ccix., quoted in
_Kingsborough's Mex. Antiq._, vol. viii., pp. 398-9; _Delafield's
Antiq. Amer._, pp. 13-104; _Malte-Brun_, _Précis de la Géog._, tom.
vi., pp. 293-4; _Monglave_, in _Antiq. Mex._, tom. i., div. i., p. 60;
_Heylyn's Cosmog._, p. 947; _Norman's Rambles in Yuc._, p. 174.
[I-119] _Ensayo de un Estudio comparativo._
[I-120] _Delafield's Antiq. Amer._, p. 57.
[I-121] _Ranking's Hist. Researches_, p. 356.
[I-122] See vol. iv., pp. 88, 95-6, for further description, also plan
of Copan ruins, p. 85, for location of vault. Jones, commenting on the
above, remarks: 'This last sentence brings us to a specimen of Gem
engraving, the most ancient of all the antique works of Art. Not only
is the death "Chamber" identical with that of Egypt, but also the very
way of reaching it--viz., first, by ascending the pyramidal base, and
then descending, and so entering the Sepulchre! This could not be
accidental,--the builders of that pyramidal Sepulchre must have had a
knowledge of Egypt.' _Hist. Anc. Amer._, pp. 116-17. Stephens, who in
his first volume of travels in Central America, p. 144, describes this
vault, writes in vol. ii., pp. 439-40: 'The pyramids of Egypt are
known to have interior chambers, and, whatever their other uses, to
have been intended and used as sepulchres. These (American pyramids),
on the contrary, are of solid earth and stone. No interior chambers
have ever been discovered, and probably none exist.' Mr Jones
criticises Mr Stephens very severely for this apparent contradiction,
but it is customary with Mr Jones to tilt blindly at whatever
obstructs his theories. Stephens doubtless refers in this passage to
such chambers as would lead one to suppose that the pyramid was built
as a token of their presence. Löwenstern is very positive that the
Mexican pyramid was not intended for sepulchral purposes. _Mexique_,
p. 274. Clavigero is of the same opinion: 'quelli degli Egizj erano
per lo più vuoti; quelli de' Messicani massiccj; questi servivano di
basi a' loro Santuarj; quelli di sepolcri de' Re.' _Storia Ant. del
Messico_, tom. iv., pp. 19-20. Foster, on the other hand, writes:
'There are those who, in the truncated pyramids, see evidences of
Egyptian origin. The pyramids, like the temple-mounds, were used for
sepulchres, but here the analogy ends.' _Pre-Hist. Races_, p. 187.
[I-123] See vol. iv., p. 474.
[I-124] _Stephens' Cent. Amer._, vol. ii., p. 440.
[I-125] The reader can compare the various accounts of pyramidal
structures given in vol. iv. on this point. See heading 'pyramid,' in
Index.
[I-126] _Stephens' Cent. Amer._, vol. ii., p. 439.
[I-127] _Antiq. Amer._, p. 56.
[I-128] Humboldt reviews the points of resemblance and comes to the
conclusion that they afford no foundation upon which to base a theory
of Egyptian origin. _Vues_, tom. i., pp. 120-4. 'There is much in the
shape, proportions and sculptures of this pyramid (Xochicalco) to
connect its architects with the Egyptians.' _Mayer's Mex. as it Was_,
p. 186. Bradford finds that some 'of the Egyptian pyramids, and those
which with some reason it has been supposed are the most ancient, are
precisely similar to the Mexican Teocalli.' But he only sees Egyptian
_traces_ in this; he shows that similar pyramidal structures have been
found in very many parts of the world; and he believes the Americans
to have originated from many sources and stocks. See _Amer. Antiq._,
p. 423.
[I-129] See vol. iv., chap. v., vii., and x. Quoting from Molina,
_Hist. Chili_, tom. i., notes, p. 169, M'Culloh writes: 'Between the
hills of Mendoza and La Punta, upon a low range of hills, is a pillar
of stone one hundred and fifty feet high, and twelve in diameter.'
'This,' he adds, 'very much reminds us of the pillar and obelisks of
ancient Egypt.' _Researches_, pp. 171-2. Jones, _Hist. Anc. Amer._,
pp. 122-3, is very confident about the obelisk. He asks: 'What are the
Obelisks of Egypt? Are they not square columns for the facility of
Sculpture? And of what form are the isolated columns at Copan? Are
they not square, and for the same purpose of facility in Sculpture
with which they are covered, and with workmanship "as fine as that of
Egypt?"... The columns of Copan stand detached and solitary,--the
Obelisks of Egypt do the same, and both are square (or four-sided) and
covered with the art of the Sculptor. The analogy of being derived
from the Nile is perfect,--for in what other Ruins but those of Egypt,
and Ancient America, is the square sculptured Column to be found?'
[I-130] _Essai Pol._, tom. i., p. 265. Notwithstanding certain points
of resemblance, says Prescott, 'the Palenque architecture has little
to remind us of the Egyptian, or of the Oriental. It is, indeed, more
conformable, in the perpendicular elevation of the walls, the moderate
size of the stones, and the general arrangement of the posts, to the
European. It must be admitted, however, to have a character of
originality peculiar to itself.' _Mex._, vol. iii., pp. 407-8.
[I-131] There is a plate showing an Aztec priestess in Delafield's
_Antiq. Amer._, p. 61, which, if correctly drawn, certainly presents a
head-dress strikingly Egyptian. The same might almost be said of a cut
in vol. iv. of this work, p. 562, and, indeed, of several other cuts
in the same volume. Mr Stephens, _Cent. Amer._, vol. ii., p. 441,
gives, for the sake of comparison, a plate representing two specimens
of Egyptian sculpture; one from the side of the great monument at
Thebes known as the Vocal Memnon, and the other from the top of the
fallen obelisk at Carnac. 'I think,', he writes, 'by comparison with
the engravings before presented, it will be found that there is no
resemblance whatever. If there be any at all striking, it is only that
the figures are in profile, and this is equally true of all good
sculpture in bas-relief.' He happens, however, here, to have selected
two Egyptian subjects which almost find their counterparts in America.
In the preceding volume of this work, p. 333, is given a cut of what
is called the 'tablet of the cross' at Palenque. In this we see a
cross, and perched upon it a bird, to which (or to the cross) two
human figures in profile, apparently priests, are making an offering.
In Mr Stephens' representation from the Vocal Memnon we find almost
the same thing, the differences being, that instead of an ornamented
Latin cross, we have here a _crux commissa_, or _patibulata_; that
instead of one bird there are two, not on the cross but immediately
above it; and that the figures, though in profile and holding the same
general positions, are dressed in a different manner, and are
apparently binding the cross with the lotus instead of making an
offering to it; in Mr Stephens' representation from the obelisk of
Carnac, however, a priest is evidently making an offering to a large
bird perched upon an altar, and here, again, the human figures occupy
the same position. The hieroglyphs, though the characters are of
course different, are, it will be noticed, disposed upon the stone in
much the same manner. The frontispiece of Stephens' _Cent. Amer._,
vol. ii., described on p. 352, represents the tablet on the back wall
of the altar, casa No. 3, at Palenque. Once more here are two priests
clad in all the elaborate insignia of their office, standing one on
either side of a table, or altar, upon which are erected two batons,
crossed in such a manner as to form a _crux decussata_, and supporting
a hideous mask. To this emblem they are each making an offering.
[I-132] Delafield, it is true, discerns a distinct analogy between the
hieroglyphs of Egypt and America. And the evidence he adduces is
absurd enough. 'Hieroglyphic writings,' he says, 'are necessarily of
three kinds, viz: phonetic, figurative, and symbolical.' He then goes
on to show at great length, that both in Egypt and in America all
three of these systems were used: hence, the resemblance. _Antiq.
Amer._, pp. 42-7. 'Les monumens du Palenque présentent des
inscriptions hiéroglyphiques qui ne paraissent pas différer des
hiéroglyphes de l'ancienne Thèbes.' _Giordan_, _Tehuantepec_, p. 57.
Jomard pronounces an inscription found at Grave Creek to be Lybian.
_Domenech's Deserts_, vol. i., pp. 411-12. Says M'Culloh: 'The _Game
of the Flyers_, we notice in this place, as M. Denon in the plates to
his Travels in Egypt, has given the copy of some figures taken from
the Egyptian hieroglyphics, which have every appearance of a similar
design with this Mexican amusement or ceremony.--The similarity of
device will be best seen, by comparing the plate given by Clavigero,
with the (lxiii. plate) of Denon's Atlas, &c.' _Researches on Amer._,
pp. 170-1. Priest, _Amer. Antiq._, p. 122, gives a comparative table
of Lybian characters, and others, which he affirms to have been found
at Otolum, or Palenque: the whole statement is, however, too
apocryphal to be worthy of further notice. See, also, a long letter
from Prof. Rafinesque to Champollion, 'on the Graphic Systems of
America, and the Glyphs of Otolum, or Palenque, in Central America,'
in _Id._, pp. 123-9. The hieroglyphics of Palenque and Tula encourage
the idea that they were founded by an Egyptian colony. _Juarros_,
_Hist. Guat._, p. 19.
[I-133] In a letter by Jomard, quoted by Delafield, we read: 'I have
also recognized in your memoir on the division of time among the
Mexican nations, compared with those of Asia, some very striking
analogies between the Toltec characters and institutions observed on
the banks of the Nile. Among these analogies there is one which is
worthy of attention. It is the use of the vague year of three hundred
and sixty-five days, composed of equal months, and of five
complementary days, equally employed at Thebes and Mexico, a distance
of three thousand leagues. It is true that the Egyptians had no
intercalation, while the Mexicans intercalated thirteen days every
fifty-two years. Still farther: intercalation was proscribed in Egypt,
to such a point that the kings swore, on their accession, never to
permit it to be employed during their reign. Notwithstanding this
difference, we find a very striking agreement in the length of the
duration of the solar year. In reality, the intercalation of the
Mexicans being thirteen days on each cycle of fifty-two years, comes
to the same thing as that of the Julian calendar, which is one day in
four years; and consequently supposes the duration of the year to be
three hundred and sixty-five days, six hours. Now such was the length
of the year among the Egyptians, since the sothic period was at once
one thousand four hundred and sixty solar years, and one thousand four
hundred and sixty-one vague years; which was, in some sort, the
intercalation of a whole year of three hundred and seventy-five days
every one thousand four hundred and sixty years. The property of the
sothic period--that of bringing back the seasons and festivals to the
same point of the year, after having made them pass successively
through every point--is undoubtedly one of the reasons which caused
the intercalation to be proscribed, no less than the repugnance of the
Egyptians for foreign institutions. Now it is remarkable that the same
solar year of three hundred and sixty-five days, six hours, adopted by
nations so different, and perhaps still more remote in their state of
civilization than in their geographical distance, relates to a real
astronomical period, and belongs peculiarly to the Egyptians.... The
fact of the intercalation (by the Mexicans) of thirteen days every
cycle, that is, the use of a year of three hundred and sixty-five days
and a quarter, is a proof that it was either borrowed from the
Egyptians, or that they had a common origin.' _Antiq. Amer._, pp.
52-3. 'On the 26th of February, the Mexican century begins, which was
celebrated from the time of Nabonassor, seven hundred and forty-seven
years before Christ, because the Egyptian priests conformably to their
astronomical observations had fixed the beginning of their month
_Toth_ and the commencement of their year at noon on that day; this
was verified by the Meridian of Alexandria, which was erected three
centuries after that epoch. Hence it has been contended there could
exist no doubt of the conformity of the Mexican with the Egyptian
calendar, for although the latter assigned twelve months of thirty
days each to the year, and added five days besides, in order that the
circle of three hundred and sixty-five days should recommence from the
same point; yet, notwithstanding the deviation from the Egyptian mode
in the division of the months and days, they yet maintained that the
Mexican method was conformable thereto, on account of the superadded
five days; with this only difference, that upon these the Americans
attended to no business, and therefore termed them Nemontemi or
useless, whereas the Egyptians celebrated, during that epoch, the
festival of the birth of their gods, as attested by Plutarch de Feide,
and Osiride. Upon the other hand it is asserted, that though the
Mexicans differed from the Egyptians by dividing their year into
eighteen months, yet, as they called the month Mextli Moon, they must
have formerly adopted the lunar month, agreeable to the Egyptian
method of dividing the year into twelve months of thirty days; but to
support this assertion no attempt has been made to ascertain the cause
why this method was laid aside. The analogy between the Mexican and
the Egyptian calendars is thus assumed to be undeniable. Besides what
has been here introduced, the same is attempted to be proved in many
other works which I pass over to avoid prolixity, and therefore only
mention that they may be found in Boturini, in La Idea del Universo,
by the abbé don Lorenza de Hervas, published in the Italian language,
in Clavigero's dissertations, and in a letter addressed to him by
Hervas, which he added to the end of his second volume.' _Cabrera_,
_Teatro_, in _Rio's Description_, pp. 103-5. See also: _Humboldt_,
_Vues_, tom. i., pp. 344, 348; _Clavigero_, _Storia Ant. del Messico_,
tom. iv., p. 20; _Malte-Brun_, _Précis de la Géog._, tom. vi., p.
295.
[I-134] I follow, chiefly, M. Warden's résumé of these accounts, as
being the fullest and clearest. _Recherches_, p. 406, et seq.
[I-135] _Hist. du Commerce_, cap. viii.
[I-136] Acosta compares the gold of Ophir with that of Hispaniola. He
entertains the opinion that Tarshish and Ophir are distant imaginary
places and not distinct countries, but imagines them to be somewhere
in the East Indies. 'Cur autem in Orientali potius India quam in hac
Occidentali Ophir fuisse existimem, illud caput est, quod ad nostrum
Peru non nisi infinito circuitu tota India Orientali & Sinarum regione
enauigata Salomonia clasis peruenire poterar.' _De Novi Orbis_, p. 36.
Ophir is supposed to be in India or Africa. _Robertson's Hist. Amer._,
vol. i., p. 7. Crowe, _Cent. Amer._, p. 65, considers the probability
of Ophir and Tarshish being on the west coast of America. The
Phœnician '_Ophir_, or _Ofor_, which means, in their ancient language,
the _Western country_, was Mexico and Central America, the land of
gold.' _Fontaine's How the World was Peopled_, pp. 259-60. On p. 162,
he says that the best authorities, Volney, Bochart, Michaelis, and
Forster, suppose Ophir to have been situated on the Persian Gulf. The
Phœnician Ophir was Hayti, for Columbus thought that he could trace
the furnaces in which the gold had been refined. _Carver's Trav._, p.
192. Kingsborough, _Mex. Antiq._, vol. vi., pp. 184-5, considers the
position of Ophir, but is undecided as to its position. Ens, _West und
Ost Indischer Lustgart_, pp. 5-8, disagreeing with Vatablus and
Stephanus, can find no resemblance to Ophir in Hayti or Peru, and
comes to the conclusion that Ophir lay somewhere in the Old World,
most likely in the East Indies. This seems to be a plagiarism of
Acosta. See also _Gottfriedt_, _Newe Welt_, p. 3. Humboldt, _Exam.
Crit._, tom. ii., pp. 40-5, discusses the position of Ophir in
Veragua. Piñeda, _De Rebus Salomonis_, believes Ophir to have been
America. _Warden_, _Recherches_, p. 196. See also _Id._, pp. 106-7.
[I-137] _De Origine Gentium Americanarum_, lib. ii., cap. vi., vii.,
viii.
[I-138] 'Sur le cap Mollabat, au pied duquel on bâti ensuite le vieux
Tanger.' _Gosselin_, cited by Warden, _Recherches_, p. 107, note 8.
[I-139] 'Le cap Spartel, qui forme l'extrémité occidentale du
détroit.' _Id._, note 9.
[I-140] The Greek text of the _Periplus_ is printed in _Hudson's
Geographiæ veteris Scriptores Græci Minores_. It was also published by
Falconer, with an English translation and many notes--8vo., Lond.
1797. Many remarks upon Hanno's voyage are made by Compomanes,
_Antigüedad Marítima de la República de Cartago_, Madrid 1756;
Bougainville, _Mémoires de l'Académie des Inscriptions_, tom. xxvi.,
xxviii.; Gosselin, _Recherches sur la Géographie des Anciens_;
Rennell, _Geography of Herodotus_, vol. ii., pp. 409-43, 8vo.; and
Heeren, _Researches on the Ancient Nations of Africa_, vol. i., pp.
492-501.
[I-141] Or _Tiphysque_.
[I-142] 'Which is expressed by repeating four times from Valum-Votan
to Valum-Chivim, from Valum-Chivim to Valum-Votan.' _Cabrera_,
_Teatro_, in _Rio's Description_, p. 34. 'Valum-Votan, ou Terre de
Votan, serait suivant Ordoñez l'île de Cuba. Mais dans mon dernier
voyage, en contournant les montagnes qui environnent le plateau élévé
où est situé _Ciudad-Real_ de Chiapas, j'ai visité de grandes ruines
qui portent le nom de _Valum-Votan_, à deux lieues environ du village
de _Teopixca_, situé à 7 l. de Cuidad-Real, et où Nuñez de la Vega dit
avoir encore trouvé, en 1696, les familles du nom de Votan.' _Brasseur
de Bourbourg_, _Popol Vuh_, p. lxxxviii.
[I-143] Brasseur's account, which is, he says, taken from certain
preserved fragments of Ordoñez' _Hist. del Cielo_, differs at this
point; it reads: 'il alla à Valum-Chivim, d'où il passa à la grande
ville, où il vit la maison de Dieu, que l'on était occupé à bâtir.'
This 'house of God,' he remarks in a note, was, 'suivant Ordoñez et
Nuñez de la Vega, le temple que Salomon était occupé à bâtir à
Jérusalem.' After this, he goes on, Votan went 'à la cité antique, où
il vit, de ces propres yeux, les ruines d'un grand édifice que les
hommes avaient érigé par le commandement de leur aïeul commun, afin de
pouvoir par là arriver au ciel.' In another note he remarks, 'Ordoñez
commentant ce passage y trouve tout naturellement la tour de Babel:
mais il s'indigne contre les Babyloniens, de ce qu'ils avaient eu la
mauvaise foi de dire à Votan que la tour avait été bâtie par ordre de
leur aïeul commun (Noé): "Il faut remarquer ici, dit-il, que les
Babyloniens n'ont fait que tromper Votan, en lui assurant que la tour
avait été construite par ordre de leur aïeul Noé, afin d'en faire un
chemin pour arriver au ciel: jamais certainement le saint patriarche
n'eut la moindre part dans la folie arrogante de Nemrod" (_Mémoire MS.
sur Palenqué_.) Nuñez de la Vega rapporte la même tradition sur Votan
et ses voyages (_Constitut. Diœces_, in Præamb., n. 34).' _Brasseur de
Bourbourg_, _Popol Vuh_, p. lxxxviii.
[I-144] _Cabrera_, _Teatro_, in _Rio's Description_, p. 34. I have
followed Cabrera's account because, unfortunately, Ordoñez' work is
not to be had. Brasseur gives a fuller account of Votan's adventures
than Cabrera, but he professes to draw his information from fragments
of Ordoñez' writings, and it is impossible to tell whether his extra
information is the result of his own imagination or of that of his
equally enthusiastic original. The learned Abbé relates that the men
with whom Votan conversed concerning the tower of Babel, assured him
'que cet édifice était le lieu où Dieu avait donné à chaque famille un
langage particulier. Il affirme qu'à son retour de la ville du temple
de Dieu, il retourna une première et une seconde fois à examiner tous
les souterrains par où il avait déjà passé, et les signes qui s'y
trouvaient. Il dit qu'on le fit passer par un chemin souterrain qui
traversait la terre et se terminait à la racine du ciel. A l'égard de
cette circonstance, il ajoute que ce chemin n'était autre qu'un trou
de serpent où il entra parce qu'il était un serpent.' _Popol Vuh_, p.
lxxxix. See farther, concerning Votan: _Carbajal Espinosa_, _Hist.
Mex._, tom. i., p. 165; _Juarros_, _Hist. Guat._, p. 208; _Clavigero_,
_Storia Ant. del Messico_, tom. i., pp. 150-1; _Boturini_, _Idea_, p.
115; _Levy_, _Nicaragua_, p. 4; _Tschudi's Peruvian Antiq._, pp.
11-15; _Priest's Amer. Antiq._, pp. 248-9; _Brasseur de Bourbourg_,
_Hist. Nat. Civ._, tom. i., pp. 43-5, 68-76; _Domenech's Deserts_,
vol. i., pp. 10-7. This last is merely a literal copy of Tschudi, to
whom, however, no credit is given.
[I-145] 'Ordoñez tire un argument du mot _chivim_, qu'il écrit aussi
_hivim_, pour rappeler le _chivim_ du pays des Hévéens de la
Palestine, d'où il fait sortir les ancêtres de Votan. Dans la langue
tzendale, qui était celle du livre attribué à Votan, la racine du mot
_chivin_ pourrait être _chib_ ou _chiib_, qui signifie _patrie_, ou
_ghib_ qui veut dire armadille.' _Brasseur de Bourbourg_, _Popol Vuh_,
p. lxxxviii., note.
[I-146] _Cabrera_, _Teatro_, in _Rio's Description_, pp. 47-53. It
seems that the supposed Phœnician descent of the Americans has served
as an excuse for the tyranny their conquerors exercised over them.
'Cursed be Canaan!' said Noah, 'A servant of servants shall he be unto
his brethren.' Montanus says that it is a mistake to term the
Phœnicians descendants of Canaan, for they are a Semitic people.
_Nieuwe Weereld_, p. 25.
[I-147] 'The strong Galleys, with sails and oars, and always before
the constant East-Wind and onward wave-current, would accomplish ten
miles an hour by day, and during the night, without the Rowers, six
miles an hour, and, equally dividing the twenty-four hours, would make
a run of 192 miles per day. Nautical proofs will show that in the
above calculation the power of the Trade-Winds [_i. e._ the
East-Winds] are _underrated_. The distance from Teneriffe to Florida
is about 3300 miles, which by the foregone data they would traverse in
seventeen and a quarter days. The Voyage may therefore with safety be
said to have been accomplished during an entire month, and that,
consequently the first landing of a branch of the human family in
Ancient America would be in the last month of Autumn, three hundred
and thirty-two years before the Christian Æra.'
[I-148] It would be impossible to give here the entire evidence with
which Mr Jones supports his theory. Suffice it to say that the
analogies he adduces are far-fetched in the extreme, and that his
premises are to a great extent grounded upon certain vague utterances
of Isaiah the prophet. His unbounded dogmatism, were it less strongly
marked, would render his work offensive and unreadable to those who
disagree with his opinions; as it is, it is simply ludicrous. I cannot
better express my opinion of the book than by using the words of the
distinguished _Américaniste_ Dr Müller: 'Ganz ohne Werth soll die in
London 1843 erschienene Schrift eines Engländers, George Jonas, über
die Urgeschichte des alten America sein.' _Amerikanische
Urreligionen_, p. 3.
[I-149] _Jones' Hist. Anc. Amer._, pp. 168-72.
[I-150] According to Mr Jones, Solomon's temple was built by Tyrian
workmen.
[I-151] Gebelin affirms enthusiastically: '"que cette inscription
vient d'arriver tout exprès du nouveau monde, pour confirmer ses idées
sur l'origine des peuples, et que l'on y voit, _d'une manière
évidente_, un monument phénicien, un tableau qui, sur le devant,
désigne une alliance entre les peuples américains et la nation
étrangère, arrivant, par des _vents du nord_, d'un pays riche et
industrieux."' Humboldt, however, commenting upon this, writes: 'J'ai
examiné avec soin les quatre dessins de la fameuse pierre de Taunton
River.... Loin d'y reconnoître un arrangement symétrique de lettres
simples ou de caractères syllabiques, je n'y vois qu'un dessin à peine
ébauché, et analogue à ceux que l'on a trouvés sur les rochers de la
Norwège.' _Vues_, tom. i., pp. 181-2. 'The history of this inscription
is scarcely surpassed, in the interest it has excited, or the novel
phases it has exhibited at successive epochs of theoretical
speculation, by any Perusinian, Eugubine, or Nilotic riddle. When the
taste of American antiquaries inclined towards Phœnician relics, the
Dighton inscription conformed to their opinions; and with changing
tastes it has proved equally compliant. In 1783 the Rev. Ezra Stiles,
D.D., President of Yale College, when preaching before the Governor
and State of Connecticut, appealed to the Dighton Rock, graven, as he
believed, in the old Punic or Phœnician character and language: in
proof that the Indians were of the accursed seed of Canaan, and were
to be displaced and rooted out by the European descendants of
Japhet!... So early as 1680 Dr. Danforth executed what he
characterized as "a faithful and accurate representation of the
inscription" on Dighton Rock. In 1712 the celebrated Dr. Cotton Mather
procured drawings of the same, and transmitted them to the Secretary
of the Royal Society of London, with a description, printed in the
_Philosophical Transactions_ for 1741, referring to it as "an
inscription in which are seven or eight lines, about seven or eight
feet long, and about a foot wide, each of them engraven with
unaccountable characters, _not like any known character_." In 1730,
Dr. Isaac Greenwood, Hollisian Professor at Cambridge, New England,
communicated to the Society of Antiquaries of London a drawing of the
same inscription, accompanied with a description which proves the
great care with which his copy was executed. In 1768, Mr. Stephen
Sewall, Professor of Oriental Languages at Cambridge, New England,
took a careful copy, the size of the original, and deposited it in the
Museum of Harvard University; and a transcript of this was forwarded
to the Royal Society of London, six years later, by Mr. James
Winthrop, Hollisian Professor of Mathematics. In 1786 the Rev. Michael
Lort, D.D., one of the Vice-Presidents of the Society of Antiquaries
of London, again brought the subject, with all its accumulated
illustrations, before that learned society; and Colonel Vallency
undertook to prove that the inscription was neither Phœnician nor
Punic, but Siberian. Subsequently, Judge Winthrops executed a drawing
in 1788; and again we have others by Judge Baylies and Mr. Joseph
Gooding in 1790, by Mr. Job Gardner in 1812; and finally, in 1830, by
a Commission appointed by the Rhode Island Historical Society, and
communicated to the Antiquaries of Copenhagen with elaborate
descriptions: which duly appear in their _Antiquitates Americanæ_, in
proof of novel and very remarkable deductions.' _Wilson's Prehist.
Man_, pp. 403-5. See also _Pidgeon's Trad._, p. 20.
[I-152] 'Il est assez remarquable que, sur sept caractères, aucun ne
s'y trouve répété plusieurs fois.' _Vues_, tom. i., pp. 183-4, with
cut of part of inscription.
[I-153] See _Schoolcraft_, in _Amer. Ethno. Soc., Transact._, vol. i.,
pp. 386-97, for full account of this stone, with cuts. See also
_Wilson's Prehist. Man_, pp. 408, et seq.
[I-154] For this statement I have only newspaper authority, however.
'Die "Amerika," ein in Bogota, Neu Granada, erschienenes Journal,
kündigt eine Entdeckung an, die so seltsam ist, dass sie der
Bestätigung bedarf, ehe man ihr Glauben schenken kann. Don Joaquim de
Costa soll danach auf einem seiner Güter ein steinernes Monument
entdeckt haben, das von einer kleinen Colonie Phönizier aus Sidonia im
Jahre 9 oder 10 der Regierung Hiranus, eines Zeitgenossen Salomons,
ungefähr zehn Jahrhunderte vor der christlichen Aera errichtet wurde.
Der Block hat eine Inschrift von acht Linien, die in schönen
Buchstaben, aber ohne Trennung der Worte oder Punctation geschrieben
sind. In der Uebersetzung soll die Inschrift besagen, dass jene Männer
des Landes Canarien sich im Hafen Apiongaber (Bay-Akubal) einschifften
und nach zwölfmonatiger Fahrt von dem Lande Egypten (Afrika) durch
Strömungen fortgeführt, in Guayaquil in Peru landeten. Der Stein soll,
wie es heisst, die Namen der Reisenden tragen.' _Hamburg Reform_, Oct.
24, 1873. See farther, concerning inscriptions: _Torquemada_, _Monarq.
Ind._, tom. i., p. 29; _Stratton's Mound-Builders_, MS., p. 13;
_Priest's Amer. Antiq._, p. 121.
[I-155] See particularly _Melgar_, in _Soc. Mex. Geog., Boletin_, 2da
época, tom. iii., p. 112, et seq.; and _Jones' Hist. Anc. Amer._, p.
154, et seq.; _Baldwin's Anc. Amer._, pp. 185-6.
[I-156] See vol. iv. of this work, p. 118.
[I-157] _Melgar_, in _Soc. Mex. Geog., Boletin_, 2da época, tom. iii.,
pp. 110-11.
[I-158] See farther, concerning Phœnician and Carthaginian theories:
_Torquemada_, _Monarq. Ind._, tom. i., pp. 28-9, 255; _Hill's Antiq.
Amer._; _Melgar_, in _Soc. Mex. Geog., Boletin_, 2da época, tom. iii.,
p. 111; _Lescarbot_, _Hist. Nouv. France_; _Dally_, _Races Indig._,
pp. 5, 8; _Religious Cer. and Cust._, vol. iii., pp. 3-4; _Domenech's
Deserts_, vol. i., pp. 9-21; _Vigne's Travels_, vol. ii., pp. 41-56;
_Sheldon_, in _Am. Antiq. Soc., Transact._, vol. i., pp. 366-8;
_Lizana_, _Devocionario_, in _Landa_, _Relacion_, p. 354; _Levy_,
_Nicaragua_, pp. 10, 208; _Kennedy's Probable Origin_; _Baldwin's Anc.
Amer._, pp. 171-4, 200, 207; _Du Pratz_, _Hist. Louisiane_, tom. iii.,
pp. 75-86; _Chateaubriand_, _Lettre aux Auteurs_, p. 87; _Stratton's
Mound-Builders_, M.S.; _Carver's Trav._, pp. 188, 191-2; _Montanus_,
_Nieuwe Weereld_, pp. 16-22, 27-8; _De Costa_, _Pre-Columbian Disc.
Amer._, p. xiv.; _Ritos Antiguos_, in _Kingsborough's Mex. Antiq._,
vol. ix., p. 10; _Revue Amér._, tom. i., p. 3; _Farcy_, _Discours_, in
_Antiq. Mex._, tom. i., div. i., pp. 43-4: _West und Ost Indischer
Lustgart_, p. 4; _Drake's Aborig. Races_, pp. 20-2; _García_, _Orígen
de los Ind._, pp. 41-77, 192-239; _Priest's Amer. Antiq._, pp. 250-1,
333-4; _Adair's Amer. Ind._, p. 16; _Kingsborough's Mex. Antiq._, vol.
viii., p. 84; _Fontaine's How the World was Peopled_, pp. 254-61.
[I-159] _Orígen de los Ind._, pp. 79-128.
[I-160] 'Yo hice grande diligencia en averiguar esta verdad, y puedo
afirmar, que he trabajado mas en ello, que en lo que escrivo en toda
la Obra; i asi de lo que acerca de esta he hallado, pondre tales
fundamentos al edificio, i maquina de esta sentencia, i opinion, que
puedan mui bien sufrir su peso.' _Id._, p. 79.
[I-161] Anian was the name given to the strait which was supposed to
lie between Asia and America, and which, after its actual discovery,
was named Bering Strait. The unknown northern regions of America were
also called Anian.
[I-162] The worthy Father's geographical knowledge was somewhat vague;
thus in the next section he writes: 'Tambien pudieron ir las diez
Tribus desde la Tierra, que dice Esdras, à la China.... De la China
pudieron ir por Mar à la Tierra de Nueva-España, para donde no es mui
larga la navegacion, viniendo por el Estrecho, ò Canal, que està,
entre la China, i el Reino de Annian, i de Quivira.' _Origen de los
Ind._, p. 81.
[I-163] Among several instances given by García to show the cowardice
of the Jews, is this: 'dice la Sagrada Escritura, por grande
incarecimiento, que no les quiso llevar Moises por la Tierra de
Philistim, conociendo su pusilanimidad, i cobardia, porque no
temiesen, viendo los Enemigos, que venian en su seguimiento, i de
cobardes se bolviesen à Egipto.' With regard to the cowardice of the
Americans, he writes: 'Cuenta la Historia, que entrò Cortès, en la
Conquista de Nueva-España con 550 Españoles, i de estos eran los 50
Marineros: i en Mexico tuvo, quando lo ganò, 900 Españoles, 200,000
Indios, 80 Caballos: murieron de los Nuestros 50, i de los Caballos 6.
Entrò Piçarro en el Perù con pocos mas de 200 Españoles, con los
quales, i con 60 Caballos tuvo Victoria contra el Rei Atanualpa.' Not
only at the time of the Conquest, he adds, did the Americans scatter
and run on the discharge of a musket, but even at the present day,
when they are familiar with firearms, they do the same. _Orígen de los
Ind._, pp. 85-6.
[I-164] Immediately afterwards he says that the Jews and Americans
were alike, because they both bathed frequently.
[I-165] This scarcely seems to be a parallelism, and certainly would
not be, had the worthy Father written, as he well might: 'freedom and
_the hardships of the desert_,' instead of 'manna and the promised
land'.
[I-166] To show García's style and logic, which are, indeed, but
little different from the style and reasoning of all these ancient
writers, I translate literally, and without embellishment of any kind,
his attempts to prove that whatever differences exist at the present
day between the Jew and the American, are due to the special act of
God. 'It was divinely ordained that men should be scattered throughout
all countries, and be so different from one another in disposition and
temperament, in order that by their variety men should become
possessed of a different and distinct genius; of a difference in the
color of the face and in the form of the body; just as animals are
various, and various the things produced by the earth, various the
trees, various the plants and grasses, various the birds; and finally,
various the fish of the sea and of rivers: in order that men should
see in this how great is the wisdom of Him that created them. And
although the variety and specific difference existing in these
irrational and senseless beings causes in them a specific distinction,
and that in men is only individual, or accidental and common; the Most
High desired that this variety and common difference should exist in
the human species, as there could be none specific and essential, so
that there should be a resemblance in this between man and the other
created beings: of which the Creator himself wished that the natural
cause should be the arrangement of the earth, the region of the air,
influence of the sky, waters, and edibles. By which the reader will
not fail to be convinced that it was possible for the Indians to
obtain and acquire a difference of mental faculties, and of color of
face and of features, such as the Jews had not.' _Orígen de los Ind._,
p. 105.
[I-167] 'Y finalmente, si nos dixeren, que solos aquellos siete
generos de Gentes, que he nombrado, que son Colcos, Egypcios, Etiopes,
Fenices, Syros de Palestina, i Syros de los Rios Termodon, i Pantenio,
i sus vecinos los Macrones fueron los que vsaron en el Mundo la
circuncision.... A Herodoto, i à los que alegaren lo referido, se
responde, que sin duda los Hebreos fueron los primeros que la vsaron,
por mandado de Dios.' _Orígen de los Ind._, p. 110.
[I-168] See _Orígen de los Ind._, pp. 119-23, for examples of
linguistic resemblances.
[I-169] _Kingsborough's Mex. Antiq._, vol. viii., pp. 19-20, vol. vi.,
p. 536.
[I-170] _Id._, vol. viii., p. 21.
[I-171] _Id._, pp. 25-7, 30-1.
[I-172] _Id._, p. 39.
[I-173] _Id._, p. 58.
[I-174] _Id._, pp. 67, 218-19, 240.
[I-175] _Id._, p. 135.
[I-176] _Id._, p. 154.
[I-177] 'Y el Ynga Yupangue entraba solo, y él mismo por su mano
sacrificaba las ovejas y corderos.' _Betanzos_, _Historia de los
Ingas_, lib. i., cap. xi., quoted in _Kingsborough's Mex. Antiq._,
vol. viii., p. 156.
[I-178] _Id._, pp. 157, 236, 389, vol. vi., pp. 273-5.
[I-179] _Id._, vol. viii., p. 160.
[I-180] _Id._, p. 174.
[I-181] _Id._, p. 176.
[I-182] _Id._, pp. 174-82. He presents a most elaborate discussion of
this point. See also vol. vi., pp. 512, 523.
[I-183] _Id._, vol. viii., p. 238.
[I-184] _Id._, p. 248.
[I-185] _Id._, p. 257.
[I-186] _Id._, p. 258, vol. vi., p. 236.
[I-187] _Id._, pp. 164-6.
[I-188] _Id._, p. 208. 'Representations of the lifting up of serpents
frequently occur in Mexican paintings: and the plagues which Moses
called down upon the Egyptians by lifting up his rod, which became a
serpent, are evidently referred to in the eleventh and twelfth pages
of the _Borgian Manuscript_. An allusion to the passage of the Red Sea
... seems also to be contained in the seventy-first page of the
_Lesser Vatican MS._; and the destruction of Pharaoh and his host, and
the thanksgiving of Moses, may perhaps be signified by the figure on
the left, in the same page, of a man falling into a pit or gulf, and
by the hand on the right stretched out to receive an offering.'
[I-189] _Id._, p. 222.
[I-190] _Id._, p. 232, et seq. Kingsborough reasons at some length on
this point.
[I-191] _Id._, p. 361.
[I-192] _Id._, p. 406.
[I-193] _Id._, pp. 272-3, 333-5, 392-3; vol. viii., pp. 121-2, 142-3,
391.
[I-194] _Id._, vol. vi., pp. 300-1; vol. viii., p. 137.
[I-195] _Id._, vol. vi., p. 504, vol. viii., p. 18.
[I-196] _Id._, vol. vi., p. 125.
[I-197] _Id._, p. 45.
[I-198] _Id._, p. 142.
[I-199] _Id._, p. 246. Duran sustains the theory that the Indians are
the descendants of the lost ten tribes of Israel. After giving several
reasons founded on the Scriptures, he refers to the traditions
obtained by him from the old people of the country. They related that
their ancestors, whilst suffering many hardships and persecutions,
were prevailed upon by a great man, who became their chief, to flee
from that land into another, where they might have rest; they arrived
at the sea-shore, and the chief struck the waters with a rod he had in
his hands; the sea opened, and the chief and his followers marched on,
but were soon pursued by their enemies; they crossed over in safety,
and their enemies were swallowed up by the sea; at any rate, their
ancestors never had any further account of their persecutors. Another
tradition transmitted from generation to generation, and recorded in
pictures, is, that while their first ancestors were on their journey
to the promised land, they tarried in the vicinity of certain high
hills; here a terrible earthquake occurred, and some wicked people who
were with them were swallowed up by the earth opening under their
feet. The same picture that Father Duran saw, showed that the
ancestors of the Mexican people transmitted a tradition, relating that
during their journey a kind of sand (or hail) rained upon them. Father
Duran further gives an account furnished him by an old Indian of
Cholula (some 100 years old) concerning the creation of the world: The
first men were giants who, desirous of seeing the home of the sun,
divided themselves into two parties, one of which journeyed to the
west, and the other to the east, until they were stopped by the sea;
they then concluded to return to the place they started from, called
_Vztacculemjueminian_; finding no way to reach the sun, whose light
and beauty they highly admired, they determined to build a tower that
should reach the heavens. They built a tower; but the Lord became
angry at their presumption, and the dwellers of heaven descended like
thunderbolts and destroyed the edifice; the giants on seeing their
work destroyed, were much frightened, and scattered themselves
throughout the earth. _Duran_, _Hist. Indias_, MS., tom. i., cap. i.
[I-200] _Kingsborough's Mex. Antiq._, vol. vi., p. 246.
[I-201] _Id._, p. 248.
[I-202] _Id._, p. 253.
[I-203] _Id._, p. 254.
[I-204] _Id._, p. 312.
[I-205] _Id._, p. 361.
[I-206] _Id._, p. 382.
[I-207] _Id._, p. 401.
[I-208] To enter into details on all these subjects would require
volumes as large, and I may add, as unreadable, as those of Lord
Kingsborough. The reader who wishes to investigate more closely, will
find all the points to which I have referred in volumes vi. and viii.
of the noble writer's work, _Mexican Antiquities_. Mr James Adair, 'a
trader with the Indians, and resident in their country for forty
years,' very warmly advocates the Hebrew theory. As his intercourse
with the Americans was confined to the wild tribes, the genuine 'red
men' inhabiting the south-eastern states of North America, his
argument and analogies differ in many points from those of
Kingsborough and García, who treated chiefly of the civilized nations
of Mexico and Central America. Here are some of his comparisons: 'The
Israelites were divided into Tribes and had chiefs over them, so the
Indians divide themselves: each tribe forming a little community
within the nation--And as the nation hath its particular symbol, so
hath each tribe the badge from which it is denominated.' If we go from
nation to nation among them we shall not find one individual who doth
not distinguish himself by his family name. Every town has a state
house or synedrion, the same as the Jewish sanhedrim, where almost
every night the headmen meet to discuss public business. The Hebrew
nation were ordered to worship Jehovah the true and living God, who by
the Indians is styled _Yohewah_. The ancient heathens, it is well
known, worshiped a plurality of Gods: but these American Indians pay
their religious devoir to Loak Ishtohoollo Aba, The Great Beneficent
Supreme Holy Spirit of Fire. They do not pay the least perceptible
adoration to images. Their ceremonies in their religious worship
accord more nearly with the Mosaic institutions, which could not be if
they were of heathen descent. The American Indians affirm, that there
is a certain fixed time and place, when and where every one must die,
without the possibility of averting it; such was the belief also of
the ancient Greeks and Romans, who were much addicted to copying the
rites and customs of the Jews. Their opinion that God chose them out
of all the rest of mankind as his peculiar and beloved people, fills
both the white Jew and the red American, with that steady hatred
against all the world, which renders them hated and despised by all.
We have abundant evidence of the Jews believing in the ministration of
angels, during the Old Testament dispensation, their frequent
appearances and their services on earth, are recorded in the oracles,
which the Jews themselves receive as given by divine inspiration, and
St Paul in his epistle addressed to the Hebrews speaks of it as their
general opinion that "angels are ministering spirits to the good and
righteous on earth." The Indian sentiments and traditions are the
same. They believe the higher regions to be inhabited by good spirits,
relations to the Great Holy One, and that these spirits attend and
favor the virtuous. The Indian language and dialects appear to have
the very idiom and genius of the Hebrew. Their words and sentences are
expressive, concise, emphatical, sonorous, and bold, and often both in
letters and signification synonymous with the Hebrew language. They
count time after the manner of the Hebrews, reckoning years by lunar
months like the Israelites who counted by moons. The religious
ceremonies of the Indian Americans are in conformity with those of the
Jews, they having their Prophets, High Priests, and others of
religious order. As the Jews had a sanctum sanctorum or most holy
place, so have all the Indian nations. The dress also of their High
Priests is similar in character to that of the Hebrews. The festivals,
feasts, and religious rites of the Indian Americans have also a great
resemblance to that of the Hebrews. The Indian imitates the Israelite
in his religious offerings. The Hebrews had various ablutions and
anointings according to the Mosaic ritual--and all the Indian nations
constantly observe similar customs from religious motives. Their
frequent bathing, or dipping themselves and their children in rivers,
even in the severest weather, seems to be as truly Jewish as the other
rites and ceremonies which have been mentioned. The Indian laws of
uncleanness and purification, and also the abstaining from things
deemed unclean are the same as those of the Hebrews. The Indian
marriages, divorces and punishments of adultery, still retain a strong
likeness to the Jewish laws and customs on these points. Many of the
Indian punishments resemble those of the Jews. Whoever attentively
views the features of the Indian, and his eye, and reflects on his
fickle, obstinate, and cruel disposition will naturally think of the
Jews. The ceremonies performed by the Indians before going to war,
such as purification and fasting, are similar to those of the Hebrew
nation. The Israelites were fond of wearing beads and other ornaments,
even as early as the patriarchal age, and in resemblance to these
customs the Indian females continually wear the same, believing it to
be a preventive against many evils. The Indian manner of curing the
sick is very similar to that of the Jews. Like the Hebrews, they
firmly believe that diseases and wounds are occasioned by divine
anger, in proportion to some violation of the old beloved speech. The
Hebrews carefully buried their dead, so on any accident they gathered
their bones, and laid them in the tombs of their forefathers: thus,
all the numerous nations of Indians perform the like friendly office
to every deceased person of their respective tribe. The Jewish records
tell us that the women mourned for the loss of their deceased
husbands, and were reckoned vile by the civil law if they married in
the space of at least ten months after their death. In the same manner
all the Indian widows, by an established strict penal law, mourn for
the loss of their deceased husbands; and among some tribes for the
space of three or four years. The surviving brother by the Mosaic law,
was to raise seed to a deceased brother, who left a widow childless to
perpetuate his name and family. The American law enforces the same
rule. When the Israelites gave names to their children or others they
chose such appellatives as suited best their circumstances and the
times. This custom is a standing rule with the Indians. _Amer. Ind._
[I-209] _Amer. Antiq._, pp. 68-70.
[I-210] 'See Deut., chap. vi., from 4th to 9th verse, inclusive; also,
chap. xi., verse 13 to 21, inclusive; and Exodus, chap. xiii., 11 to
16, inclusive, to which the reader can refer, if he has the curiosity
to read this most interesting discovery.... It is said by Calmet, that
the above texts are the very passages of Scripture which the Jews used
to write on the leaves of their phylacteries. These phylacteries were
little rolls of parchment, whereon were written certain words of the
law. These they wore upon their forehead, and upon the wrist of the
left arm.' _Id._
[I-211] _Antiquities of Licking County, Ohio_, MS.
Brasseur de Bourbourg, although he rejects Kingsborough's theory,
thinks that some Jews may have reached America; he recognizes a Jewish
type on certain ruins, and calls attention to the perfectly Jewish
dress of the women at Palin and on the shores of Lake Amatitlan. _Hist.
Nat. Civ._, tom. i., p. 17. Customs and relics seem to show that the
Americans are of Hebrew descent, and that they came by way of the
Californias. _Giordan_, _Tehuantepec_, p. 57. The theory of descent
from the ten tribes is not to be despised. On the north-west there
are many beliefs and rites which resemble the Jewish; circumcision
obtains in Central America, and women wear Jewish costumes. Father
Ricci has seen Israelites in China living according to Moses' laws,
and Father Adam Schall knew Israelites who had kept the Old Testament
laws, and who knew nothing of the death of the Savior. This shows that
the ten tribes took this direction, and as an emigration from Asia to
America is perfectly admissible, it is likely that the Jews were among
the number who crossed, probably by the Aleutian islands. _Rossi_,
_Souvenirs_, pp. 276-7. Jones, as might be expected, 'will not yield
to any man in the firm belief that the Aborigines of North America
(_but North America only_) and the ancient Israelites are identical,
unless controverted by the stern authority of superior historical
deductions.' _Hist. Anc. Amer._, pp. 2, 11-26, 188-90. Parker does
not accept the Jewish theory, chiefly because of the great variety of
distinct languages in America, but he points out several resemblances
between north-west tribes and Jews. _Explor. Tour_, pp. 194-8. Meyer
finds many reasons for regarding the wild tribes of the north as
Jews; such as physical peculiarities; numerous customs; the number of
languages pointing to a Babylonian confusion of tongues. Most Indians
have high-priests' temples, altars, and a sacred ark which they carry
with them on their wanderings. They count by four seasons, celebrate
new-moon and arbor festivals, and offer first fruits. In September,
when the sun enters the sign of the scales, they hold their feast of
atonement. The name Iowa he thinks is derived from Jehova. They work
with one hand and carry their weapons in the other. The pillars of
cloud and pillars of fire which guided the Israelites, may be volcanoes
on the east coast of Asia, by whose aid the ten tribes reached America.
_Nach dem Sacramento_, pp. 241-5. If the Toltecs were Jews, they must
have visited the Old World in the year 753 of the Roman era, to obtain
the Christian dogmas apparent in their cult. _Waldeck_, _Voy. Pitt._,
p. 45. The Navajo tradition that they came out of the water a long way
to the north; their peaceful, pastoral manner of life; their aversion
to hogs' flesh; their belief that they will return to the water whence
they came, instead of going to hunting-grounds like other tribes; their
prophets who prophesy and receive revelation; their strict fast-days,
and keenness in trade; their comparatively good treatment of women--are
Jewish similarities, stronger than any tribes can present. 'Scalping
appears to have been a Hebrew custom.... The most striking custom of
apparently Hebraic origin, is the periodical separation of females,
and the strong and universal idea of uncleanness connected therewith.'
_Schoolcraft's Arch._, vol. iii., pp. 60, 62. The Tartars are probably
descended from the ten tribes; they boast of being Jews, are divided
into tribes, and practice circumcision. The separation of women at
certain times, and the expression Hallelujah Yohewah, are proofs of
Jewish descent; scalping is mentioned in Bible (68th Psalm, ver. 21).
_Crawford's Essay._ According to various manuscripts the Toltecs are of
Jewish descent. Having crossed the Red Sea, they abandoned themselves
to idolatry, and fearing Moses' reprimand, they separated from the
rest and crossed the ocean to the Seven Caves, and there founded Tula.
_Juarros_, _Hist. Guat._, tom. ii., pp. 7-8. Juarez, _Municipalidad
de Leon_, p. 10, states that Leon de Cordova is of the same opinion.
Em. de Moraez, a Portuguese, in his History of Brazil, thinks nothing
but circumcision wanting to form a perfect resemblance between the
Jews and Brazilians. He thinks that America was wholly peopled by
Jews and Carthaginians. _Carver's Trav._, pp. 188-9. Catlin thinks the
North Americans are a mixed race, who have Jewish blood in them. The
mixture is shown by their skulls, while many customs are decidedly
Jewish. Probably part of tribes scattered by Christians have come
over and intermarried. He gives analogies in monotheism, sanctuaries,
tribeship, chosen people belief, marriage by gifts, war, burial,
ablutions, feasts, sacrifices, and other customs. Any philological
similarity is unnecessary and superfluous. The Jew element was too
feeble to influence language. _Catlin's N. Amer. Ind._, vol. ii., pp.
231-5. Melgar gives a list of the Chiapanec calendar names, and finds
fourteen agree with suitable Hebrew words. He concludes, therefore,
that ancient intercourse with the Old World is proven. _Soc. Mex.
Geog., Boletin_, 2da época, tom. iii., p. 108. Jarvis, _Religion Ind.
N. Amer._, pp. 71-87, compares words in Hebrew and American languages.
Ethan Smith, _Views of the Hebrews_, presents eleven arguments in
favor of the Jewish theory. Beatty, _Journal of Two Months' Tour in
America_, gives a number of reasons why the Hebrew theory should be
correct. See further, for general review of this theory: _Crowe's
Cent. Amer._, pp. 64-8; _Domenech's Deserts_, vol. i., pp. 46-9;
_Simon's Ten Tribes_, which is, however, merely a cheap abridgement of
Kingsborough; _Dally_, _Races Indig._, pp. 5-6; _Thorowgood's Jewes in
America_; _Worsley's Amer. Ind._, pp. 1-185; _L'Estrange_, _Americans
no Jewes_; _Spizelius_, _Elevatio Relationis_, a criticism on _Menasse
Ben Israel's Hope of Israel_; _Tschudi's Peruvian Antiq._, pp. 8-11.
In opposition to the Hebrew theory we read that Wolff, the Jew
traveler, found no Jewish traces among the tribes of North America.
_Fontaine's How the World was Peopled_, p. 157. 'The strong trait
in Hebrew compound words, of inserting the syllable el or a single
letter in the names of children, derived from either the primary or
secondary names of the deity, does not prevail in any Indian tribes
known to me. Neither are circumstances attending their birth or
parentage, which were so often used in the Hebrew children's names,
ever mentioned in these compounds. Indian children are generally
named from some atmospheric phenomenon. There are no traces of the
rites of circumcision, anointing, sprinkling, or washing, considered
as consecrated symbols. Circumcision was reported as existing among
the Sitkas, on the Missouri; but a strict examination proved it to
be a mistake.' _Schoolcraft's Arch._, vol. iii., p. 61. The Rev. T.
Thorowgood in 1650, published a work entitled _Jewes in America, or
Probabilities that the Americans are of that Race_. This was answered
in 1651, by Sir Hamon L'Estrange, in a book entitled, _Americans no
Jewes_. L'Estrange believes that America was peopled long before the
dispersion of the Jews, which took place 1500 years after the flood. A
strong mixture of Jewish blood would have produced distinct customs,
etc., which are not to be found. The native traditions as to origin
are to be regarded as dreams rather than as true stories. The analogous
customs and rites adduced by Thorowgood, L'Estrange goes on, are amply
refuted by Acosta and other writers. The occasional cannibalism of
the Jews was caused by famine, but that of the Americans was a regular
institution. The argument that the Americans are Jews because they have
not the gospel, is worthy only of ridicule, seeing that millions of
other pagans are in the same condition. Of the Hebrew theory Baldwin,
who devotes nearly two pages to it, writes: 'this wild notion, called
a theory, scarcely deserves so much attention. It is a lunatic fancy,
possible only to men of a certain class, which in our time does not
multiply.' _Anc. Amer._, p. 167. Tschudi regards the arguments in
favor of the Jewish theory as unsound. _Peruvian Antiq._, p. 11. Acosta
thinks that the Jews would have preserved their language, customs, and
records, in America as well as in other places. _Hist. de las Ynd._,
pp. 79-80. Macgregor argues that the Americans could not have been
Jews, for the latter people were acquainted with the use of iron as
far back as the time of Tubal Cain; they also used milk and wheaten
bread, which the Americans could and would have used if they had once
known of them. _Progress of Amer._, vol. i., p. 24. Montanus believes
that America was peopled long before the time of the dispersion of
the Jewish tribes, and raises objections to nearly every point that
has been adduced in favor of a Hebrew origin. _Nieuwe Weereld_, p.
26, et seq. Torquemada gives Las Casas' reasons for believing that
the Americans are of Jewish descent, and refutes them. _Monarq.
Ind._, tom. i., pp. 22-7. The difference of physical organization is
alone sufficient to set aside the question of Jewish origin. That so
conservative a people as the Jews should have lost all the traditions,
customs, etc., of their race, is absurd. _Democratic Review_, vol.
xi., p. 617. Rafinesque advances, as objections to Jew theory, that
the ten tribes are to be found scattered over Asia; that the Sabbath
would never have fallen into disuse if they had once introduced it into
America; that the Hebrew knew the use of iron, had plows, and employed
writing; that circumcision is practiced only in one or two localities
in America; that the sharp, striking Jewish features are not found in
Americans; that the Americans eat hogs and other animals forbidden to
the Jews; that the American war customs, such as scalping, torturing,
cannibalism, painting bodies and going naked, are not Jewish in the
least; that the American languages are not like Hebrew. _Priest's Amer.
Antiq._, pp. 76-9.
[I-212] I translate freely from Bertrand, _Mémoires_, p. 32, et seq.,
for this account.
[I-213] In the State of New York.
[I-214] The discovery was in this wise: 'Près du village de
Manchester, dans le comté d'Ontario, État de New York, se trouve une
éminence plus considérable que celle des environs, et qui est devenue
célèbre dans les fastes de la nouvelle Église sous le nom de Cumorah.
Sur le flanc occidental de cette colline, non loin de son sommet, et
sous une pierre d'une grande dimension, des lames d'or se trouvaient
déposées dans un coffre de pierre. Le couvercle en était aminci vers
ses bords, et relevé au milieu en forme de boule. Après avoir dégagé
la terre, Joseph (Smith) souleva le couvercle à l'aide d'un levier, et
trouva les plaques, l'Urim-Thummim, et le pectoral. Le coffre était
formé de pierres reliées entre elles aux angles par du ciment. Au fond
se trouvaient deux pierres plates placées en croix, et sur ces pierres
les lames d'or et les autres objets. Joseph voulait les enlever, mais
il en fut empêché par l'envoyé divin, qui l'informe que le temps
n'était pas encore venu, et qu'il fallait attendre quatre ans à partir
de cette époque. D'après ses instructions, Joseph se rendit tous les
ans le même jour au lieu du dépôt, pour recevoir de la bouche du
messager céleste, des instructions sur la manière dont le royaume de
Dieu devait être fondé et gouverné dans les derniers jours.... Le 22
septembre 1827, le messager des cieux lui laissa prendre les plaques,
l'Urim-Thummim et le pectoral, à condition qu'il serait responsable,
et en l'avertissant qu'il serait _retranché_, s'il venait à perdre ces
objets par sa négligence, mais qu'il serait protégé s'il faisait tous
ses efforts pour les conserver.' _Bertrand_, _Mémoires_, pp. 23-5.
[I-215] Though the question of the Scandinavian discoveries would seem
to merit considerable attention from one who wrote a 'colonial
history' of America, yet Mr George Bancroft disposes of the entire
subject in a single page: 'The story of the colonization of America by
Northmen,' he writes, 'rests on narratives, mythological in form, and
obscure in meaning; ancient, yet not contemporary. The chief document
is an interpolation in the history of Sturleson, whose zealous
curiosity could hardly have neglected the discovery of a continent.
The geographical details are too vague to sustain a conjecture; the
accounts of the mild winter and fertile soil are, on any modern
hypothesis, fictitious or exaggerated; the description of the natives
applies only to the Esquimaux, inhabitants of hyperborean regions, the
remark which should define the length of the shortest winter's day,
has received interpretations adapted to every latitude from New York
to Cape Farewell; and Vinland has been sought in all directions, from
Greenland and the St. Lawrence to Africa.' _Bancroft's History_, vol.
i., pp. 5-6. Irving says that as far as he 'has had experience in
tracing these stories of early discoveries of portions of the New
World, he has generally found them very confident deductions drawn
from very vague and questionable facts. Learned men are too prone to
give substance to mere shadows, when they assist some preconceived
theory. Most of these accounts, when divested of the erudite comments
of their editors, have proved little better than the traditionary
fables, noticed in another part of this work, respecting the imaginary
islands of St. Borondon, and of the Seven Cities.' _Columbus_, vol.
iii., p. 434. All of which would certainly be true enough of most
theories, but that it was erroneous as far as the Northmen's visits
are concerned, has, I think, been conclusively shown in later years.
[I-216] 'It might also be argued, if it were at all necessary, that,
if these Sagas were post-Columbian compositions drawn up by Icelanders
who were jealous of the fame of the Genoese navigator, we should
certainly be able to point out something either in their structure,
bearing, or style, by which it would be indicated. Yet such is not the
case. These writings reveal no anxiety to show the connection of the
Northmen with the great land lying at the west. The authors do not see
anything at all remarkable or meritorious in the explorations, which
were conducted simply for the purpose of gain. Those marks which would
certainly have been impressed by a more modern writer forging a
historical composition designed to show an occupation of the country
before the time of Columbus, are wholly wanting. There is no special
pleading or rivalry, and no desire to show prior and superior
knowledge of the country to which the navigators had from time to time
sailed. We only discover a straightforward, honest endeavor to tell
the story of certain men's lives. This is done in a simple, artless
way, and with every indication of a desire to mete out even handed
justice to all. And candid readers who come to the subject with minds
free from prejudice, will be powerfully impressed with the belief that
they are reading authentic histories written by honest men.'
_Pre-Columbian Disc. Amer._, pp. xli.-xlii.
[I-217] Vol. viii., p. 114, et seq.
[I-218] The exact dates in these relations I cannot vouch for; but the
several authors who have written on the subject differ by only a year
or two.
[I-219] 'Helluland, from _Hella_, a flat stone, an abundance of which
may be found in Labrador and the region round about.' _De Costa's
Pre-Columbian Disc. Amer._, p. 28. 'From data in the Landnama and
several other ancient Icelandic geographical works, we may gather that
the distance of a day's sailing was estimated at from twenty-seven to
thirty geographical miles (German or Danish, of which fifteen are
equal to a degree; each of these accordingly equal to _four_ English
sea-miles). From the island of Helluland, afterwards called Little
Helluland, Biarne sailed to Heriulfsnes (Ikigeit) in Greenland, with
strong south-westerly gales, in four days. The distance between that
cape and _Newfoundland_ is about 150 miles, which will correspond,
when we take into consideration the strong gales. In modern
descriptions it is stated that this land partly consists of naked,
rocky flats, where no tree, not even a shrub, can grow, and which are
therefore usually called _Barrens_; thus answering completely to the
_hellur_ of the ancient Northmen, from which they named the country.'
_Abstract of Hist. Evid._, in _Lond. Geog. Soc., Jour._, vol. viii.,
p. 123.
[I-220] 'Markland was situate to the south-west of Helluland, distant
about three days' sail, or about from eighty to ninety miles. It is
therefore _Nova Scotia_, of which the descriptions given by later
writers answer to that given by the ancient Northmen of Markland.'
_Id._
[I-221] 'Vinland was situate at the distance of two days' sail,
consequently about from fifty-four to sixty miles, in a south-westerly
direction from Markland. The distance from Cape Sable to Cape Cod is
stated in nautical works as being W. by S. about seventy leagues, that
is, about fifty-two miles. Biarne's description of the coasts is very
accurate, and in the island situate to the eastward (between which and
the promontory that stretches to eastward and northward Leif sailed)
we recognize Nantucket. The ancient Northmen found there many shallows
(_grunnsæ fui mikit_); modern navigators make mention at the same
place "of numerous riffs and other shoals," and say "that the whole
presents an aspect of drowned land."' _Id._, pp. 121-2. 'The leading
evidences serve to attest that Vinland was the present very marked
seaboard area of New England. The nautical facts have been carefully
examined by Professors Rafn and Magnusen, and the historical data
adapted to the configuration of the coast which has Cape Cod as its
distinguishing trait. All this seems to have been done with surprising
accuracy, and is illustrated by the present high state of the arts in
Denmark and Germany.' _Schoolcraft's Arch._, vol. i., p. 111.
[I-222] 'Kialarnes (from Kiölr, a keel, and _nes_, a cape, most likely
so named on account of its striking resemblance to the keel of a ship,
particularly of one of the long ships of the ancient Northmen) must
consequently be _Cape Cod_, the Nauset of the Indians, which modern
geographers have sometimes likened to a horn, and sometimes to a
sickle or sythe.' _Id._, p. 122.
[I-223] 'The Straumfiördr of the ancient Northmen is supposed to be
_Buzzard's Bay_, and Straumey, Martha's Vineyard; although the account
of the many eggs found there would seem more precisely to correspond
to the island which lies off the entrance of Vineyard Sound, and which
at this day is for the same reason called _Egg Island_.' _Id._
[I-224] See _Abstract of Hist. Evid._, in _Lond. Geog. Soc., Jour._,
vol. viii., p. 114, et seq., and _De Costa's Pre-Columbian Disc.
Amer._, p. 11, et seq.
[I-225] In the year 983, according to _Abstract of Hist. Evid._, in
_Lond. Geog. Soc., Jour._, vol. viii., p. 125. De Costa makes it 928.
_Pre-Columbian Disc. Amer._, p. 86.
[I-226] 'Professor Rafn in, what seems to the author, his needless
anxiety to fix the locality of the White-man's land in America, says
that, as this part of the manuscript is difficult to decipher, the
original letters _may_ have got changed, and vi inserted instead of
xx, or xi, which numerals would afford time for the voyager to reach
the coast of America, in the vicinity of Florida. Smith in his
_Dialogues_, has even gone so far as to _suppress_ the term _six_
altogether, and substitutes, "by a number of days sail unknown." This
is simply trifling with the subject. In _Grönland's Historiske
Mindesmœrker_, chiefly the work of Finn Magnussen, no question is
raised on this point. The various versions all give the number six,
which limits the voyage to the vicinity of the Azores. Schöning, to
whom we are so largely indebted for the best edition of Heimskringla,
lays the scene of Marson's adventure at those islands, and suggests
that they may at that time have covered a larger extent of territory
than the present, and that they may have suffered from earthquakes and
floods, adding, "It is likely, and all circumstances show, that the
said land has been a piece of North America." This is a bold, though
not very unreasonable hypothesis, especially as the volcanic character
of the islands is well known. In 1808, a volcano rose to the height of
3,500 feet. Yet Schöning's suggestion is not needed. The fact that the
islands were not inhabited when discovered by the Portuguese does not,
however, settle anything against Schöning, because in the course of
five hundred years, the people might either have migrated, or been
swept away by pestilence. _Grönland's Historiske Mindesmœrker_, (vol.
i., p. 150), says simply, that "It is _thought_ that he (Are Marson)
ended his days in America, or at all events in one of the larger
islands of the west. Some think that it was one of the Azore
islands."' _De Costa's Pre-Columbian Disc. Amer._, p. 87.
[I-227] _Abstract of Hist. Evid._, in _Lond. Geog. Soc., Jour._, vol.
viii., p. 125; _De Costa's Pre-Columbian Disc. Amer._, p. 89, et seq.
[I-228] See _Schoolcraft's Arch._, vol. i., pp. 110, et seq., for
plate and discussion of Dighton Rock.
[I-229] It bore the following inscription: _Elligr. Sigvaps: son: r.
ok. Bjanne. Tortarson: ok: Enripi. osson: laugardag. in: fyrir gagndag
Holpu: varda te. ok rydu: M. C. XXXV_; or, _Erling Sighvatssonr, ok
Bjarne Pordarson, ok Endridi oddsson laugardaginn fyrir gagndag hlodu
varda pessa ok ruddu 1135_; 'c'est-à-dire: Erling Sigvatson, Bjarne
Thordarson, et Endride Oddson érigèrent ces monceaux de pierres le
samedi avant le jour nommé Gagndag (le 25 avril) et ils nettoyèrent la
place en 1135.' _Warden_, _Recherches_, p. 152.
[I-230] 'We have noticed the discovery of a place called Estotiland,
supposed to be Nova Scotia, in 1354, the inhabitants of which were
Europeans, who cultivated grain, lived in stone houses, and
manufactured beer, as in Europe at that day. Now, from the year 1354,
till the time of the first settlements made in Onondaga county, by the
present inhabitants, is about 400 years. Is it not possible,
therefore, that this glass bottle, with some kind of liquor in it, may
have been derived from this Estotiland, having been originally brought
from Europe; as glass had been in use there, more or less, from the
year 664, till the Scandinavians colonized Iceland, Greenland, and
Estotiland, or Newfoundland.' _Priest's Amer. Antiq._, pp. 260-1.
[I-231] 'Malgré les réclamations que mes suppositions soulevèrent de
divers côtés et les sourires incrédules qu'elles appelèrent sur les
lèvres de plusieurs de nos savants dont je respecte et honore les
connaissances, je persiste plus que jamais dans l'opinion que
j'exprimais alors; plus j'avance dans mes études américaines plus je
demeure convaincu des relations qui existèrent, antérieurement à
Christophe Colomb, entre le Nouveau-Monde et les contrées situées à
l'orient de l'autre côté de l'océan Atlantique, et plus je suis
persuadé que les Scandinaves ont dû, à une période même plus reculée
que celle dont vos (Prof. Rafn's) intéressants mémoires rapportent le
souvenir, émigrer vers le continent américain.' _Brasseur de
Bourbourg_, in _Nouvelles Annales des Voy._, 1858, tom. clx., pp.
261-92.
[I-232] 'Il est impossible de ne point être frappé de l'analogie qui
existe entre les idées bramaniques sur la divinité et les passages du
_Popol-Vuh_ cités plus haut. Mais si nous consultons les traditions
beaucoup plus récentes, conservées même après l'établissement du
christianisme en Suède, nous trouverons encore, entre les coutumes
religieuses des populations de ces contrées et celles qui nous sont
retracées dans le Popol-Vuh, plus d'un rapport.' _Viollet-le-Duc_, in
_Charnay_, _Ruines Amér._, pp. 41-2. See farther concerning emigration
to America from north-western Europe: _Mitchill_, in _Amer. Antiq.
Soc., Transact._, vol. i., p. 341, et seq.; _Priest's Amer. Antiq._,
scattered notices, pp. 88-9, 234-329; _Robertson's Hist. Amer._, vol.
i., pp. 278-80; _Schoolcraft's Arch._, vol. i., pp. 110-11, 120-4;
_Brasseur de Bourbourg_, in _Nouvelles Annales des Voy._, 1855, tom.
cxlvii., pp. 157-8; _Viollet-le-Duc_, in _Charnay_, _Ruines Amér._,
pp. 11, 18-19, 23-4, 42-3; _Warden_, _Recherches_, pp. 146-54;
_Montanus_, _Nieuwe Weereld_, pp. 28-30, 117; _Tschudi's Peruvian
Antiq._, pp. 3-7, 21-2; _Malte-Brun_, _Précis de la Géog._, tom. i.,
pp. 197-8; _Davis' Discovery of New England by the Northmen_;
_Baldwin's Anc. Amer._, pp. 279-85; _Davis' Anc. Amer._, pp. 13-31;
_Tylor's Anahuac_, pp. 278-9; _M'Culloh's Researches on Amer._, pp.
21-2; _Brinton's Abbé Brasseur_, in _Lippincott's Mag._, vol. i., p.
79, et seq.; _Smith's Human Species_, p. 237; _Deuber_, _Geschichte
der Schiffahrt_; _Hermes_, _Entdeckung von Amer._, pp. 1-134;
_Foster's Pre-Hist. Races_, pp. 399-400; _Hill's Antiq. of Amer._;
_Wilson's Prehist. Man_, pp. 394-420; _Kruger's Discov. Amer._, pp.
1-134; _Domenech's Deserts_, vol. i., pp. 53-64, 404, 411-12;
_Beaufoy's Mex. Illustr._, p. 322; _Brasseur de Bourbourg_, _Hist.
Nat. Civ._, tom. i., pp. 18-22; _Id._, _Popol Vuh_, pp. li.-liv.,
lxxxix.-xcii.; _Hist. Mag._, vol. ix., pp. 364-5; _Gondra_, in
_Prescott_, _Hist. Conq. Mex._, tom. iii., p. 15; _Humboldt's Exam.
Crit._, tom. ii., pp. 83-104, 105-20; _Irving's Columbus_, vol. iii.,
pp. 432-40; _Humboldt_, _Vues_, tom. i., p. 239; _Klemm_,
_Cultur-Geschichte_, tom. v., pp. 164-71; _Rafinesque_, _The American
Nations_; _Brasseur de Bourbourg_, _Quatre Lettres_, p. 17;
_Williamson's Observations on Climate_; _Zesterman's Colonization of
America by Northwestern Europeans_; _Farcy_, _Discours_, in _Antiq.
Mex._, tom. i., div. i., pp. 48-9; _Simpson's Nar._, p. 159;
_Schoolcraft_, in _Amer. Ethno. Soc., Transact._, vol. i., pp. 391-6.
[I-233] About 1169-70.
[I-234] 'All this is related in old Welsh annals preserved in the
abbeys of Conway and Strat Flur.... This emigration of Prince Madog is
mentioned in the preserved works of several Welsh bards who lived
before the time of Columbus. It is mentioned by Hakluyt, who had his
account of it from writings of the bard Guttun Owen. As the Northmen
had been in New England over one hundred and fifty years when Prince
Madog went forth to select a place for his settlement, he knew very
well there was a continent on the other side of the Atlantic, for he
had knowledge of their voyages to America; and knowledge of them was
also prevalent in Ireland. His emigration took place when Henry II.
was king of England, but in that age the English knew little or
nothing of Welsh affairs in such a way as to connect them with English
history very closely.' _Baldwin's Anc. Amer._, p. 286. See also
_Humboldt_, _Exam. Crit._, tom. ii., pp. 142-9; _Farcy_, _Discours_,
in _Antiq. Mex._, tom. i., div. i., pp. 49-50. 'Before wee passed
these ilands, under the lee of the bigger iland, we anchored, the wind
being at north-east, with intent to refresh ourselves with the fowles
of these ilands. They are of divers sorts, and in great plentie, as
pengwins, wilde duckes, gulles, and gannets; of the principall we
purposed to make provisions, and those were the pengwins; which in
Welsh, as I have beene enformed, signifieth a white head. From which
derivation, and many other Welsh denominations given by the Indians,
or their predecessors, some doe inferre that America was first peopled
with Welsh-men; and Montezanna, king, or rather emperour of Mexico,
did recount unto the Spaniards, at their first comming, that his
auncestors came from a farre countrie, and were white people. Which,
conferred with an auncient cronicle, that I have read many yeares
since, may be conjectured to bee a prince of Wales, who many hundreth
yeares since, with certaine shippes, sayled to the westwards, with
intent to make new discoveries. Hee was never after heard of.'
_Hawkins' Voy._, in _Hakluyt Soc._, p. 111.
[I-235] Written in Welsh, translated into English by Humphrey Llwyd,
and published by Dr David Powel in 1584.
[I-236] Dedicated to Prince Charles, and published in 1613.
[I-237] See _Warden_, _Recherches_, pp. 154-7.
[I-238] They are 'made of _raw-hides_, the skins of buffaloes,
stretched underneath a frame made of willows or other boughs, and
shaped nearly round, like a tub; which the woman carries on her head
from her wigwam to the water's edge, and having stepped into it,
stands in front, and propels it by dripping her paddle _forward_, and
_drawing it to her_, instead of paddling by the side.' _Catlin's Amer.
Ind._, vol. ii., p. 261.
[I-239] See comparative vocabulary. _Id._
[I-240] As a good deal of importance has been attached to it, it will
be as well to give Jones' statement in full; it is as follows: 'These
presents certify all persons whatever, that in the year 1660, being an
inhabitant of Virginia, and chaplain to Major General Bennet, of
Mansoman County, the said Major General Bennet and Sir William
Berkeley sent two ships to Port Royal, now called South Carolina,
which is sixty leagues southward of Cape Fair, and I was sent
therewith to be their minister. Upon the 8th of April we set out from
Virginia, and arrived at the harbor's mouth of Port Royal the 19th of
the same month, where we waited for the rest of the fleet that was to
sail from Barbadoes and Bermuda with one Mr. West, who was to be
deputy governor of said place. As soon as the fleet came in, the
smallest vessels that were with us sailed up the river to a place
called the Oyster Point; there I continued about eight months, all
which time being almost starved for want of provisions: I and five
more traveled through the wilderness till we came to the Tuscarora
country. There the Tuscarora Indians took us prisoners because we told
them that we were bound to Roanock. That night they carried us to
their town and shut us up close, to our no small dread. The next day
they entered into a consultation about us, and, after it was over,
their interpreter told us that we must prepare ourselves to die next
morning, whereupon, being very much dejected, I spoke to this effect
in the British [Welsh] tongue: "Have I escaped so many dangers, and
must I now be knocked on the head like a dog!" Then presently came an
Indian to me, which afterward appeared to be a war captain belonging
to the sachem of the Doegs (whose original, I find, must needs be from
the Old Britons), and took me up by the middle, and told me in the
British [Welsh] tongue I should not die, and thereupon went to the
emperor of Tuscarora, and agreed for my ransom and the men that were
with me. They (the Doegs) then welcomed us to their town, and
entertained us very civilly and cordially four months, during which
time I had the opportunity of conversing with them familiarly in the
British [Welsh] language, and did preach to them in the same language
three times a week, and they would confer with me about any thing that
was difficult therein, and at our departure they abundantly supplied
us with whatever was necessary to our support and well doing. They are
settled upon Pontigo River, not far from Cape Atros. This is a brief
recital of my travels among the Doeg Indians.
Morgan Jones, the son of John Jones, of Basateg, near Newport, in the
County of Monmouth. I am ready to conduct any Welshman or others to
the country.
New York, March 10th, 1685-6.' _Gentleman's Mag._, 1740.
[I-241] _Chambers' Jour._, vol. vi., p. 411.
[I-242] 'These accounts are copied from manuscripts of Dr. W. O.
Pughe, who, together with Edward Williams (the bard of Glamorgan),
made diligent inquiries in America about forty years ago, when they
collected upwards of one hundred different accounts of the Welsh
Indians.' _Id._ 'It is reported by travellers in the west, that on the
Red River ... very far to the southwest, a tribe of Indians has been
found, whose manners, in several respects, resemble the Welch.... They
call themselves the McCedus tribe, which having the Mc or Mac attached
to their name, points evidently to a European origin, of the Celtic
description.... It is well authenticated that upwards of thirty years
ago, Indians came to Kaskaskia, in the territory, now the state of
Illinois, who spoke the Welch dialect, and were perfectly understood
by two Welchmen then there, who conversed with them.' _Priest's Amer.
Antiq._, pp. 230-2.
[I-243] _Recherches_, p. 157. Griffiths related his adventures to a
native of Kentucky, and they were published in 1804, by Mr Henry
Toulmin, one of the Judges of the territory of Mississippi. See
_Stoddard's Sketches of Louisiana_, p. 475; _Philadelphia Medical and
Physical Journal_, vol. i., 1805.
[I-244] _Amer. Antiq. Soc., Transact._, vol. i., p. 305.
[I-245] We read farther: 'But what is still more remarkable, in their
war song he discovered, not only the sentiments, but several lines,
the very same words as used in _Ossian's_ celebrated majestic poem of
the wars of his ancestors, who flourished about thirteen hundred years
ago. The Indian names of several of the streams, brooks, mountains and
rocks of Florida, are also the same which are given to similar
objects, in the highlands of Scotland.' All this, could we believe it,
would fill us with astonishment; but the solution of the mystery lies
in the next sentence: 'This celebrated metaphysician (Monboddo) was a
firm believer in the anciently reported account of America's having
been visited by a colony from Wales long previous to the discovery of
Columbus.' _Priest's Amer. Antiq._, p. 230. It is this being a 'firm
believer' in a given theory that makes so many things patent to the
enthusiast which are invisible to ordinary men.
[I-246] _Monastikon Britannicum_, pp. 131-2, 187-8, cited in _De
Costa's Pre-Columbian Disc. Amer._, p. xviii.
[I-247] See _Kingsborough's Mex. Antiq._, vol. vi., pp. 188-90; _De
Costa's Pre-Columbian Disc. Amer._, pp. xviii.-xx.
[I-248] _Mœurs des Sauvages Amériquains Comparées aux Mœurs des
Premiers Temps._ Paris, 1724.
[I-249] _García_, _Orígen de los Ind._, pp. 189-92.
[I-250] _Pidgeon's Trad._, p. 16.
[I-251] _Landa_, _Relacion_, pp. lxx.-lxxx.
[I-252] _Hist. Anc. Amer._, p. 107. In the Greeks of Homer I find the
customs, discourse, and manners of the Iroquois, Delawares, and
Miamis. The tragedies of Sophocles and Euripides paint to me almost
literally the sentiments of the _red-men_, respecting necessity,
fatality, the miseries of human life, and the rigour of blind destiny.
_Volney's View of the Climate and Soil of the United States of
America._ London, 1804.
[I-253] See _Priest's Amer. Antiq._, pp. 385-90; _Torquemada_,
_Monarq. Ind._, tom. i., p. 255; _Scenes in Rocky Mts._, pp. 199-202;
_Villagutierre_, _Hist. Conq. Itza_, p. 6; _Kingsborough's Mex.
Antiq._, vol. vi., pp. 184, 527-8.
[I-254] See _Baldwin's Anc. Amer._, p. 177; _Foster's Pre-Hist.
Races_, pp. 394-5.
[I-255] _Hist. Nat. Civ._, tom. i., p. 6.
[I-256] 'Imaginez un livre entier écrit en calembours, un livre dont
toutes les phrases, dont la plupart des mots ont un double sens, l'un
parfaitement net et distinct de l'autre, et vous aurez, jusqu'à un
certain point, l'idée du travail que j'ai entre les mains. C'est en
cherchant l'explication d'un passage fort curieux, relatif à
l'histoire de Quetzal-Coatl, que je suis arrivé à ce résultat
extraordinaire. Oui, Monsieur, si ce livre est en apparence l'histoire
des Toltèques et ensuite des rois de Colhuacan et de Mexico, il
présente, en réalité, le récit du cataclysme qui bouleversa le monde,
il y a quelques six ou sept mille ans, et constitua les continents
dans leur état actuel. Ce que le _Codex Borgia_ de la Propagande, le
_Manuscrit de Dresde_ et le _Manuscrit Troano_ étaient en images et en
hiéroglyphes, le _Codex Chimalpopoca_ en donne la lettre; il contient,
en langue nahuatl, l'histoire du monde, composée par le sage Hueman,
c'est-à-dire par la main puissante de Dieu dans le grand Livre de la
nature, en un mot, c'est le Livre divin lui-même, c'est le
_Teo-Amoxtli_.' _Brasseur de Bourbourg._ _Quatre Lettres_, p. 24.
[I-257] _Id._, p. 39.
[I-258] In the Codex Chimalpopoca, Brasseur reads that 'à la suite de
l'éruption des volcans, ouverts sur toute l'étendue du continent
américain, double alors de ce qu'il est aujourd'hui, l'éruption
soudaine d'un immense foyer sous-marin, fit éclater le monde et abîma,
entre un lever et un autre de l'étoile du matin, les régions les plus
riches du globe.' _Quatre Lettres_, p. 45.
[I-259] _Id._, p. 108.
[I-260] See farther, concerning Atlantis: _Brasseur de Bourbourg_,
_MS. Troano_, tom. i., pp. 29-32, 199; _Irving's Columbus_, vol. i.,
pp. 24, 38, vol. iii., pp. 419, 492-4, 499-512; _Baril_, _Mexique_, p.
190; _Dally_, _Races Indig._, p. 7; _Farcy_, _Discours_, in _Antiq.
Mex._, tom. i., div. i., pp. 41-2; _De Costa's Pre-Columbian Disc.
Amer._, p. xiii.; _Heylyn's Cosmog._, pp. 943-4; _Sanson d'Abbeville_,
_Amérique_, pp. 1-3; _Willson's Amer. Hist._, pp. 90-1; _Warden_,
_Recherches_, pp. 97-113; _Carli_, _Cartas_, pt i., p. 1; _Brasseur de
Bourbourg_, in _Landa_, _Relacion_, pp. xviii.-cxii.; _Davis' Anc.
Amer._, p. 13; _Malte-Brun_, _Précis de la Géog._, tom. i., pp. 28-30,
213-15; _Wilson's Prehist. Man_, pp. 392-3; _Kingsborough's Mex.
Antiq._, vol. vi., pp. 181-4; _Foster's Pre-Hist. Races_, pp. 394-9;
_Larrainzar_, _Dictamen_, pp. 8-25; _Stratton's Mound-Builders_, MS.;
_Bradford's Amer. Antiq._, pp. 216-22; _Baldwin's Anc. Amer._, pp.
174-84; _Mitchill_, in _Amer. Antiq. Soc._, _Transact._, vol. i., p.
340; _Faliés_, _Études Hist. sur les Civilisations_, tom. i., pp.
185-93, 218; _M'Culloh's Researches on Amer._, pp. 26-32; _Humboldt_,
_Exam. Crit._, tom. i., pp. 42, 130-206, tom. ii., pp. 46, 163-214;
_Oviedo_, _Hist. Gen._, tom. i., pp. 14-18, 22; _Monglave_, in _Antiq.
Mex._, pp. 57-60; _Cabrera_, _Teatro_, in _Rio's Description_, p. 126;
_Villagutierre_, _Hist. Conq. Itza_, pp. 5-6; _Purchas his Pilgrimes_,
vol. v., pp. 799-801; _Torquemada_, _Monarq. Ind._, tom. i., p. 29;
_West und Ost Indischer Lustgart_, pt i., pp. 4-5; _Montanus_, _Nieuwe
Weereld_, pp. 18-19; _Clavigero_, _Storia Ant. del Messico_, tom. iv.,
p. 31; _Despréaux_, in _Museo Mex._, tom. ii., pp. 84-6; _Major's
Prince Henry_, p. 83; _Rafinesque_, in _Priest's Amer. Antiq._, pp.
123-4; _Domenech's Deserts_, vol. i., pp. 42-6, 413-14; _Fontaine's
How the World was Peopled_, pp. 256-7; _Herrera_, _Hist. Gen._, tom.
i., lib. i., cap. ii.; _Smith's Human Species_, p. 83; _Soc. Géog.,
Bulletin_, tom. iv., p. 235.
[I-261] Davis, _Anc. Amer._, p. 12, thinks that a portion of the
animals of the original creation migrated west. 'If this idea,' he
says, 'is new to others, I hope it may be considered more reasonable
than the infidel opinion, that men and animals were distinct creations
from those of Asia.' 'Think you,' he adds sagely, 'they would have
transported venomous serpents from the old to the new world?'
[I-262] Concerning unity or variety of the American races, see:
_Prichard's Researches_, vol. i., p. 268, vol. v., pp. 289, 374, 542;
_Morton's Crania Amer._, p. 62; _Bradford's Amer. Antiq._, pp. 197-98;
_Baldwin's Anc. Amer._, pp. 66-7; _Maury_, in _Nott and Gliddon's
Indig. Races_, p. 81; _Humboldt_, _Essai Pol._, tom. i., p. 83;
_Humboldt_, _Vues_, tom. i., pp. 21-36; _Willson's Amer. Hist._, p.
89; _Jones' Hist. Anc. Amer._, p. 4; _Smith's Human Species_, p. 251;
_Catlin's N. Amer. Ind._, vol. ii., p. 234; _Domenech's Deserts_, vol.
i., pp. 3-4.
[I-263] 'I am compelled to believe that the Continent of America, and
each of the other Continents, have had their aboriginal stocks,
peculiar in colour and in character--and that each of these native
stocks has undergone repeated mutations, by erratic colonies from
abroad.' _Catlin's N. Amer. Ind._, vol. ii., p. 232; _Bradford's Amer.
Antiq._, pp. 224-5, thinks it consonant with the Bible to suppose
'distinct animal creations, simultaneously, for different portions of
the earth.' A commentator on Hellwald who advocates autochthon theory
remarks that: 'the derivation of these varieties from the original
stock is philosophically explained on the principle of the variety in
the offspring of the same parents, and the better adaptation and
consequent chance of life.' _Smithsonian Rept._, 1866, p. 345. 'That
theory is probably, in every point of view, the most tenable and exact
which assumes that man, like the plant, a mundane being, made his
appearance generally upon earth when our planet had reached that stage
of its development which unites in itself the conditions of the man's
existence. In conformity with this view I regard the American as an
autochthon.' The question of immigration to America has been too much
mixed with that of the migration in America, and only recently has the
opinion made progress that America has attained a form of civilization
by modes of their own. Neither the theory of a _populating
immigration_ or a _civilizing immigration_ from the old world meet any
countenance from the results of the latest investigations. _Hellwald_,
in _Id._, p. 330. All tribes have similarities among them which make
them distinct from old world. _Brasseur de Bourbourg_, _Hist. Nat.
Civ._, tom. i., p. 23. Dr. Morton says the study of physical
conformation alone, excludes every branch of the Caucasian race from
any obvious participation in the peopling of this continent, and
believes the Indians are all of one race, and that race distinct from
all others. _Mayer's Observations_, p. 11. We can never know the
origin of the Americans. The theory that they are aborigines is
contradicted by no fact and is plausible enough. _Morelet_, _Voyage_,
tom. i., pp. 177-8. The supposition that the Red Man is a primitive
type of a human family originally planted in the western continent
presents the most natural solution of the problem. The researches of
physiologists, antiquaries, philologists, tend this way. The
hypothesis of an immigration, when followed out, is embarrassed with
great difficulties and leads to interminable and unsatisfying
speculations. _Norman's Rambles in Yuc._, p. 251. God has created
several couples of human beings differing from one another internally
and externally, and these were placed in appropriate climates. The
original character is preserved, and directed only by their natural
powers they acquired knowledge and formed a distinct language. In
primitive times signs and sounds suggested by nature were used, but
with advancement, dialects formed. It requires the idea of a miracle
to suppose that all men descend from one source. _Kames_, in _Warden_,
_Recherches_, p. 203. 'The unsuccessful search after traces of an
ante-Columbian intercourse with the New World, suffices to confirm the
belief that, for unnumbered centuries throughout that ancient era, the
Western Hemisphere was the exclusive heritage of nations native to its
soil. Its sacred and sepulchral rites, its usages and superstitions,
its arts, letters, metallurgy, sculpture, and architecture, are all
peculiarly its own.' _Wilson's Prehist. Man_, p. 421. Morton concludes
'that the American Race differs essentially from all others, not
excepting the Mongolian; nor do the feeble analogies of language, and
the more obvious ones in civil and religious institutions and the
arts, denote anything beyond casual or colonial communication with the
Asiatic nations; and even these analogies may perhaps be accounted
for, as Humboldt has suggested, in the mere coincidence arising from
similar wants and impulses in nations inhabiting similar latitudes.'
_Crania Amer._, p. 260. 'I am firmly of opinion that God created an
original man and woman in this part of the globe, of different species
from any in the other parts.' _Romans' Concise Natural Hist. of E. and
W. Florida._ 'Altamirano, the best Aztec scholar living, claims that
the proof is conclusive that the Aztecs did not come here from Asia,
as has been almost universally believed, but were a race originated in
America, and as old as the Chinese themselves, and that China may even
have been peopled from America.' _Evans' Our Sister Rep._, p. 333.
Swan believes that 'whatever was the origin of different tribes or
families, the whole race of American Indians are native and indigenous
to the soil.' _N.W. Coast_, p. 206.
CHAPTER II.
INTRODUCTORY TO ABORIGINAL HISTORY.
Origin and Earliest History of the Americans Unrecorded
-- The Dark Sea of Antiquity -- Boundary between Myth and
History -- Primitive Annals of America compared with those
of the Old World -- Authorities and Historical Material --
Traditional Annals and their Value -- Hieroglyphic Records
of the Mayas and Nahuas -- Spanish Writers -- The Conquerors
-- The Missionaries -- The Historians -- Converted Native
Chroniclers -- Secondary Authorities -- Ethnology -- Arts,
Institutions, and Beliefs -- Languages -- Material Monuments
of Antiquity -- Use of Authorities and Method of Treating the
Subject.
The preceding résumé shows pretty conclusively that the American
peoples and the American civilizations, if not indigenous to the
New World, were introduced from the Old at a period long preceding
any to which we are carried by the traditional or monumental annals
of either continent. We have found no evidence of any populating
or civilizing migration across the ocean from east or west, north
or south, within historic times. Nothing approaching identity has
been discovered between any two nations separated by the Atlantic
or Pacific. No positive record appears even of communication between
America and the Old World,--intentionally by commercial, exploring,
or warlike expeditions, or accidentally by shipwreck,--previous to
the voyages of the Northmen in the tenth century; yet that such
communication did take place in many instances and at different
periods is extremely probable. The numerous trans-oceanic analogies,
more or less clearly defined, which are observed, may have resulted
partially from this communication, although they do not of themselves
necessarily imply such an agency. If scientific research shall in the
future decide that all mankind descended from one original pair, that
the centre of population was in Asia rather than in America, and that
all civilization originated with one Old World branch of the human
family--and these are all yet open questions--then there will be no
great difficulty in accounting for the transfer of both population
and culture; in fact the means of intercontinental intercourse are so
numerous and practicable that it will perhaps be impossible to decide
on the particular route or routes by which the transfer was effected.
If, on the other hand, a contrary decision be reached on the above
questions, the phenomena of American civilization and savagism will be
even more easily accounted for.
[Sidenote: THE MYSTERY OF ANTIQUITY.]
Regarding North America then, at the most remote epoch reached by
tradition, as already peopled for perhaps hundreds of centuries, I
propose in the remaining pages of this volume to record all that is
known of aboriginal history down to the period when the native races
were found by Europeans living under the institutions and practicing
the arts that have been described in the preceding volumes of this
work. Comparatively little is known or can ever be known of that
history. The sixteenth century is a bluff coast line bounding the dark
unnavigable sea of American antiquity. At a very few points along
the long line headlands project slightly into the waters, affording
a tolerably sure footing for a time, but terminating for the most
part in dangerous reefs and quicksands over which the adventurous
antiquarian may pass with much risk still farther from the firm land
of written record, and gaze at flickering mythical lights attached
to buoys beyond. As a rule, nothing whatever is known respecting the
history of savage tribes until they come in contact with nations of
a higher degree of culture possessing some system of written record.
Respecting the past of the Wild Tribes by whom most of our territory
was inhabited, we have only a few childish fables of creation, the
adventures of some bird or beast divinity, of a flood or some other
natural convulsion, a victory or a defeat which may have occurred one
or a hundred generations ago. These fables lack chronology, and have
no definite historical signification which can be made available.
The Civilized Nations, however, had recorded annals not altogether
mythical. The Nahua annals reach back chronologically, although not
uninterruptedly to about the sixth century of our era; the Maya record
is somewhat less extensive in an unbroken line; but both extend more
or less vaguely and mythically to the beginning of the Christian
era, perhaps much farther. Myths are mingled in great abundance with
historical traditions throughout the whole aboriginal period, and it
is often utterly impossible to distinguish between them, or to fix the
boundary line beyond which the element of history is absolutely wanting.
The primitive aboriginal life, not only in America but throughout
the world, is wrapped in mystery. The clear light of history fades
gradually, as we recede from the present age, into an ever-deepening
shadow, which, beyond a varying indefinable point, a border-land
of myth and fable, merges into the black night of antiquity. The
investigations of modern science move back but slowly this bound
between the past and present, and while the results in the aggregate
are immense, in shedding new light on portions of the world's annals,
progress toward the ultimate end is almost inappreciable. If the
human mind shall ever penetrate the mystery, it will be one of its
last and most glorious triumphs. America does not differ so much as
would at first thought appear from the so-called Old World in respect
to the obscurity that shrouds her early history, if both are viewed
from a corresponding stand-point--in America the Spanish Conquest in
the sixteenth century, in the eastern continent a remote period when
history first began to be recorded in languages still in use. Or if
we attach greater importance to Biblical than to other traditions,
still America should be compared, not with the nations whose history
is traced in the Hebrew record, but with the distant extremities of
Asia, Europe, and Africa, on whose history the Bible throws no light,
save the statement that they were peopled from a common centre, in
which populating movement America has equal claims to be included. To
all whose investigations are a search for truth, darkness covers the
origin of the American peoples, and their primitive history, save for
a few centuries preceding the Conquest. The darkness is lighted up here
and there by dim rays of conjecture, which only become fixed lights of
fact in the eyes of antiquarians whose lively imagination enables them
to see best in the dark, and whose researches are but a sifting-out of
supports to a preconceived opinion.
* * * * *
The authorities on which our knowledge of aboriginal history rests are
native traditions orally handed down from generation to generation, the
Aztec picture-writings that still exist, the writings of the Spanish
authors who came in contact with the natives in the period immediately
following the Conquest, and also of converted native writers who wrote
in Spanish, or at least by the aid of European letters. In connection
with these positive authorities the actual condition, institutions,
and beliefs of the natives at the Conquest, together with the material
monuments of antiquity, all described in the preceding volumes,
constitute an important illustrative, corrective, or confirmatory
source of information.
[Sidenote: TRADITION AS AN AUTHORITY.]
Oral tradition, in connection with linguistic affinities, is our only
authority in the case of the wild tribes, and also plays a prominent
part in the annals of the civilized nations. In estimating its
historical value, not only the intrinsic value of the tradition itself,
but the authenticity of the version presented to us must be taken into
consideration; the latter consideration is, however, closely connected
with that of the early writers and their reliability as authorities on
aboriginal history. No tribe is altogether without traditions of the
past, many--probably most--of which were founded on actual occurrences,
while a few are wholly imaginary. Yet, whatever their origin, all are,
if unsupported by written records, practically of little or no value.
Every trace of the circumstances that gave rise to a tradition is soon
lost, although the tradition itself in curiously modified forms is long
preserved. Natural convulsions, like floods and earthquakes, famines,
wars, tribal migrations, naturally leave an impression on the savage
mind which is not easily effaced, but the fable in which the record
is embodied may have assumed a form so changed and childish that we
pass over it to-day as having no historical value, seeking information
only in an apparently more consistent tale, which may have originated
at a recent date from some very trivial circumstance. Examples are not
wanting of very important events in the comparatively modern history of
Indian tribes, the record of which has not apparently been preserved
in song or story, or the memory of which at least has become entirely
obliterated in little more than a hundred years. Oral tradition has no
chronology that is not purely imaginary; "many moons ago," "our fathers
did thus and so," may refer to antediluvian times or to the exploits
of the narrator's grandfather. Among the American savages there was
not even a pride in the pedigree of families or horses to induce care
in this respect, as among the Asiatic hordes of patriarchal times. But
the traditions of savages, valueless by themselves for a time more
remote than one or two generations, begin to assume importance when
the events narrated have been otherwise ascertained by the records of
some contemporary nation, throwing indirectly much light on history
which they were powerless to reveal. Three traditions are especially
prevalent in some form in nearly every section of America;--that of a
deluge, of an aboriginal migration, and of giants that dwelt upon the
earth at some time in the remote past. These may be taken as examples
and interpreted as follows, the respective interpretations being
arranged in the order of their probability.
The tradition of a flood would naturally arise, 1st, from the
destruction of a tribe or part of a tribe by the sudden rising of
a river or mountain stream--that is from a modern event such as has
occurred at some time in the history of nearly every people, and which
a hundred years and a fertile imagination would readily have converted
into a universal inundation. 2d. From the finding of sea-shells and
other marine relics inland, and even on high mountains, suggesting
to the natives' untutored mind what it proves to later scientific
research--the fact that water once covered all. 3d. From the actual
submersion of some portions of the continent by the action of volcano
or earthquake, an event that geology shows not to be improbable, and
which would be well calculated to leave a lasting impression on the
minds of savages. 4th. From the deluge of the scriptural tradition,
the only one of the many similar events that may have occurred which
makes any claims to have been historically recorded. The accompanying
particulars would be naturally invented. Some must have escaped, and an
ark or a high mountain are the natural means.
A traditional migration from north, south, east, or west may point to
the local journeying of a family or tribe, either in search of better
hunting-grounds, or as a result of adverse fortune in war; in a few
cases a general migration of many tribes constituting a great nation
may be referred to; and finally, it is not quite impossible that a
faint memory of an Old World origin may have survived through hundreds
of generations.
[Sidenote: INTERPRETATION OF TRADITION.]
So with the giant tradition, resulting, 1st, from the memory of a
fierce, numerous, powerful, and successful enemy, possibly of large
physique. No tribe so valiant that it has not met with reverses,
and the attributing of gigantic strength and supernatural powers
to the successful foe, removes among the descendants the sting of
their ancestors' defeat. 2d. From the discovery of immense fossil
bones of mastodons and other extinct species. It is not strange that
such were deemed human remains by the natives when the Spaniards in
later times have honestly believed them to be the bones of an extinct
gigantic race. 3d. From the existence of grand ruins in many parts
of the country, far beyond the constructive powers of the savage, and
therefore in his eyes the work of giants--as they were intellectually,
in comparison with their degenerate descendants. 4th. From an actual
traditional remembrance of those who built the ruined cities, and
intercourse with comparatively civilized tribes. 5th. From the
existence in primitive times of a race of giants.
Numerous additional sources for each of these traditions might
doubtless be suggested; but those given suffice for illustration, and,
as I have remarked, they are arranged in each case in what would seem
the natural order of probability. The near and natural should always
be preferred to the remote and supernatural; and the fables mentioned
should be referred to Noah's deluge, Asiatic origin, and the existence
of a gigantic race, only when the previous suppositions are proved by
extraneous evidence to be untenable. The early writers on aboriginal
America, using their reason only when it did not conflict with their
faith, reversed the order of probability, and thus greatly impaired
the usefulness of their contributions to history. The supposition
of a purely imaginary origin, common to aboriginal legend and modern
romance, should of course be added to each of the preceding lists, and
generally placed before the last supposition given.
* * * * *
Passing from the wild tribes to the civilized nations of Mexico and
Central America, we find tradition, or what is generally regarded as
such, much more complete and extensive in its scope, less childish
in detail, and with a more clearly defined dividing line between
history and mythology. Theoretically we might expect a higher grade
of tradition among a partially civilized people; but on the other
hand, what need had the Nahuas or Mayas of oral tradition when they
had the art of recording events? In fact, our knowledge of Aztec
and Maya history is not in any proper sense traditional, although
commonly spoken of as such by the writers. Previous to the practice
of the hieroglyphic art--the date of whose invention or introduction
is unknown, but must probably be placed long before the Christian
era--oral tradition was doubtless the only guide to the past; but
the traditions were recorded as soon as the system of picture-writing
was sufficiently perfected to suggest if not to clearly express their
import. After picture-writing came into general use, it is difficult
to imagine that any historical events should have been handed down by
tradition alone. Still in one sense the popular knowledge of the past
among the Mexicans may be called traditional, inasmuch as the written
records of the nation were not in the hands of the people, but were
kept by a class of the priesthood, and may be supposed to have been
read by comparatively few. The contents of the records, however, except
perhaps some religious mysteries which the priests alone comprehended,
were tolerably well known to the educated classes; and when the records
were destroyed by Spanish fanaticism, this general knowledge became the
chief source whence, through the 'talk of the old men,' the earlier
writers drew their information. It is in this light that we must
understand the statement of many able writers, that the greater part
of our knowledge of early American history is traditional, since this
knowledge was not obtained by an actual examination of the records
by the Spaniards, but orally from the people, the upper classes of
whom had themselves read the pictured annals, while the masses were
somewhat familiar through popular chants and plays with their contents.
The value of history faithfully taken from such a source cannot be
doubted, but its vagueness and conflicting statements respecting dates
and details may be best appreciated by questioning intelligent men in
the light of nineteenth century civilization respecting the details
of modern history, withholding the privilege of reference to books or
documents.
[Sidenote: HIEROGLYPHIC RECORDS.]
Of the Nahua hieroglyphic system and its capabilities enough has
been said elsewhere.[II-1] By its aid, from the beginning of the Toltec
period at least, all historical events were recorded that were deemed
worthy of being preserved. The popular knowledge of these events was
perpetuated by means of poems, songs, and plays, and this knowledge was
naturally faulty in dates. The numerous discrepancies which students of
the present day meet at every step in the investigation of aboriginal
annals, result chiefly from the almost total destruction of the painted
records, the carelessness of those who attempted to interpret the few
surviving documents at a time when such a task by native aid ought to
have been feasible, the neglect of the Spanish priesthood in allowing
the art of interpretation to be well-nigh lost, their necessary
reliance for historical information on the popular knowledge above
referred to, and to a certain degree doubtless from their failure to
properly record information thus obtained.
But few native manuscripts have been preserved to the present time,
and only a small part of those few are historical in their nature,
two of the most important having been given in my second volume.[II-2]
Most of the events indicated in such picture-writings as have been
interpreted are also narrated by the early writers from traditional
sources. Thus we see that our knowledge of aboriginal history depends
chiefly on the hieroglyphic records destroyed by the Spaniards, rather
than on the few fragments that escaped such destruction. To documents
that may be found in the future, and to a more careful study of those
now existing, we may look perhaps for much corrective information
respecting dates and other details, but it is not probable that newly
discovered picture-writings or new readings of old ones will extend the
aboriginal annals much farther back into the past. These remarks apply
of course only to the Aztec documents; the Maya records painted on skin
and paper, or inscribed on stone, are yet sealed books, respecting the
nature of whose contents conjecture is vain, but from which the future
may evolve revelations of the greatest importance.
* * * * *
[Sidenote: THE SPANISH WRITERS.]
Closely connected with the consideration of tradition and hieroglyphic
records as authorities for my present subject, is that of the Spanish
and native writers through whom for the most part American traditions,
both hieroglyphically recorded and orally transmitted--in fact, what
was known to the natives at the Conquest of their own past history--are
made known to the modern student. These were Catholic missionaries
and their converts, numerous, zealous, and as a class honest writers.
Through an excess of religious zeal they had caused at the first
irreparable harm by destroying the native records, but later they seem
to have realized to a certain extent their error, and to have done
all in their power to repair its consequences by zealously collecting
such fragments of historical knowledge as had been preserved among
the people. Their works have passed the test of severe criticism,
and the defects of each have been fairly pointed out, exaggerated, or
defended, according to the spirit of the critic; but the agreement of
the different works in general outline, and even their differences in
detail and their petty blunders, show that in their efforts to record
all that could be ascertained of the history of the New World and the
institutions of its people, their leading motive was the discovery
of the truth, although they were swayed like other writers of their
time, and all other times, by the spirit of the age, and by various
religious, political, and personal prejudices.
The prevailing weakness of Spanish writers on America is well
known--their religious enthusiasm and strong attachment to church
dogmas, which, in view of some of its consequences, is pronounced at
least mistaken zeal even by devoted churchmen of the present day. They
believed in the frequent miraculous interposition of God in the work
of converting the native pagans; in the instrumentality of the devil
in the spiritual darkness preceding the Conquest. In their antiquarian
researches a passage of scripture as commented by the Fathers brought
infinitely stronger conviction to their minds than any sculptured
monument, hieroglyphic record, historical tradition, or law of nature.
In short, they were true Catholics of their time.[II-3] The prevalence
of this religious spirit among the only men who had an opportunity
to clear up some of the mysteries of the American past is to be
regretted. They could have done their work much better without its
influence; but, on the other hand, without such a motive as religious
enthusiasm there is little probability that the work would have been
done at all. It is not only in American researches, however, that this
imperfection prevails. As we recede from the present we find men more
and more religious, and religion has ever been an imperious mistress,
brooking no rivalry on the part of reason. Reliance on superstition and
prejudice, rather than facts and reason, is not more noticeable perhaps
in works on ancient America than in other old works. The faith of the
Spaniards renders their conclusions on origin and the earlier periods
of primitive history valueless, but if that were all, the defect would
be of slight importance, for it is not likely that the natives knew
anything of their own origin, and the Spaniards had no means not now
accessible of learning anything on that subject from other sources. We
may well pardon them for finding St Thomas and his Christian teachings
in the Toltec traditions of Quetzalcoatl; the ten lost tribes of Israel
in the American aborigines; Noah's flood and the confusion of tongues
in an Aztec picture of a man floating on the water and a bird speaking
from a tree; provided they have left us a correct version of the
tradition, a true account of the natives and their institutions, and an
accurate copy of the picture referred to. But it is not improbable that
their zeal gave a coloring to some traditions and suppressed others
which furnished no support to the Biblical accounts, and were invented
wholly in the interests of the devil. Fortunately it was chiefly
on the mythological traditions supposed to relate to the creation,
deluge, connection of the Americans with the Old World peoples, and
other very remote events that they exercised their faith, rather than
on historical traditions proper; fortunately, because the matters of
origin and the earliest primitive history were entirely beyond the
reach of such authorities, even had they been represented with the most
perfect accuracy.
The writings of the authors in question were moreover submitted to a
rigorous system of censorship by Spanish councils and tribunals under
the control of the priesthood, without the approval of whose officials
no work could be published. The spirit that animated these censors
was the same as that alluded to above, and their zeal was chiefly
directed to the discovery and expurgation of any lurking anti-Catholic
sentiment. Many valuable works were doubtless suppressed, but such
of them as were preserved in manuscript, or those whose contents have
since been made known, have not proved that the censors directed their
efforts against anything but heterodoxy and unfavorable criticism of
Spanish dealings with the natives.
Spanish credulity accepted as facts many things which modern reason
pronounces absurd; shall we therefore reject all statements that
rest on Spanish authority? Do we reject all the events of Greek and
Roman history, because the historians believed that the sun revolved
about the earth, and attributed the ordinary phenomena of nature to
the actions of imaginary gods? Should we deny the historical value
of the Old Testament records because they tell of Jonah swallowed by
a whale, and the sun ordered to stand still? Do we refuse to accept
the occurrences of modern Mexican history because many of the ablest
Mexican writers apparently believe in the apparition of Nuestra Señora
de Guadalupe? And finally, can we reject the statements of able and
conscientious men--many of whom devoted their lives to the study of
aboriginal character and history, from an honest desire to do the
natives good--because they deemed themselves bound by their priestly
vows and the fear of the Inquisition to draw scriptural conclusions
from each native tradition? The same remarks apply to the writings of
converted and educated natives, influenced to a great degree by their
teachers; more prone, perhaps, to exaggeration through national pride,
but at the same time better acquainted with the native character and
with the interpretation of the native hieroglyphics. To pronounce all
these works deliberately executed forgeries, as a few modern writers
have done, is too absurd to require refutation.
The writers of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries who derived
their information from original sources, and on whose works all that
has been written subsequently is founded, comprise, 1st, the conquerors
themselves, chiefly Cortés, Diaz del Castillo, and the Anonymous
Conqueror, whose writings only touch incidentally upon a few points of
ancient history. 2d. The first missionaries who were sent from Spain
to supplement the achievements of Cortés by spiritual conquests. Such
were José de Acosta, Bernardino Sahagun, Bartolomé de Las Casas, Juan
de Torquemada, Diego Duran, Gerónimo de Mendieta, Toribio de Benavente
(Motolinia), Diego García de Palacio, Didaco Valades, and Alonzo de
Zurita. Of these Torquemada is the most complete and comprehensive,
so far as aboriginal history is concerned, furnishing an immense
mass of material drawn from native sources, very badly arranged and
written. Duran also devotes a large portion of his work[II-4] to history,
confining himself chiefly, however, to the annals of the Aztecs. The
other authorities named, although containing full accounts of the
natives and their institutions, devote comparatively little space
to historical traditions; Sahagun is the best authority of all, so
far as his observations go in this direction. All have been printed,
either in the original Spanish or in translations, except Las Casas,
whose great historical works exist only in manuscript. 3d. The native
writers who after their conversion acquired the Spanish language and
wrote on the history of their people, either in Spanish or in their own
language, employing the Spanish alphabet. Most of them were thoroughly
imbued with the spirit of their converters, and their writings as
a class are subject to the same criticism. Domingo Muñoz Camargo,
a noble Tlascaltec, wrote, about 1585, a history of his own people,
which has been published only in a French translation. Fernando de
Alvarado Tezozomoc, descended from the royal family of Azcapuzalco,
wrote the chronicles of Mexican history from the standpoint of the
Tepanecs, represented at the time of the Conquest by the kingdom of
Tlacopan. Fernando de Alva Ixtlilxochitl was a grandson of the last
king of Tezcuco, from whom he inherited all that were saved of the
records in the public archives. His works are more extensive than
those of any other native writer, covering the whole ground of Nahua
history, although treating more particularly of the Chichimecs, his
ancestors.[II-5]
[Sidenote: SECONDARY AUTHORITIES.]
In this class should be included the reported but little known
writings of Juan Ventura Zapata y Mendoza, Tadeo de Niza, and Alonzo
Franco.[II-6] There are also many manuscripts by native authors whose
names are unknown, brought to light by comparatively recent
researches, and preserved for the most part in the Brasseur and Aubin
collections in Paris. Their contents are unknown except through the
writings of the Abbé Brasseur. The Popol Vuh is another important
document, of which there are extant a Spanish and a French
translation. 4th. Spanish authors who passed their lives mostly in
Spain, and wrote chiefly under royal appointment. Their information
was derived from the writers already mentioned, from the official
correspondence of the colonists, and from the narratives of returning
adventurers. Most of them touched upon aboriginal history among other
topics. To this class belonged Peter Martyr, Francisco Lopez de
Gomara, Antonio de Herrera, and Gonzalo Fernandez de Oviedo y Valdés.
5th. Catholic priests and missionaries who founded or were in charge
of the missions at later periods or in remote regions, as Yucatan,
Guatemala, Chiapas, Oajaca, Michoacan, and the north-western provinces
of New Spain. They wrote chiefly in the seventeenth and eighteenth
centuries, and treat principally of the conversion of the natives, but
include also in many cases their historical traditions and their
explanations of the few aboriginal documents that fell into the
possession of the converts. The number of such works is very great,
and many of them have never been printed. Among the most important
writers of this class are Diego de Landa, Diego Lopez Cogolludo, Padre
Lizana, and Juan de Villagutierre Soto-Mayor, on Yucatan; Ramon de
Ordoñez y Aguiar,[II-7] Fuentes y Guzman,[II-8] F. E. Arana,[II-9]
Francisco García Pelaez,[II-10] and Domingo Juarros, on Guatemala;
Francisco Nuñez de la Vega,[II-11] Francisco Ximenez,[II-12] and
Antonio de Remesal, on Chiapas; Ribas, Alegre, and Arricivita on the
north-western provinces; and Francisco de Burgoa on Oajaca. To the
above should be added the regular records kept in all the missions,
and the numerous letters and reports of the missionaries in distant
provinces, many of which have been preserved, and not a few printed.
There may also be included in this class the writings of some later
Mexican authors, such as Boturini, Sigüenza y Góngora, Veytia, Leon y
Gama, and Clavigero. Their works were mostly founded on the
information supplied by their predecessors, which they did much to
arrange and classify, but they also had access to some original
authorities not previously used. Clavigero is almost universally
spoken of as the best writer on the subject, but it is probable that
he owes his reputation much more to his systematic arrangement and
clear narration of traditions that had before been greatly confused,
and to the omission of the most perplexing and contradictory points,
than to deep research or new discoveries.
The preceding classes include all the original authorities, that is,
all founded on information not accessible to later writers. These
works have been the foundation of all that has been written since,
except what has been developed from linguistic and other scientific
researches. All that modern authors have done may be followed step by
step, their facts as well as their conclusions.
Of the secondary authorities already alluded to, the condition and
institutions of the natives, with the material relics of their past,
not much need be said. It is only indirectly by means of comparisons
that these authorities can help us in the study of history. How
little they can teach unaided is illustrated in the case of the wild
tribes, for whose history they are practically the only authorities.
In Mexico and Central America the state of civilization as shown in
native art, religion, government, or manners and customs, may indicate
by resemblances or dissimilarities a connection or want of it between
the different civilized tribes, and may thus corroborate or modify
their written annals; it may even throw some light on the unity or
diversity of its own origin by showing the nature of the connection
between the Nahua and Maya cultures, in which striking resemblances
as well as contrasts are observed. Outside of the regions mentioned,
where there were no tangible records, we can only search among the
wilder tribes for points of likeness by which to attach their past to
that of the civilized nations. It may be foreseen that the results of
such a search will be but meagre and unsatisfactory, yet on several
important branches of the subject, such as the relation borne by the
Mound-Builders and Pueblos to the southern nations, it furnishes our
only light.
[Sidenote: LANGUAGE AS A HISTORICAL AUTHORITY.]
Of the historical aids now under consideration, ethnology proper,
the study of physical and mental characteristics, has yielded and
promises apparently the least important results. In fact, as has
been already pointed out in another part of this work, it has hardly
acquired the right to be classed among the sciences, so far as its
application to the American people is concerned. Theoretically it
may, in a more perfect state of development than now exists, throw
some light on the route and order of American migrations, possibly
on the question of origin; thus far, however, ethnological studies
have been practically fruitless. Results obtained from a comparison
of the miscellaneous arts and customs of various tribes have likewise
furnished and will continue to furnish but very slight assistance in
historical investigations. Resemblances and dissimilarities in these
respects depend intimately on environment, which in comparatively
short periods works the most striking changes. Strongly marked
analogies are noted in tribes that never came in contact with each
other, while contrasts as marked appear in people but a short time
separated. Under the same circumstances, after all, men do about the
same things, the mind originating like inventions; and coincidences
in arts and customs, unless of an extraordinary nature, may be more
safely attributed to an independent origin resulting from environment,
than to international identity or connection. That language is by far
the best of these secondary authorities is conceded by all. No better
proof of relationship between native tribes can be desired than the
fact that they speak the same language, or dialects showing clear
verbal and constructive resemblances. The most prominent abuse of this
authority has been a disposition to connect the past of tribes in whose
languages slight and forced verbal similarities are pointed out. There
is also some difference of opinion about the use of the authority.
That two tribes speaking the same languages or similar dialects have
had a common origin, or have at least been intimately connected in the
past, as tribes, is evident; but how far back that origin or connection
may extend, whether it may reach back through the ages to the first
division of the human race, or even to the first subdivision of the
American peoples, is a disputed point. Fortunately the doubts that have
been raised concern chiefly the question of origin, which for other
reasons cannot yet be settled.[II-13]
Having thus given a sketch of the sources to which we may look for
all that is known and has been conjectured respecting the American
past, I shall proceed to place before the reader in the remaining
chapters of my work what these authorities reveal on the subject. I
have not, I believe, exaggerated their value, but fully comprehend the
unsubstantial character which must be attributed to many of them. I am
well aware that aboriginal American history, like the ancient Egyptian
and Hebrew annals, differs materially in its nature and degree of
accuracy from the history of England since the expedition of William
the Conqueror, or of Mexico since the Conquest by Hernan Cortés. I do
not propose to record such events only as may be made to conform to the
modern idea of chronologic exactitude, rejecting all else as fabulous
and mythic. Were such my purpose, a chapter on the subject already
given in the second volume would suffice, with some contraction for
the earlier epochs, and a corresponding expansion, perhaps, for Aztec
history during the century immediately preceding the Conquest. On the
contrary, I shall tell the tale as I find it recorded, mingled as it
doubtless is at many points with myth and fable, and shall recount,
as others have done, the achievements of heroes that possibly never
lived, the wanderings of tribes who never left their original homes.
It is not in a spirit of real or feigned credulity that I adopt this
course,--on the contrary, I wish to clearly discriminate between fact
and fancy wherever such discrimination may be possible, and so far as
an extensive study of my subject may enable me to do so--but it is in
accordance with the general plan of the whole work to record all that
is found, rejecting only what may be proven false and valueless rather
than what may possibly be so.
[Sidenote: TREATMENT OF THE SUBJECT.]
I have compared the American past to a dark sea, from the bluff coast
line of which projects an occasional cape terminating in precipitous
cliffs, quicksands, and sunken rocks, beyond which some faint lights
are floated by buoys. The old authors, as Torquemada, Clavigero, and
Veytia, had but little difficulty in crossing from the headlands to the
tower of Babel beyond the Sea of Darkness; they told the story, fables
and all, with little discrimination save here and there the rejection
of a tale infringing apparently on orthodoxy, or the expression of
a doubt as to the literal acceptation of some marvelous occurrence.
Of modern authors, those who, like Wilson, refuse to venture upon
the projecting capes of solid rock and earth, who utterly reject the
Aztec civilization with all its records, are few, and at this day
their writings may be considered as unworthy of serious notice. Other
writers, of whom Gallatin is a specimen, venture boldly from the main
coast to the extremity of each projecting point, and acknowledge the
existence of the rocks, sands, and buoys beyond, but decline to attempt
their passage, doubting their security. These men, in favor of whose
method there is much to be said, accept the annals of the later Aztec
periods, but look with distrust upon the traditions of the Chichimec,
Toltec, and Olmec epochs; and hardly see in the far distance the
twinkling floating lights that shine from Votan's Empire of Xibalba.
Then there are writers who are continually dreaming they have found
secure footing by routes previously unknown, from rock to rock and
through the midst of shifting sands. Such are the advocates of special
theories of American history resting on newly discovered authorities
or new readings of old ones. They carefully sift out such mythic
traditions as fit their theories, converting them into incontrovertible
facts, and reject all else as unworthy of notice; these, however,
have chiefly to do with the matter of origin. Finally, I may speak
of Brasseur de Bourbourg, rather a class by himself, perhaps, than
the representative of a class. This author, to speak with a degree
of exaggeration, steps out without hesitation from rock to rock over
the deep waters; to him the banks of shifting quicksand, if somewhat
treacherous about the edges, are firm land in the central parts; to
him the faintest buoy-supported stars are a blaze of noon-day sun; and
only on the floating masses of sea-weed far out on the waters lighted
up by dim phosphorescent reflections, does he admit that his footing is
becoming insecure and the light grows faint. In other words, he accepts
the facts recorded by preceding authors, arranges them often with
great wisdom and discrimination, ingeniously finds a historic record
in traditions by others regarded as pure fables, and thus pushes his
research far beyond the limits previously reached. He rejects nothing,
but transforms everything into historic facts.
In the present sketch I wish to imitate to a certain extent the writers
of each class mentioned, except perhaps the specialists, for I have
no theory to defend, have found no new bright sun to illumine what
has ever been dark. With the Spanish writers I would tell all that
the natives told as history, and that without constantly reminding the
reader that the sun did not probably stand still in the heavens, that
giants did not flourish in America, that the Toltec kings and prophets
did not live to the age of several hundred years, and otherwise
warning him against what he is in no danger whatever of accepting
as truth. With Wilson and his class of antiquarian sceptics I would
feel no hesitation in rejecting the shallow theories and fancies
evolved by certain writers from their own brain. With Gallatin I wish
to discriminate clearly, when such discrimination is called for and
possible, between the historic and the probably mythic; to indicate
the boundary between firm land and treacherous quicksand; but also
like Brasseur, I would pass beyond the firm land, spring from rock
to rock, wade through shifting sands, swim to the farthest, faintest,
light, and catch at straws by the way;--yet not flatter myself while
thus employed, as the abbé occasionally seems to do, that I am treading
dry-shod on a wide, solid, and well-lighted highway.
FOOTNOTES:
[II-1] Vol. ii., pp. 523-52.
[II-2] pp. 544-9.
[II-3] The fact that they were Spaniards and Catholics is enough to
condemn them with critics of a certain class, of which Adair may be
quoted as an example: 'I lay little stress upon Spanish testimonies,
for time and ocular proof have convinced us of the labored falsehood
of almost all their historical narrations.... They were so divested of
those principles inherent to honest enquirers after truth, that they
have recorded themselves to be a tribe of prejudiced bigots.' _Amer.
Ind._, p. 197.
[II-4] _Historia Antigua de la Nueva España_, MS. of 1588, folio, 3
volumes. A part of this work has recently been printed in Mexico. I
have a manuscript copy made by Mr C. A. Spofford from that existing in
the Congressional Library in Washington.
[II-5] Ixtlilxochitl has been the subject of much criticism favorable
and otherwise. The verdict of the best authors seems to be that he
wrote honestly, compiling from authentic documents in his possession,
but carelessly, especially in the matter of chronology which presents
contradictions on nearly every page. Even Wilson, _Conq. Mex._, pp.
23, 61, who stigmatizes as liars all the early writers on this
subject, admits that Alva lies elegantly, and has written an able
though fictitious narrative. Carelessness in dates and a disposition
to unduly exalt his own race and family, are the most glaring faults
of this author, and are observable also to a certain extent in all the
native historians.
[II-6] _Veytia_, _Hist. Ant. Mej._, tom. ii., p. 91; _Clavigero_,
_Storia Ant. del Messico_, tom. i., p. 10; _Brasseur de Bourbourg_,
_Hist. Nat. Civ._, tom. ii., p. 196.
[II-7] _Historia de la Creacion del Cielo y de la Tierra, conforme al
Sistema de la gentilidad Americana._
[II-8] _Recopilacion Florida de la Historia del Reyno de Guatemala_,
MS. in the Guatemalan Archives.
[II-9] _Memorial de Tecpan-Atitlan_, a history of the Cakchiquel
Kingdom, MS. discovered by Brasseur.
[II-10] _Memorias para la Historia del Antiguo Reyno de Guatemala._
Guatemala, 1852.
[II-11] _Constituciones Diocesanas del Obispado de Chiappas._ Rome,
1702.
[II-12] Vol. iii. of a History of Chiapas and Guatemala, found by
Scherzer at the University of San Carlos. See _Ximenez_, _Hist. Ind.
Guat._, pp. viii., xiii.
[II-13] Languages, 'the most ancient historical monuments of nations.'
'If in the philosophical study of the structure of languages, the
analogy of a few roots acquires value only when they can be
geographically connected together, neither is the want of resemblance
in roots any very strong proof against the common origin of nations.'
_Humboldt's Pers. Nar._, vol. v., pp. 143, 293. Language, 'which
usually exhibits traces of its origin, even when the science and
literature, that are embodied in it, have widely diverged.'
_Prescott's Mex._, vol. iii., p. 394. 'In the absence of historical
evidence, language is the best test of consanguinity; there are
reasons why climate should alter the physical character, but it does
not appear that the language would be materially affected by such
local influence.' _Prichard's Nat. Hist. Man_, vol. i., p. xvi.
'Efectivamente, la historia por sí sola nada nos descubre acerca del
orígen de las naciones, muy poco nos enseña sobre la mezcla y
confusion de las razas, casi nada nos dice de las emigraciones de los
pueblos, mientras todo esto lo esplica admirablemente el análisis y la
investigacion del filólogo.' _Pimentel_, _Discurso_, in _Soc. Mex.
Geog., Boletin_, tom. viii., pp. 367-8. 'The problem of the common
origin of languages has no necessary connection with the problem of
the common origin of mankind.... The science of language and the
science of Ethnology have both suffered most severely from being mixed
up together. The classification of races and languages, should be
quite independent of each other. Races may change their language and
history supplies us with several instances where one race adopted the
language of another. Different languages, therefore, may be spoken by
different races; so that any attempt at squaring the classification of
races and tongues must necessarily fail.' _Müller's Science of Lang._,
vol. i., pp. 326-7.
CHAPTER III.
THE PRE-TOLTEC PERIOD OF ABORIGINAL HISTORY.
Subdivision of the Subject -- Tzendal Tradition of the
Votanic Empire -- Votan's Book and its Contents as reported
by Nuñez de la Vega, Cabrera, and Ordoñez -- Testimony of
Manners and Customs, Religion, Languages, and Monuments of
the Civilized Nations respecting the Primitive Maya Peoples
-- The Quiché Record, or Popol Vuh -- Civilizing Efforts
of Gucumatz and his Followers -- Exploits of Hunahpu and
Xbalanque -- Conquest of Xibalba -- Migration from Tulan
Zuiva, the Seven Caves -- Meaning of the Quiché Tradition --
Nahua Traditions -- The Toltecs in Tamoanchan according to
Sahagun -- The Codex Chimalpopoca -- Pre-Toltec Nations in
Mexico -- Olmecs and Xicalancas -- The Quinames -- Cholula
and Quetzalcoatl -- The Totonacs -- Teotihuacan -- Otomís,
Miztecs, Zapotecs, and Huastecs -- The Toltecs in Huehue
Tlapallan -- Migration to Anáhuac -- The Chichimecs in
Amaquemecan -- Ancient Home of the Nahuatlacas and Aztecs --
Primitive Annals of Yucatan -- Conclusions.
[Sidenote: TREATMENT OF THE SUBJECT.]
[Sidenote: DIVISION OF THE SUBJECT.]
In order to render more vivid than it would otherwise have been a
picture of Nahua and Maya institutions as they were found in the
sixteenth century, I have devoted one chapter of a preceding volume to
an outline view of aboriginal history; to fill in so far as possible
its details, is my remaining task. The sketch alluded to will prove
convenient here, since it will enable me at various points to refer
intelligibly and yet briefly to events somewhat in advance of their
chronologic order. As has been stated, the sixth century is the most
remote period to which we are carried in the annals of Anáhuac by
traditions sufficiently definite to be considered in a strict sense as
historic records. Prior to the sixth century there were doubtless other
periods of Nahua greatness, for there is little evidence to indicate
that this was the first appearance in Mexico of this progressive
people, but previous development cannot be definitely followed--in a
historical sense--although affording occasional glimpses which supply
interesting matter for antiquarian speculation.
In the southern regions, where the Maya culture flourished, or what
may be considered geographically as Central America, we have seen that
the chronologic record is much less extensive and perfect even than in
the north, taking us back in an oft-broken line only a few centuries
beyond the Conquest. Yet we have caught traditional glimpses far back
in the misty past of a mighty aboriginal empire in these tropical
lands, of the earlier and grander stages of Maya culture, of Votan,
of Xibalba, of even the early periods of Nahua civilization and power.
Palenque, Copan, and their companions in ruin, the wonderful material
monuments of the ancient epoch, proving it to be no mere creation of
the imagination, have been described and pictured. With the breaking-up
of the Maya empire into separate nations at an unknown date, the
aboriginal history of Central America as a whole ceases, and down to
a period closely preceding the Conquest, we have only an occasional
event, the memory of which is preserved in the traditions of two or
three nations.
* * * * *
The history of the Native Races may be most conveniently subdivided
as follows;--1st. The Pre-Toltec Period, embracing the semi-mythic
traditions of the earliest civilization, extending down to a
date--always preceding the sixth century, but varying in different
parts of the territory--when the more properly historic annals of
the different nations begin, and including also the few traditions
referring to pre-Toltec nations north of Tehuantepec. 2d. The Toltec
Period, referring like the two following periods to Anáhuac alone,
and extending down to the eleventh century. 3d. The Chichimec Period,
extending from the eleventh century to the formation of the tri-partite
alliance between the Aztecs, Acolhuas, and Tepanecs in the fifteenth
century. 4th. The Aztec Period, that of Aztec supremacy during the
century preceding the Conquest. 5th. The annals of such Nahua nations
outside the limits of the Aztec Empire proper as cannot be conveniently
included in the preceding divisions. 6th. Historical traditions of
the Wild Tribes of the north. 7th. The Quiché-Cakchiquel nations of
Guatemala. 8th. Miscellaneous nations and tribes of Central America.
9th. The Maya nations of Yucatan.
The first division, the Pre-Toltec Period, to which the present chapter
is devoted, will include the few vague traditions that seem to point to
the cradle of American civilization, to the Votanic empire, to Xibalba,
and to the deeds of the civilizers, or culture-heroes, in Tabasco
and Chiapas. Who can estimate the volumes that would be required for
a full narration of all that actually occurred within this period,
had the record been made or preserved;--the development, from germs
whose nature is unknown, of American civilization; the struggles and
misfortunes of infant colonies; the exploits of native heroes; plots
of ambition, glorious success, utter failure; the rise and fall of
princes and of empires; wars, triumphs, defeats; oppression and revolt;
political combinations and intrigues; religious strife between the
fanatic devotees of rival divinities; seasons of plenty and of famine;
earthquake, flood, and pestilence--a tangled network of events spread
over the centuries;--to relate all that we may know of it a chapter
will suffice.
[Sidenote: VOTAN AND HIS DEEDS.]
I have told in another volume the mythic tale of Votan,[III-1] the
culture-hero, how he came to America and apportioned the land among
the people. He came by divine command from Valum Chivim by way of Valum
Votan, built a great city of Nachan, 'city of the serpents'--so called
from his own name, for he was of the race of Chan, a Serpent--and
founded a great empire in the Usumacinta region, which he seems to have
ruled over as did his descendants or followers for many centuries. He
was not regarded in the native traditions as the first man in America;
he found the country peopled, as did all the culture-heroes, but by
his teachings and by the aid of his companions he firmly established
his own ideas of religion and government. So far as his memory was
preserved by tradition he was a civilizer, a law-giver, the introducer
of the Maya culture, worshiped moreover, after his disappearance, as
a god. He came by sea from the east, but with the locality whence
he started I have nothing to do here; neither is it necessary to
indulge in speculation respecting the four mysterious visits which
he paid after his arrival in America to his original home in the Old
World, where it is gravely asserted he was present at the building
of Solomon's temple and saw the ruins of the tower of Babel. His
reported acts in the New World, whose people he came to civilize,
were;--the dividing or apportioning of the lands among the people;
their instruction in the new institutions they were required to adopt;
the building of a great city, Nachan, afterwards the metropolis of
an empire; the reception of a new band of disciples of his own race,
who were allowed to share in the success already achieved by his
enterprise; the subdividing of his empire after its power had become
wide-spread in the land into several allied monarchies subordinate in
a certain degree to Nachan, among whose capitals were Tulan, Mayapan,
and Chiquimula; the construction of a subterranean road or 'snake hole'
from the barranca of Zuqui to Tzequil; the deposit of a great treasure
with tapirs as sacred animals in a 'house of gloom' at Huehuetan in
Soconusco, protected by guardians called _tlapianes_, at whose head
was a Lady Superior; and finally the writing of a 'book' in which was
inscribed a complete record of all he had done, with a defense or proof
of his claims to be considered one of the Chanes, or Serpents.[III-2]
[Sidenote: THE BOOK OF VOTAN.]
This document is the authority, indirectly, for nearly all that is
known from Tzendal sources of Votan and his empire. Francisco Nuñez de
la Vega, Bishop of Chiapas, claims to have had in his possession[III-3] and
to have read this historical tract. He does not describe it, but from
his having been able to read the contents, it would seem to have been,
if genuine, not the original in hieroglyphics but an interpretation
in European letters, although still perhaps in the Tzendal language.
Of the contents, besides a general statement of Votan's coming as
the first man sent by God to portion out the land, and some of his
experiences in the Old World, this author says nothing definite.
He claims to have had much knowledge of Tzendal antiquity derived
from the work mentioned and other native writings, but he feared to
perpetuate this knowledge lest it might "confirm more strongly an
idolatrous superstition." He is the only authority for the deposit of
the treasure in the Dark House at Huehuetan, without saying expressly
that he derived his information from Votan's writings. This treasure,
consisting of aboriginal relics, the bishop felt it to be his duty
to destroy, and it was publicly burned in 1691. It is not altogether
improbable that a genuine Maya document similar to the _Manuscript
Troano_ or _Dresden Codex_,[III-4] preserved from the early times, may
have found a native interpreter at the time of the Conquest, and
have escaped in its disguise of Spanish letters the destruction that
overtook its companions.
The next notice of this manuscript is found in the writings of Dr Paul
Felix Cabrera,[III-5] who in the last part of the eighteenth century found
it in the possession of Don Ramon de Ordoñez y Aguiar, a native and
resident of Ciudad Real in Chiapas.[III-6] He describes the document as
consisting of "five or six folios of common quarto paper, written in
ordinary characters in the Tzendal language, an evident proof of its
having been copied from the original in hieroglyphics, shortly after
the conquest."[III-7] The manuscript, according to Cabrera, recounted
Votan's arrival with seven families, to whom he apportioned the lands;
his voyages to the Old World; and his reception of the new-comers.
Returning from one of his voyages "he found seven other families of the
Tzequil nation, who had joined the first inhabitants, and recognized
in them the same origin as his own, that is, of the Culebras. He
speaks of the place where they built their first town, which, from its
founders, received the name of Tzequil; he affirms the having taught
them refinement of manners in the use of the table, table-cloth, etc.;
that, in return for these, they taught him the knowledge of God and of
his worship; his first ideas of a king and obedience to him; and that
he was chosen captain of all these united families."
Ordoñez, at the time of Cabrera's visit, was engaged in writing his
great 'History of the Heaven and Earth,'[III-8] a work, as the learned
Doctor predicts, to be "so perfect in its kind, as will completely
astonish the world." The manuscript was never published, part of the
historical portion was lost, and the remaining fragments or copies
of them fell into the hands of Brasseur de Bourbourg, whose writings
contain all that is known of their contents; and it must be confessed
that from these fragments little or nothing of value has been extracted
by the abbé in addition to what Nuñez de la Vega and Cabrera had
already made known. Ordoñez was familiar with the Tzendal language
and character, with the ancient monuments of his native state, and
was zealously devoted to antiquarian researches; he had excellent
opportunities to collect and record such scraps of knowledge as
the Tzendal tribes had preserved from the days of their ancestors'
greatness;[III-9] but his enthusiasm seems rather to have led him to
profitless speculations on the original population of the New World and
"its progress from Chaldea immediately after the confusion of tongues."
Even after rejecting the absurd theories and speculations which seem
to have constituted the bulk of his writings, one cannot help looking
with some distrust on the few traditional statements respecting Votan
not given by other authors, and thinking of possible transformations
that may have been effected in Tzendal fables under the pens of two
writers like Ordoñez and Brasseur, both honest investigators, but
of that enthusiastic class of antiquarians who experience few or no
difficulties.
[Sidenote: TZENDAL TRADITIONS.]
The few items of information respecting the Votanic period not already
mentioned, some of them not in themselves improbable, but few traceable
to any very definite native source, are the following: The date of the
foundation of the empire, according to Ordoñez, was about 1000 B.C.
Whether he had any other reason for this supposition than his theory
that the building of Solomon's temple, attributed by some writers
to that period, took place during Votan's life, is uncertain. The
name Tzequiles, applied to Votan's followers by the aborigines,--or
rather, it would seem, by the first to the second division of the
Serpents--is said to mean in Tzendal 'men with petticoats,' and to have
been applied to the new-comers by reason of their peculiar dress.[III-10]
To them was given, after the permanent establishment of the empire,
one of the great kingdoms into which it was divided, with Tulan as
their capital city. This kingdom with two others, whose capitals were
Mayapan in Yucatan and Chiquimula, possibly Copan, in Honduras, were
allied with, yet to a certain degree subordinate to, the original
empire whose capital was Nachan, built and ruled by Votan himself and
his descendants. The only names which seem to have been applied in the
Tzendal traditions to the people and their capital city were Chanes,
or Serpents, and Nachan, or City of Serpents; but these names acquire
considerable historical importance when it is noted that they are the
exact equivalents of Culhuas and Culhuacan, names which will be found
so exasperatingly prevalent in the Nahua traditions of the north.
Ordoñez claims, however, that the name Quiché, at a later period that
of a Guatemalan kingdom, was also in these earlier times applied to
Votan's empire.[III-11]
Of Votan's death there is no tradition, nor is anything definite
reported of his successors, save, what is perhaps only a conjecture,
that their names are recorded in the Tzendal calendar as the names of
days,[III-12] the order being that of their succession. In this case it is
necessary to suppose that Votan had two predecessors, Igh and Imox; and
in fact Brasseur claims to find in one document a statement that Igh
brought the first colony to America.[III-13] Chinax, the last but two of
the line, a great soldier, is said to have been put to death by a rival
of another nation.[III-14] Nuñez de la Vega notes the existence of a family
of Votans in his time, claiming direct descent from the great founder;
and Brasseur states that a wild tribe of the region are yet known as
Chanes.[III-15]
[Sidenote: THE VOTANIC EMPIRE.]
Such are the vague memories of the Chiapan past so far as they were
preserved by the natives of the region, and collected by Europeans.
The nature of the traditions themselves, the sources whence they
sprang, the medium through which they are given to us, are not such
as to inspire great confidence in the accuracy of the details related,
although some of the traditions are not improbable and were very likely
founded on actual occurrences. But whatever value may be attached
to their details, the traditions in question have great weight in
establishing two general propositions--the existence in the remote
past of a great and powerful empire in the Usumacinta region, and a
general belief among the subjects of that empire that the beginning
of their greatness was due to a hero or demi-god called Votan. They
point clearly to the appearance and growth of a great race, nation,
or dynasty; and they carry us no farther. Respecting the questions
who or what was Votan, man or mythic creation, populator, colonizer,
civilizer, missionary, conqueror, foreign or native born? When, how,
and whence did he come to the central tierra caliente? Who were the
people among whom he wrought his mighty deeds, and what was their past
history? we are left to simple conjecture,--conjecture of a class which
falls without the limits of my present purpose, and to which the first
chapter of this volume has been devoted. Doubtless the Votanic was not
the first period of American civilization and power, but none earlier
is known to us. In addition to the Tzendal traditions there are several
other authorities bearing more or less directly on this primitive
empire, which I proceed to investigate.
* * * * *
In the second volume of this work I have described the physique,
character, manners and customs, arts, and institutions of the civilized
nations of our territory, dividing them into two great families or
groups, the Mayas and the Nahuas, "the former the more ancient, the
latter the more recent and wide-spread." The many contrasts observed
between the institutions of the northern and southern nations seemed
sufficiently marked to outweigh the frequently recurring resemblances,
and to justify me in the opinion there expressed that their culture
had either been distinct from the beginning, or--what is more probable
and for my purpose practically the same thing--that it had progressed
in different paths for a long time previous to the coming of the
Spaniards. The contrasts observed were attributed to a distinct origin
of the two national groups, or, with more probability, to their long
separation; while the analogies were to be referred either to unity
of origin, to the tendency of humanity to like development under like
circumstances, to frequent communication and friction by commerce or
war, or still better, to the influence of all these causes combined.
[Sidenote: THE MAYAS AND NAHUAS.]
The picture presented in the third volume of the myths and languages of
the same nations favored the view previously taken. In the religious
fancies, divinities, forms of worship, ideas of a future state,
physical, animal, and creation myths, to which the first part of
the volume was devoted, the analogies, it is true, seemed somewhat
stronger and the contrasts less striking than in the characteristics
previously portrayed; this was perhaps because the myths of any people
point farther back into their past than do the so-called manners and
customs; but in the consideration of languages which followed, the
contrasts between the two groups came out more distinctly marked than
at any previous stage of the investigation. A very large proportion
of the tongues of the civilized nations were found to belong more or
less closely to one or the other of two linguistic families. Finally,
in the fourth volume a study of material relics tended very strongly
to confirm the opinion before arrived at respecting the development
of Maya and Nahua culture in distinct channels, at least during the
historic period. I need not repeat here even en résumé the facts
exhibited in the preceding volumes, nor the lessons that have at
different points been drawn from them; but I may briefly mention some
general conclusions founded on the preceding matter which bear on my
present purpose of historical investigation. First, as already stated,
the Maya and Nahua nations have been within traditionally historic
times practically distinct, although coming constantly in contact.
Second, this fact is directly opposed to the once accepted theory of a
civilized people, coming from the far north, gradually moving southward
with frequent halts, constantly increasing in power and culture, until
the highest point of civilization was reached in Chiapas, Honduras,
and Yucatan, or as many believed in South America. Third, the theory
alluded to is rendered altogether untenable by the want of ruins in
California and the great north-west; by the utter want of resemblance
between New Mexican and Mexican monuments; by the failure to discover
either Aztec or Maya dialects in the north; and finally by the strong
contrasts between the Nahuas and Mayas, both in language and in
monuments of antiquity. Fourth, the monuments of the south are not
only different from but much more ancient than those of Anáhuac, and
cannot possibly have been built by the Toltecs after their migration
from Anáhuac in the eleventh century, even if such a migration took
place. Fifth, these monuments, like those of the north, were built by
the ancestors of the people found in possession of the country at the
Conquest, and not by an extinct race or in remote antiquity.[III-16] Sixth,
the cities of Palenque, Ococingo, and Copan, at least, were unoccupied
when the Spaniards came; the natives of the neighboring region knew
nothing of their origin even if they were aware of their existence,
and no notice whatever of the existence of such cities appears in
the annals of the surrounding civilized nations during the eight or
nine centuries preceding the Conquest; that is, the nation that built
Palenque was not one of those found by Europeans in the country, but
its greatness had practically departed before the rise of the Quiché,
Cakchiquel, and Yucatan powers. Seventh, the many resemblances that
have been noted between Nahua and Maya beliefs, institutions, arts,
and relics, may be consistently accounted for by the theory that at
some period long preceding the sixth century the two peoples were
practically one so far as their institutions were concerned, although
they are of themselves not sufficient to prove the theory. Eighth,
the oldest civilization in America which has left any traces for our
consideration, whatever may have been its pre-historic origin, was
that in the Usumacinta region represented by the Palenque group of
ruins.[III-17]
It is not likely that Américanistes of the present day will disagree
materially with the preceding conclusions, especially as they do not
positively assert the southern origin of the Nahua peoples or deny
their traditional migration from the north. The general theory alluded
to of a great migration from north to south, and the theory of a
civilized race of foreign origin extinct long before the Conquest,
will find few defenders in view of the results of modern research. It
is true that many writers attribute more or less positively the grand
ruins of Central America to the Toltecs after their migration southward
in the eleventh century; but their decision has been generally reached
without even considering the possible existence of any other civilized
nation in the annals of American antiquity. Their studies have shown
them that Palenque was not the work of an extinct race, and they have
consequently attributed the ruins to the oldest people mentioned in
the popular version of American traditional history--the Toltecs, and
the more naturally because that people, according to the tradition, had
migrated southward. Mr Stephens, who arrived at this conclusion in the
manner indicated, admits that from a study of the ruins themselves he
would have assigned the foundation of the cities to a much more remote
period.[III-18]
[Sidenote: MONUMENTS AND INSTITUTIONS.]
Thus the monumental relics of Central America by themselves and by
comparisons with other American ruins, point directly to the existence
of a great empire in the Palenque region; and the observed phenomena
of myths, language, and institutions agree perfectly with such a
conclusion, which, however, unaided, they could not have established.
We may then accept as a reality the Votanic Maya empire on the
authority of the native traditions confirmed by the tangible records of
ruined cities, and by the condition of the southern civilized nations
in the sixteenth century. It is more than probable that Palenque was
the capital, as Ordoñez believes--the Nachan of the Votanic epoch--and
not improbable that Ococingo, Copan, and some of the older Yucatec
cities were the centres of contemporaneous, perhaps allied powers.[III-19]
[Sidenote: TRADITIONS OF THE QUICHÉS.]
I pass next to the traditions of the Quiché nations as preserved in
the _Popol Vuh_, or National Book, and known to the world through
the Spanish translation of Ximenez and the French of Brasseur de
Bourbourg.[III-20] These traditions, the authenticity and general accuracy
of which there is no reason to doubt, constitute a hopelessly entangled
network of mythic tales, without chronology, but with apparent
although vague references here and there, to actual events in the
primitive history of the peoples whose descendants were the Quichés
and Cakchiquels, and with a more continuous account in the closing
chapters, of the Quiché annals of a much later period, immediately
preceding the Conquest. In the introduction we read: "This is the
origin of the ancient history of Quiché. Here we write the annals of
the past, the beginning of all that has taken place in the city of
Quiché, among the tribes of the Quiché nations. Behold we bring about
the manifestation of what was in obscurity, its first dawning by the
will of the Creator and of the Former, of Him who begets and of Him who
gives being. Their names are Hunahpu Vuch--'shooter of the blowpipe at
the opossum,' Hunahpu Utïu--'shooter of the blowpipe at the coyote,'
Zaki Nima Tzyiz--'great white pricker,' Tepeu--the 'dominator,' and
Gucumatz--the 'plumed serpent;' Heart of the Lakes, Heart of the Sea,
Master of the Verdant Planisphere, Master of the Azure Surface. Thus
it is that these also are named, sung, and celebrated--the grandmother
and the grandfather, whose names are Xpiyacoc and Xmucane, preserver
and protectrice; twice grandmother and twice grandfather, as it is
stated in the Quiché annals; concerning whom was related all that
they did afterwards in the light of life, in the light of the word,
(civilization). Behold that which we shall write after the word of
God, and in Christianity; we shall bring it to light because the _Popol
Vuh_, the national book, is no longer visible, in which it was clearly
seen that we came from beyond the sea--'the narrative of our life
in the land of shadow, and how we saw the light and life,' as it is
called. It is the first book, written in olden times; but its view is
hidden from him who sees and thinks. Wonderful is its appearance, and
the narrative of the time when he (the Creator) finished everything in
heaven and on earth."[III-21]
Then follows an account, which has already been presented in a
condensed translation,[III-22] of a time when all was silent, and there
was yet no earth, and no living thing, only the immobility and silence
of a boundless sea, on the surface of which floated the Creator and
his companion deities named above, including Gucumatz, the 'plumed
serpent.' Then the light appeared and the earth with its vegetation
was created by Gucumatz and the Dominator at the word of Hurakan,
Heart of Heaven, the Thunderbolt. Life and fecundity were given to the
animals and birds, who were distributed as guardians of the forests
and mountains, and called upon to speak and praise the names of those
that had made them; but the poor animals, after efforts twice repeated,
could not obey, and were assigned a position far below that which they
had been intended to fill. Two attempts at the creation of intelligent
beings followed, both failures. First man was made of earth, and
although he could speak, he was intellectually stupid and physically
clumsy, unable to stand erect, and soon mingled with the water like a
man of mud. He was destroyed by the disgusted creators. The sorcerers,
Xpiyacoc and Xmucane, grandmothers of the sun and of the moon, were
consulted in the second creation, and the 'chief of Toltecat' is
mentioned in addition to the names already given. Lots were cast, all
needful precautions were taken, and man was made again of wood and
pith; but he lacked intelligence, led a useless life, and forgot the
Heart of Heaven. They became numerous on the face of the earth, but
the gods were wroth and sent upon them a flood, and a resinous shower
from heaven; their houses refused to cover them, the trees shook them
from the branches where they sought shelter, the animals and even the
household implements turned against the poor wooden men, reviling and
persecuting them, until all were destroyed, save a few who remained as
a memorial in the form of apes.[III-23]
At this point the character of the narrative changes somewhat, and,
although an account of a third and final creation of man, given on a
subsequent page,[III-24] should, in the opinion of Brasseur, be introduced
here, I proceed with a résumé of the Quiché tradition in the order
of its arrangement in both the Spanish and French version, devoting a
paragraph to each chapter of the French translation.
There was sky and earth, but little light; and a man named Vucub Cakix,
'seven aras, or paroquets,' was puffed up with pride and said, "those
that were drowned were like supernatural beings;[III-25] now will I be
great above all created beings. I am their sun and their moon; great
is my splendor." He was not the sun, nor did his view reach over the
whole earth, but he was proud of his riches. This was when the flood
destroyed the wooden manikins. Now we will tell when Vucub Cakix was
defeated and man was made.
[Sidenote: VUCUB CAKIX AND ZIPACNA.]
This is the cause of his destruction by two young men, Hunahpu (or
Hunhunahpu) and Xbalanque, 'little tiger,' who were really gods, and
thought it not good that Vucub Cakix should swell with pride and offend
the Heart of Heaven; and they plotted against his life and wealth.
He had two sons, Zipacna and Cabrakan, the 'earthquake,' by his wife
Chimalmat. Zipacna's work was to roll the great mountains which he made
in a night, and which Cabrakan shook at will. The death of the father
and son was resolved upon by the two young men.
Vucub Cakix was shot by them while eating the fruit called _nanze_ in
a tree-top, and his jaw broken, although in revenge he carried home the
arm of Hunahpu, which he hung over the fire. But an old man and an old
woman, Zaki Nim Ak and Zaki Nima Tzyiz--divinities already named, in
human disguise--were induced by the two young men to volunteer their
services in curing the jaw of Vucub Cakix, who seems to have been a
king, for they found him on his throne howling with pain. They pulled
out his broken teeth of precious stones, in which he took great pride,
substituting grains of maize; they dimmed his eyes, took away his
riches, and recovered the missing arm. Then the king died as did his
wife, and the purpose of Hunahpu and Xbalanque was accomplished against
him who was proud and regarded not the will of the Heart of Heaven.
These are the deeds of Zipacna, son of Vucub Cakix, who claimed to
be creator of the mountains. Bathing at the river-side he found four
hundred young men striving in vain to carry away a tree which they
had cut. Generously he bore the burden for them, and was invited to
join their band, being an orphan; but they soon plotted against him,
casting a tree upon him in a deep pit they had employed him to dig. He
cunningly took refuge in a branch gallery, cut off his hair and nails
for the ants to carry up to his foes, waited until the four hundred had
become intoxicated in their rejoicing at his supposed death, emerged
from the pit, and toppled over their house upon them so that not one
escaped.
But in his turn Zipacna was conquered by Hunahpu and Xbalanque, who
were grieved that the four hundred had perished. Zipacna, bearing the
mountains by night, wandered in the day by the river and lived on fish
and crabs; by an artificial crab his two foes enticed him in a time of
hunger to crawl on all fours into a cavern at the bottom of a ravine,
where the mountain, previously mined, fell upon him. Thus perished and
was turned to stone, at the foot of Mt Meavan, the self-styled 'maker
of the mountains,' the second who by his pride displeased the deities.
One only now remained, Cabrakan. "It is I who destroy the mountains,"
he said; but it was the will of Hurakan, 'the thunderbolt,' that his
pride also should be humbled, and the order was given to Hunahpu and
Xbalanque. They found him at his favorite employment of overturning
the hills, enticed him eastward to exhibit his skill and overthrow a
particularly high mountain which they claimed to have seen, killed a
bird with their blowpipe on the way, and poisoned it with earth before
it was given Cabrakan to eat. Thus was his strength destroyed; he
failed to move the mountain, was tied, and buried.
[Sidenote: THE IMMACULATE CONCEPTION.]
Thus ends the first of the four divisions of the _Popol Vuh_.[III-26]
Next we are to hear something of the birth and family of Hunahpu and
Xbalanque. The recital is, however, to be covered with mystery, and
only half is to be told of the relation of their father.[III-27] Xpiyacoc
and Xmucane had two sons, Hunhunahpu and Vukub Hunahpu, the first being
as the French translation unintelligibly renders it a sort of double
personage. The former had also by his wife Xbakiyalo two sons, Hunbatz
and Hunchouen, very wise, great artists, and skillful in all things;
the latter never married. All four spent the day in playing at dice and
at ball, and Voc, the messenger of Hurakan, came to see them, Voc who
remained not far from here nor far from Xibalba.[III-28] After the death of
Xbakiyalo, the two played ball, journeying toward Xibalba, having left
Hunbatz and Hunchouen behind, and this became known to Hun Came and
Vukub Came, monarchs of Xibalba, who called together the council of the
empire and sent to summon them or to challenge them to a game of ball,
that they might be defeated and disgraced.
The messengers were owls, four in number; and the players, after a
sad parting from their mother, Xmucane, and from the young Hunbatz
and Hunchouen, followed them down the steep road to Xibalba from
the ball-ground of Nimxob Carchah.[III-29] Crossing ravines and rivers,
including one of blood, they came to the royal palace of Xibalba, and
saluted two wooden figures as monarchs, to the great amusement of the
latter and the assembled princes. Then the brothers were invited to a
place on the seat of honor, which proved to be a red-hot stone, and the
contortions of the guests when they sat upon it provoked a new burst of
laughter which well-nigh resulted in apoplexy. Five ordeals are here
mentioned as existing in Xibalba, to the first of which only, that of
the House of Gloom,[III-30] were the brothers subjected; then they were
sacrificed and their bodies buried together. But the head of Hunhunahpu
was hung in a tree, which at once became covered with gourds from which
the head could not be distinguished, and it was forbidden to all in
Xibalba to approach that tree.
But Xquiq, a virgin princess, daughter of Cuchumaquiq, heard of
the tree, and went alone to taste the forbidden fruit. Into her
outstretched hand the head of Hunhunahpu spat, and the spittle caused
the young girl to conceive, and she returned home, after a promise from
the head that no harm should result to her. All this was by the order
of Hurakan. After six months her condition was observed by her father,
and in spite of her protestations that she had known no man, the owls,
the royal messengers, were ordered to sacrifice her and bring back her
heart in a vase. She persuaded and bribed the royal officers, however,
by the promise of future emoluments, to carry back to the kings the
coagulated sap of the blood-wort instead of her blood and heart, and
she escaped; thus were Hun Came and Vukub Came tricked by this young
girl.
Xquiq, far advanced in pregnancy, went for protection to the place
where Xmucane was living with the young Hunbatz and Hunchouen. The old
woman was not disposed at first to credit the stranger's tale that she
was with child by Hunhunahpu, and therefore entitled to protection as
a granddaughter at the hands of Xmucane; but by calling upon the gods
and gathering a basket of maize where no maize was growing, the young
girl proved the justice of her claim, and was received by the great
grandmother of her unborn children.
[Sidenote: HUNAHPU AND XBALANQUE.]
The virgin mother brought forth twin sons, and they were named Hunahpu
and Xbalanque. From their very birth they were ill-treated. They were
turned out of the house by their grandmother for crying, and throughout
childhood and youth were abused by Hunbatz and Hunchouen, by reason of
jealousy. They passed their time shooting birds in the mountains with
their blowpipes, while their brothers, great musicians, painters, and
sculptors, remained at home singing and playing the flute. But at last
Hunbatz and Hunchouen were changed by the young heroes into monkeys.
Xmucane was filled with sadness, and she was offered the privilege of
beholding again the faces of her favorite grandsons, if she could do
so without laughing; but their grimaces and antics were too ludicrous;
the old lady failed in three interviews to restrain her laughter, and
Hunbatz and Hunchouen appeared no more. Hunahpu and Xbalanque became in
their turn musicians and played the air of _hunahpu qoy_, the 'monkey
of Hunahpu.'[III-31]
The first work undertaken by the twins was the clearing of a milpa
or cornfield. It was not very difficult on the first day, for their
enchanted tools worked by themselves while the young agriculturists
went hunting, taking care to put dirt on their faces and to pretend
to be at work when their grandmother brought their lunch at noon. In
the night, however, the wild beasts met and replaced all the trees and
shrubbery that the brothers had removed. Hunahpu and Xbalanque watched
for them the next night, but in spite of their efforts the beasts all
escaped--although the deer and rabbit lost their tails--except the rat,
which was caught in a handkerchief. The rat's life was spared by the
youths and in return this animal revealed the glorious deeds of their
fathers and uncles, their games at ball, and the existence of a ball
of India rubber with other implements of the game which they had left
about the house. All of the implements and the ball came into their
possession with the knowledge of the secret.
Joyful at their discovery Hunahpu and Xbalanque went away to play in
the ball-ground of their fathers, and the monarchs of Xibalba, Hun
Came and Vukub Came, heard them and were angry, and sent messengers
to summon them as their fathers had been summoned to play at Xibalba.
The messengers came to the house of Xmucane, who, filled with alarm,
dispatched a louse to carry the summons to her grandsons. On the way
the louse consented, to insure greater speed, to be swallowed by a
toad, the toad by a serpent, and the serpent by the great bird Voc. On
arrival a series of vomitings ensued, until the toad was free; but in
spite of his most desperate efforts he could not throw up the louse,
who, it seems, had played him a trick, lodged in his gums, and not been
swallowed at all. However, the message was delivered, and the players
returned home to take leave of their grandmother and mother. Before
their departure they planted each a cane in the middle of the house,
the fate of which should depend upon their own, since it would wither
at their death.
The ball-players set out for Xibalba by the route their fathers had
followed, passing the bloody river and the river Papuhya; but they sent
in advance an animal called Xan, with a hair of Hunahpu's leg to prick
the kings and princes. Thus they detected the artificial men of wood,
and also learned the names of all the princes by their exclamations and
mutual inquiries when pricked. On their arrival at court they refused
to salute the manikins or to sit upon the red-hot stone; they even
passed through the first ordeal in the House of Gloom, thus thrice
avoiding the tricks which had been played upon their fathers.
The kings were astonished and very angry, and the game of ball was
played, and those of Xibalba were beaten. Then Hun Came and Vukub
Came required the victors to bring them four bouquets of flowers,
ordering the guards of the royal gardens to watch most carefully, and
committed Hunahpu and his brother to the House of Lances--the second
ordeal--where the lancers were directed to kill them. Yet a swarm of
ants in the brothers' service entered easily the royal gardens, the
lancers were bribed, and the sons of Xquiq were still victorious. Those
of Xibalba turned pale, and the owls, guards of the royal gardens, were
punished by having their lips split.
Hunahpu and Xbalanque were subjected to the third ordeal in the House
of Cold, but warmed by burning pine-cones they were not frozen. So in
the fourth and fifth ordeals, since they passed a night in the House
of Tigers and in the House of Fire without suffering injury; but in the
House of Bats, although the occupants did them no harm, Hunahpu's head
was cut off by Camazotz, 'ruler of bats,' who came from on high.
The beheading of Hunahpu was by no means fatal, but after a combination
of events utterly unintelligible, including an assemblage of all the
animals, achievements particularly brilliant by the turtle and rabbit,
and another contest at ball-playing, the heroes came out uninjured from
all the ordeals to which they were subjected in Xibalba.
[Sidenote: DEATH OF THE TWIN BROTHERS.]
At last, instructing two sorcerers, Xulu and Pacam, that those of
Xibalba had failed because the brutes were not on their side, and
directing them also what to do with their bones, Hunahpu and Xbalanque
stretched themselves voluntarily face down on a funeral pile, still in
Xibalba, and died together. Their bones were pulverized and thrown into
the river, where they sank and were changed into fine young men.
On the fifth day they re-appeared, like man-fishes; and on the day
following in the form of ragged old men, dancing, burning and restoring
houses, killing and restoring each other to life, and performing other
wonderful things. They were induced to exhibit their skill before the
princes of Xibalba, killing and resuscitating the king's dog, burning
and restoring the royal palace; then a man was made the subject of
their art, Hunahpu was cut in pieces and brought to life by Xbalanque.
Finally, the monarchs of Xibalba wished to experience personally the
temporary death; Hun Came, the highest in rank, was first killed, then
Vukub Came, but life was not restored to them; the two shooters of
the blow-pipe had avenged the wrongs of their fathers; the monarchs of
Xibalba had fallen.
Having announced their true names and motives, the two brothers
pronounced sentence on the princes of Xibalba. Their ball was to appear
no more in the favorite game, they were to perform menial service,
with only the beasts of the woods as vassals, and this was to be their
punishment for the wrongs they had done; yet strangely enough, they
were to be invoked thereafter as gods, or rather demons, according to
Ximenez. The character of the Xibalbans is here described. They were
fond of war, of frightful aspect, ugly as owls, inspiring evil and
discord; faithless, hypocritical, and tyrants, they were both black
and white, painting their faces, moreover, with divers colors. But
their power was ruined and their domination ceased. Meanwhile, the
grandmother Xmucane at home watched the growth of the canes, and was
filled alternately with grief and joy, as these withered and again
became green according to the varying fortunes of the grandsons in
Xibalba.[III-32] Finally, to return to Xibalba, Hunahpu and Xbalanque
rendered the fitting funeral honors to their fathers who had perished
there, but who now mounted to heaven and took their places as the sun
and moon; and the four hundred young men killed by Zipacna became stars
in the skies. Thus ends the second division of the National Book of the
Quichés.[III-33]
[Sidenote: MIGRATION FROM TULAN.]
The first chapter of the third division relates another and final
creation of man from maize, in Paxil, or Cayala, 'land of divided and
stagnant waters,' and has already been translated in full in another
volume.[III-34] According to Brasseur's opinion it should follow the
account of the preceding creations,[III-35] and precede the narrative of
the struggle with Xibalba; but was introduced here at the beginning
of the Quiché migrations intentionally in order to attach the later
Quiché nations more closely to the heroic epochs of their history.
The remaining chapters of the division have also been translated in
substance.[III-36] In them are related the adventures of Balam-Quitzé,
Balam-Agab, Mahucutah, and Iqi-Balam, the product of the final creation
by Gucumatz and his companion deities, and the founders of the Quiché
nations. The people multiplied greatly in a region called the East, and
migrated in search of gods to Tulan-Zuiva, the 'seven caves,' where
four gods were assigned to the four leaders; namely, Tohil, Avilix,
Hacavitz, and Nicahtagah. Here their language was changed or divided,
and the division into separate nations was established. Suffering
from cold and endeavors to obtain fire while they were awaiting the
sun, are the points most dwelt upon during their stay in Tulan, and in
connection with these troubles the coming of an envoy from Xibalba is
mentioned,[III-37] which circumstance may indicate that Tulan was in the
Xibalban region. But they determined to abandon or were driven from
Tulan, and after a tedious journey, including apparently a crossing
of the sea, they reached Mt Hacavitz, where at last they beheld the
sun. Mt Hacavitz was apparently in Guatemala, and the events mentioned
in the record as having occurred subsequently to the arrival there,
although many are of a mythical nature and few can be assigned to any
definite epoch, may best be referred to the more modern history of
the Quiché-Cakchiquel nations in Guatemala, to be treated in a future
chapter.
The events preceding the rising of the sun on Mt Hacavitz, are not
easily connected with the exploits of Hunahpu and Xbalanque; but to
suppose that they follow in chronologic order, and that the traditions
in question reflect vaguely the history of the heroes or tribes that
prevailed against Xibalba is at least as consistent as any theory that
can be formed. The chief objection is the implied crossing of the
sea during the migration from Tulan, which may be an interpolation.
A lamentation which they chanted on Mt Hacavitz has considerable
historical importance. "Alas," they said, "we were ruined in Tulan,
we were separated, and our brothers still remain behind. Truly we
have beheld the sun, but they, where are they now that the dawn has
appeared? Truly Tohil is the name of the god of the Yaqui nation, who
was called Yolcuat Quitzalcuat (Quetzalcoatl) when we parted yonder in
Tulan. Behold whence we set out together, behold the common cradle of
our race, whence we have come. Then they remembered their brothers far
behind them, the nation of the Yaqui whom their dawn enlightened in the
countries now called Mexico. There was also a part of the nation which
they left in the east, and Tepeu and Oliman were the places where they
remained."[III-38]
A Cakchiquel record of what would seem to be the same primitive
traditions contained in the _Popol Vuh_, exists but has never been
published. It is only known through an occasional reference or
quotation in the writings of Brasseur de Bourbourg. From one of these
references[III-39] we learn that the barbarian Utïu, Jackal, or Coyote,
that conducted Gucumatz to Paxil where maize was discovered, was
killed by one of the heroes or deities; hence the name Hunahpu Utïu,
'shooter of the blowpipe at the coyote.' The following quotation from
the same document refers to the name Tulan, which with its different
spellings occurs so perplexingly often in all the primitive traditions
of American civilization. "Four persons came from Tulan, from the
direction of the rising sun, that is one Tulan. There is another Tulan
in Xibalbay and another where the sun sets, and it is there that we
came; and in the direction of the setting sun there is another where
is the god: so that there are four Tulans; and it is where the sun sets
that we came to Tulan, from the other side of the sea where this Tulan
is, and it is there that we were conceived and begotten by our mothers
and our fathers."[III-40]
[Sidenote: MEANING OF THE QUICHÉ TRADITIONS.]
Such in a condensed form are the tales that make up the primitive
annals of the Quiché nations of Guatemala. We may be very sure that,
be they marvelous or common-place, each is founded on an actual
occurrence, and has its meaning. That meaning, so far as details are
concerned, has been doubtless in most instances lost. We may only
hope to extract from the tenor of the record as a whole, a general
idea respecting the nature of the historic events thus vaguely
recorded; and even this would be perhaps a hopeless task, were it
not for the aid derived from the Tzendal traditions, with monumental,
institutional, and linguistic arguments already considered, and the
Nahua records yet to be examined. It is not altogether visionary to
behold in the successive creations by Gucumatz, the 'plumed serpent,'
and his companions, as we have done in the coming of Votan, the
introduction or growth of a new civilization, new forms of government
or religion, new habits of life in America; even if we cannot admit
literally the arrival at a definite time and place of a civilizer,
Gucumatz, or hope to reasonably explain each of his actions. It is
not necessary to decide whether the new culture was indigenous or of
foreign origin; or even to suppose it radically different from any
that preceded or were contemporaneous with it. We need not go back
to ancient times to see partisans or devotees attach the greatest
importance to the slightest differences in government or religion,
looking with pity or hatred on all that are indifferent or opposed.
Thus in the traditions before us opponents and rivals are pictured as
the powers of darkness, while tribes that cling to the freedom of the
forests and are slow to accept the blessings of civilized life, are
almost invariably spoken of as brutes. The final creation of man, and
the discovery of maize as an essential element in his composition,
refer apparently to the introduction among or adoption by the new
people or new sect of agriculture as a means of support, but possibly
to the creation of a high rank of secular or religious rulers. Utïu,
the Jackal, a barbarian, led Gucumatz and his companions to Paxil
Cayala where maize was found, but was killed by the new-comers in the
troubles that ensued. Early in the narrative, however, the existence
of a rival power, the great empire of Xibalba, almost synonymous with
the infernal regions, is explicitly indicated, and a large portion
of the _Popol Vuh_ is devoted to the struggle between the two. The
princes and nations of Xibalba, symbolized in Vukub Cakix, Zipacna,
Cabrakan, Hun Came, and Vukub Came, were numerous and powerful, but,
since the history is written by enemies, they were of course bad.
Their chief fault, their unpardonable sin, consisted in being puffed
up with pride against the Heart of Heaven, in refusing to accept the
views of the new sect. Consequently the nations and chiefs that had
arrayed themselves on the side of Gucumatz, represented by Xbalanque
and Hunahpu, of several generations, struggle long and desperately
to humble their own enemies and those of the supreme god, Hurakan.
The oft-repeated struggles are symbolized by games at ball between
the rival chiefs. The ball grounds or halls are battle-fields. The
animals of the forests often take a prominent part on one side or the
other; that is, the savage tribes are employed as allies. Occasionally
men are for some offense or stupidity changed to monkeys, or tribes
allied with the self-styled reformers and civilizers prove false to
their allegiance and return to the wild freedom of the mountains.
It is difficult, if not impossible, to determine the meaning of that
portion of the narrative which recounts the immaculate conception of
the princess Xquiq; but Brasseur, not without reason, sees in the birth
of Hunahpu and Xbalanque from a Xibalban mother, an indication that
the rival nations became more or less mixed by intermarriage. The same
author conjectures that the quarrels between the two twins and their
elder half-brothers record dissensions that arose between the chiefs
of pure and mixed blood. After a long series of wars with varying
results, symbolized by the repeated games of ball, and the ordeals
to which Xbalanque and his brother were successively subjected, the
princes of Xibalba were defeated. From the terms in which the victory
is described in the tradition, the general impression is conveyed
that it was not a conquest involving the destruction of cities and the
extermination or enslaving of the people; but rather the overthrow of
a dynasty; the transfer of the supreme power to nations that formerly
occupied subordinate positions. The chief feature in the celebration of
the triumph was the apotheosis of the heroes who had fallen during the
struggle.
After the triumph of Gucumatz' followers, the written tradition is
practically silent. Of the greatness of the newly constituted empire we
know nothing; the record only re-opens when misfortune has again come
upon the nations and they are forced to abandon Tulan for new homes.
Neither their defeats nor the names of their conquerors were thought
worthy of a place in the annals of the Quiché nations, afterwards so
powerful in Guatemala; yet we can hardly doubt that the princes of
Xibalba contributed to their overthrow. Forced to leave Tulan, spoken
of as the cradle of their race, they migrated in three divisions,
one towards the mountains of Guatemala, one towards Mexico, and the
third toward the east by way of Tepeu and Oliman, which the Cakchiquel
manuscript is said to locate on the boundary of Peten and Yucatan.
[Sidenote: CONQUEST OF XIBALBA.]
The Quiché traditions, then, point clearly to, 1st, the existence in
ancient times of a great empire somewhere in Central America, called
Xibalba by its enemies; 2d, the growth of a rival neighboring power;
3d, a long struggle extending through several generations at least,
and resulting in the downfall of the Xibalban kings; 4th, a subsequent
scattering,--the cause of which is not stated, but was evidently war,
civil or foreign,--of the formerly victorious nations from Tulan, their
chief city or province; 5th, the identification of a portion of the
migrating chiefs with the founders of the Quiché-Cakchiquel nations in
possession of Guatemala at the Conquest. The National Book, unaided,
would hardly suffice to determine the location of Xibalba, which
was very likely the name of a capital city as well as of the empire.
Utatlan, in the Guatemalan highlands, is clearly pointed out as the
place whence Xbalanque set out for its conquest, and several other
names of localities in Guatemala are also mentioned, but it should
be noted that the tradition comes through Guatemalan sources, and it
is not necessary even to suppose that Utatlan was the centre of the
forces that struggled against the powers of darkness. Yet since we know
through Tzendal traditions and monumental relics, of the great Votanic
empire of the Chanes, which formerly included the region of Palenque,
there can hardly be room for hesitation in identifying the two powers.
The description of Paxil Cayala, 'divided and stagnant waters,' "a
most excellent land, full of good things, where the white and yellow
maize did abound, also the cacao, where were sapotes and many fruits,
and honey; where all was overflowing with the best of food," agrees at
least as well with the Usumacinta region as with any other in Central
America. The very steep descent by which Xbalanque reached Xibalba
from Utatlan, corresponds perfectly with the topography of the country
towards the Usumacinta. The statement that in the final migration from
Tulan to Guatemala, two parties were left behind, one of which went to
Mexico, and the other was left in the east, also seems to point in the
same direction. The _Cakchiquel Manuscript_ tells us that there was
a Tulan in Xibalba, evidently the one whence the final migration took
place, and from the Tzendal tradition through Ordoñez we have learned
that Tulha, or Tulan, was one of the great cities of Votan's Empire.
Finally there is absolutely nothing in the narrative which points to
any other location.
[Sidenote: XIBALBA THE VOTANIC EMPIRE.]
Xibalba was then the Empire of the Serpents, to which tradition assigns
Votan as a founder; the same name was applied also to its capital city
Nachan, probably identical with Palenque; and Tulan, or Tulha, the
centre of nations which were successively subjects, allies, rivals,
and conquerors of the imperial city, may be conjecturally identified
with the ruined Ococingo or Copan. Vukub Cakix, the last but two of
the Xibalban monarchs, was perhaps the same as Chinax who occupied the
same position in the Tzendal tradition and calendar. But who were the
followers of Gucumatz, the nations before whose leaders, Hunahpu and
Xbalanque, the pride of Xibalba was humbled, and to whom the traditions
thus far studied have assigned no name? It is most natural to identify
them with the Tzequiles, who, according to the tradition, arrived
during Votan's absence, gave his followers new ideas of government
and religion, were assigned lands, and became a powerful people with
Tulan as their capital. This makes the Tzendal tradition much more
intelligible and complete, and agrees much better with the Quiché
record, than the opposite one adopted without any apparent reason by
Brasseur de Bourbourg. According to the Quiché chant of lamentation,
one division of the refugees from Tulan went north to Mexico, where
they found their 'dawn,' their greatness. This seems to point toward
the Nahua nations, which alone achieved greatness in Mexico during
historic times. The tribes which migrated northward are called, in the
_Popol Vuh_, Yaqui, a name which according to Brasseur de Bourbourg,
has much the same signification etymologically as Nahuatl, and was
commonly applied by the Maya-Quiché peoples of Central America to the
Mexicans. Moreover, their god, Tohil, was called by these Yaqui tribes,
even while they were yet in Tulan, Yolcuat Quitzalcuat, while the most
prominent of the Nahua divinities is well known to the readers of the
preceding volumes to have been Quetzalcoatl. Chanes, the only name
given to the subjects of Votan and his successors, is the equivalent
of Culhuas, a word which, especially in composition, is of frequent
occurrence in all the native tongues. Culhuacan was one of the most
celebrated cities of Anáhuac, as the Acolhuas were among the most noted
peoples. Again Tulan Zuiva is defined as the Seven Caves, in the Nahua
tongues Chicomoztoc, which the Aztecs are well known to have claimed as
a former home. One of the divinities engaged in the creation, or in the
propagation of the new doctrines in the region of Xibalba was the chief
of Toltecat, another name prominent in all Nahua traditions as that of
their most famous nation, the Toltecs; and finally Gucumatz, the great
leader of Xibalba's conquerors, was identical with Quetzalcoatl, since
both names signify equally the 'plumed serpent,' the former in Quiché,
the latter in Aztec. These facts seem significant and naturally direct
our attention to an examination of the early Nahua records.
* * * * *
[Sidenote: THE NAHUAS IN TAMOANCHAN.]
The records of the Nahua nations, so far as they relate to the
pre-Toltec period, if more extensive and numerous, are not less
confused than those of the south. To bring into any semblance of order
this mass of contradictory semi-mythical, semi-historic details, to
point out and defend the historic meaning of each aboriginal tale,
is an impossible task which I do not propose to undertake. The only
practicable course is to present the leading points of these early
traditions as they are given by the best authorities, and to draw from
them, as I have done from the Tzendal and Quiché records, some general
conclusions respecting the most probable course of primitive history;
for conclusions of a very general nature, and bearing on probabilities
only, are all that we can expect to reach respecting pre-Toltec
America. Sahagun, justly esteemed as one of the best authorities,
speaks in substance as follows:[III-41]
Countless years ago the first settlers arrived in New Spain. Coming
in ships by sea, they approached a northern port; and because they
disembarked there it was called Panutla, or Panoaia, 'place where
they arrived who came by sea,' now corruptly called Pantlan (Pánuco);
and from this port they began to follow the coast, beholding the
snowy sierras and the volcanoes, until they reached the province of
Guatemala; being guided by a priest carrying their god, with whom he
continually took counsel respecting what they ought to do. They came
to settle in Tamoanchan, where they remained a long time, and never
ceased to have their wise men, or prophets, called _amoxoaque_, which
means 'men learned in the ancient paintings,' who, although they came
at the same time, did not remain with the rest in Tamoanchan; since
leaving them there, they re-embarked and carried away with them all
the paintings which they had brought relating to religious rites and
mechanical arts. Before their departure they spoke as follows:--"Know
that our god commands you to remain here in these lands, of which he
makes you masters and gives you possession. He returns to the place
whence he and we came; but he will come back to visit you when it shall
be time for the world to come to an end; meantime you will await him
in these lands, possessing them and all contained in them, since for
this purpose you came hither; remain therefore, for we go with our
god." Thus they departed with their god wrapped in blankets, towards
the east, taking all the paintings. Of the wise men only four remained,
Oxomoco, Cipactonal, Tlaltetecui, and Xuchicaoaca, who, after the
others had departed, consulted together, saying:--A time will come
when there will be light for the direction of this republic; but during
the absence of our god, how shall the people be ruled? What order will
there be in all things, since the wise men carried away their paintings
by which they governed? Therefore did they invent judicial astrology
and the art of interpreting dreams; they composed the calendar, which
was followed during the rule of the Toltecs, Mexicans, Tepanecs, and
Chichimecs. By this calendar, however, it is not possible to ascertain
how long they remained in Tamoanchan,--although this was known by the
paintings burned in the time of the Mexican ruler, Itzcoatl, in whose
reign the lords and princes agreed that all should be burned that they
might not fall into the hands of the vulgar and be unappreciated. From
Tamoanchan they went to sacrifice at Teotihuacan, where they built two
mountains in honor of the sun and moon, and where they elected their
rulers, and buried the lords and princes, ordering the tumuli, still to
be seen, to be made over their graves. Some description of the mounds
follows, with the statement that they were the work of giants. The town
of Teotl, or god, was called Teotihuacan, because the princes who were
buried there were made gods after death, and were thought not to have
died but to have waked from a sleep. From Tamoanchan certain families
went to settle the provinces called Olmeca Vixtoti. Here are given some
details of these Olmecs and of the Huastecs, to be spoken of later.
After the centre of power had been a long time in Tamoanchan, it was
afterwards transferred to the town called Xumiltepec. Here the lords
and priests and the old men discovered it to be the will of their god
that they should not remain always in Xumiltepec, but that they were
to go farther; thus all gradually started on their migration, having
first repaired to Teotihuacan to choose their leaders and wise men. In
this migration they came to the valley of the Seven Caves. There is no
account of the time they remained there, but finally the Toltecs were
told by their god that they must return (that is towards Teotihuacan,
or Anáhuac), which they did and came to Tollancingo (Tulancingo), and
finally to Tulan (Tollan).
[Sidenote: THE NAHUA TRADITIONS.]
In the introduction to the same work[III-42] we are told also that the
first settlers came from towards Florida, followed the coast, and
landed at the port of Pánuco. They came in search of the 'terrestrial
paradise,' were called Tamoanchan, which means 'we seek our house,' and
settled near the highest mountains they found. "In coming southward to
seek the earthly paradise, they did not err, since it is the opinion of
those that know that it is under the equinoxial line."
In Sahagun's version of the tradition we find Tamoanchan,[III-43] the
first home of the Nahua nations in America, definitely located down
the coast from Pánuco in the province of Guatemala. The coast region
of Tabasco was probably included in this author's time in Guatemala; at
least it is as near Guatemala as the new-comers could get by following
the coast. The location therefore agrees with that of Xibalba and
the Votanic empire as derived from other sources; and in fact the
whole narrative may with great plausibility be applied to the events
described in the Quiché tradition--the arrival of Gucumatz and his
companions (although Sahagun does not name Quetzalcoatl as the leader
of the immigrants), the growth of a great power in the central region,
and the final forced migration from Tulan Zuiva, the Seven Caves. The
absence of the name Tulan, as applied to a city or county in Central
America, from the northern traditions as they have been preserved for
our examination, may be very satisfactorily accounted for by the fact
that another great city founded much later in Anáhuac, the capital
of the Toltec monarchy, was also called Tollan; consequently such
traditions as the Spaniards gathered from the natives respecting a
Tulan, were naturally referred by them to the later city. It is to be
noted, moreover, in this connection, that the descriptions given by the
Spanish writers of Tollan, with its luxuriant vegetation, and birds of
brilliant plumage, often apply much better to the southern than to the
northern Anáhuac. In addition to the points mentioned in the Quiché
record, we learn from Sahagun that the Toltec calendar was invented or
introduced during the stay in that southern country of Tamoanchan;[III-44]
that the Nahua power in the south extended north to Anáhuac and
embraced Teotihuacan, a holy city and religious centre, even in those
remote times; that the Olmecs, Miztecs, and Huastecs belonged to the
same group of nations and their rise or appearance to the same period;
and that from the Seven Caves the Toltecs migrated--that is their
centre or capital was transferred--to Tulancingo, and later to Tollan.
All these points we shall find confirmed more or less directly by other
authorities.
* * * * *
[Sidenote: THE CODEX CHIMALPOPOCA.]
A very important Nahua record, written in Aztec with Spanish letters by
an anonymous native author, and copied by Ixtlilxochitl, which belonged
to the famous Boturini collection, is the _Codex Chimalpopoca_.[III-45]
Unfortunately it has never been published, and its contents are only
known by occasional references in the works of Brasseur de Bourbourg,
who had a copy of the document. From the passages quoted by the abbé
I take the following brief account, which seems of some importance in
connection with the preceding:
"This is the beginning of the history of things which came to pass
long ago, of the division of the earth, the property of all, its
origin and its foundation, as well as the manner in which the sun
divided it six times four hundred plus one hundred plus thirteen years
ago to-day, the twenty-second of May, 1558." "Earth and the heavens
were formed in the year Ce Tochtli; but man had already been created
four times. God formed him of ashes, but Quetzalcoatl had perfected
him." After the flood men were changed into dogs.[III-46] After a new
and successful attempt at creation, all began to serve the gods,
called Apantecutli, 'master of the rivers,' Huictlollinqui, 'he who
causes the earth to shake,' Tlallamanac, 'he who presides on the
earth,' and Tzontemoc, 'he whose hair descends.' Quetzalcoatl remained
alone. Then they said, "the vassals of the gods are born; they have
already begun to serve us," but they added, "what will you eat, O
gods?" and Quetzalcoatl went to search for means of subsistence. At
that time Azcatl, the 'ant,' going to Tonacatepetl, 'mount of our
subsistence,' for maize, was met by Quetzalcoatl, who said, "where
hast thou been to obtain that thing? Tell me." At first the Ant would
not tell, but the Plumed Serpent insisted, and repeated, "whither
shall I go?" Then they went there together, Quetzalcoatl
metamorphosing himself into a 'black ant.'[III-47] Tlaltlauhqui
Azcatl, the 'yellow ant,'[III-48] accompanied Quetzalcoatl
respectfully, as they went to seek maize and brought it to Tamoanchan.
Then the gods began to eat, and put some of the maize in our mouths
that we might become strong.[III-49] The same record implies that
Quetzalcoatl afterwards became obnoxious to his companions and
abandoned them.[III-50]
In this document we have evidently an account of substantially the
same events that are recorded in the Tzendal and Quiché records:--the
division of the earth by the Sun in the year 955 B.C., or as Ordoñez
interprets the Tzendal tradition, by Votan 'about 1000 B.C.'; the
formation of the earth by the supreme being, and the successive
creations of man, or attempts to introduce civilization among savages
through the agency of Quetzalcoatl,--acts ascribed by the Quiché
tradition to the same person under the name of Gucumatz; the flood
and resulting transformation of men into dogs, instead of monkeys as
in the _Popol Vuh_, symbolizing perhaps the relapse into savagism of
partially civilized tribes;--the adoption of agriculture represented
in both traditions as an expedition by Quetzalcoatl, or Gucumatz, in
search of maize. According to the _Popol Vuh_ he sought the maize in
Paxil and Cayala, 'divided and stagnant waters,' by the aid of Utïu,
'the coyote;' while in the Nahua tradition, aided by Azcatl, 'the ant,'
he finds the desired food in Tonacatepetl, 'mount of our subsistence.'
Finally, the _Codex Chimalpopoca_ identifies the home of the Nahua
nations, whence the search for maize was made, with Tamoanchan, which
Sahagun has clearly located in Tabasco.
* * * * *
[Sidenote: PRIMITIVE NATIONS OF MEXICO.]
Before considering the traditions that relate the migration of the
Toltecs proper to Tollan in Anáhuac, it will be most convenient to
give the little that is known of those nations that are supposed to
have preceded the Toltecs in Mexico. The chief of these are the
Quinames, Olmecs, Xicalancas, Totonacs, Huastecs, Miztecs, Zapotecs,
and Otomís.[III-51] The Olmecs and Xicalancas, who are sometimes
represented as two nations, sometimes as divisions of the same nation,
are regarded by all the authorities as Nahuas, speaking the same
language as the Toltecs, but settled in Anáhuac long before the
establishment of the Toltec Empire at Tollan. As nations they both
became extinct before the Spanish Conquest, as did the Toltecs, but
there is little doubt that their descendants under new names and in
new national combinations still lived in Puebla, southern Vera Cruz,
and Tabasco--the region traditionally settled by them--down to the
coming of the Spaniards. They are regarded as the first of the Nahua
nations in this region and are first noticed by tradition on the
south-eastern coasts, whither they had come in ships from the east.
Sahagun, as we have seen, identifies them with certain families of the
Nahuas who set out from Tamoanchan to settle in the northern coast
region. Ixtlilxochitl tells us they occupied the land in the third age
of the world, landing on the east coast as far as the land of
Papuha,[III-52] 'muddy water,' or in the region about the Laguna de
Terminos. Veytia names Pánuco as their landing-place, and gives the
date as a few years after the regulation of the calendar, already
noticed in Sahagun's record.[III-53] Their national names are derived
from that of their first rulers Olmecatl and Xicalancatl. Two ancient
cities called Xicalanco are reported on the gulf coast; one of them,
which flourished nearly or quite down to the time of the Conquest, and
whose ruins are still said to be visible,[III-54] was just below Vera
Cruz; the other, probably the more ancient, stood at the point which
still bears the name of Xicalanco at the entrance to the Laguna de
Terminos. This whole region is also said to have borne the name of
Anáhuac Xicalanco.[III-55] Mendieta and Torquemada[III-56] relate that
the followers of Xicalancatl peopled the region towards the
Goazacoalco, where stood the two cities referred to. The people of
that part of the country were generally known at the time of the
Conquest as Nonohualcas. The chief development of this people, or of
its Olmec branch, was, so far as recorded in tradition, in the state
of Puebla further north and inland.
[Sidenote: OLMECS AND XICALANCAS.]
This tradition of the arrival of strangers on the eastern coast,
and the growth of the Olmec and Xicalanca powers on and north of
the isthmus, in view of the facts that these nations are universally
regarded as Nahuas and as the first of the race to settle in Anáhuac,
cannot be considered as distinct from that given by Sahagun respecting
the Nahua race, especially as the latter author speaks of the departure
of certain families from Tamoanchan to settle in the provinces of
Olmeca Vixtoti. It is most natural to suppose that the new power
extended gradually northward to Puebla as well as inland into Chiapas,
where it came more directly in contact with its great rival. This view
of the matter is likewise supported by the fact that Quetzalcoatl, the
culture-hero, is said to have wrought his great works in the time of
the Olmecs and Xicalancas--according to some traditions to have been
their leader when they arrived on the coast. Sahagun also applies the
name Tlalocan, 'land of riches,' or 'terrestrial paradise,' to this
south-eastern region, implying its identity with Tamoanchan.[III-57]
Our knowledge of Olmec history subsequent to their first appearance,
is confined to a few events which occurred in Puebla. Here, chiefly on
the Rio Atoyac near Puebla de los Angeles and Cholula, they found the
Quinames, or giants, a powerful people who long kept them subordinate
in rank and power, or, as the tradition expresses it, 'enslaved them.'
These Quinames, as Ixtlilxochitl states, were survivors of the great
destruction which closed the second age of the world. They were,
according to Veytia, "more like brutes than rational beings; their food
was raw meat of birds and beasts which they hunted indiscriminately,
fruits and wild herbs, since they cultivated nothing; but they knew
how to make pulque with which to make themselves drunk; going entirely
naked with disheveled hair." They were cruel and proud, yet they
received the strangers kindly, perhaps through fear of their great
numbers, they being so few, and magnanimously permitted them to settle
in their lands. The Olmecs were treated well enough at first, although
they looked with terror upon the giants. The latter, aware of the fear
they inspired, became more and more insolent, claiming that as lords
and masters of the land they were showing the strangers a great favor
in permitting them to live there. As a recompense for this kindness
they obliged the Olmecs to serve as slaves, neither hunting nor fishing
themselves, but depending on their new servants for a subsistence.
Thus ill-treated, the Nahuas soon found their condition insupportable.
Another great cause of offence was that the Quinames were addicted
to sodomy, a vice which they refused to abandon even when they were
offered the wives and daughters of the newcomers. At last it was
resolved at a council of the Olmec chiefs to free themselves once for
all from their oppressors. The means adopted were peculiar. The giants
were invited to a magnificent banquet; the richest food and the most
tempting native beverages were set before the guests; all gathered at
the feast, and as a result of their unrestrained appetites were soon
stretched senseless like so many blocks of wood on the ground. Thus
they became an easy prey to the reformers, and perished to a man. The
Olmecs were free and the day of their national prosperity dawned.
[Sidenote: THE QUINAMES, OR GIANTS.]
The Quinames, traditionally assigned as the first inhabitants of nearly
every part of the country, have been the subject of much discussion
among the Spanish writers. Veytia indeed rejects the idea that a race
of giants actually existed, and Clavigero considers their existence
as a race very doubtful, although admitting that there were doubtless
individuals of great size. Most other writers of this class accept
more or less literally the tradition of the giants who were the first
dwellers in the land, deeming the discovery of large bones in various
localities and the scriptural tales of giants in other parts of the
world, to be sufficient corroborative authority. Veytia thinks the
Quinames were probably of the same race as the Toltecs, but were tribes
cast out for their sloth; Ixtlilxochitl records the opinion entertained
by some that they were descended from the Chichimecs. The former fixes
the date of their destruction as 107, the latter as 299, A.D. Oviedo
adopts the conclusion of Mendoza that the giants probably came from
the Strait of Magellan, the only place where such beings were known
to exist. Boturini saw no reason to doubt the existence of the giants.
Being large in stature, they could out-travel the rest of mankind, and
thus became naturally the first settlers of distant parts of the world.
Torquemada, followed by Veytia, identifies them with a similar race
that traditionally appeared at a very early time in Peru, where they
were destroyed by fire from heaven.[III-58]
The Quinames were of course not giants, and it is not at all probable
that they were savage tribes. Such tribes are described as animals
rather than giants in the American traditionary annals. The spirit
of the narrative, the great power ascribed to the Quinames, their
kind reception of the strangers, their growing insolence, even their
vices, point clearly, here as in Chiapas, to a powerful nation, at
first feared as masters, then hated as rivals, but finally ruled as
subjects by the newly risen power. While it is impossible to decide
authoritatively in the matter, it may be regarded as more than likely
that this foe was a branch of that overthrown in the south; that the
Xibalban power, as well as that of the Nahuas, extended far towards
Anáhuac in the early days; that the great struggle was carried on in
the north as well as in the south.
About the time the Quinames were defeated, the pyramid of Cholula was
erected under the direction of a chief named Xelhua. The occasion of
its being built seems to have been connected in some way with a flood,
probably that mentioned in the Quiché tradition, the reports of which
may or may not be founded on an actual inundation more than usually
disastrous in a country subject to periodical overflow. The authorities
are not agreed whether the mighty mound was intended as a memorial
monument in honor of the builder's salvation from a former flood, or
as a place of refuge in case the floodgates of the skies should again
be opened; neither is it settled whether Xelhua was an Olmec or a
Quiname chieftain, although most authors incline to the former opinion.
Pedro de los Rios tells us that the bricks for the construction of the
pyramid were manufactured at Tlalmanalco and passed by a line of men
from hand to hand for a distance of several leagues. Of course the
Spanish writers have not failed to connect this pyramid in some way
with the Hebrew traditions respecting the tower of Babel, especially as
work on the Cholula tower was stopped by fire, sent from heaven by the
irritated deities.[III-59]
[Sidenote: QUETZALCOATL, THE CULTURE-HERO.]
During the Olmec period, that is, the earliest period of Nahua
power, the great Quetzalcoatl appeared. We have seen that in the
_Popol Vuh_ and _Codex Chimalpopoca_ this being is represented as the
half-divinity, half-hero, who came at the head of the first Nahuas
to America from across the sea. Other authorities imply rather that
he came later from the east or north, in the period of the greatest
Olmec prosperity, after the rival Quinames had been defeated. To such
differences in detail no great importance is to be attached; since
all that can be definitely learned from these traditions is the facts
that Quetzalcoatl, or Gucumatz, was the most prominent of the Nahua
heroes, and that his existence is to be attributed to this earliest
period, known in Mexico as Olmec, but without a distinctive name in
the south. Quetzalcoatl was a white, bearded man, venerable, just, and
holy, who taught by precept and example the paths of virtue in all the
Nahua cities, particularly in Cholula. His teachings, according to the
traditions, had much in common with those of Christ in the Old World,
and most of the Spanish writers firmly believed him to be identical
with one of the Christian apostles, probably St Thomas. During his
stay in this region his doctrines do not seem to have met with a
satisfactory reception, and he left disheartened. He predicted before
his departure great calamities, and promised to return in a future
year Ce Acatl, at which time his doctrines were to be fully accepted,
and his descendants were to possess the land. Montezuma is known to
have regarded the coming of Cortés and the Spaniards as a fulfillment
of this prediction, and in his speech to the new-comers states further
that after his first visit Quetzalcoatl had already once returned,[III-60]
and attempted unsuccessfully to induce his followers to go back with
him across the sea. The first part of the prophet's prediction actually
came to pass, as traditions tell us, for only a few days after his
departure occurred the earthquake which destroyed the pyramid at
Cholula, the American Babel, and ushered in the new or fourth age of
fire, according to Ixtlilxochitl. On the ruins of the pyramid was built
a temple to Quetzalcoatl, who was afterwards worshiped as a god.[III-61]
We shall find very similar traditions of another Quetzalcoatl who
appeared much later, during the Toltec period, and who also made
Cholula a centre of his reform. As we shall see, the evidence is
tolerably conclusive that the two are not the same, yet it is more than
likely that the traditions respecting them have been considerably mixed
both in native and European hands. After the time of Quetzalcoatl we
know nothing of Olmec or Xicalanca history down to the establishment of
the Toltec empire, when these nations were still in possession of the
country of Puebla and Tlascala. Boturini conjectures that, being driven
from Mexico, they migrated to the Antilles and to South America. There
is not, however, the slightest necessity to suppose that the Olmecs
ever left the country at all. Their institutions and language were the
same as that of the Toltec peoples that nominally succeeded them, and
although like the Toltecs they became extinct as a nation, yet there is
no reason to doubt that their descendants lived long in the land, and
took part in the new political combinations that make up Nahua history
down to the Conquest.[III-62]
[Sidenote: THE TOTONACS AND TEOTIHUACAN.]
[Sidenote: APOTHEOSIS OF NANAHUATZIN.]
The Totonacs are included by the authorities among the primitive,
or Pre-Toltec nations in Anáhuac. At the time of the Conquest they
occupied central Vera Cruz, their chief city being Zempoala; but they
claimed to have migrated from the valley of Mexico, and to have lived
long near the banks of Lake Tezcuco, where they built the pyramids
at Teotihuacan, a place already noticed as a religious centre in
this early period. Torquemada seems to be the original authority for
the Totonac traditions respecting their primitive history, having
obtained his information from an aged native. His brief account,
quoted in substance by all others who have mentioned the subject, is as
follows:--"Of their origin they say that they set out from the place
called Chicomoztoc, or Seven Caves, together with the Xalpanecs; and
that they were twenty divisions, or families, as many of one as of
the other; and although thus divided into families, they were all of
one language and of the same customs. They say they started from that
place, leaving the Chichimecs still shut up there; and they directed
their journey towards this part of Mexico, and having arrived at the
plains on the lake, they halted at the place where Teotihuacan now is;
and they affirm that they built these two temples which were dedicated
to the sun and moon. Here they remained for some time, but either not
contented with the place, or with a desire to pass to other places,
they went to Atenamitic, where Zacatlan now stands." Thence they
gradually moved eastward until at last they settled on the coast in
their present location. That the pyramids of Teotihuacan[III-63] were built
by the Nahuas--the Olmecs or one of their companion nations--and became
their religious centre and the burial-place of their kings and priests
long before the establishment of the empire of Tollan, there can be
but little doubt; nor is it improbable that the Totonacs were, as they
claim to be, a pre-Toltec tribe in Anáhuac; but that they were in this
early time a Nahua tribe, a nation contemporaneous with the Olmecs and
of the same institutions, that they were the builders of Teotihuacan,
is only proved by their own claim as recorded by Torquemada. This
evidence must probably be regarded as insufficient in view of the
fact that the Totonac language is wholly distinct from the Nahua.[III-64]
It is true that, as will be seen later, all the ancient tribes, that
adopted more or less the Nahua institutions, and joined in the struggle
against the rival Maya powers, did not speak the same language; but it
is also very probable that many nations in later times, when the Nahua
power as represented by the Aztecs had become so predominant, claimed
ancient Nahua affinities to which they had no right.[III-65] In addition
to what has already been said respecting Teotihuacan, only one event is
mentioned in its pre-Toltec history,--the apotheosis of Nanahuatzin, an
event which probably preceded rather than followed the erection of the
pyramids. The strange fable respecting this event, already related in
a preceding volume,[III-66] is, briefly, to the effect that the gods were
assembled at Teotihuacan for the purpose of inducing the sun to appear
and illumine their darkness. A great fire having been kindled, and the
announcement made that the honors of apotheosis would be given to him
who should give himself up as a living sacrifice, Nanahuatzin threw
himself into the fire, was instantly devoured and transformed into the
sun, which at once appeared in the east. Metztli followed the example
of Nanahuatzin, and took his place in the heavens as the moon, less
brilliant than his companion, since the heat of the fire had somewhat
abated before his sacrifice. The true historic signification of this
account we cannot hope to ascertain, yet it is of great interest, since
it seems to point to the introduction in these regions of sun-worship
and of human sacrifice; indeed, the _Codex Chimalpopoca_, according
to Brasseur, expressly states that "then began divine immolation at
Teotihuacan." The same authority gives this event also as the beginning
of a new chronologic period called Nahui Ollin Tonatiuh, 'the sun in
its four movements,' thus suggesting some connection between this
assemblage and that mentioned by Sahagun as having taken place in
the south, when the new calendar was invented. The remark in the same
document that "on that day the kings did tremble," may point to this
epoch as that of the great revolution--carried on chiefly in Chiapas,
but which may have extended to Anáhuac--by which the kings of Xibalba
were overthrown; especially since the narrative of the sacrifice
at Teotihuacan bears a striking resemblance to the apotheosis of
Hunhunahpu and his fellow-heroes at Xibalba.[III-67]
* * * * *
So far as the other so-called primitive nations of New Spain are
concerned, little can be said, except that they claim and have always
been credited with a very ancient residence in this land, dating
back far beyond the beginning of the historic period. The Otomís, one
division of whom are known as Mazahuas, differ entirely from the Nahua
nations in language, having possibly a slight linguistic affinity with
the Totonacs, and although far from being savages, they have always
been to a certain extent an outcast and oppressed race, the 'Jews of
Anáhuac,' as one writer terms them, down-trodden in succession by
Toltec, Chichimec, and Aztec. They probably occupied a very large
portion of Anáhuac and the surrounding mountains, when the Toltecs
proper established their power. Ixtlilxochitl, followed by Veytia,
represents the Otomís, though differing in language, as having been
one of the Acolhua tribes that made their appearance in Anáhuac many
centuries later, but the event referred to as their coming to the
country at that period, may probably be their coming down from the
mountains and adopting more or less the civilized life of the Acolhuas
at Tezcuco.[III-68]
The Miztecs and Zapotecs are simply mentioned by the authorities
in connection with the Olmecs and Xicalancas as having occupied the
south-eastern region during the primitive period. Later they became
powerful nations in the country now constituting the state of Oajaca,
and were probably at least the equals of the Aztecs in civilization.
Their own annals do not, so far as they may be interpreted, reach back
to the pre-Toltec times, and although they may very likely have come
in contact with the Olmecs in Puebla, or even have been their allies,
receiving from them or with them the elements of Nahua culture, yet
the fact that their languages are distinct from the Nahua, shows
that they like the Totonacs were not, as some authors imply, simply a
branch of the Nahua people in Tamoanchan. It is more natural to suppose
that these three nations were either wild tribes, or, if partially
civilized, connected with the Maya, Xibalban, or Quiname nations, and
that they accepted more or less fully the Nahua ideas after the Olmec
nations had risen to power in Anáhuac. The statement of Brasseur that
the tribes of Oajaca received their civilization from the two brothers
of Xibalba's conquerors, Hunbatz and Hunchouen, is probably unfounded,
since nothing of the kind appears in the chapter of García's work to
which the abbé refers.[III-69]
[Sidenote: THE HUASTECS IN VERA CRUZ.]
To the Huastecs of Northern Vera Cruz, the preceding remarks may also
be applied, save that their language, while distinct from the Nahua,
is also very evidently connected with the great Maya linguistic family
of the south. Yet the ruins of Huastec and Totonac Vera Cruz,[III-70] are
more like the Nahua monuments than like those of Yucatan or Chiapas,
showing how powerful was the influence of the Nahua element in the
north. The only historical tradition relating to the Huastecs is the
following from Sahagun:--In the time of the Olmecs, after the art
of making pulque had been invented in the mountain called thereafter
Popoconaltepetl, 'mountain of foam,' the inventors prepared a banquet
on the same mountain. All the principal old men and old women were
invited, and before each guest were placed four cups of the new
wine,--the quantity deemed sufficient to exhibit the excellence of
the newly-discovered beverage, and to cheer without inebriating the
dignitaries present. But one chief, Cuextecatl by name, was so rash as
to indulge in a fifth cup, and was moved thereby to discard the maxtli
which constituted his court dress, and to conduct himself in a very
indecorous manner; so much so that after recovering his sound sense,
he was forced by very shame to flee with all his followers, and all
those of his language, to the region of Pánuco, where they settled,
and were called from their leader Cuextecas, afterwards Guaxtecas or
Huastecs.[III-71]
* * * * *
[Sidenote: THE TOLTECS IN HUEHUE TLAPALLAN.]
I now come to what may be termed the regular annals of that branch of
the Nahua nations which finally established a kingdom in Anáhuac with
Tollan for a capital, and which acquired the name of Toltec. These
annals will be found not more satisfactory or less mythical than the
traditions that have been given in the preceding pages, although in
their more salient points they seem to agree with those traditions.
They were recorded in a most careless and confused manner by the native
writer Fernando de Alva Ixtlilxochitl, who derived his information from
the documents which survived the destruction by the Spanish priests.
The comments of later writers, and their attempts to reconcile this
author's statements one with another and all with scriptural traditions
and with the favorite theory of a general migration from the north,
have still further confused the subject. I have no hope of being able
to reduce Ixtlilxochitl's statements to perfect order, or to explain
the exact historical meaning of each statement; still, by the omission
of a large amount of profitless conjecture, scriptural comparison,
and hopelessly entangled chronology, the tradition may be somewhat
simplified so as to yield, as other traditions have done, some items of
general information respecting the primitive Nahua period.
At the end of the first age of the world or the 'sun of waters,' as
we are told by Ixtlilxochitl, the earth was visited by a flood which
covered even the most lofty mountains. After the repeopling of the
earth by the descendants of a few families who escaped destruction,
the building of a tower as a protection against a possible future
catastrophe of similar nature, and the confusion of tongues and
consequent scattering of the population--for all these things were
found in the native traditions, as we are informed--seven families
speaking the same language kept together in their wanderings for
many years; and after crossing broad lands and seas, enduring great
hardships, they reached the country of Huehue Tlapallan, or 'Old'
Tlapallan; which they found to be fertile and desirable to dwell
in.[III-72] The second age, the 'sun of air,' terminated with a great
hurricane which swept away trees, rocks, houses, and people, although
many men and women escaped, chiefly such as took refuge in caves
which the hurricane could not reach. After several days the survivors
came out to find a multitude of apes living in the land; and all this
time they were in darkness, seeing neither the sun nor moon. The next
event recorded, although Veytia makes it precede the hurricane, is the
stopping of the sun for a whole day in his course, as at the command of
Joshua as recorded in the Old Testament. "When the mosquito, however,
saw the sun thus suspended and pensive, he addressed him saying, 'Lord
of the world, why art thou thus motionless, and doest not thy duty as
is commanded thee? Dost thou wish to destroy the world as is thy wont?'
Then seeing that he was yet silent and made no response, the insect
went up and stung him in the leg, whereupon he, feeling himself stung,
started anew on his accustomed course."
Next occurred an earthquake which swallowed up and destroyed all
the Quinames, or giants--at least all those who lived in the coast
regions--together with many of the Toltecs and of their neighbors the
Chichimecs. After the destruction of these Philistines, "being at peace
with all this new world, all the wise Toltecs, both the astrologers and
those of other arts, assembled in Huehue Tlapallan, the chief city of
their dominion, where they treated of many things, the calamities they
had suffered and the movements of the heavens since the creation of the
world, and of many other things, which on account of their histories
having been burned, have not been ascertained further than what has
been written here, among which they added the bissextile to regulate
the solar year with the equinox, and many other curiosities as will
be seen in their tables and arrangement of years, months, weeks, days,
signs, and planets as they understood them."
One hundred and sixteen years after this regulation or invention of the
Toltec calendar, "the sun and moon were eclipsed, the earth shook, and
the rocks were rent asunder, and many other things and signs happened,
though there was no loss of life. This was in the year Ce Calli, which,
the chronology being reduced to our systems, proves to be the same date
when Christ our Lord suffered" (33 A.D.)
Three hundred and five years later, when the empire had been long at
peace, Chalcatzin and Tlacamihtzin, chief descendants of the royal
house of the Toltecs, raised a revolt for the purpose of deposing the
legitimate successor to the throne. The rebellious chiefs were after
long wars driven out of their city Tlachicatzin in Huehue Tlapallan,
with all their numerous families and allies. They were pursued by their
kindred of the city or country of Tlaxicoluican for sixty leagues, to
a place discovered by Cecatzin, which they named Tlapallanconco or
'little' Tlapallan. The struggle by which the rebels were conquered
lasted eight years,--or thirteen, according to Veytia--and they
were accompanied on their forced migration by five other chiefs. The
departure from Huehue Tlapallan seems to have taken place in the fifth
or sixth century.[III-73]
[Sidenote: EXILE OF THE TOLTECS.]
[Sidenote: THE TOLTEC MIGRATION.]
They remained at Tlapallanconco[III-74] three years, and towards the end
of their stay the seven chieftains assembled to deliberate whether
they should remain there permanently or go farther. Then rose a
great astrologer, named Hueman, or Huematzin, saying that according
to their histories they had suffered great persecutions from heaven,
but that these had always been followed by great prosperity; that
their persecutions had always occurred in the year Ce Tecpatl, but
that year once passed, great blessings ensued; that their trouble was
a great evil immediately preceding the dawn of a greater good, and
consequently it did not behoove them to remain so near their enemies.
Moreover, his astrology had taught him that towards the rising sun
there was a broad and happy land, where the Quinames had lived for many
years, but so long a time had now passed since their destruction that
the country was depopulated; besides, the fierce Chichimecs, their
neighbors, rarely penetrated those regions. The planet which ruled
the destinies of that new country yet lacked many years of carrying
out its threats, and in the meantime they and their descendants to
the tenth generation might enjoy a golden and prosperous century.
Again, the threatening planet did not rule their nation, but that
of the giants, so that possibly it might do no great injury even to
their descendants. He advised that some colonists be left here to
people the country, become their vassals, and in time to turn upon
their enemies and recover their native land and original power. These
and other things did Hueman counsel, and they seemed good to the
seven chiefs; so that after three years were passed, or eleven years
from the time when they left Huehue Tlapallan, they started on their
migration. The first stopping-place, about seventy leagues distant
and reached in twelve days was Hueyxalan--'great sandy' as Veytia
interprets it--a place discovered by Cohuatzon where they remained four
years. They next halted after a journey of twenty days at Xalisco,
a country about a hundred leagues farther east--or as Veytia says
west--near the seashore. They lived eight years in this land, which
was discovered by Ziuhcohuatl. Other twenty days and hundred leagues
took them to Chimalhuacan Atenco on the coast where there were certain
islands, and here they dwelt five years. At the start they had taken a
vow, under penalty of severe punishment, to have no intercourse with
their wives for twenty-three years; but as the time was now expired
they began here to increase and multiply. After the five years they
resumed their journey eastward for eighteen days or eighty leagues
to Toxpan, discovered by Mezotzin, where they lived for five years
also. Quiyahuitztlan Anáhuac, discovered by Acapichtzin--was twenty
days' journey or a hundred leagues east of Toxpan, also on the coast,
with inlets so that they were obliged to pass in boats from one place
to another. They remained here six years suffering great hardships.
The next halting-place was Zacatlan, distant eighteen days or eighty
leagues in a direction not stated. Chalcatzin was the discoverer,
and during the first of their seven years' stay here--just fifty-two
years, or a _xiuhtlalpilli_, after their wars began--a son was born to
the chief, and named from the place Zacapantzin. At Totzapan, eighty
leagues distance from Zacatlan, they lived six years, in the last of
which a son named Totzapantzin was born to Cecatzin, who discovered
this place. This was just fifty-two years after they left their native
country. Twenty-eight days or one hundred and forty leagues brought
them to Tepetla, Cohuatzon being the discoverer for the second time,
where they remained seven years. At Mazatepec eighteen days or eighty
leagues distant, discovered by Ziuhcohuatl, they tarried eight years;
at Ziuhcohuatl, at the same distance, discovered by Tlapalmetzin,
also eight years; at Yztachuexucha, twenty days or one hundred leagues
northward, discovered by Metzotzin, twenty-six years. Finally a journey
of eighteen days or eighty leagues brought them to Tulancingo--written
also Tulantzinco and Tollantzinco--discovered by Acapichtzin. Here
they built a house sufficiently large to contain all the people, and
remained eighteen years before transferring their capital to Tollan
farther east and establishing what was afterwards known as the Toltec
empire. The third year of their stay in Tulancingo completed an age, or
one hundred and four years since the departure from their country.[III-75]
According to Ixtlilxochitl, the Toltecs reached Anáhuac in the sixth
century, or according to Veytia and others who have attempted to
reconstruct his chronology, near the end of the seventh century.[III-76]
This tradition of the Toltecs affords in itself no sufficient data from
which to locate accurately Huehue Tlapallan, their most ancient home
in America. The name is interpreted as 'ancient red land, or land of
color,' and might perhaps apply as well to the north as to the south.
Pedro de Alvarado writing from Santiago, or Old Guatemala, to Cortés
in 1524, announces his intention to set out in a few months to explore
the country of Tapalan "which is in the interior fifteen days' march
from here. It is pretended that the capital is as large as Mexico."[III-77]
This indicates that at the time of the Conquest the name was still
applied to a region which may correspond very well to Honduras, Peten,
or Tabasco. Ixtlilxochitl himself, in relating the expeditions on
which his ancestor of the same name accompanied Cortés, mentions one
to "Tlapalan, a province which lies toward Ihueras," or Ibueras, being
the former name of Honduras.[III-78] Brasseur says that "Mexican geography
at the time of the discovery applied this name only to the provinces
north of Guatemala, between the tributaries of the Rio Usumacinta and
Honduras;" and also that the country was spoken of by authors at the
time of the Conquest as Tlapallan de Cortés, on account of Cortés'
expedition to Honduras, but he mentions no authors except those I have
referred to.[III-79] The same author believes that the name Tlapallanconco
given by Ixtlilxochitl to the first station, sixty leagues from Huehue
Tlapallan, should be Tlapallantzinco. He tells us that the Guatemalan
histories mentions such a city conquered by the Quichés in Soconusco
on the coast, at a point not far from sixty leagues distant from the
Ococingo region.[III-80] Again, according to Sahagun and Torquemada, when
Quetzalcoatl, the second of the name, who flourished while the Toltecs
were at Tollan, left the country, he embarked or disappeared on the
gulf coast near the Goazacoalco River, announcing his intention to go
to Tlapallan. This would certainly favor the idea that Tlapallan was a
southern country.
[Sidenote: THE COUNTRY OF HUEHUE TLAPALLAN.]
On the other hand, the eastward direction attributed to the migration
from Tlapallanconco to Anáhuac is not consistent with any Central
American location of the starting-place; but, in connection with the
fact that Xalisco is given as the second station about a hundred and
seventy leagues distant from Tlapallanconco, would agree somewhat
better with the theory generally adopted by the Spanish writers that
the original home of the Toltecs was in the north-west, probably on
the Gulf of California; yet the name Tlapallan has never been found in
the north-west.[III-81] Material relics of any great empire are wanting in
that region, at least beyond Quemada in Zacatecas, and the itinerary is
full of inconsistencies which prove it to be unreliable as a historic
record. For instance, an eastern course of a hundred leagues to any
point on the coast of Jalisco would be an impossibility; the next two
moves led a hundred leagues down the Pacific Coast, and then across
the continent to Toxpan, or Tuxpan, on the gulf coast in Vera Cruz;
then, although Tuxpan is on the eastern coast, the migration continued
still a hundred leagues eastward, another impossibility of course.
How they returned to the states of Vera Cruz and Mexico, where the
other stations would seem to be located, does not appear. In fact
the tradition of this migration as it reads, so far as directions,
distances, and names are concerned, is meaningless, a fact due either
to the carelessness of the compiler or the scantiness of his materials.
Intrinsically then the evidence, while not conclusive, favors the idea
that Huehue Tlapallan was in the south.
Comparing the Toltec tradition with those that have been already given,
we find, except in names, a strong resemblance in general features.
In the successive creations and destructions of men; the apes that
peopled the land after one of the destructions; the ancient settlement
and growth to power of the Toltecs in a fertile country named Huehue
Tlapallan; the destruction of a rival power, that of the Quinames;
the regulation or invention of the calendar by an assemblage of wise
men in Huehue Tlapallan; and a final forced migration to new homes--in
all these features the tradition seems to represent a vague memory of
events already familiar to us as having occurred in the central region;
in the Votanic empire of the Tzendal traditions; in the Xibalba, Paxil,
and Tulan Zuiva, or Seven Caves, of the Quiché record; and especially
in the Tamoanchan and Tonacatepetl of the annals gathered by Sahagun.
[Sidenote: SOUTHERN ORIGIN OF THE TOLTECS.]
In opposition to those analogies we have the fact that the Spanish
writers locate Huehue Tlapallan in the north, as they do also the
original homes of all the nations that are reported by native tradition
to have migrated successively into Anáhuac. It is not probable that
this idea of a northern origin was a pure invention of the Spaniards;
they doubtless found among the Aztecs with whom they came in contact
what seemed to them a prevalent popular notion that the ancestors of
the race came from the north. Yet the tradition given by Sahagun--and
referring to a time long prior to the Toltec migration of the fifth or
sixth century--relating to the first appearance of the Nahua civilizers
on the gulf coast, whither they had come by sea from the north-east,
probably from Florida, would have been perhaps a sufficient foundation
for such a popular idea; and the not improbable fact that the Aztecs
proper and some other nations, prominent in rank and power at the
time of the Conquest, did actually come into Anáhuac from the region
immediately adjoining it on the north or north-west, would certainly
have contributed to confirm that idea. In other words the Aztecs when
questioned by the Spaniards may have replied that they came from the
north, referring in most cases to the latest move of their nation into
Anáhuac, but possibly in some instances to the vague traditions of
their fathers respecting the very earliest periods of their existence
as a race. The Spaniards at once connected the reported northern
origin with the world-peopling migration from Central Asia after the
confusion of tongues; and since the old and new world were supposed
to be connected or nearly so in the north, they found the native
tradition strongly confirmed by the scriptures. When the theory of
successive migrations from the north, thus confirmed, had once been
established in their minds, nothing could overthrow it; it became in
a certain sense a part of their religion. Each migration subsequently
found recorded in the native annals, as means of communication between
the conquerors and conquered became perfected, was at once given a
north-to-south direction. The natives themselves were in many instances
not unwilling to please their masters by orthodox interpretations
of their picture-writings. Finally the ruins of Quemada, the Casas
Grandes of Chihuahua, and the adobe buildings on the Gila were
discovered--doubtless traces left by migrating nations, and thus the
last doubt on the subject, if any could exist, was removed even from
the minds of later and more intelligent class of Spanish writers, like
Clavigero and Veytia.[III-82]
* * * * *
[Sidenote: THE PRIMITIVE CHICHIMECS.]
In the Toltec tradition we have found the Chichimecs mentioned as a
powerful and fierce people and their neighbors in Huehue Tlapallan.
Since this is the first mention of that famous people, since all the
best authorities insist that the Toltecs and Chichimecs were of the
same blood and language, and since the Chichimecs afterwards succeeded
the Toltecs in Anáhuac, we naturally turn to the Chichimec traditions
of their early home for additional information respecting Huehue
Tlapallan, although the Chichimec migration occurring several centuries
later would come chronologically beyond the limits of this chapter.
Our search in this direction for data from which to determine the
location of the ancient Nahua empire is, however, fruitless. Although
Ixtlilxochitl is still the chief authority, we have no mention of
Huehue Tlapallan. The country--or _a_ country, for it is not certain
that it was the original Chichimec home and not one located in central
Mexico, although some of the traditions seem to point to primitive
times--of immense extent, is called Amaquemecan; one of its chief
cities seems to have borne the same name, and another city was Oyome.
The names Necuametl and Nacuix are also applied to the country by
Ixtlilxochitl, and he further states that the Chichimecs came like the
other nations from Chicomoztoc. Some fourteen kings are named as having
ruled over the kingdom, beginning with Chichimecatl who brought the
people to the country and from whom they took their name. Nothing is
known of the reigns of any except the last three, the first of whom is
reported to have sent his son at the request of the Toltecs to become
the first king in Tollan. Ixtlilxochitl in his account of the sending
for this king says that the Chichimecs were at that time in the region
of Pánuco, and that fear of hostility from them was the chief motive
of the Toltecs in inviting a Chichimec to rule over them. It is not,
however, stated that the Chichimec capital was in that part of the
country. When at last the empire came into the hands of two brothers,
one of whom Xolotl, with all his people, decided to migrate, not
one of their halting-places is named, until they had journeyed for a
whole year and reached the vicinity of Anáhuac; consequently there is
no clue to the course of their migration. Besides the statement that
the Chichimecs came from the Seven Caves, and another by Veytia that
the kings wore quetzal-feathers, there seems to be absolutely nothing
in the tradition to indicate whether Amaquemecan was in the north
or south. Yet the Spanish writers have no hesitation in fixing the
direction, although disagreeing somewhat about the locality. From two
to three hundred leagues north of Jalisco, beyond New Mexico, and in
Alaska are some of the decisions in this matter,--decisions resting on
authority that the reader already understands. It seems probable that
the great original Nahua empire whether it be called Huehue Tlapallan,
Tamoanchan, Tulan, or Amaquemecan, was the Chichimec empire--that is,
that the Toltecs or revolting branch constituted but a small portion of
the Chichimec or Nahua people.[III-83]
* * * * *
[Sidenote: MIGRATION FROM THE SOUTH.]
The Chichimec migration was followed by many others at irregular
intervals, ending with that of the Aztecs, all of which will be
spoken of in their proper place. The chronologic order attributed by
tradition to these migrations is not to be relied on, giving, as may
be supposed, only a vague idea of the order in which the different
nations acquired some prominence in and about the valley of Mexico.
In its ancient centre--not in Anáhuac, whether it was in the north or
south--the primitive Nahua power was overthrown, or from that centre
it was transferred to be re-established by exiled princes and their
descendants on the Mexican plateaux. This transfer, whose nature we may
vaguely comprehend, but of whose details we know nothing, is the event
or series of events referred to by the various migration-traditions.
The recollections of these events assumed different forms in the
traditions of different tribes until each nation claimed or were deemed
by the Spaniards to claim a distinct migration from its former home.
The accounts of the migrations following the Toltec will be given in
their proper place, and here we have only to notice that the Seven
Caves are mentioned as a starting-place or station in most if not
all of these migrations, and that the only names that appear in the
traditions applied to the ancient Nahua dwelling-place are Aztlan,
Culhuacan or Teo Culhuacan, and Aquilasco. These names are perhaps
applied to cities in the ancient home, but it is by no means certain,
as will appear later, that they did not all belong to localities
in central Mexico. At least neither the names nor the events of the
migrations as reported afford any proof of geographical location. The
analogy between Culhuacan and Culiacan is not a strong argument in
favor of a north-western location, or at most does not outweigh the
identity of the names Culhuacan and Nachan. A palm-tree painted on the
picture-writing supposed to record one of the migrations, in connection
with the starting-place, as has been remarked by several authorities,
seems to favor the idea that the point of departure was in the south
rather than in the north, and would certainly be a circumstance of
considerable weight against an extreme northern location for Aztlan.
The Abbé Brasseur de Bourbourg attempts to reconcile the general
fact shown by all the earlier traditions that the primitive Nahua
power was in the south, with the idea of a migration from the north
apparently entertained by each of the nations of Anáhuac and by the
Spanish writers. According to his idea the Nahuas, overcome by the
monarchs of Xibalba, were driven from Chiapas, dwelt a few years on the
Pacific coast at Tlapallantzinco, and thence migrated north-westward
in different bands, following the general direction of the coast,
to Sonora and Upper California. Along this route, as this author
claims, distinct traces of their migration are apparent, referring
perhaps, although he does not say so, to linguistic traces. In this
northern region, about the Gulf of California, they established great
kingdoms and built great cities, each Nahua colony becoming a centre
of civilization to the wild tribes with whom it came in contact. From
this region, to places in which the names Teo Culhuacan, Aztlan, etc.,
of the traditions may be applied, the different Nahua nations descended
into Anáhuac in successive migrations from the seventh to the twelfth
century, impelled by civil convulsions or the pressure of outside and
warlike tribes.[III-84]
I am inclined to find in the abbé's theory a statement--too definite
perhaps--of a general fact. That is, the Nahua power--established
in eastern and south-eastern Mexico by the Olmec tribes almost
simultaneously with its growth in the south--was after its overthrow
in Central America established by exiled nobles over western and
north-western Mexico. I find no evidence, however, that the Nahua
power ever became settled and flourishing farther north than Durango
and Sinaloa, although the influence of their institutions may, not
improbably, have extended to the Sonora tribes; into California and
the far north-west the Nahuas never penetrated. If a Nahua empire or
political power ever really existed in the north-west, its centre
was probably in the region of Quemada, in Zacatecas and Jalisco.
Soon, however, the valley of Mexico became the political centre, and
the subsequent history of the country was essentially a history of
Anáhuac. The modern aboriginal annals of each nation dated from its
rise to notice in Anáhuac, and in the traditions of previous history
imperfectly communicated to the Spaniards, their former greatness in
the south, their defeat and exile, their life in outside provinces, and
their settlement in the valley were sadly confused.
[Sidenote: ANNALS OF YUCATAN.]
Mendieta, Torquemada, Gomara, and others, record the popular tradition
of the settlement of Mexico as follows: An old man Iztac Mixcohuatl,
by his wife Ilancueitl, in Chicomoztoc, or the Seven Caves, had six
sons, Xelhua, Tenuch, Ulmecatl, Xicalancatl, Mixtecatl, and Otomitl.
Tenuch's descendants were the Aztecs; Xelhua gave his name to no
nation, but his followers settled at various points in the south-east;
the others founded the nations which took their names. Mendieta adds
that by another wife the same old man had a son named
Quetzalcoatl.[III-85] Piñeda tells us that a nephew of Votan divided
the land of Anáhuac.[III-86] According to Arlegui the Toltecs came
from the west and divided New Spain between their seven
families.[III-87] I believe I have now given all the important
traditions that seem to belong to the pre-Toltec period in Mexico, and
I deem it unnecessary to refer to the authors who merely give an
abridged version of the same accounts, many of them confining
themselves to the simple statement that the Toltecs, a very skillful
people, came first from the north and settled in the region afterwards
known as New Spain.
* * * * *
Returning to the south, it only remains to examine briefly the
primitive Maya annals of Yucatan, which confirm in a few points those
of other peoples, so far as they relate to the great American centre
of civilization in the south. These annals will be given in full
elsewhere; a very general view, with especial reference to the points
referred to, will suffice here. A prevalent belief among the Mayas at
the time of the Conquest was, that the peninsula was settled in ancient
times by two races, one from the east, the other from the west. It
is not implied that they came at the same period, but rather that the
migration from the east preceded that from the west by many centuries.
Lizana tells us that in ancient times the east was called _cenial_,
or 'little descent,' and the west _nohenial_, or 'great descent,'
believing that these names indicate the comparative numbers of the
respective colonies. Landa and Herrera record a tradition that the
oldest inhabitants came from the east, the sea being divided to afford
them a passage. Cogolludo concludes, contrary to the opinion of Lizana,
that the colony from the east must have been much more numerous as well
as more ancient than the other, because of the universal use of the
Maya language and of Maya names of places throughout the peninsula--a
conclusion that carries little weight, since it rests mainly on the
assumption that those who came from the west spoke the Aztec language,
an assumption for which there is no authority whatever.
[Sidenote: ZAMNÁ'S EMPIRE.]
The personage whose name appears first in the Maya tradition is
Zamná, son of the chief deity, who taught the people, invented the
hieroglyphic alphabet, and gave a name to each locality in Yucatan. His
rôle, so far as anything is known of it, was precisely the same as that
of Votan in Chiapas. Zamná is reported to have lived long in the land
and to have been buried at the close of his career at Izamal. During
his life he founded Mayapan, 'standard (or capital) of Maya,'--Maya
being the native name of the country and signifying according to some
authorities 'land without water'--a city which was several times ruined
and rebuilt after its founder's time. Zamná may be most naturally
connected with the traditional migration from the east. Cogolludo, it
is true, states that he was at the head of the other colony, and this
statement is repeated in one place by Brasseur, but as the Spanish
writer directly contradicts his statement on the same page, not much
importance is to be attached to it. Vague as it is, the tradition of
Zamná and his followers from the east seems identical with that of
Votan. If we suppose that such persons as Zamná and Votan actually had
an existence--a supposition which like its opposite forms no part of
this chapter--it would be impossible to determine whether the two were
the same, or Zamná the companion, disciple, or descendant of Votan;
but we may well believe that the period, the empire, the institutions
alluded to in the Maya record are the same as those connected with the
Votanic or Xibalban traditions. The ancient power whose centre was in
Chiapas, Tabasco, and Honduras, extended north-eastward into Yucatan as
it did north-westward into Anáhuac. Ordoñez states, as usual without
giving his authority, that Mayapan was one of the allied capitals,
which with Nachan and Tulan constituted the Votanic empire. The fact
that the name of the Cocomes, the most ancient people, or at least
the oldest line of kings and nobles, in Yucatan signifies in the Nahua
tongue 'serpents,' like the name Chanes applied to Votan's followers,
may have some significance, although in the Maya tongue Cocome is also
said to mean 'listener.'
At an unknown date, but subsequent to that of Zamná's rule, we find
three brothers, the Itzaob, reigning at Chichen over a people called
from them the Itzas, as the city also was called thereafter Chichen
Itza. They came from the west, were just and chaste men, and their
reign a long and glorious one. One of them, however, having finally
left the country, the others gave themselves up to immoral practices,
and were put to death. Notwithstanding the fact that the brothers came,
according to the Spanish writers, from the west, there is much reason
to suppose that the nation whose capital was at Chichen, was an ancient
people dating back to the time of Zamná, since the most satisfactory
interpretation of the name 'Itza' is that it came from 'Ytzamna,' the
more ancient form of the great founder's name. Connected with the three
brothers in a manner not clearly defined by the tradition--either
ruling conjointly with them or more probably coming into power
immediately after their downfall--was Cukulcan, who also came from
the west, who was also famous for the purity of his life, and whose
teachings in fact were identical with those of Quetzalcoatl among the
Nahua peoples. He also is credited with the founding, or re-founding of
Mayapan, which under his rule became the political centre of the whole
country, although Chichen still retained great prominence. Cukulcan
having raised the country to a condition of the highest prosperity,
finally abandoned Yucatan for some unknown motive and returned
westward, disappearing at Champoton, or Potonchan, on the coast, where
he dwelt for some time and where a temple in his honor was afterwards
erected. After his departure the Cocome princes came into power, their
capital being still Mayapan.
The identity in character, teachings, and actions between Cukulcan and
Quetzalcoatl, suggests the first appearance in Yucatan, at this time,
of Nahua tribes or Nahua institutions, corresponding to a certain
extent with the appearance of the Olmecs and Xicalancas in Anáhuac,
and indicating that the Nahua influence was exerted during its earliest
period of development in the north-east as well as in the north-west.
Indeed, Veytia records a tradition to the effect that Yucatan was
settled by the Olmecs and Xicalancas driven from Mexico at the coming
of the Toltecs; this author justly rejects the latter part of this
report, but expresses his belief that bands from these nations did
actually settle in the peninsula. When to the analogies already noticed
between Quetzalcoatl and Cukulcan we add the fact that their names
are etymologically identical, both signifying 'plumed serpent,' little
reason remains to doubt that the Maya tradition refers, like the others
that have been noticed, to the first coming into prominence of the
Nahuas in America.
[Sidenote: THE TUTUL XIUS IN YUCATAN.]
The next prominent event in Yucatan history, as it is also the last
that has any special bearing upon the period now under consideration,
and the most important in that connection, is the arrival of the Tutul
Xius. According to the traditions of the natives as recorded by the
Spaniards, this peaceful but highly cultivated people came from the
south, perhaps from Chiapas, after wandering for forty years in the
unsettled and mountainous portions of the country, and settled near
Mayapan. The Cocomes, successors to the Itza brothers and Cukulcan,
having at the time governed the country long and prosperously, received
the new-comers kindly and formed an alliance with them, an alliance
which continued for a long time until the Cocome kings, becoming
tyrannical, were overthrown by a revolution in which the Tutul Xius
were the most prominent actors. It is, however, with their arrival and
not with their subsequent actions that we have to do here. The mere
tradition of their arrival after a long migration from the southern
highlands would at best furnish only slight grounds for the conjecture
of the Spaniards that they came from Chiapas; but another document
unknown to the Spanish missionary-authors throws great light upon
this people, and invests their appearance in Yucatan with increased
importance. The document referred to is the Maya manuscript translated
by Pio Perez, first published in Mr Stephens' work on Yucatan, and
later with the work of Bishop Landa, which begins as follows:--"This
is the series of katunes elapsed since the four Tutul Xius departed
from the house of Nonoual, which was west of Zuina, and came from the
land of Tulapan. Four katunes passed after they set out before they
arrived here with Holonchan Tepeuh and his companions, before they
reached this peninsula; the 8 Ahau had passed, the 6 Ahau, the 4 Ahau,
and the 2 Ahau--eighty-one years before they arrived in this peninsula,
eighty-one years that they spent in their journey from their country
to this peninsula of Chacnouitan." Here we find it distinctly stated
that this people came from Tulapan, 'capital of Tula,' the very place
from which, according to the Quiché record, the Nahua nations migrated,
and it is more than likely that Zuina should be Zuiva, defined in the
_Popol Vuh_ as the Seven Caves. This, in connection with the Quiché
lamentation over that division of their brothers which they had left
in the east, is amply sufficient to identify the Tutul Xius as one of
the Nahua tribes that migrated from the original centre. The family of
Nonoual seems to have given a name to the tribes that occupied Tabasco
down to the Conquest. This document assumes to give the date of the
Tutul Xiu migration, a most important date, since it is also that of
the overthrow of Nahua power in Chiapas and its transfer to Anáhuac;
but until the Maya system of Ahau katunes[III-88] shall have been the
object of much additional research, there is little hope of arriving
at an accurate interpretation of the date. Sr Perez gives it as 144
A.D. The Abbé Brasseur, relying on the same document, gives the date
repeatedly as 171 A.D.; but in his translation of the document in
Landa's work he concluded that it should be 401 A.D., reckoning each
Ahau katun as twenty years, and remarking that this date agrees much
better than the earlier one with Ixtlilxochitl's chronology. Of the
Perez manuscript Mr Gallatin remarks that it contains all we know of
the history and chronology of Yucatan. To ascertain dates is out of
the question; but it is probable that the events are stated in their
respective order.[III-89]
[Sidenote: OVERTHROW OF THE NAHUAS.]
A Mexican document, known only through Brasseur de Bourbourg, and by
him called the _Codex Gondra_, furnishes some additional information
respecting the overthrow of the Nahua power in Central America, and
especially respecting the house of Nonoual alluded to in the Perez
document. I quote from the author named as follows:--"The manuscript
begins with a description of the twenty wards of the great city of
Tollan, or Tulhá, _Huey Tollan_; but it gives the names of only the
first twelve, the translator, who apparently attached but little
importance to names, having deemed it proper to omit the other eight.
The author relates the events that precipitated the ruin of the throne,
occasioned by the minority of the last Chane prince, whose guardianship
was claimed by two powerful families, one called the Chichimec-Toltecs,
and the other the Chichimecs of Nonohualco. The quarrel terminated
in the insurrection of the latter and the assassination of the young
monarch. But the prince was beloved by the people, and on account of
the popular indignation, the murderers were forced to flee by night
with all their followers. On their departure from Tulhà, Xelhua,
the chief the Nonohualcos, went to consult the oracle of Culhuacan,
[Palenque?] which enjoined him to depart. On the way he did penance for
his crime, and after several defeats at the hands of the tribes through
whose lands he was forced to pass, he at last founded the kingdom of
the Nonohualcos, fixing the capital at Quetzaltepec in the mountains
about the country of the Zoques, who were conquered by his successors.
The author gives the names of the thirteen princes who occupied the
throne after Xelhua with the leading events of their reigns. But while
Xelhua was establishing a new empire, Ieyxcohuatl, chief of the Toltec
party, who had seized upon the power after the death of the young king
of Tulhà, of which he had been the principal cause, was forced after
a few years of power to abandon in his turn the capital, with all his
followers, to avoid the vengeance of the people. He went into exile
with the Toltecs, and the manuscript gives their itinerary as far as
Tlachihualtepec, or Cholula, at the time occupied by the Olmecs and
Xicalancas, who ruled the whole Aztec plateau."[III-90]
* * * * *
I have placed before the reader such historical traditions of the
civilized nations as seem to bear upon the earliest period of their
development. Their exact meaning, so far as details are concerned,
is with the aid of existing authorities beyond the reach of the most
careful study, and no attempt has been made to attach a definite
significance to each aboriginal tale, or to form from all a symmetrical
chronologic whole; indeed, their interpretation has not been carried
so far in many cases as the authorities seemed with considerable
plausibility to justify. Taking up one after another the annals
of the leading nations as recorded by the best authorities, I have
endeavored to point out only the apparent general significance of
each. The evidence thus elicited by a separate examination of each
witness has pointed--with varying force, but with great uniformity of
direction--towards the Central or Usumacinta region, not necessarily
as the original cradle of American civilization, but as the most
ancient home to which it can be traced by traditional, monumental,
and linguistic records. In obtaining this evidence there has been no
occasion to resort to the sifting process of rejecting all testimony
seemingly opposed to a preconceived theory. Almost the only argument
against the general tenor of the traditions, monuments, and languages,
has been the prevalent idea among Spanish writers favoring a migration
from the north; and the force of this argument has proved to be more
apparent than real. Comparison of the records one with another has
greatly strengthened the evidence derived from them separately; and
the cumulative proof afforded by their successive examination has been
deemed sufficient to confirm the general conclusions of the preceding
pages, which may be expressed as follows:
[Sidenote: GENERAL CONCLUSIONS.]
Throughout several centuries preceding the Christian era, and perhaps
one or two centuries following, there flourished in Central America
the great Maya empire of the Chanes, Culhuas, or Serpents, known to
its foes as Xibalba, with its centre in Chiapas at or near Palenque,
and with several allied capitals in the surrounding region. Its first
establishment at a remote period[III-91] was attributed by the people to
a being called Votan, who was afterwards worshiped as a god. Whether
such a person as Votan ever had an actual existence; who, or what he
was; whence, or how, or among what people the civilization attributed
to him was introduced--we can only form vague conjectures. America
was certainly peopled before the Votanic era, and that most likely
by civilized as well as savage tribes, but pre-Votanic nations have
left absolutely no record.[III-92] Perhaps the most reasonable conjecture
is that the Votanic power was of gradual growth, at first humble
and subordinate, but constantly increasing, overcoming, absorbing,
succeeding other powers as others in later times succeeded, absorbed,
and overcame it. The Votanic institutions can only be known by the
traces they may be supposed to have left in those of the later Maya
nations. The prevailing language was doubtless either the Maya, the
Tzendal, or a mother-tongue from which these as well as the Quiché,
Cakchiquel, and others of the same linguistic family, have sprung;
although it is not unlikely that the empire embraced some nations
speaking other languages. From its centre in the Usumacinta region the
Votanic power was gradually extended north-westward towards Anáhuac,
where its subjects vaguely appear in tradition as Quinames, or giants.
It also penetrated north-eastward into Yucatan, where Zamná was its
reputed founder, and the Cocomes and Itzas probably its subjects. In
other regions where its influence was doubtless felt it seems to have
left no definite traces.
Much of our knowledge respecting the original Maya empire is drawn from
the traditions of a rival power. It is not quite certain even that any
of the ruined temples or palaces in the central region were entirely
the work of the ancient people before they came under Nahua influences;
the differences noted in the monuments referred to suggest the effects
of such influences exerted in different degrees.[III-93] The Maya empire
seems to have been in the height of its prosperity when the rival
Nahua power came into prominence, perhaps two or three centuries before
Christ.[III-94] The origin of the new people and of the new institutions
is as deeply shrouded in mystery as is that of their predecessors,
although the nature of the institutions themselves is well known to
us in a later and doubtless somewhat modified state of development.
The language of the nations among which these institutions were first
established was doubtless the Nahua, or old Aztec. The Plumed Serpent,
known in different tongues as Quetzalcoatl, Gucumatz, and Cukulcan,
was the being who traditionally founded the new order of things. The
Nahua power grew up side by side with its Xibalban predecessor, having
its capital Tulan apparently in Chiapas. Like the Maya power, it was
not confined to its original home, but was borne by the Olmec colonies
towards Anáhuac, where it came in contact with that of the Quinames;
and in the person of Cukulcan it penetrated the peninsula of Yucatan
to exert its influence upon the Itzas and Cocomes. The two powers seem
not to have been on unfriendly terms at first. In fact there is much
reason to suspect that their respective institutions did not differ
radically, and that their rivalry developed into open hostility only
after the Nahuas had succeeded in introducing their ideas among so many
Maya nations, and in reducing to a life of civilization so many wild
tribes, that they had acquired a balance of political power. For it
is certain that, whatever may have been true of the Maya culture, the
Nahua institutions and power were by no means confined to nations of
the Nahua language, and that some of the leading nations which accepted
the Nahua ideas of religion and government spoke other and even Maya
tongues. The struggle on the part of the Xibalbans seems to have been
that of an old effete monarchy against a young and progressive people.
Whatever its cause, the result of the conquest was the overthrow of the
Votanic monarchs at a date which may be approximately fixed within a
century before or after the beginning of our era.[III-95] From that time
the ancient empire disappears from traditional history, and there is
no conclusive evidence that the Xibalban kings or their descendants
ever renewed the struggle. Yet we read of no great destruction or
enslavement or migration of the Chanes resulting from the Nahua
victory. The result was only a change of dynasty accompanied by the
introduction of some new features in government and religious rites.
The old civilization was merged in the new, and practically lost its
identity; so much so that all the many nationalities that in later
times traced their origin to this central region were proud, whatever
their language, to claim relationship with the successful Nahuas, whose
institutions they had adopted and whose power they had shared.
Respecting the ensuing period of Nahua greatness in Central America
nothing is recorded save that it ended in revolt, disaster, and a
general scattering of the tribes at some period probably preceding the
fifth century. The national names that appear in connection with the
closing struggles are the Toltecs, Chichimecs, Quichés, Nonohualcas,
and Tutul Xius, none of them apparently identical with the Xibalbans.
Indeed there seems to be very little reason to suppose that this final
struggle was a renewal of the old contest between the followers of
Votan and Quetzalcoatl, although Brasseur de Bourbourg seems inclined
to take that view of it; but a series of civil wars between rival Nahua
tribes, or tribes that had accepted Nahua government, seems rather to
have been the agency that brought about their final forced migrations.
Of the subsequent history of the nations that finally remained masters
of their central home nothing is known; it may be conjectured that
the Tzendales and Chiapanecs found by the Spaniards in that part of
the country were their somewhat degenerate descendants. Of the tribes
that were successively defeated and forced to seek new homes, those
that spoke the Maya dialects, although considering themselves Nahuas,
seem to have settled chiefly in the south and east.[III-96] Some of them
afterwards rose to great prominence in Guatemala and Yucatan, and their
annals will form the subject of future chapters. The Nahua-speaking
tribes as a rule established themselves in Anáhuac and in the western
and north-western parts of Mexico, as their companion tribes, the
Olmecs and Xicalancas, had already established themselves in the
south-eastern region. The valley of Mexico and the country immediately
adjoining soon became the centre of the Nahuas in Mexico; its history
or that of the nations that successively rose to power there, will be
continued in the following chapter.
From this epoch of separation in Chiapas the Mayas of the south and
the Nahuas of the north were practically distinct peoples, as they have
been considered in the preceding volumes of this work. At the date of
separation all were in a certain sense Nahua nations, and the Nahuas
proper had doubtless been considerably affected by the ancient peoples
whom they had overcome or converted, and with whom they had so long
associated:--hence the analogies that appear between the institutions
and monuments of the north and south. Of the contrasts that also
appear, some date back to original differences between the two rival
powers; others result from development and progress in different
paths, during the ten centuries that elapsed before the coming of the
Spaniards.
Bradford, Squier, Tylor, Viollet-le-Duc, Bartlett, and Müller,[III-97]
may be mentioned with Brasseur de Bourbourg among the authorities who
practically agree with the conclusions expressed above, at least so far
as the southern origin of the Nahua culture is concerned. It is true
that the Abbé Brasseur's general conclusions differ in many points from
those that I have given; that his opinions expressed in different works
and even in different parts of the same work differ most perplexingly
from each other; that his theories in many of their details rest
on foundations that seem purely imaginary; that his style, while
fascinating to the general reader, is most confusing to the student;
and that his citations of authorities are often inaccurate;--yet
he must be regarded as the true originator of the views advanced in
this chapter, inasmuch as the material from which they are built up
was largely the fruit of his investigations, and his researches have
done more than those of all other writers combined to throw light on
primitive American history.
FOOTNOTES:
[III-1] Vol. iii., p. 450, et seq.
[III-2] Ordoñez states in one part of his work that this record was
not written by Votan himself, but by his descendant in the eighth or
ninth generation. _Brasseur de Bourbourg_, in _Popol Vuh_, p.
lxxxvii.
[III-3] _Constituciones Diocesanas del Obispado de Chiappas._ Rome,
1702.
[III-4] See vol. ii., pp. 771-4.
[III-5] _Teatro Critico Americano_, p. 32, et seq.
[III-6] See vol. iv., p. 289.
[III-7] 'At the top of the first leaf, the two continents are painted
in different colours, in two small squares, placed parallel to each
other in the angles: the one representing Europe, Asia, and Africa is
marked with two large SS; upon the upper arms of two bars drawn from
the opposite angles of each square, forming the point of union in the
centre; that which indicates America has two SS placed horizontally on
the bars, but I am not certain whether upon the upper or lower bars,
but I believe upon the latter. When speaking of the places he had
visited on the old continent, he marks them on the margin of each
chapter, with an upright S, and those of America with an horizontal S.
Between these squares stands the title of his history "Proof that I am
Culebra" (a snake), which title he proves in the body of his work, by
saying that he is Culebra, because he is Chivim.' _Cabrera_, _Teatro_,
pp. 33-4.
[III-8] _Historia del Cielo y de la Tierra_, MS. See vol. iv., p. 289,
for additional notes respecting this author.
[III-9] 'Un estudio de muchos ratos (mas de treinta años) ...
acompañado de la constante aplicacion con que me dediqué á entender
las frases de que usaron los Indios en su primitive gentilismo,
principalmente en la historia que de su establecimiento en esta region
que nosotros llamamos América, escribió Votan, la cual conseguí, de
les mismos Indios (quienes me la franquearon), y sobre todo, la
conveniencia que resulta de una prolixa combinacion de la situacion de
aquella ciudad (Palenque), de la disposicion y arquitectura de sus
edificios, de la antigüedad de sus geroglíficos, y finalmente de las
producciones de su terreno, con las noticias que, á costa de porfiadas
diligencias, habia adquirido; creí que me tenian en estado de
despertar un sistema nada nuevo, pero olvidado.' _Ordoñez_, MS., in
_Brasseur de Bourbourg_, _Cartas_, p. 7.
[III-10] Ordoñez, as represented by Cabrera--_Teatro_, p. 96--claims
that the name _Tzequiles_ has precisely the same meaning as
_Nahuatlacas_ in the Nahua dialect, and he applies the name to a Nahua
rather than a Maya people, with much reason as will appear later,
although Brasseur is of a contrary opinion. _Hist. Nat. Civ._, tom.
i., p. 70.
[III-11] _Brasseur de Bourbourg_, _Cartas_, p. 10.
[III-12] For list see vol. ii., p. 767.
[III-13] _Cartas_, p. 71.
[III-14] _Piñeda_, _Descrip. Chiapas_, in _Soc. Mex. Geog., Boletin_,
tom. iii., pp. 343-6; _Brasseur de Bourbourg_, _Hist. Nat. Civ._, tom.
i., pp. 95-7.
[III-15] _Cabrera_, _Teatro_, p. 30; _Brasseur de Bourbourg_, _Popol
Vuh_, p. cix.; _Carbajal Espinosa_, _Hist. Mex._, tom. i., p. 165; See
on Votan and his empire, besides the works that have been mentioned in
this chapter, _Juarros_, _Hist. Guat._, p. 203; _Clavigero_, _Storia
Ant. del Messico_, tom. i., pp. 150-1, tom. iv., pp. 15-16;
_Boturini_, _Idea_, pp. 114-5; _Brasseur de Bourbourg_, _Popol Vuh_,
introd; _Id._, _Esquisses_; _Id._, _Palenqué_; _Fontaine's How the
World was Peopled_, p. 136; _Tschudi's Peruvian Antiq._, pp. 11-15;
_Domenech's Deserts_, vol. i., p. 10, et seq.; _Levy_, _Nicaragua_, p.
4; _Priest's Amer. Antiq._, pp. 248-9; _Beaufoy's Mex. Illust._, pp.
218-21; _Farcy_, _Discours_, in _Antiq. Mex._, tom. i., div. i., p.
43.
[III-16] On the Antiquity of Copan, the ruins of Yucatan, and
Palenque, see vol. iv., pp. 104, 280-5, 359-62.
[III-17] 'The monuments of the Mississippi present stronger internal
evidence of great antiquity than any others in America, although it by
no means follows that they are older than Palenque and Copan.' Vol.
iv., p. 790.
[III-18] _Yucatan_, vol. ii., pp. 454-5. By a careful study of Mr
Stephens' conclusions, it will appear evident to the reader that he
ascribes the Central American ruins to the Toltecs, simply as the
oldest nations on the continent of America, of which we have any
knowledge, and that he reconciles their condition at the time of his
exploration with their recent origin, chiefly by a consideration of
the Yucatan ruins, most of which doubtless do not date back to the
Votanic empire, and many of which were still occupied at the coming of
the first Spaniards.
[III-19] Although in the 'general view,' vol. ii., chap. ii., I have
classed the Toltecs among the Nahua nations, it will be noticed that
the preceding conclusions of the present chapter are independent of
such a classification, and are not necessarily opposed to the theory,
held by some, that the cities of Central America were built by the
Toltecs _before_ they assumed a prominent position among the nations
of Anáhuac. The following notes bear more or less directly on points
involved in the preceding text. Mr Tylor, _Anáhuac_, pp. 189-93;
_Researches_, p. 184, believes that the civilization of Mexico and
Central America were originally independent although modified by
contact one with the other, and attributes the Central American cities
to a people who flourished long before the Toltecs, and whose
descendants are the Mayas. Yet he favors the climatic theory of the
origin and growth of civilization, according to which the culture of
the south must have been brought from the Mexican tierra templada. I
have no objection to offer to this theory. It is in the Usumacinta
region that the Maya civilization has left its first record both
traditional and monumental; and that is sufficient for my present
purpose. Orozco y Berra, _Geografía_, pp. 124-5, etc., concludes from
his linguistic researches that the Palenque civilization was much
older than the Toltec and distinct from it. Hellwald, in _Smithsonian
Rept._, 1866, pp. 340-1, pronounces the Palenque culture the oldest in
America, with no resemblance to that of the Nahuas. He rejects the
theory that the ruins were the work of migrating Toltecs. Palenque
will probably some day decide the question of American civilization.
It only awaits a Champollion. _Charnay_, _Ruines Amér._, p. 439. The
ruins in the south have undoubted claims to the highest antiquity.
_Bradford's Amer. Antiq._, p. 199. The Usumacinta seems a kind of
central point for the high culture of Central America. _Müller_,
_Amerikanische Urreligionen_, p. 456.
[III-20] See vol. iii., pp. 42-4, note 1, for a bibliographical notice
of the _Popol Vuh_.
[III-21] _Popol Vuh_, pp. 1-5; _Ximenez_, _Hist. Ind. Guat._, pp.
4-5.
[III-22] Vol. iii., pp. 44-7.
[III-23] _Popol Vuh_, pp. 5-31; _Ximenez_, _Hist. Ind. Guat._, pp.
5-14.
[III-24] _Popol Vuh_, p. 195, et seq.
[III-25] Or, as Brasseur translates, 'the remnant of those that were
drowned,' etc.
[III-26] pp. 31-67; _Ximenez_, _Hist. Ind. Guat._, pp. 15-29.
[III-27] Ximenez, p. 29, conveys the idea, however, that it is only
from ignorance that so little is told, and not from a desire to be
mysterious.
[III-28] Ximenez renders this word by 'infierno,' or hell. No
satisfactory meaning can be derived from its etymology.
[III-29] Carchah is the name of an Indian town in Vera Paz.
[III-30] _Casa lobrega, maison ténébreuse_. It will be remembered that
Votan is said to have established a House of Gloom at Huehuetan. See
p. 160.
[III-31] A ballet, according to Brasseur, still performed by the
natives of Guatemala, clad in wooden masks and peculiar costumes.
[III-32] The place whence the brothers started to contend against the
princes of Xibalba, seems to have been Utatlan in Guatemala--see vol.
iv., pp. 124-8--for Gumarcaah the Quiché name of that place is said to
signify 'house of old withered canes.' Moreover, Torquemada and Las
Casas have preserved the tradition that Exbalanquen (Xbalanque) set
out from Utatlan for the conquest of hell. _Monarq. Ind._, tom. ii.,
p. 53; _Hist. Apologética_, MS., cap. 125. Xibalba doubtless had the
signification of the infernal regions in the popular traditions.
[III-33] _Popol Vuh_, pp. 68-192; _Ximenez_, _Hist. Ind. Guat._, pp.
29-79.
[III-34] See vol. ii., pp. 716-7.
[III-35] See p. 172.
[III-36] Vol. iii., pp. 47-54.
[III-37] _Popol Vuh_, pp. 221-2.
[III-38] _Popol Vuh_, pp. 245-7; _Ximenez_, _Hist. Ind. Guat._, pp.
98-9.
[III-39] Notes to _Popol Vuh_, pp. lxxxv, ccliv.
[III-40] _Id._, pp. xci-ii.
[III-41] _Sahagun_, _Hist. Gen._, tom. iii., lib. x., pp. 139-45.
[III-42] Tom. i., p. xviii.
[III-43] According to Brasseur de Bourbourg, _Hist. Nat. Civ._, tom.
i., p. 59, the name should be Temoanchan to agree exactly with
Sahagun's definition, 'vamos á nuestra casa.' The same author heard an
Indian of Guatemala define the name as an earthly paradise. _Popol
Vuh_, pp. lxxviii-lxxix.
[III-44] Brasseur believes that the Oxomoco and Cipactonal of the
Nahua myth, are the same as the Xpiyacoc and Xmucane of the _Popol
Vuh_, since the former are two of the inventors of the calendar, while
the latter are called grandmothers of the sun and light. _Popol Vuh_,
pp. 4, 20.
[III-45] 'Una _Historia de los Reynos de Culhuàcan, y Mexico_, en
lengua _Nahuatl_, y papel Europèo de Autor Anonymo, y tiene añadida
una _Breve Relacion de los Dioses, y Ritos de la Gentilidad_ en lengua
Castellana, etc. Està todo copiado de letra de Don Fernando de Alba y
le falta la primera foja.' _Boturini_, _Catálogo_, pp. 17-18. 'M.
Aubin, qui possède les copies faites par Gama et Pichardo, ajoute au
sujet de ce document: "Cette histoire, composée en 1563 et en 1579,
par un écrivain de Quauhtitlan et non par Fernando de Alba
(Ixtlilxochitl), comme l'a cru Pichardo, n'est guère moins précieuse
que les précédentes (in Brasseur's list), et remonte, année par année,
_au moins_ jusqu'à l'an 751 de J. C. A la suite de ces annales se
trouve l'histoire anonyme (l'Histoire des soleils), d'où Gama a
extrait le texte mexicain de la tradition sur les soleils."' _Brasseur
de Bourbourg_, _Hist. Nat. Civ._, tom. i., p. lxxix.; _Id._, _Popol
Vuh_, p. xi.
[III-46] _Chichime_ or 'dogs,' a transformation which may not
improbably have something to do with the origin of the name
Chichimecs, a name applied to so many tribes in all parts of the
country. The _Codex Chimalpopoca_, however, speaks also of a
transformation into monkeys as a result of a great hurricane. _Popol
Vuh_, p. lxxx.
[III-47] Or, as Brasseur suggests, adopting the customs of the people
in order to obtain the entrée of Tonacatepetl and the secret of their
agriculture.
[III-48] Molina, _Vocabulario_, translates the name, 'red ant.'
[III-49] _Codex Chimalpopoca_, in _Brasseur de Bourbourg_, _Hist. Nat.
Civ._, tom. i., pp. 53-9, 70-1.
[III-50] _Id._, p. 117.
[III-51] The Cuicatecs, Triquis, Chinantecs, Mazatecs, Chatinos,
Papabucos, Soltecos, Chontales, and Cohuixcas, in the south-western
regions, are regarded by Orozco y Berra as fragments of pre-Toltec
nations. _Geografía_, pp. 121, 126. Prichard, _Nat. Hist. Man_, vol.
ii., p. 512, adds the Coras, Tepanecs, and Tarascos. The Codices
Vaticanus and Tellerianus, give the names of the tribes that migrated
from the seven caves, as Olmecs, Xicalancas, Chichimecs, Nonohualcas,
Michinacas, Couixcas, Totonacs, and Cuextecas. The Nonohualcas and
Xicalancas, however, were probably the same, and we shall see later
that Chichimecs was probably never a tribal name at all. _Gallatin_,
in _Amer. Ethno. Soc., Transact._, vol. i., p. 135.
[III-52] _Relaciones_, in _Kingsborough's Mex. Antiq._, vol. ix., p.
459. Papuhya, 'river of mud,' is a name also applied by the Quiché
tradition to a river apparently in this region. See p. 178; _Popol
Vuh_, pp. 140-1. Brasseur in the same work, pp. lxxii., lxxvii-viii.,
refers to _Las Casas_, _Hist. Apol._, tom. iii., cap. cxxiii-iv., as
relating the arrival of these nations under Quetzalcoatl and twenty
chiefs at Point Xicalanco.
[III-53] _Veytia_, _Hist. Ant. Mej._, tom. i., p. 150.
[III-54] See vol. iv., p. 434.
[III-55] See vol. ii., p. 112.
[III-56] _Hist. Ecles._, p. 146; _Monarq. Ind._, tom. i., p. 32.
[III-57] _Sahagun_, _Hist. Gen._, tom. i., lib. iii., p. 264, tom.
iii., lib. x., p. 136: Camargo, _Hist. Tlax._, in _Nouvelles Annales
des Voy._, 1843, tom. xcviii., pp. 135-7, is the only author who
differs materially in his account of the arrival and establishment of
the Olmecs and Xicalancas. He states that in company with the Zacatecs
they came from the Seven Caves, passed through Mexico, Tochimilco,
Atlixco, Calpan, and Huexotzinco, founding their chief settlement in
Tlascala where the village of Natividad now stands. See vol. iv., pp.
478-9, for notice of ruins. Gomara, _Conq. Mex._, fol. 299-300, also
brings these nations from the Seven Caves.
[III-58] Concerning the giants, see _Ixtlilxochitl_, in
_Kingsborough's Mex. Antiq._, vol. ix., pp. 205-6, 392, 459; _Veytia_,
_Hist. Ant. Mej._, tom. i., pp. 143-54; _Duran_, _Hist. Indias_, MS.,
tom. i., cap. ii. This author represents the Quinames as having been
killed while eating and drinking, by the Tlascaltecs who had taken
possession of their arms. He says they yielded after a desperate
resistance. _Torquemada_, _Monarq. Ind._, tom. i., pp. 34-6;
_Boturini_, _Idea_, pp. 130-5; _Arlegui_, _Chrón. Zacatecas_, p. 6;
_Oviedo_, _Hist. Gen._, tom. iii., pp. 539-41; _Clavigero_, _Storia
Ant. del Messico_, tom. i., p. 125; _Brasseur de Bourbourg_, _Hist.
Nat. Civ._, tom. i., pp. 66, 153-4; _Id._, _Popol Vuh_, pp. lxviii.,
cxxvii.; _Id._, _Esquisses_, p. 12; _Granados y Galvez_, _Tardes
Amer._, pp. 15, 21; _Rios_, _Compend. Hist. Mex._, p. 5; _Piñeda_, in
_Soc. Mex. Geog., Boletin_, tom. iii., p. 346; _Pimentel_, in _Dicc.
Univ._, tom. x., p. 610.
[III-59] On building of Cholula pyramid, see _Codex Mexicano_, in
_Kingsborough's Mex. Antiq._, vol. v., p. 172; _Ixtlilxochitl_, in
_Id._, vol. ix., pp. 206, 459; _Gondra_, in _Prescott_, _Hist. Conq.
Mex._, tom. iii., pp. 45, 69; _Veytia_, _Hist. Ant. Mej._, tom. i.,
pp. 15, 18, 153; _Boturini_, _Idea_, pp. 113-14; _Humboldt_,
_Mélanges_, p. 553; _Id._, _Vues_, tom. i., p. 114; _Popol Vuh_, p.
cxxv.; _Brasseur de Bourbourg_, _Hist. Nat. Civ._, tom. i., pp. 153,
301-3; _Orozco y Berra_, _Geografía_, p. 132; _Gallatin_, in _Amer.
Ethno. Soc., Transact._, vol. i., p. 167.
[III-60] _Cortés_, _Cartas_, p. 86. Quetzalcoatl however is not
named.
[III-61] Respecting Quetzalcoatl in his mythological aspects as a
divinity, see vol. iii., pp. 248-87. The story of his visit to the
Olmecs is told in _Ixtlilxochitl_, in _Kingsborough_, vol. ix., pp.
206, 459; _Veytia_, _Hist. Ant. Mej._, tom. i., pp. 155-6, 161-204.
[III-62] _Boturini_, _Idea_, p. 135; _Clavigero_, _Storia Ant. del
Messico_, tom. iv., p. 52, tom. i., p. 147. Between Chiapas and
Zacatecas is a vast space, of which the only notion given us by
history is the fact that the Olmecs, Xicalancas, and Zapotecs lived in
the region of Puebla and Tlascala. They were the primitive peoples,
that is, the first known. _Orozco y Berra_, _Geografía_, pp. 124-5.
The Xicalancas founded Atlixco and Itzucan, but migrated to South
America. The Olmecs who had been driven to the gulf coasts followed
them. _Carbajal Espinosa_, _Hist. Mex._, tom. i., p. 242. The
Xicalancas possessed the country before the Chichimecs, by whom they
were regarded as enemies. _Ixtlilxochitl_, in _Kingsborough's Mex.
Antiq._, vol. ix., p. 461. Mexicans, Culhuas, Tepanecs, Olmecs,
Xicalancas, Tarascos, and Chichimecs were all of the same race and
language. _Camargo_, _Hist. Tlax._, in _Nouvelles Annales des Voy._,
1843, tom. xcviii., pp. 131, 135, 188. See also _Brasseur de
Bourbourg_, _Hist. Nat. Civ._, tom. i., pp. 67, 196, tom. iii., p. 9;
_Bradford's Amer. Antiq._, pp. 200, 213; _Hellwald_, in _Smithsonian
Rept._, 1866, p. 337; _Müller_, _Reisen_, tom. iii., pp. 33-4.
The Olmecs passed from Mexico to Guatemala, which they conquered.
_Alcedo_, _Dicc._, tom. iii., p. 374. Palenque, the oldest American
city, was built by the Olmecs, a mixture of yellow aborigines and the
first white immigrants. _Viollet-le-Duc_, in _Charnay_, _Ruines
Amér._, p. 45. The Mazahuas and Olmecs belong to the aborigines of
Guatemala. _Müller_, _Amerikanische Urreligionen_, p. 456.
[III-63] For description see vol. iv., pp. 529-44.
[III-64] Brasseur de Bourbourg, _Hist. Nat. Civ._, tom. i., p. 56,
pronounces the Totonac very like the Maya. Orozco y Berra,
_Geografía_, p. 127, deems the relationship doubtful. See vol. iii.,
pp. 776-7.
[III-65] On the Totonacs, see _Torquemada_, _Monarq. Ind._, tom. i.,
p. 278; _Pimentel_, _Cuadro_, tom. i., pp. 223-7; _Clavigero_, _Storia
Ant. del Messico_, tom. iv., pp. 51-2; _Brasseur de Bourbourg_, _Hist.
Nat. Civ._, tom. i., pp. 151-61, tom. iii., pp. 350-1. This author
says that the Totonacs came from the north at about the same time as
the Olmecs came from the south. There seems to be no authority for
this save the popular opinion that locates Chicomoztoc in the north.
_Orozco y Berra_, _Geografía_, pp. 120, 140. The Aztecs attributed
Teotihuacan, Cholula, Papantla, etc., to the Toltecs because they were
the oldest people they knew; but they may have been built before the
Toltec invasion. _Humboldt_, _Vues_, tom. i., p. 98.
[III-66] Vol. iii., p. 60, et seq.
[III-67] _Brasseur de Bourbourg_, _Hist. Nat. Civ._, tom. i., pp.
180-8; _Popol Vuh_, pp. cxlii-iii.; _Boturini_, _Idea_, pp. 37-41; see
also references in vol. iii., p. 60, et seq.
[III-68] On the Otomís, see _Clavigero_, _Storia Ant. del Messico_,
tom. i., pp. 147-8, tom. iv., p. 51; _Veytia_, _Hist. Ant. Mej._, tom.
ii., p. 39; _Alegre_, _Hist. Comp. de Jesus_, tom. i., p. 90;
_Ixtlilxochitl_, in _Kingsborough's Mex. Antiq._, vol. ix., p. 210;
_Carbajal Espinosa_, _Hist. Mex._, tom. i., p. 243; _Brasseur de
Bourbourg_, _Hist. Nat. Civ._, tom. i., pp. 156-9, 196, tom. ii., p.
235, tom. iii., p. 56; _Motolinia_, in _Icazbalceta_, _Col. de Doc._,
tom. i., p. 9; _Orozco y Berra_, _Geografía_, pp. 120, 136-7;
_Pimentel_, _Cuadro_, tom. i., pp. 117-18; _Gondra_, in _Prescott_,
_Hist. Conq. Mex._, tom. iii., p. 20; _Prichard's Nat. Hist. Man_,
vol. ii., p. 512.
[III-69] Sahagun, _Hist. Gen._, tom. iii., lib. x., p. 136, heads a
paragraph 'Olmecas, Vixtoti and Mixtecas,' speaking of all together,
and applying to them the name _Tenimes_, or those who speak a
barbarous tongue. Orozco y Berra, _Geografía_, pp. 120, 125, 133,
speaks of the 'Ulmecas or Mixtecs,' and thinks they were driven from
their former position by the first Nahua invasion, driving out in turn
the Chuchones. He pronounces the Miztec and Zapotec kindred tongues,
and states that these nations joined their fortunes from an early
period. Veytia, _Hist. Ant. Mej._, tom. i., p. 150, says the Zapotecs
are reported to have come with the Olmecs and Xicalancas. _Clavigero_,
_Storia Ant. del Messico_, tom. i., p. 150; _Brasseur de Bourbourg_,
_Hist. Nat. Civ._, tom. i., p. 154; _Id._, _Popol Vuh_, p. cclv.;
_García_, _Orígen de los Ind._, pp. 327-8; _Mayer's Mex. Aztec, etc._,
vol. i., p. 98; _Hellwald_, in _Smithsonian Rept._, 1866, p. 337;
_Pimentel_, _Cuadro_, tom. i., p. 37.
[III-70] See vol. iv., p. 425, et seq.
[III-71] Sahagun, _Hist. Gen._, tom. iii., lib. x., pp. 142-3;
_Squier's Cent. Amer._, pp. 316-17. Huaxtlan means 'where the _huaxi_
(a kind of fruit) abounds.' _Pimentel_, _Cuadro_, tom. i., pp. 5-6;
_Orozco y Berra_, _Geografía_, p. 141; _Gallatin_, in _Amer. Ethno.
Soc., Transact._, vol. i., p. 173; _Brinton_, in _Hist. Mag._, n. s.,
vol. i., p. 16; _Prichard's Nat. Hist. Man_, vol. ii., p. 513; _Id._,
_Researches_, vol. v., p. 342, 345.
[III-72] The date of the arrival in Huehue Tlapallan is given by
Ixtlilxochitl in his first Toltec relation (p. 322) as 2236 years
after the creation, or 520 years after the flood. That is, it occurred
long before the Christian era. In other places (pp. 206, 459) the same
author represents the Toltecs as banished from their country and
migrating to Huitlapalan in California on the South Sea in 387 A.D.,
whence they continued their journey to Tulancingo. Now, although I
attach very little importance to this author's chronology, and shall
enter into no discussion with a view either to reconcile or overthrow
it, yet it is plain that this last statement, notwithstanding the use
of the name Huitlapalan, refers to a migration long subsequent to that
mentioned in the text. The date 387 A.D., therefore, given by
Gallatin, (in _Schoolcraft's Arch._, vol. v., p. 96) and Müller,
(_Reisen_, tom. iii., p. 97), as that of the arrival in Huehue
Tlapallan, according to Ixtlilxochitl, is calculated to convey a false
impression.
[III-73] Ixtlilxochitl, p. 322, says it was 305 years after the death
of Christ, or about 338 A.D.; but on the same page he again makes the
date 439 A. D. Veytia, tom. i., p. 208, dates the rebellion 583, the
exile 596, and the founding of Tlapallanconco 604 A.D. Clavigero, tom.
iv., p. 46, gives 544 as the date of departure, but on p. 126 of tom.
i., he gives 596, agreeing with Veytia. Müller, in his tables,
_Reisen_, tom. iii., p. 97, dates the outbreak of war 427, the
departure 439, the migration 447 A.D. Brasseur, _Popol Vuh_, p. clv.,
gives the last of the fourth century as the date of the Toltec
migration. Cabrera, _Teatro_, pp. 90-1, makes the date 181 B.C. 544
A.D., one of Clavigero's dates, is that which has, perhaps, been most
commonly adopted by modern writers.
[III-74] Brasseur, _Hist. Nat. Civ._, tom. i., p. 126, writes this
name Tlapallantonco; and in _Popol Vuh_, p. clix., he insists that it
should be Tlapallantzinco. Müller, _Reisen_, tom. iii., p. 98, calls
it also Tlappallanzingo.
[III-75] Ixtlilxochitl, p. 324, makes this third year 543, and their
arrival in Tulancingo consequently 540 A.D.; or as is implied on p.
307, 487 A.D.; or adding 104 years to the first date given by this
author in note 71, we have 442 A.D. Veytia, tom. i., p. 221, 697 A.D.
_Id._, after Boturini, in _Tezcoco en los Ultimos Tiempos_, 687 A.D.
Müller, _Reisen_, tom. iii., p. 97, 558 A.D. Clavigero, tom. iv., p.
51, 648 A.D., or tom. i., p. 126, 700 A.D.
[III-76] In other parts of his work Ixtlilxochitl has a very different
account of this migration to the effect that the Toltecs were banished
from their country, sailed and coasted on the South Sea, arrived at
Huitlapalan or Huitlapatlan--the Gulf of California, or a place on the
coast of California--in 387 A.D., coasted Xalisco, arrived at
Guatulco, then at Tochtepec or Turlitepeque on the North Sea, and
finally at Tulancingo, pp. 206-7, 459-60. On the Toltec migration see
_Ixtlilxochitl_, in _Kingsborough's Mex. Antiq._, vol. ix., pp. 321-4;
_Veytia_, _Hist. Ant. Mej._, tom. i., pp. 6-33, 139, 157, 205-21, 231;
_Clavigero_, _Storia Ant. del Messico_, tom. i., p. 126, tom. iv., pp.
46, 51; _Torquemada_, _Monarq. Ind._, tom. i., pp. 36-7; _Boturini_,
_Idea_, pp.136-7; _Carbajal Espinosa_, _Hist. Mex._, tom. i., pp.
216-18; _Brasseur de Bourbourg_, _Hist. Nat. Civ._, tom. i., pp. 100,
126; _Popol Vuh_, pp. clv., clix-xi.; _Id._, _Esquisses_, pp. 11,
13-14; _Gallatin_, in _Amer. Ethno. Soc., Transact._, vol. i., p. 203;
_Bradford's Amer. Antiq._, p. 202; _Müller_, _Reisen_, tom. iii., pp.
91-7.
[III-77] _Alvarado_, in _Ternaux-Compans_, _Voy._, série i., tom. x.,
p. 147; _Id._, in _Ramusio_, _Navigationi_, tom. iii., fol. 300.
[III-78] _Ixtlilxochitl_, in _Kingsborough's Mex. Antiq._, vol. ix.,
p. 446.
[III-79] _Popol Vuh_, pp. lxiv., cxii., cxxvi-viii.
[III-80] _Id._, p. clix.
[III-81] The discovery of a town of similar name by Cortés, doubtingly
reported by Veytia, _Hist. Ant. Mej._, tom. i., p. 23, and others,
seems to rest on no authority whatever.
[III-82] The Nahuas state that they came from the north-west.
_Mendieta_, _Hist. Ecles._, p. 147; _Torquemada_, _Monarq. Ind._, tom.
i., p. 33. The tradition of the Toltecs will not allow us to fix
either date, locality, or source of their migration, but the north is
vaguely given as the source. _Gallatin_, in _Amer. Ethno. Soc.,
Transact._, vol. i., p. 203. Huehue Tlapallan situated north-west of
the Gila. _Humboldt_, _Vues_, tom. i., p. 204. Not in the Gila Valley.
_Smith's Human Species_, p. 250. Tradition shows Huehue Tlapallan,
miserable like all nations abandoned to luxury and power, unable to
feed its children, casting them forth. _Ramirez_, in _Revista
Cientifica_, tom. i., p. 21. Brasseur de Bourbourg, _Popol Vuh_, p.
clix., speaks of Tlaxi Coliuhcan, mentioned by Ixtlilxochitl, as the
old capital of the Quinames, or Palenque. He perhaps has no other
reason for this than the resemblance of the names Coliuhcan and
Colhuacan. He says, _Hist. Nat. Civ._, tom. i., p. 100, that Huehue
Tlapallan may be translated 'land of colors' or 'land of nobles.'
Throughout his works he places this country in the south, identifying
it with Xibalba. It is proved incontestably that the Toltecs came from
Tulhá, whose ruins are seen near Ococingo. _Id._, _Cartas_, p. 28.
Cabrera, _Teatro_, p. 94, thinks Tlapalla must have been in the
south-east.
[III-83] _Ixtlilxochitl_, in _Kingsborough's Mex. Antiq._, vol. ix.,
pp. 208-9, 217, 333, 335-7, 392-4, 450; _Veytia_, _Hist. Ant. Mej._,
tom. i., pp. 25, 139, 231, 301-2, tom. ii., pp. 3-7; _Torquemada_,
_Monarq. Ind._, tom. i., pp. 38-40. Brasseur, _Hist. Nat. Civ._, tom.
i., pp. 125-6, thinks that Chalcatzin and Tlacamitzin were the
successors of Xhunahpa left by Xbalanque in command of the Nahuas, and
that they were defeated and exiled by the monarch of Xibalba. For
details and further references respecting the Chichimec migration see
a future chapter. The Chichimec kings were: Chichimecatl, Mixcohuatl,
Huitzilopochtli, Huemac, Nauhyotl, Quauhtepetla, Nonohualca, Huetzin,
Quauhtonal, Masatzin, Quetzal, Icoatzin, Mozeloquitzin,
Tlamacatzin--in one place Nequametl and Namocuix are named instead of
Chichimecatl. _Ixtlilxochitl_, p. 394; _Veytia_, tom. i., p. 231;
_Carbajal Espinosa_, _Hist. Mex._, tom. i., pp. 225-6; _Müller_,
_Reisen_, tom. iii., pp. 43-4.
[III-84] _Brasseur de Bourbourg_, _Hist. Nat. Civ._, tom. i., pp. 126,
179-80; _Id._, _Cartas_, pp. 31-4; _Id._, _Popol Vuh_, pp. clix-clxi.
Brasseur gives a report of the ruins of a northern Tula in California,
which of course is unfounded. He thinks the Opatas, Yaquis, Mayos, and
Tarahumares are remnants of the old Toltec populations in this region.
He does not attribute the ruins of the New Mexican and Arizona group
to the Toltecs, at least not at this early period. Bradford also,
_Amer. Antiq._, p. 202, speaks of the first age as diffusing
population from the centre through the north, to return in a reflux of
numerous tribes in the second age.
[III-85] _Mendieta_, _Hist. Ecles._, pp. 145-6; _Torquemada_, _Monarq.
Ind._, tom. i., pp. 32-3; _Gomara_, _Conq. Mex._, fol. 299-300;
_Prichard's Nat. Hist. Man_, vol. ii., p. 514; _Brasseur de
Bourbourg_, _Popol Vuh_, pp. xxix.-xxx.
[III-86] _Descrip. Chiapas_, in _Soc. Mex. Geog., Boletin_, tom. iii.,
p. 344.
[III-87] _Chrón. Zacatecas_, pp. 6-7.
[III-88] See vol. ii., pp. 762-5.
[III-89] For details and for subsequent Yucatan history, see a future
chapter. My authorities for the preceding remarks are _Landa_,
_Relacion_, pp. 28-50; _Lizana_, in _Id._, pp. 348-56; _Cogolludo_,
_Hist. Yuc._, pp. 178-9, 192, 196-7; _Las Casas_, _Hist. Apologética_,
MS., cap. 123; _Torquemada_, _Monarq. Ind._, tom. ii., p. 52;
_Veytia_, _Hist. Ant. Mej._, tom. i., p. 237; _Herrera_, _Hist. Gen._,
dec. iv., lib. x., cap. ii.; _Ternaux-Compans_, in _Nouvelles Annales
des Voy._, 1843, tom. xcvii., pp. 31-6. _Perez_, in _Landa_,
_Relacion_, pp. 420-3; _Id._, in _Stephens' Yucatan_, vol. ii., pp.
465-9; _Brasseur de Bourbourg_, _Hist. Nat. Civ._, tom. i., pp. 68,
76-80, 126-7; _Id._, _Popol Vuh_, pp. lxxix, clv.-vi.; _Id._,
_Cartas_, p. 13; _Gallatin_, in _Amer. Ethno. Soc., Transact._, vol.
i., pp. 171-3; _Orozco y Berra_, _Geografía_, p. 128.
[III-90] _Brasseur de Bourbourg_, _Cartas_, pp. 27-8. The abbé seems
to have made but little if any use of the Codex Gondra in his
subsequent works; although it may be supposed that from it, and indeed
from the very portion above quoted, he takes his account of the
closing events of the Toltec empire in Anáhuac to be given in a future
chapter.
[III-91] About 1000 B.C. by Ordoñez, and 955 B.C. by the Codex
Chimalpopoca, are the only definite dates given for this
establishment.
[III-92] Brasseur, _Hist. Nat. Civ._, tom. i., p. 44, speaks of
cyclopean ruins in Central America left by civilized nations preceding
or contemporary with those among whom Votan introduced his culture;
but this is purely imaginary; there are ruins which may ante-date the
epoch in question, but none to which there is any good reason for
assigning so great an antiquity.
[III-93] It may be well to give here the conclusions of M.
Viollet-le-Duc, the distinguished French architect, respecting these
ruins and their builders, although they carry the matter back to the
question of origin, and consequently beyond the sphere of this
chapter. This author's conclusions are professedly based on an
examination of material monuments, but were doubtless much affected,
like those of other late writers, including myself, by the study of
Brasseur's works.
The whole continent was peopled with wild tribes of yellow blood from
Asia via the north-west at a very remote period. About 1000 B.C., the
Culhuas, a mixed race of black and white blood appeared from the east
and introduced agriculture and a slight degree of civilization. Soon
after the Culhuas, the Nahuas appeared, a white race coming from the
north of Europe via the Mississippi Valley, Florida, and West Indies,
in successive migrations. Palenque was built by the yellow races under
a strong influence of the Culhuas and a very slight Nahua influence;
the cities of Yucatan were built when the Nahuas had conquered their
rivals and the influence of the white race had become predominant;
Mitla owes its origin to a still more recent period, and was built by
a migrating tribe in which the yellow blood seems to have
predominated. _Viollet-le-Duc_, in _Charnay_, _Ruines Amér._
[III-94] A document, for the authenticity of which even Brasseur de
Bourbourg declines to vouch, dates the first appearance of the Nahuas
at 279 B.C. The abbé thinks that event was probably during the century
before Christ; but he, it must be remembered, accepts the coming of
Quetzalcoatl and his followers and the introduction of a new
civilization literally. _Hist. Nat. Civ._, tom. i., p. 101.
[III-95] I find no authority for Brasseur de Bourbourg's opinion that
the fall of Xibalba preceded the final scattering of the Nahua nations
by only one century.
[III-96] Orozco y Berra, _Geografía_, pp. 128-9, judges from the
occurrence of Nahua names in Guatemala that nations speaking Nahua
were formerly located there, and were overcome either by Maya-speaking
tribes that they found in the country, or by others that invaded the
country after them.
[III-97] _Amerikanische Urreligionen_, p. 524. Some of these writers,
however, believe strongly in a migration of tribes from the north,
although attributing the Nahua culture to the south.
CHAPTER IV.
THE TOLTEC PERIOD.
The Nahua Occupation of Mexico in the Sixth and Seventh
Centuries -- Condition of Anáhuac -- The Mixcohuas and
Chichimec Culhuas -- The Toltecs at Tulancingo and Tollan
-- Establishment of a Monarchy and Choice of a King,
710-720 A.D. -- Kingdoms of Culhuacan and Quauhtitlan --
The Teoamoxtli -- Prophecies and Death of Hueman -- Birth
of Quetzalcoatl -- Foundation of the Empire, 856 A.D. --
Alliance between Culhuacan, Otompan, and Tollan -- Reign
of Topiltzin Ceacatl Quetzalcoatl at Tollan -- Excesses of
Huemac II., or Tecpancaltzin -- Xochitl, the King's Mistress
-- Fulfillment of the Prophet's Predictions -- Toveyo's
Adventures -- Plagues sent upon the Toltecs -- Famine and
Pestilence -- Reign of Acxitl, or Topiltzin -- Debauchery
of King, Nobles, and Priests -- Tokens of Divine Wrath --
Foreign Invaders -- Final Overthrow of the Toltec Empire.
The sixth and seventh centuries of our era saw the Nahua power,
represented by the various Toltec Chichimec tribes, transferred
from Central America to the Mexican plateaux, with its centre about
the lakes of the valley. The general nature of this transfer we may
comprehend from what has been said in the preceding chapter; of its
details we know little or nothing. Each tribe that rose to national
prominence in Anáhuac during the succeeding centuries, preserved a
somewhat vague traditional memory of its past history, which took the
form in every case of a long migration from a distant land. In each of
these records there is probably an allusion to the original southern
empire, its disruption, and the consequent tribal scattering; but at
the same time most of the events thus recorded relate apparently to
the movements of particular tribes in and about Anáhuac at periods
long subsequent to the original migration and immediately preceding
the final establishment of each tribe. The Toltec version of this
common record has already been given, down to the establishment of
one of the many exiled tribes--the Toltecs proper--at Tulancingo just
north-east of the valley of Mexico. The annals of other Nahua tribes,
the Chichimecs, Nahuatlacas, Tepanecs, Acolhuas, and Aztecs--all of
which may be regarded to a great extent as different versions of the
same common record--will be presented in a future chapter with all
their particulars, fabulous or historical, so far as they have been
preserved. The migrations narrated may all be supposed to date back to
a common beginning, but are arranged by the authorities chronologically
according to the dates of their termination.
We have seen the Olmec tribes established for several centuries on
the eastern plateaux, or in the territory now constituting the states
of Puebla and Tlascala. Cholula was the Olmec capital, a flourishing
city celebrated particularly for its lofty pyramid crowned with a
magnificent temple built in honor of Quetzalcoatl. Teotihuacan within
the valley of Anáhuac had long been as it long continued to be the
religious centre of all the Nahua nations. Here kings and priests
were elected, ordained, and buried. Hither flocked pilgrims from
every direction to consult the oracles, to worship in the temples of
the sun and moon, and to place sacrificial offerings on the altars of
their deities. The sacred city was ruled by the long-haired priests
of the Sun, famous for their austerity and for their wisdom. Through
the hands of these priests, as the Spanish writers tell us, yearly
offerings were made of the first fruits of all their fields; and each
year at harvest-time a solemn festival was celebrated, not unattended
by human sacrifice. It is true that the Spanish authorities in their
descriptions of Teotihuacan and the ceremonies there performed, refer
for the most part to the Toltec rather than the pre-Toltec period;
but it has been seen in the preceding chapter that this city rose
to its position as the religious centre of the Nahuas in Mexico long
before the appearance of the Toltecs, and there is no evidence of any
essential change in its priesthood, or the nature of its theocratic
rule.[IV-1] No national name is applied in tradition to the people that
dwelt in Teotihuacan at this period, although the Totonacs claim to
have built the pyramids before they were driven eastward by Chichimec
tribes. Tabasco, Vera Cruz, and Tamaulipas were occupied by Xicalancas,
Totonacs, and Huastecs, respecting whom little more than their names
is known. Southward in Oajaca were already settled the Miztecs and
Zapotecs. The Otomís, a very numerous people, whose primitive history
is altogether unknown, occupied a large part of the valley of Mexico,
and the surrounding mountains, particularly toward the north and
north-west. There were doubtless many other tribes in Mexico when the
later Nahua nations came, particularly in the north and west, which
tribes were driven out, at least from the most desirable locations,
subjected, or converted and partially civilized by the new-comers; but
such tribes have left no traces in history.[IV-2]
* * * * *
[Sidenote: ANÁHUAC IN THE SIXTH CENTURY.]
During the sixth and seventh centuries we must imagine Anáhuac and the
adjoining territory on the north and west, for a broad but unknown
extent, as being gradually occupied by numerous Nahua nations of
varying power and numbers and of varying degrees of civilization. Some
were originally or soon became in their new homes wild hunting tribes,
powerful but rude, the terror of their neighbors; others settled in
the fertile valleys, lived by agriculture, and retained much of their
original culture. The more powerful nations, probably the most advanced
in culture as well, established themselves in and about the valley of
Mexico, where their capitals were soon flourishing cities, and where
all branches of aboriginal art received more attention than elsewhere
and were correspondingly developed. These central peoples became known,
perhaps at once, but more probably at a later date, as Toltecs, a
name which, whatever its original derivation and signification, became
synonymous with all that is skillful and excellent in art. On the other
hand the outside Nahua nations, many of which had lost in their new
life something of the true Nahua polish, and all of whom were regarded
more or less as barbarians by their more favored brothers of the lake
shores, were from this time known as Chichimecs, whatever may have been
the original application of that name.
[Sidenote: THE MIXCOHUAS.]
It has been remarked that little or nothing is known of the events that
occurred during these two centuries, during which the whole western
section of the country came into possession of numerous Nahua tribes,
as the eastern section had done long before, and as the whole country
remained down to the Spanish Conquest; for there is little evidence
of any subsequent migrations from or into Mexico. Ixtlilxochitl and
the Spanish writers, Torquemada, Vetancvrt, Clavigero, Duran, Veytia,
and the rest, confine their attention to the Toltecs proper, their
migration from Huehue Tlapallan to Tulancingo, which I have already
narrated, their subsequent removal to Tollan, the establishment
of their monarchy, and the succession of their kings. According to
these authors, the Toltecs met no opposition, Tollan had no rivals
nor allied capitals. Brasseur de Bourbourg, however, finds in the
_Codex Chimalpopoca_, already alluded to,[IV-3] and the _Memorial
de Culhuacan_,[IV-4] another similar chronologic record in the Nahua
language, a slight account of some of the other nations that settled in
Anáhuac at this period, even prior to the establishment of the Toltecs
at Tollan. These two documents are the chief authorities for the whole
Toltec period, and since neither of them has ever been published,
nothing remains but to accept the version given by the abbé.[IV-5] The
Mixcohuas were the first of the new tribes that came into notice in the
annals. They first appear at Chalchiuhapan, afterwards Tlascala, but
soon present themselves before the priests of Teotihuacan to receive
their sanction and become 'vassals of the Sun.' Faithless to the vows
taken at the sacred city, the new-comers, instead of establishing
themselves peaceably in the land, proved at first a torment to the
older inhabitants and a source of great anxiety to the priests who had
encouraged their coming; but the first bands of Mixcohuas were finally
subdued and forced to submit to the requirements of the priests of the
Sun by the aid of other succeeding but kindred bands of Chichimecs.
Thus the first epoch of Nahua occupation was one of strife, during
which the name of Mixcohuatl, or Mixcohuatl Mazatzin, 'the hunter,' is
most prominent; together with those of Xiuhnel and Mimich, who defeat
the Olmecs at Huitzilapan. The united bands under Mixcohuatl are known
in the tradition as Chichimec Culhuas, the founders of the city of
Culhuacan on the lake shore, who in a period of sixteen years--from
670 to 686, according to the authorities--became masters of nearly the
whole region south and east of the lakes.[IV-6] At about the same time the
province of Quauhtitlan, 'land of forests,' north-west of the lakes,
seems to have been occupied by another Chichimec nation--for all are
known in the traditions as Chichimecs whenever they are alluded to as
coming from without the valley, but become good Toltecs as soon as they
acquire a degree of power within its limits. Chicon Tonatiuh, 'seven
suns,' is named as the leader of this nation, and the chief cities of
the province were Huehuetocan, 'city of old men,' and Macuexhuacan,
'city of necklaces.'
[Sidenote: FOUNDATION OF TOLLAN.]
Meanwhile the exiles from Huehue Tlapallan were tarrying at Tulancingo,
where they had arrived toward the end of the seventh century,[IV-7]
and where--contrary to the advice of their prophet Hueman, if we may
credit the tradition--weary with their long wanderings, they lived
from sixteen to twenty years in a house which they built sufficiently
large to accommodate them all. During their stay they sent out parties
to make settlements in the adjoining territory, as had been their
custom wherever they had stopped in their long migration. Finally they
listened to the counsels of the venerable Hueman, and, still under the
command of their seven chiefs, transferred their home to Xocotitlan on
the river Quetzalatl, since called Tula, Tullanatl, or Montezuma, where
they founded the city of Tollan,[IV-8] where now stands the little village
of Tula, about thirty miles north-west of the city of Mexico. According
to Brasseur the Otomí city that stood here before the coming of the
Toltecs was called Mamhéni. It cannot be supposed that the Otomís
yielded up their fertile valley to the strangers without a struggle;
but the relation of this struggle like that of many a subsequent one in
which the Toltecs must have engaged in order to establish and maintain
their power, seems to have been intentionally omitted in the native
annals as recorded by the Spanish writers.
During the first six years of their stay in the valley of the
Quetzalatl, the Toltecs gave their attention to the building of the new
city, and the careful cultivation of the surrounding lands; at least
such is the account given by Ixtlilxochitl and those who have followed
him; but, according to Brasseur's interpretation, they spent the six
years in the conquest of the province and siege of the ancient city
which they re-named Tollan. Up to this time the exiles from Huehue
Tlapallan had lived under the command of the rebel princes Chalcaltzin
and Tlacamihtzin with their five companions acting as chiefs of the
different families,[IV-9] but all acting under the directions of Hueman
the prophet. The great age attributed to both prophet and chiefs,
who for over a century at the least had directed the wanderings of
their people, does not, of course merit serious discussion, since
it cannot be literally accepted. The most natural, yet a purely
conjectural, interpretation of the tradition is that a line or family
of chieftains is represented by its founder or by its most famous
member; and that by Hueman is to be understood the powerful priesthood
that ruled the destinies of the Toltecs, from the earliest days to
the fall of their empire. The government was a theocratic republic,
each chief directing the movements of his band in war and, so far as
such direction was needed, in peace, but all yielding, through fear of
the gods or veneration for their representatives, implicit obedience
to the counsels of their spiritual leader in all matters of national
import. But in the seventh year after their arrival in Tollan, when
the republic was yet in a state of peace and prosperity, undisturbed
by foreign or internal foes, the chiefs convened an assembly of the
heads of families and the leading men. The object of the meeting was
to effect a change in the form of their government, and to establish a
monarchy. The motive of the leaders, as represented by the tradition,
was a fear of future disturbances in a commonwealth governed by so many
independent chieftains. They recommended the election of an absolute
monarch, offering to surrender their own power and submit to the rule
of whatever king the people might choose. The members of the convention
acquiesced in the views of the chieftains, and approved the proposed
change in their form of government. An election being next in order,
a majority expressed their preference for one of the seven chiefs to
occupy the new throne.
[Sidenote: A MONARCHY ESTABLISHED.]
At this stage of the proceedings Hueman addresses the meeting; though
entertaining the highest opinion of the character, ability, and
patriotism of the candidates proposed, he deems it his duty to oppose
their election. He reminds the people that the main object of the
proposed change was to secure a peaceable and independent possession of
their new country; that the Chichimecs had pursued and already caused
them much trouble; that much was to be feared from their confirmed
hostility; that their foes were not far distant, and would very likely
invade the country at no very distant day. He recommended as the most
efficient means of avoiding future strife, that an embassy with rich
presents be sent to the Chichimec monarch, asking for a son or other
near relative who should be crowned king of the Toltecs. An express
stipulation must, however, be required on the part of the Chichimec
king that the Toltecs should ever be a perfectly free and independent
people, owing no allegiance whatever to the Chichimecs, although
the two powers would enter into an alliance for mutual defense and
assistance. The advice of the aged and venerated counsellor was of
course accepted without objection; in fact, as pictured by the Spanish
writers, Toltec history is for the most part but a record of sage
counsels of wise rulers cheerfully acquiesced in by an appreciative
and obliging people. Ambassadors of the highest rank, laden with
gifts of value, were dispatched by the shortest routes to the court
of Huehue Tlapallan--notwithstanding the implied vicinity of some
Chichimec nations--where Icauhtzin[IV-10] occupied the throne. The mission
was entirely successful. The second son of the king, still a young
man, whose name in his own country is unknown, was with the required
stipulations, brought back by the embassy and crowned at Tollan under
the name of Chalchiuh Tlatonac,[IV-11] 'shining precious stone.'
The young king, by reason of his fine personal appearance, his
character, intelligence and amiability, seems to have greatly pleased
from the first the people over whom he was called to rule. The events
related above, the settlement at Tollan and the connection of the first
king, must be attributed to the first quarter of the eighth century,
between 710 and 720.[IV-12] Immediately after the accession of the young
monarch, a law was established by him and his counsellors to the
effect that no king should reign more than fifty-two years, but at the
expiration of this term should abdicate in favor of his eldest son,[IV-13]
whom he might, however, still serve as adviser. Should the king die
before the allotted time had elapsed, it was provided that the state
should be ruled during the unexpired term by magistrates chosen by the
people. In addition to the inherent improbability of such extraordinary
legislation, it should be noted that subsequent events, even as related
by Ixtlilxochitl, do not in all cases agree with it. Its meaning can
only be conjectured; it is noticeable, however, that the time allotted
to each reign was exactly a cycle of fifty-two years, and it is not
altogether unlikely that a custom prevailed of alluding in the pictured
annals to each cycle by the name of the most famous king whose reign
fell within the period. The next event, and the only one particularly
recorded in the reign of Chalchiuh Tlatonac, was his marriage.
Realizing the importance of providing for heirs that the dynasty might
be perpetuated, he left the choice of a wife entirely to his subjects,
much to their satisfaction, as indicating a desire on the part of
royalty to please the people. The choice fell upon a beautiful daughter
of Acapichtzin. The latter had himself been a favorite candidate for
royal honors when a kingdom was first proposed, and was thus rewarded
by seeing his daughter raised to the dignity of first Toltec queen. The
Olmec, Xicalanca, and other Toltec nations had voluntarily given their
allegiance to the monarch of Tollan, who reigned long and prosperously
for fifty-two years, when he died and was buried in the chief temple in
7 Acatl, or about 771 A.D.[IV-14]
[Sidenote: THE KINGDOM OF TOLLAN.]
Thus in the record preserved by the Spanish writers, all participation
in the new monarchy by other Chichimec Toltec tribes than those in and
about Tollan, is altogether ignored. The Olmecs and other pre-Toltec
nations are represented as having voluntarily offered their allegiance,
new towns founded by colonists sent out from Tollan and Tulancingo
became of course tributary to the new kingdom, and it is even admitted
that powerful Chichimec nations were established not far distant, and
were regarded with some anxiety in view of probable future events until
the danger was averted by the selection of a Chichimec prince as king,
and the consequent transformation of their rivals into allies. The
absence of any further mention of these allied and friendly nations
throughout the whole period of Toltec history is certainly most
extraordinary, and might be sufficient in itself to arouse a suspicion
that in the records from which this account was drawn the kingdom of
Tollan was given unmerited prominence, while its allies and rivals were
intentionally denied their share in the glories of the Toltec empire.
This suspicion seems to be to a considerable extent confirmed by the
two Nahua documents already referred to.[IV-15] These authorities relate
substantially the same course of events as the others, and refer them
to approximately the same date; they tell us of the original theocratic
republic ruled by independent chieftains who were subordinate to a
central sacerdotal power; the determination finally reached to adopt
a monarchical form of government; and the choice of a king, who
does not seem to have been one of the tribal chieftains. But they
attribute these acts to several more or less closely allied nations,
of which that established at Tollan was only one, and not the chief.
The sacerdotal supremacy attributed to the priesthood of Tollan under
the name of Hueman, was really exercised by the priests of the sun at
Teotihuacan; there were the deliberations held; and there probably did
the first king receive the rites of coronation. The leading nation in
Anáhuac at the time was that of the Chichimec Culhuas under Mixcohuatl
Mazatzin; those at Tollan and Quauhtitlan, and perhaps others whose
name has not been preserved, having been less powerful allies. The
choice of the chiefs fell upon Nauhyotl, or Nauhyotzin, as the first
Toltec king, and having been crowned probably at Teotihuacan, he
established his capital at Culhuacan, then, as for a long time after
the metropolis of Anáhuac, in 11 Calli, or 721 A.D. Of Nauhyotl's
family and previous rank nothing is known. Whether he was a prince
high in rank in a foreign land, identical with the Chalchiuh Tlatonac
of Ixtlilxochitl, or, as Brasseur conjectures, sprung from the union
of a native princess of the pre-Toltec tribes and a Chichimec Culhua
chief, we have no means of determining. He was the first, so far as
can be known, to assume the titles Tlatoani and Topiltzin,[IV-16] both of
which endured to the time of the Conquest, the former signifying 'lord'
or 'monarch,' and implying the highest rank in matters temporal, as
the latter in matters spiritual, corresponding very nearly with that
of 'pope' in Catholic countries. The close connection between church
and state in all the Nahua nations has been frequently pointed out in
this work; as the Abbé Brasseur says, "the empire and the priesthood
were one, and the ritual was the base of the throne. In order to firmly
establish the monarchy, and ensure the fruits of their conquests, the
Toltecs must rule not only the bodies but the conscience of their
subjects. Where persuasion and the imposing spectacle of religious
ceremonies were of no avail, violence and terror were resorted to,
and insensibly the peoples of Mexico adopted the civilization of their
masters together with their superstitious rites."[IV-17]
[Sidenote: KINGDOM OF QUAUHTITLAN.]
In 725 Chicon Tonatiuh, assumed the title of Tlatoani and became king
of Quauhtitlan, probably in some degree subordinate to the king at
Culhuacan. The first mention by these authorities of a king in Tollan
is to the effect that Mixcohuatl Mazatzin was called to that throne
in 752. Meantime one of Mixcohuatl's sons, named Texcatlipocatl,
afterwards deified as Tezcatlipoca, had founded the dominion of
Tezcuco, and another son, named like his father Mixcohuatl, but
better known and afterwards worshiped as Camaxtli, had continued the
conquests of the Mixcohuas on the eastern plateau of Huitzilapan, or
Tlascala.[IV-18] In 753 Chicon Tonatiuh, who had died two years before,
was succeeded in Quauhtitlan by Xiuhnel; the new king was murdered
soon after by his subjects, or as the tradition has it, was stabbed
through the liver by a native woman in whose arms he was sleeping.
A revolt followed, by which the Toltec power in that province was
temporarily overthrown by the aboriginal inhabitants, whoever they
may have been. In 767 Nauhyotl, king at Culhuacan, died and was
succeeded by Totepeuh, identical with Mixcohua Camaxtli, also known
as Nonohualcatl, and whose father was at the time reigning at Tollan.
Early in the reign of Totepeuh a wide-spread war is vaguely reported
as having been waged chiefly in the regions outside the valley. In
this war the original inhabitants of the country, the Toltec tribes
already settled there, and newly arrived Chichimec bands are vaguely
mentioned as the combatants; Xochitzin, a beautiful princess possessed
of supernatural powers, or at least holding communication with the
gods and regarded as an oracle, was the prime mover in this war;
Huactli was the most prominent leader, in full sympathy apparently
with the Toltec sovereign; and at the end of the strife Huactli married
Xochitzin and became king of the re-established dominion of Quauhtitlan
in 804. Thirteen years later after a long reign Mixcohuatl Mazatzin,
king of Tollan, died. He had been a very famous warrior, one of the
most prominent of all the Toltec chieftains in Anáhuac, and was in
after years worshiped as one of the gods of war.[IV-19] His successor was
Huetzin, whom Brasseur conjectures to have been a son of the late king
and identical with Tezcatlipoca.
[Sidenote: THE TEOAMOXTLI, OR DIVINE BOOK.]
Returning now to the other version of Toltec history we learn that
after the death of the first king of Tollan, his son Ixtlilcuechahuac
mounted the throne.[IV-20] His reign, like that of his predecessor, was
peaceful and prosperous; but the only event recorded was a meeting of
all the sages under the direction of the aged Hueman, which took place
only a few years before the end of the second king's term of office.
At this assembly there were brought forward all the Toltec records
reaching back to the earliest period of their existence, and from
these documents, after a long conference and the most careful study,
the _Teoamoxtli_, or 'book of God,' was prepared. In its pages were
inscribed the Nahua annals from the time of the deluge, or even from
the creation; together with all their religious rites, governmental
system, laws and social customs; their knowledge respecting agriculture
and all the arts and sciences, particular attention being given to
astrology; and a complete explanation of their modes of reckoning time
and interpreting the hieroglyphics. To the divine book was added a
chapter of prophecies respecting future events and the signs by which
it should be known when the time of their fulfillment was drawing near.
After the completion of the Teoamoxtli, Hueman, now three hundred
years old, announced his approaching end and made known to the Toltecs
their future. After ten cycles had elapsed from the time when they
left Huehue Tlapallan, they were to be ruled by a king whose right to
the royal power would not be undisputed among his subjects. From his
mother's womb he would have certain personal peculiarities by which
he might be known; his curly hair would assume the form of a mitre
or tiara. The earlier years of his reign were to be years of great
prosperity; his rule would be wise, just, and able. In middle life
the king would abandon the ways of wisdom and virtue, giving himself
up to all manner of vice leading infallibly to disaster; and worst of
all his subjects would imitate his vicious conduct and share in his
misfortunes. Great calamities were to come upon the Toltecs, sent by
Tloque Nahuaque, the great God, and like unto these with which their
ancestors were afflicted in the remote past. Finally the kingdom was to
be destroyed by civil wars, and the king, driven from his possession,
after nearly all his subjects had perished, was to return to the
ancient home of their race, there in his later years to become once
more wise and discreet. Yet a sign was not denied this fated people;
for certain unnatural phenomena were to announce their destruction
as drawing nigh. When the rabbit should have horns like a deer, and
the humming-bird be found with spurs, and stones yield fruit; when
the priests of the temples should forget their vows of chastity with
noble ladies, pilgrims to the shrines of the god--then might they
look for the fulfillment of Hueman's predictions; for lightnings and
hail and snow, for famine and pestilence and devouring insects, to be
followed by desolating wars. For such as escaped these disasters, or
for their descendants, another visitation of divine wrath was reserved
in the form of a foreign people from the east, who ten cycles later
were to take possession of the country in fulfillment of the words of
the ancient prophet Quetzalcoatl. No further information is given of
Hueman's death or of Ixtlilcuechahuac's rule.
Huetzin, the third king, was crowned, according to Veytia's chronology,
in 823,[IV-21] a date that very nearly agrees with that given in the
other version, or 817. Totepeuh,[IV-22] the fourth, elsewhere mentioned
as second king at Culhuacan, took the throne from his father after
fifty-two years; and handed it down after a like period to his
own son Nacaxoc,[IV-23] the fifth monarch at Tollan, who was in turn
succeeded by Mitl in 979.[IV-24] These reigns, the last of which lasted
fifty-nine years, were marked by the occurrence of no event specially
important, though in all great progress was made, new towns founded,
old cities beautified, and new temples built, including one of great
magnificence at Quauhnahuac (Cuernavaca, possibly Xochicalco) and
another at Tollan intended to rival that of the Sun at Teotihuacan,
which city is incidentally admitted to have surpassed Tollan in extent
and magnificence. During this period the Toltec power was firmly
established over a broad territory, and there were yet no tokens of
approaching destruction.[IV-25]
* * * * *
[Sidenote: TOTEPEUH KING OF TOLLAN.]
[Sidenote: VENGEANCE OF QUETZALCOATL.]
In the annals of Culhuacan we left Totepeuh on the throne. His first
military expedition was directed towards the eastern plateau, where
Chalchiuhapan, later Tlascala, seems to have been founded at about
this time, and where this king was afterwards worshiped under his name
of Camaxtli. In his next expedition, to the province of Huitznahuac,
he encountered, defeated after many fruitless attempts, and finally
married a bold princess Chimalman, who fought entirely naked at the
head of a body of amazons. The conquest of Cuitlahuac next claimed
his attention, for this was the only city on the lakes that had been
able to withstand the power of his father and predecessor. To this
city and this period Brasseur traces back the foundation of the Nahual
Teteuctin, an order of chivalry, whence proceeded the highest titles
of learning and nobility, down to the coming of the Spaniards.[IV-26]
Queen Chimalman, becoming enceinte immediately after marriage, dreamed
that she bore in her bosom a chalchiuite, or precious stone, and
decided to name her son, predestined to a glorious career, Quetzalcoatl
Chalchiuitl. At his birth, which occurred nine months later, the heir
was named also Ceacatl, probably from the day on which he was born. In
addition to his mother's dream and the auguries drawn from it, the fact
that Ceacatl Quetzalcoatl united in his veins the noblest blood of the
Toltecs and the pre-Toltec peoples, gave special import to his birth,
and the event was celebrated with great pomp at Culhuacan, and gifts of
great value were sent from all directions.[IV-27] 839 is the approximate
date to which Ceacatl Quetzalcoatl's birth is referred; his mother
died in childbed, and the child was entrusted to the king's sister
Cohuatl, a priestess of the temple, perhaps the same as Cihuacoatl,
or Cioacoatl, afterwards deified as the goddess of childbirth.[IV-28]
In 845 King Totepeuh Nonohualcatl himself, now far advanced in years,
was murdered by conspiring nobles under the leadership of Apanecatl,
Zolton, and Cuilton; he was succeeded by Yohuallatonac, and at the same
time Ihuitimal,--a name that bears no resemblance to that of Huetzin's
successor according to the Spanish writers,--took Huetzin's place on
the throne of Tollan. Brasseur believes that Huetzin left Tollan to
become king at Culhuacan, and that he was the same as Yohuallatonac.
It must be noted that the confused state of the aboriginal annals is
due not only to the incompleteness of the native records--many having
been destroyed--and the errors of interpreters, but also largely to
the unfortunate custom of the Nahua peoples of giving many names to the
same person, and multiplying names apparently in proportion to fame and
rank. It is recorded that Ceacatl, while yet a boy, wreaked a terrible
vengeance on the murderers of his father. The latter took refuge in the
fortress of Cuitlahuac on one of the lake islands deemed impregnable,
but by a subterranean passage leading under the waters, the prince
and his followers gained access to fort and temple. The leaders of the
conspiracy were sprinkled with red pepper after a preparatory flaying
and mangling, and dying in indescribable torture were sacrificed to the
memory of Totepeuh, the first of the many thousand victims subsequently
offered to the same divinity under his name of Camaxtli. From this time
nothing whatever is recorded of Ceacatl for about twenty years, until
he re-appears under his name of Quetzalcoatl as the most celebrated of
the Toltec kings and high-priests, afterwards deified like most heroes
of this early time.
The only event recorded before the re-appearance of Quetzalcoatl is
one of great importance, a convention of the princes and wise men of
Anáhuac and vicinity. At this assemblage the system of government and
the laws of succession were perfected and as may be supposed given
substantially the form which they preserved down to the Conquest; but
the most important act was the establishment of an alliance between
the crowns of Culhuacan, Otompan, and Tollan. Each king was to be
perfectly independent in the affairs of his own domain; but in matters
affecting the general interests the three monarchs were to constitute
a council, in which the king of Culhuacan was to rank first, assuming
a title nearly equivalent to that of Emperor. Otompan took the second
place and Tollan the third. This is the first mention of Otompan as
a capital, but since its domain seems to have included the territory
of Teotihuacan and Tezcuco, its prominent position in the league is
not improbable. The establishment of this alliance, or, as it may be
more conveniently termed, empire, is referred to the date 1 Tecpatl,
856.[IV-29]
* * * * *
[Sidenote: CEACATL QUETZALCOATL.]
Ceacatl Quetzalcoatl re-appears in history, still following the same
authorities, about the year 870, and succeeded Ihuitimal as king of
Tollan, assuming the title Topiltzin, on the death of that king in
873.[IV-30] All the Spanish writers have much to say of Quetzalcoatl,
although none of them--except Sahagun, who expresses himself very
clearly on the subject--[IV-31] seem to have regarded him as one of the
Toltec kings in the regular order of succession to the throne; and
their accounts are inextricably confused by reason of their having
made no distinction between Quetzalcoatl the original culture-hero, and
Quetzalcoatl, the pontiff-ruler of Tollan, applying indiscriminately to
one person all the traditions in which the name occurred. I will give
first the regular Spanish version of these traditions.
Mendieta records the tradition that he was the son of Camaxtli and
Chimalman, and also another to the effect that Chimalman became
pregnant by swallowing a chalchiuite, which she found when sweeping;
but other authorities, without going back to his birth, represent
him as appearing on the eastern coast, most of them agreeing on the
region of Pánuco as the locality. He was tall, well formed, with broad
forehead and large eyes, of fair complexion, with long black hair[IV-32]
and a full beard. Bare as to his head and feet, he wore a long white
robe ornamented with black flowers, according to Las Casas, or with
black or red crosses, as other writers say, supporting his steps with
a staff. He was austere in manner, but in character all that is good,
and gentle, disapproving all acts of violence and blood, and withal
most chaste, neither marrying nor knowing women. With him was a large
company of artists and men learned in every branch of science, whom
some of the authors seem to consider a colony from a foreign land. From
Pánuco Quetzalcoatl, with his companions, came to Tollan after having
tarried for some time, as Camargo tells us, at Tulancingo. He was at
first received by the Toltecs with much enthusiasm, and during his
stay in Tollan filled the position of high-priest or supreme spiritual
ruler. His rule was mild, but he insisted on a strict performance of
all religious duties, and subjected himself to severe penances, such as
the drawing of blood from tongue and limbs by means of maguey-thorns.
He was not without supernatural powers, since his announcements made
by a crier from the top of a neighboring mountain could be heard for
a distance of three hundred miles. He introduced many new religious
rites, including the practice of fasting and the drawing of blood
from their own body by penitents, also according to some authorities,
the establishment of convents and nunneries, and the sacrifice of
birds and animals; to human sacrifices he was ever opposed. He was a
patron of all the arts and sciences, which in his time reached their
highest state of development.[IV-33] Finally, Quetzalcoatl left Tollan
and went to Cholula, which city with others on the eastern plateau,
some authors--still referring to another Quetzalcoatl, and another
epoch--credit him with having founded. There are many versions of his
motives for abandoning Tollan, most referring to certain troubles
between him and a rival Huemac or Tezcatlipoca. Playing ball with
Tezcatlipoca, the latter assumed the form of a tiger, scared the
spectators so that many fell over a precipice, and pursued his opponent
from town to town until he reached Cholula; or he was driven away by
the tricks of a sorcerer named Titlacaâon, or Titlacahua, who appeared
in the form of an old man. By dint of much persuasion the magician
induced Quetzalcoatl, who was unwell, to drink a medicine which he had
brought, recommended to act as a narcotic. The medicine proved to be
pulque, the high-priest was soon intoxicated, and in this condition
was easily persuaded that by going to the ancient country of Tlapallan
he might regain his youth. The other tricks of this sorcerer are many,
but they seem to belong to the final overthrow of the Toltec empire
rather than to Quetzalcoatl's time. Many details are given of the
high-priest's journey towards Tlapallan, of the places through which
he passed, and the wonderful traces which he left. He is generally
credited with having stopped a short time at Quauhtitlan, and with
having lived some years at Cholula, where he was especially popular,
and where in after years his doctrines found their most devoted
followers. But his chief enemy, Huemac, and the necromancers followed
him even to Cholula with their persecutions, and he was forced to set
out again on his journey towards Tlapallan. He finally disappeared in
the Goazacoalco region, after predicting the future coming of bearded
white men from the east. I have given here only a brief outline of the
traditions respecting Quetzalcoatl, because a full account has been
presented in another volume, to which the reader is referred.[IV-34]
[Sidenote: FLIGHT OF QUETZALCOATL.]
The supposition that Quetzalcoatl was a member of the Toltec royal
family and reigned as a king at Tollan, together with the evident
confounding in the traditions as recorded by the Spanish writers
of two distinct persons named Quetzalcoatl,[IV-35] remove most of the
difficulties connected with this famous personage, the second of the
name. It seems to me most probable that the traditions relating to
Quetzalcoatl's foreign origin or his long absence in distant parts of
the country, his arrival at Pánuco, and his final disappearance in the
south--although these are all accepted by Brasseur--should be referred
to the Quetzalcoatl of primitive times. The young prince, unable
for some unrevealed reason, to obtain after his arrival at years of
discretion the crown of his murdered father, retired to some city in or
near Anáhuac, probably Tulancingo, where he first comes into notice,
to bide his time. Here he settled on his future policy including
some religious reforms, communicated with powerful friends throughout
Anáhuac, and perfected his plans for recovering his lost throne. Some
crosses and other relics seen by the Spaniards in the mountains of
Meztitlan, were attributed by native tradition to Ceacatl's residence
in Tulancingo.[IV-36] Such was the force of his claim as son of Totepeuh,
and such the influence of the religious dogmas zealously promulgated by
him and his disciples, that at last on the death of Ihuitimal, perhaps
his brother, he was raised to the throne of Tollan, as has been said,
in 873, under the title of Topiltzin Ceacatl Quetzalcoatl.
[Sidenote: REIGN OF CEACATL.]
There is nothing in the Spanish version of the Quetzalcoatl traditions
by which to fix the epoch in which he flourished. It is merely implied
that Huemac, his chief enemy, was temporal ruler at the same time
that he exercised the functions of high-priest, and succeeded him
in power. Huemac is identified by Brasseur, not without some reason,
with Nacaxoc, the fifth king of the Spanish writers, whose reign is
represented by them as having been most peaceful and uneventful.
He is also known as Tezcatlipoca, and was closely related to
Yohuallatonac,[IV-37] the king of Culhuacan. In the _Codex Chimalpopoca_
he is called both Huemac and Matlacxochitl.
After Quetzalcoatl had been about ten years on the throne, opposition
to his power, fomented by his enemies from the first, assumed serious
proportions. Several causes are plausibly attributed by the records
and their interpreters to this opposition. The new pontiff-king had
effected many innovations in religious ceremonies. It does not appear
that his doctrines differed very materially from those entertained by
his predecessors, but the changes introduced by him had been so readily
admitted by reason of the popularity and zeal of their author and his
subordinates, as to excite jealousy among the ecclesiastical powers.
Most prominent among his peculiar reforms, and the one that is reported
to have contributed most to his downfall, was his unvarying opposition
to human sacrifice. This sacrifice had prevailed from pre-Toltec
times at Teotihuacan, and had been adopted more or less extensively
in Culhuacan and Tollan. By Quetzalcoatl it was absolutely prohibited
in the temples of the latter capital, and thus the powerful priesthood
of Otompan, and Culhuacan was arrayed against him. Again it is thought
that under Quetzalcoatl the spiritual power always closely connected
with the temporal in Nahua governments, became so predominant as to
excite the jealousy and fears of the nobility in Tollan, who were
restive under a priestly restraint not imposed on their brothers of
corresponding rank in the other nations of the empire. Finally, under
the rule of Ceacatl, Tollan had become the metropolis of the empire. It
does not appear that the terms of the alliance, according to which the
monarch of Culhuacan outranked the others, had been changed; but in the
magnificence of her palaces and temples, and the skill and fame of her
artists, if not in population, Tollan now surpassed the cities of the
valley, and thus naturally was looked upon as a too successful rival.
The dissatisfied element at home was headed by Huemac, or Tezcatlipoca,
who had perhaps some well-founded claim to the throne, and received
the support of the allied monarchs. The ensuing struggle is symbolized
in the record of the Spanish writers by the successive tricks of
the necromancers; and the religious strife between rival sects was
continued with more or less bitterness down to the latest Aztec epoch.
Such was Quetzalcoatl's repugnance to the shedding of human blood, that
he seems to have voluntarily abandoned his throne against the wishes
of his more warlike partisans, and after a brief stay in Quauhtitlan,
to have crossed to the eastern plateau of Huitzilapan in 895. Huemac,
Tezcatlipoca, or Nacaxoc succeeded immediately to the royal power in
Tollan.[IV-38]
[Sidenote: CONQUEST OF CHOLULA.]
The teachings and influence of Quetzalcoatl had preceded him among
the Olmec nations of the eastern region. His father, under the name of
Camaxtli, had done more than any other to bring these nations under the
Toltec power, had founded the city afterwards known as Tlascala, and
was perhaps already worshiped as a deity. Moreover the Quetzalcoatl of
old had traditionally introduced Nahua institutions in this region,
where he was still the object of supreme veneration. Whether the
city of Cholula was actually founded at this time or by the first
Quetzalcoatl, it is impossible to determine,[IV-39] but the coming of
Ceacatl seems to have marked the beginning of a new era of prosperity
on the eastern plateau. Temples in honor of Camaxtli were erected in
Tlascala and Huexotzinco, while Cholula became the capital of what may
almost be termed a new Toltec monarchy. All the southern and eastern
provinces subject to the empire during Ceacatl's reign at Tollan, gave
in their adhesion to him at Cholula. Large numbers of his partisans
also followed him from Tollan, and all the primitive peoples, among
whom human sacrifice in pre-Toltec times had been unknown, were glad
to submit to the royal high-priest. His reign in Cholula lasted about
ten years,[IV-40] and during this time his doctrines are thought to have
been introduced by disciples dispatched from Cholula into the southern
regions of Oajaca.
In 904 Yohuallatonac was succeeded in Culhuacan by Quetzallacxoyatl,
and Huemac, having subdued by his strict and severe measures all open
opposition to his rule at home, but looking with much uneasiness on the
prosperity of Ceacatl in his new capital, and the constant emigration
of his own subjects eastward, resolved again to attack his former
rival. At the head of a large army he directed his march towards
Cholula. Quetzalcoatl as before, notwithstanding the remonstrance
of his people, refused to resist his progress, but departed before
Huemac's arrival for other lands as before related. Cholula, with the
neighboring cities and provinces fell an easy prey to the valiant
Huemac; but so long did he remain absent in his insatiable desire
to conquer new territory, that his subjects revolted and with the
co-operation of the king of Culhuacan proclaimed Nauhyotl king about
the year 930.[IV-41] Huemac did not yield without a struggle. Returning
westward to defend his throne he met Nauhyotl on the lake shores;
his army was routed and he was killed, or at least disappeared. As
Tezcatlipoca and under various other titles he ever after ranked among
the highest in the pantheon of Nahua divinities.[IV-42]
During the ensuing era of peace among the Toltecs under Nauhyotl, or
Mitl, and his allies, it seems that Cholula regained its prosperity,
re-established the institutions and worship of Quetzalcoatl, and
soon rivaled in magnificence Tollan, Culhuacan, and Teotihuacan.
Still remaining to a certain extent a part of the Toltec empire,
under the rule of the king at Tollan, Cholula seems to have preferred
from this period a republican form of home rule, similar, if not
identical, to that in vogue on the eastern plateau at the coming of the
Spaniards.[IV-43] Four of Quetzalcoatl's chief disciples were charged with
the establishment of a permanent government, which they entrusted to
two supreme magistrates, one chosen from the priesthood and exercising
the functions of high-priest under the title of Tlachiach or 'lord
from on high,' and the other from the nobility being at the head of the
civil government with the title Aquiach.
[Sidenote: REIGN OF NAUHYOTL.]
The reign of Nauhyotl, or Mitl,[IV-44] at Tollan was one of great
prosperity and peace. The new king devoted all his energies to
promoting the glory of his capital city, where he re-established
nearly all the reforms instituted by Ceacatl and partially abolished
by Huemac. He is represented as having looked with some uneasiness on
the growing prosperity of Cholula, and on the pilgrimages continually
undertaken by residents of Tollan to the eastern shrines; but instead
of resorting like his predecessor to hostile measures, he determined
to eclipse the glory of Cholula by the erection of new and magnificent
temples at home. The finest of these temples was that built in honor of
the Goddess of Water,[IV-45] or the Frog Goddess, to which was attached a
college of priests vowed to celibacy. Meantime the worship of Camaxtli
and Tlaloc were more firmly established than before at Tlascala and
Huexotzinco, and grand temples were built in several Toltec provinces
without Anáhuac, particularly in the south, one of the most famous
being near Quauhnahuac, later Cuernavaca, the ruins of which may
be supposed with some plausibility to be identical with those of
Xochicalco.[IV-46] After having restored Tollan to the position it had
occupied under Ceacatl Quetzalcoatl, Nauhyotl died after a reign of
fifteen years in 945.[IV-47]
All the authorities agree that Nauhyotl was succeeded at his death
by his queen Xiuhtlaltzin,[IV-48] who reigned four years, showing
great zeal and wisdom in the management of public affairs, and dying
deeply regretted by all her subjects.[IV-49] The Spanish writers name
Tecpancaltzin as the successor of the lamented queen, referring to his
reign and to that of his successor the events which brought about the
overthrow of the Toltec empire. The Nahua records, however, represent
queen Xiuhtlaltzin as having been followed by her son Matlaccoatl,
who reigned from 949 to 973, and who in his turn was succeeded by
Tlilcoatzin, ruling from 973 to 994, and preceding Tecpancaltzin,
respecting whose reign these records agree to a great extent with
the other authorities. We have no record of any specific events that
occurred during the reign of the three sovereigns last mentioned, save
that in Culhuacan Quetzallacxoyatl was succeeded in 953 by Chalchiuh
Tlatonac, and the latter in 985 by Totepeuh, the second of the
name.[IV-50]
* * * * *
I come now to the last century of the period to which this chapter
is devoted, a century whose annals form a continuous record of civil
and religious strife in Anáhuac, invasions by powerful bands from
the adjoining regions on the north and north-west, pestilence and
famine, resulting in the utter overthrow of the Toltec empire. There
is somewhat less contradiction among the two classes of authorities
quoted respecting the events of this century than in the case of those
preceding. The Spanish writers still speak of Tollan, it is true, as
if that city alone constituted the empire; but the Nahua documents
also ascribe almost exclusively to Tollan the occurrences which caused
the destruction of the Toltec power. The latter documents, however,
still keep up the thread of historical events at Culhuacan and in other
provinces, and they are doubtless much more reliable in the matter
of dates than the Spanish version, besides narrating the invasions
of foreign tribes, a disturbing element in Toltec politics almost
entirely ignored by Ixtlilxochitl and his followers. Notwithstanding
the general agreement of the authorities referred to, it must be noted
that the record is but a succession of tales in which the marvelous
and supernatural largely predominate, conveying a tolerably accurate
idea of the general course of history during this period, but throwing
very little light on its details. In accordance with my plan already
announced, I have but to tell the tales as they are recorded; their
general meaning is sufficiently apparent, and I shall offer but rarely
conjectures respecting the specific significance of each.
[Sidenote: REIGN OF HUEMAC II.]
Huemac II., also known as Tecpancaltzin,[IV-51] the eldest son of Totepeuh
II. of Culhuacan, mounted the throne of Tollan in 994,[IV-52] at a time
when that city in respect of art and high culture was at the head of
the empire, although Culhuacan still retained her original political
supremacy, while both Teotihuacan and Cholula were rivals in the
power and fame of their respective priesthood. There are no data for
assigning even approximately exact limits to the Toltec empire at
this period. It is probably, however, that while the Toltec was less
absolute and despotic than the Aztec power in the sixteenth century,
yet it was exerted throughout fully as wide an extent of territory,
including Michoacan and a broad region in the north-west never
altogether subjected to the Aztec kings. The Toltec domain had been
enlarged gradually by the influence of the priesthood, particularly
under Ceacatl Quetzalcoatl, until there were few provinces from
Tehuantepec to Zacatecas, from the North to the South Sea, which
did not render a voluntary allegiance to the allied monarchs of the
central region. And at the same time it cannot be believed that foreign
conquest by force of arms had so small a place among the events of
Toltec history as the records would imply. Huemac II., unlike the first
of the same name, belonged to the sect of Quetzalcoatl, using his
power to restrain the practice of human sacrifice if not altogether
abolishing it in the temples of Tollan. He even seems to have added
the name of Quetzalcoatl to his other royal and pontifical titles, or
possibly had this title before his coronation, as high-priest of the
sect at Culhuacan. The application of this title to Huemac, and that of
Tezcatlipoca to the high-priest of the rival sect, has been productive
of no little confusion in the record, since it is sometimes impossible
to decide whether certain events should be attributed to this reign or
to the time of Ceacatl and Huemac I. The new king was endowed with fine
natural qualifications for his position, and enjoyed to a remarkable
degree the confidence and esteem of the people. During the first
year he ruled with great wisdom, speaking but little, attending most
strictly to the performance of his religious duties, and always prompt
in the administration of justice to his subjects of whatever station;
but the old fire of religious strife, though smouldering, was yet
alive and ready to be fanned into a conflagration which should consume
the whole Toltec structure. The leaders of the rival sect, followers
of the bloody Tezcatlipoca and bitter enemies to all followers of
Quetzalcoatl, although now in the minority were constantly intriguing
for the fall of Huemac. But they well knew the popularity of their
hated foe, and bent all their energies to the task of dragging him
down from his lofty pedestal of popular esteem, by tempting him into
the commission of acts unworthy of himself as high-priest, king, and
successor of the great Quetzalcoatl. A scandal was to be created; wine
and women were naturally the agents to be employed; the tale is a very
strange one.
[Sidenote: THE KING'S MISTRESS.]
Papantzin, a Toltec noble of high rank, presented himself one day at
court, together with his daughter, the beautiful Xochitl,[IV-53] bearing
with other gifts to the king a kind of syrup and sugar made from
maguey-juice by a process of which Papantzin was the inventor. This
syrup is generally spoken of as pulque, but there seems to be little
reason for making a fermented liquor of 'miel prieta de maguey.'[IV-54]
Whatever the nature of the syrup, it pleased the royal palate, and
the lovely face and form of the young Xochitl were no less pleasing
to the royal eye. The king expressed his appreciation of the new
invention, and his desire to receive additional samples of the sweet
preparation, at the same time telling the father that he would be
pleased to receive such gifts at the hands of the daughter, who might
visit him for such a purpose unattended save by a servant. Proud of the
honor shown to his family, and without suspicion of evil intentions,
Papantzin only a few days later sent Xochitl, accompanied by an elderly
female attendant, with a new gift of maguey-syrup. The attendant was
directed to await her mistress in a distant apartment of the palace,
while Xochitl was introduced alone to the presence of Huemac. Bravely
the maiden resisted the monarch's blandishments and protestations of
ardent love, but by threats and force was compelled to yield her person
to his embrace. She was then sent to the strongly-guarded palace of
Palpan near the capital, and there, cut off from all communication
with parents or friends, lived as the king's mistress. Her parents were
notified that their daughter had been entrusted by Huemac to the care
of certain ladies who would perfect her education and fit her for a
prominent position among the ladies of the court and for a brilliant
marriage. To Papantzin the royal manner of showing honor to his family
seemed at best novel and strange, but he could suspect no evil intent
on the part of the pious representative of Quetzalcoatl. New favors
were subsequently shown the dishonored father, in the shape of lands
and titles and promises. For three years Huemac continued his guilty
amour in secret, and in the meantime, in 1002,[IV-55] a child was born,
named Meconetzin, 'child of the maguey,' or at a later period Acxitl.
According to the _Codex Chimalpopoca_ the king during these three years
gave himself up to the pleasures of the wine cup also, yielding to the
temptations placed before him by the crafty followers of Tezcatlipoca,
and during one of his drunken orgies revealed the secret of his love;
but however this may have been, that secret was finally suspected;
Papantzin in the disguise of a laborer visited the palace of Palpan,
met his daughter with the young Meconetzin in her arms, and listened
to the tale of her shame. The angry father seems to have been quieted
with the promise that his daughter's son should be proclaimed heir to
the throne, since the queen had borne her husband only daughters; but
the scandal once suspected was spread far and wide by the priesthood
of Tezcatlipoca, and the faith of the Toltecs in their saintly monarch
was shaken. The queen having died, Xochitl with her young son was
brought to the royal palace, and there is some reason to suppose that
she was made Huemac's legitimate queen by a regular marriage. Very
serious dissatisfaction, and even open hostility among the princes of
highest rank, were excited by the king's actions, both on account of
the shameful nature of such acts, and also because their own chance
of future succession to the throne was destroyed by Huemac's avowed
intention to make Acxitl his heir. Everything presaged a revolution,
and the foes of Quetzalcoatl were cheered with hopes of approaching
triumph. Huemac's mind was filled with trouble, which all the flattery
of the court could not wholly remove, and the prospects of his family
were not brightened by the fact that the young Acxitl from his birth
had the physical peculiarities predicted by the prophet Hueman of olden
time, in connection with such wide-spread and fatal disasters. Yet it
was hoped that by careful instruction and training, even the decrees of
fate might be reversed and impending disaster averted, especially as in
childhood and youth prince Acxitl gave most cheering promise of future
goodness and ability.[IV-56]
[Sidenote: TOVEYO'S ADVENTURES.]
Another event served to increase the troubles that began to gather
about the throne. It appears that Huemac by his first queen Maxio had
three daughters, who were much sought in marriage, rather for motives
of political ambition, perhaps, than love, by the Toltec nobles. One
especially was greatly beloved by her father and none of the many
aspirants to her hand found favor in her eyes. One day while walking
among the flowers in the royal gardens, she came upon a man selling
chile. Some of the traditions say that the pepper-vender, Toveyo,[IV-57]
was Tezcatlipoca who had assumed the appearance of a plebeian; at any
rate he was entirely naked and awakened in the bosom of the princess a
love for which her Toltec suitors had sighed in vain. So violent was
her passion as to bring on serious illness, the cause of which was
told by her maids to Huemac, and the indulgent father, though very
angry with Toveyo at first, finally, as the only means of restoring
his daughter to health, sought out the plebeian vender of pepper and
forced him, perhaps not very much against his will, to be washed
and dressed and to become the husband of the love-sick princess.
This marriage caused great dissatisfaction and indignation among the
Toltecs; an indignation that is easily understood, however the legend
be interpreted. In case a literal interpretation be accepted, the upper
classes in Tollan may naturally have been shocked by the admission of
a low-born peasant to the royal family; on the other hand the version
given may have originated with the disappointed suitors, who gratified
their spite by reviling the successful Toveyo. It is also possible that
the legend symbolizes by this marriage the granting of new privileges
to the lower classes against the will of the nobility; however this may
be, the result was wide-spread discontent ready to burst forth in open
revolt.[IV-58]
Among the disaffected lords who openly revolted against Tollan,
Cohuanacotzin, Huehuetzin, Xiuhtenancaltzin, and Mexoyotzin[IV-59] are
mentioned, by Ixtlilxochitl as rulers of provinces on the Atlantic,
by Veytia as lords of regions extending from Quiahuiztlan (according
to Brasseur, Vera Cruz) northward along the coast of the North Sea to
a point beyond Jalisco. Respecting the events of this revolution of
Toltec provinces thus vaguely located, we have only the continuation
of Toveyo's adventures, which seems to belong to this war. The tale
runs that Huemac, somewhat frightened at the storm of indignation which
followed his choice of a son-in-law, sent him out to fight in the wars
of Cacatepec and Coatepec, giving secret orders that he should be
so stationed in battle as to be inevitably killed. The main body of
the Toltec army yielded to the superior numbers of the foe and fled
to Tollan, leaving Toveyo and his followers to their fate; but the
latter, either by his superior skill or by his powers as a magician,
notwithstanding the small force at his command, utterly routed the
enemy and returned in triumph to the capital, where the king and people
received him with great honors and public demonstrations of joy. For
a time the kingdom seems to have remained without disturbance, and
fortune once more smiled on Huemac.[IV-60]
* * * * *
[Sidenote: OMENS OF DESTRUCTION.]
As to the exact order in which occurred the subsequent disasters
by which the Toltec empire was overthrown, the authorities differ
somewhat, although agreeing tolerably well respecting their nature.
Many events ascribed by Brasseur to Huemac's reign are by Veytia and
others described as having happened in that of his successor. There
can, however, be but little hesitation in following the chronology of
the Nahua documents often referred to, in preference to that of the
Spanish writers. The latter is certainly erroneous; the former at the
worst is only probably so. With his returning prosperity the king seems
to have returned to his evil ways while the partizans of Tezcatlipoca
resumed their intrigues against him. The sorcerer assembled a mighty
crowd near Tollan, and kept them dancing to the music of his drum until
midnight, when by reason of the darkness and their intoxication they
crowded each other off a precipice into a deep ravine, where they were
turned to stone. A stone bridge was also broken by the necromancer and
crowds precipitated into the river.[IV-61] Other wonderful acts of the
sorcerer against the well-being of the Toltecs as related by Sahagun
have been given in another volume.[IV-62] From one of the neighboring
volcanoes a flood of glowing lava poured, and in its lurid light
appeared frightful spectres threatening the capital. A sacrifice of
captives in honor of Tezcatlipoca, was decided upon to appease the
angry gods, a sacrifice which Huemac was forced to sanction. But when a
young boy, chosen by lot as the first victim, was placed upon the altar
and the obsidian knife plunged into his breast, no heart was found
in his body, and his veins were without blood. The fetid odor exhaled
from the corpse caused a pestilence involving thousands of deaths. The
struggles of the Toltecs to get rid of the body have been elsewhere
related.[IV-63] Next the Tlaloc divinities appeared to Huemac as he walked
in the forest, and were implored by him not to take from him his wealth
and his royal splendor. The gods were wroth at this petition, his
apparent selfishness, and want of penitence for past sins, and they
departed announcing their purpose to bring plagues and suffering upon
the proud Toltecs for six years. The winter of 1018 was so cold that
all plants and seeds were killed by frost, and was followed by a hot
summer, which parched the whole surface of the country, dried up the
streams, and even calcined the solid rocks.
[Sidenote: PLAGUES SENT UPON THE TOLTECS.]
Here seem to belong the series of plagues described by the Spanish
writers, although attributed by them to the following reign.[IV-64]
The plagues began with heavy storms of rain, destroying the ripening
crops, flooding the streets of towns, continuing for a hundred days,
and causing great fear of a universal deluge. Heavy gales followed,
which leveled the finest buildings to the ground; and toads in immense
numbers covered the ground, consuming everything edible and even
penetrating the dwellings of the people. The next year unprecedented
heat and drought prevailed, rendering useless all agricultural labor,
and causing much starvation. Next heavy frosts destroyed what little
the heat had spared, not even the hardy maguey surviving; and then came
upon the land great swarms of birds and locusts and various insects.
Lightning and hail completed the work of devastation, and as a result
of all their afflictions Ixtlilxochitl informs us that nine hundred
of every thousand Toltecs perished. Huemac and his followers were held
responsible for disasters that had come upon the people; a hungry mob
of citizens and strangers crowded the street of Tollan and even invaded
the palace of the nobles, instigated and headed by the partizans of
Tezcatlipoca; and the king was even forced at one time to abandon
the city for a time. The _Codex Chimalpopoca_ represented the long
rain already referred to as having occurred at the end of six years'
drought and famine, and to have inaugurated a new season of plenty.
Ixtlilxochitl refers to bloody wars as among the evils of the time. All
we may learn from the confused accounts, is that the Toltec empire at
that period was afflicted with war, famine, and pestilence; and that
these afflictions were attributed to the sins of Huemac II., by his
enemies and such of the people as they could influence.
After the plagues were past, and prosperity had again begun to smile
upon the land, Huemac abandoned his evil ways and gave his whole
attention to promoting the welfare of his people; but he still clung
with fatal obstinacy to his purpose of placing his son on the throne,
and determined to abdicate immediately in favor of Acxitl. His father,
king of Culhuacan, died in 1026, and the crown, to which Huemac
himself, as the eldest son would seem to have been entitled, passed
to Totepeuh's second son, Nauhyotl II. It is possible that Huemac
consented to this concession in consideration of the support of the
new king in his own projects at Tollan. After thoroughly canvassing
the sentiments of his vassal lords, and conciliating the good will
of the wavering by a grant of new honors and possessions, he publicly
announced his intention to place Acxitl on the throne. The immediate
consequence was a new revolt, and from an unexpected source, since it
was abetted if not originated by the followers of Quetzalcoatl, who
deemed Acxitl, the child of adulterous love, an unworthy successor of
their great prophet. Maxtlatzin was the most prominent of the many
nobles who espoused the rebel cause, and Quauhtli was the choice
of the malcontents for the rank of high-priest of Quetzalcoatl. To
such an extremity was the cause of Huemac and his son reduced that
they were forced to a compromise with the two leaders of the revolt,
who consented to support the cause of Acxitl on condition of being
themselves raised to the highest rank after the son of Huemac, and of
forming with him a kind of triumvirate by which the kingdom should be
ruled. All the authorities agree respecting this compromise, although
only the documents consulted by Brasseur speak of open revolt as the
cause which led to it. It is evident, however, that nothing but the
most imminent danger could have induced the king of Tollan to have
entered into so humiliating an arrangement. Immediately after the
consummation of the new alliance, the 'child of the maguey' was crowned
king and high-priest with great ceremony in 1029, under the title of
Topiltzin Acxitl Quetzalcoatl. Topiltzin is the name by which he is
usually called by the Spanish writers, although it was in reality, like
that of Quetzalcoatl, a title held by several kings. Acxitl is the more
convenient name, as distinguishing him clearly from his father and from
Ceacatl Quetzalcoatl. Huemac and Queen Xochitl retired ostensibly from
all connection with public affairs.[IV-65]
[Sidenote: EXCESSES OF ACXITL.]
The three lords of distant provinces, Huehuetzin, Xiuhtenancaltzin,
and Cohuanacotzin, who had once before rebelled against the king of
Tollan, now refused their allegiance to Acxitl; but at first they
for some reason, perhaps their own difficulties with the wild tribes
about them, engaged in no open hostilities. The new monarch, then
about forty years of age, justified the high promise of his youth, and
guided by the sage counsels of his reformed father, ruled most wisely
for several years, gradually gaining the confidence of his subjects.
But the decrees of the gods were infallible, and Acxitl, like his
father before him, yielded to temptation and plunged into all manner
of lasciviousness and riotous living. So low did he fall as to make
use of his position of high-priest to gratify his evil passions. His
inciters and agents were still Tezcatlipoca and his crafty partisans,
who persuaded ladies of every rank that by yielding to the king's
embraces they would merit divine favor. The royal example was followed
by both nobles and priests. High church dignitaries and priestesses
of the temples consecrated to life-long chastity forgot all their
vows; force was employed where persuasion failed. So openly were the
requirements of morality disregarded, that the high-priestess of the
Goddess of the Water, a princess of royal blood, on a pilgrimage to
the temple of Quetzalcoatl at Cholula, lived openly with the chief
pontiff of that city and bore him a son, who afterwards succeeded
to the highest ecclesiastical rank. Vice took complete possession
of society in all its classes, spreading to cities and provinces not
under the immediate authority of Tollan. Public affairs were left to be
managed by unscrupulous royal favorites; the prayers of the aged Huemac
and Xochitl to the gods, like their remonstrances with Acxitl, were
unavailing; crimes of all kinds remained unpunished; robbery and murder
were of frequent occurrence; and the king was justly held responsible
for all.
But Acxitl was at last brought to his senses, and his fears if not his
conscience were thoroughly aroused. Walking in his garden one morning,
he saw a small animal of peculiar appearance, with horns like a deer,
which, having been killed, proved to be a rabbit. Shortly after he saw
a _huitzilin_, or humming-bird, with spurs, a most extraordinary thing.
Topiltzin Acxitl was familiar with the Teoamoxtli, or 'divine book,'
and with Huemac's predictions; well he knew, and was confirmed in his
opinion by the sages and priests who were consulted, that the phenomena
observed were the tokens of final disaster. The king's reformation
was sudden and complete; the priests held out hopes that the prodigies
were warnings, and that their consequences might possibly be averted
by prayer, sacrifice, and reform. The Spanish writers introduce at this
period the series of plagues, which I have given under Huemac's reign;
and Brasseur adds to the appearance of the rabbit and the humming-bird
two or three of the wonderful events attributed by Sahagun to the
necromancer Titlacaâon, without any reason that I know of for ascribing
these occurrences to this particular time. Such were the appearance
of a bird bearing an arrow in its claws and menacingly soaring over
the doomed capital; the falling of a great stone of sacrifice near the
present locality of Chapultepec; and the coming of an old woman selling
paper flags which proved fatal to every purchaser.[IV-66] These events
occurred in 1036 and the following years. The king was wholly unable to
check the torrent of vice which was flowing over the land; indeed, in
his desire to atone for his past faults, he seems to have resorted to
such severe measures as to have defeated his own aims, converting his
former friends and flatterers into bitter foes.
[Sidenote: CHICHIMEC INVASION.]
In the midst of other troubles came the news that Huehuetzin was
marching at the head of the rebel forces towards Tollan, and was
already most successful on the northern frontier. The other two
lords from the gulf coasts, who had refused to acknowledge the power
of Acxitl, were in league with Huehuetzin. Unable to resist this
formidable army, the Toltec king was compelled to send ambassadors
bearing rich presents to sue for peace,--according to the Spanish
writers at the capitals of the distant rebellious provinces; but as
Brasseur says to the headquarters of the hostile army not very far from
Tollan. The presents were received, but no satisfactory agreement seems
to have been made at first. Veytia and Ixtlilxochitl speak vaguely of a
truce that was concluded as a result of this or a subsequent embassy,
to the effect that the Toltecs should not be molested for ten years,
an old military usage requiring that ten years should always intervene
between the declaration of war and the commencement of hostilities;
and the latter states that the army was withdrawn in the meantime,
because sufficient supplies could not be obtained in the territory of
the Toltecs. Brasseur, without referring to any other authorities than
those named, tells us that after remaining a whole year near Tollan,
Huehuetzin was forced to return to his own province to repel the
invasions of hostile tribes, which tribes, it is implied, were induced
to come southward and to harass the Toltec nations.[IV-67]
Taking advantage of the precarious condition of the Toltecs, many
of the tribes even in and about Anáhuac shook off all allegiance to
the empire, and became altogether independent; and at the same time
numerous Chichimec tribes from abroad took advantage of the favorable
opportunity to secure homes in the lake region. These foreign tribes
are all reported to have come from the north, but it is extremely
doubtful if any accurate information respecting the invaders has
been preserved. For the conjecture that all or any of them came from
the distant north, from California, Utah, or the Mississippi Valley,
there are absolutely no grounds; although it is of course impossible
to prove that all came from the region adjoining Anáhuac. By far the
most reasonable conjecture is that the invaders were the numerous
Nahua bands who had settled in the west and north-west, in Michoacan,
Jalisco, and Zacatecas, about the same time that the nations called
Toltecs had established themselves in and about Anáhuac. Brasseur
finds in his authorities, the only ones that give any particulars of
the invaders, that among the first Chichimec bands to arrive were the
Acxotecas and Eztlepictin, both constituting together the Teotenancas.
The Eztlepictin settled in the valley of Tenanco, south of the lakes,
while the Acxotecas took possession of the fertile valleys about
Tollan. A war between Nauhyotl II. of Culhuacan and the king of Tollan
is then vaguely recorded, in which Acxitl was victorious, but is
supposed to have suffered from the constant hostility of Culhuacan
from that time forward, although that kingdom soon had enough to do to
defend her own possessions. The Eztlepictin introduced a new divinity,
and a new worship, which Acxitl, as successor of Quetzalcoatl made
a desperate effort to overthrow. He marched with all the forces he
could command to Tenanco, but was defeated in every battle. What was
worse yet, during his absence on this campaign, the Acxoteca branch of
the invaders were admitted, under their leader Xalliteuctli, by the
partisans of Tezcatlipoca into Tollan itself. Civil strife ensued in
the streets of the capital between the three rival sects, until Tollan
with all her noble structures was well-nigh in ruins. At the same time
wars were waged between the three allied kingdoms, and pest and famine
came once more upon the land. These events occurred between 1040 and
1047.[IV-68]
[Sidenote: TOKENS OF DIVINE WRATH.]
It was evident that the gods were very angry with this unhappy people.
To avert their wrath, as Torquemada relates, a meeting of all the
wise men, priests, and nobles, was convened at Teotihuacan, where the
gods from the most ancient times had been wont to hear the prayers of
men. In the midst of the propitiatory feasts and sacrifices a demon of
gigantic proportions with long bony arms and fingers appeared dancing
in the court where the people were assembled. Whirling through the
crowd in every direction the demon seized upon the Toltecs that came
in his way and dashed them lifeless at his feet. Multitudes perished
but none had the strength to fly. A second time the giant appeared in a
slightly different form and again the Toltecs fell by hundreds in his
grasp. At his next appearance the demon assumed the form of a white
and beautiful child sitting on a rock and gazing at the holy city from
a neighboring hilltop. As the people rushed in crowds to investigate
the new phenomena, it was discovered that the child's head was a mass
of corruption, exhaling a stench so fatal that all who approached were
stricken with sudden death. Finally the devil or god appeared in a
form not recorded and warned the assembly that the fate of the Toltecs
in that country was sealed; the gods would not listen to further
petitions; the people could escape total annihilation only by flight.
The assembly broke up, and the members returned to their homes utterly
disheartened.[IV-69]
Large numbers of the Toltec nobles had already abandoned their country
and departed for foreign provinces, and this emigration was constantly
on the increase even before it was definitely determined by the ruler
to migrate. In the meantime, if Brasseur's authorities may be credited,
a new sect, the Ixcuinames or 'masked matrons,' introduced their rites,
including phallic worship and all manner of sorcery and debauchery,
into Tollan, thus adding a new element of discord in that fated city.
The Ixcuinames originated in the region of Pánuco among the Huastecs,
and began to flourish in Tollan about 1058.[IV-70] To civil and religious
strife, with other internal troubles, was now added the peril of
foreign invasion. According to the Spanish writers the ten years' truce
concluded between Acxitl and his foes under the command of Huehuetzin,
was now about to expire, and the rebel prince of the north appeared
at the head of an immense army, ready to submit his differences with
the Toltec king to the arbitration of the battle-field. According to
Brasseur, the Teo-Chichimecs invaded the rest of Anáhuac, while the
former foes of Huemac and his son, under Huehuetzin, from the provinces
of Quiahuiztlan and Jalisco, threatened Tollan. I may remark here that
I have little faith in this author's division into tribes of the hordes
that invaded Anáhuac at this period and in the following years. We know
that many bands from the surrounding region, particularly on the north,
most of them probably Nahua tribes, did take advantage of internal
dissensions among the Toltec nations to invade the central region. For
a period of many years they warred unceasingly with the older nations
and among themselves; but to trace the fortunes of particular tribes
through this maze of inter-tribal conflict is a hopeless task which I
shall not attempt. Many of these so-called Chichimec invading tribes
afterwards became great nations, and played a prominent part in the
annals to be given in future chapters; and while it is not improbable
that some of them, as the Teo-Chichimecs, Acolhuas, or Tepanecs, were
identical with the invading tribes which overthrew the Toltec empire,
there is no sufficient authority for attempting so to identify any one
of them. Neither do I find any authority whatever for the conjecture
that the invaders were barbarian hordes from the distant north, who
broke through the belt of Nahua nations which surrounded Anáhuac,
or were instigated by those nations from jealousy of Toltec power to
undertake its overthrow. Yet it would be rash to assume that none of
the wild tribes took part in the ensuing struggle; as allies, or under
Nahua leaders, they probably rendered efficient aid to the Chichimec
invaders, and afterwards in many cases merged their tribal existence in
that of the Chichimec nations.
[Sidenote: CONQUEST OF ANÁHUAC.]
The other Toltec cities, Otompan, Tezcuco, Culhuacan, seem to have
fallen before the invaders even before Tollan, although it is vaguely
reported that after the destruction of Otompan the king of Culhuacan
formed a new alliance for defense with Azcapuzalco and Coatlichan,
excluding Tollan. All the cities were sacked and burned as fast as
conquered except Culhuacan, which seems to have escaped destruction
by admitting the invaders within her gates and probably becoming their
allies or vassals. This was in 1060.[IV-71] Meantime Huehuetzin's forces
were threatening Tollan. By strenuous efforts a large army had been
raised and equipped for the defense of the royal cause. The princes
Quauhtli and Maxtlatzin, lately allied to the throne, brought all their
forces to aid the king against whom they had formerly rebelled. The
aged Huemac came out from his retirement and strove with the ardor of
youth to ward off the destruction which he could but attribute to his
indiscretions of many years ago. Even Xochitl, the king's mother, is
reported to have enlisted an army of amazons from the women of Tollan
and to have placed herself at their head. Acxitl formed his army
into two divisions, one of which, under a lord named Huehuetenuxcatl,
marched out to meet the enemy, while the other, commanded by the king
himself, was stationed within intrenchments at Tultitlan. The advance
army, after one day's battle without decisive result, fell back and
determined to act on the defensive. Reinforced by the division under
Huemac, and by Xochitl's amazons, who fought most bravely, General
Huehuetenuxcatl carried on the war for three years, but was at last
driven back to join the king. At Tultitlan a final stand was made by
Acxitl's orders. For many days the battle raged here until the Toltecs
were nearly exterminated, and driven back step by step to Tollan,
Xaltocan, Teotihuacan, and Xochitlalpan successively. Here Huemac and
Xochitl were slain, also Quauhtli and Maxtlatzin. Acxitl escaped by
hiding in a cave at Xico in Lake Chalco. In a final encounter General
Huehuetenuxcatl fell, and the small remnant of the Toltec army was
scattered in the mountains and in the marshes of the lake shore.[IV-72]
[Sidenote: FLIGHT OF ACXITL]
From his place of concealment at Xico, Topiltzin Acxitl secretly
visited Culhuacan, gathered a few faithful followers about him,
announced his intention of returning to Huehue Tlapallan, promised to
intercede in their behalf with the Chichimec emperor of their old home,
and having committed his two infant children Pochotl and Xilotzin to
faithful guardians to be brought up in ignorance of their royal birth,
he left the country in 1062.[IV-73] He is supposed to have gone southward
accompanied by a few followers. Other bodies of Toltecs had previously
abandoned the country and gone in the same direction, and large numbers
are reported to have remained in Culhuacan, Cholula, Chapultepec and
many other towns that are named. Veytia, Ixtlilxochitl, Torquemada,
and Clavigero tell us that of these who fled some founded settlements
on the coasts of both oceans, from which came parties at subsequent
periods to re-establish themselves in Anáhuac. Others crossed the
isthmus of Tehuantepec and passed into the southern lands. The other
authors also agree that of those who escaped destruction part remained,
and the rest were scattered in various directions. None imply a general
migration en masse towards the south.[IV-74] Lists are given of the Toltec
nobles that remained in Anáhuac and of the cities where they resided.
The larger number were at Culhuacan, under Xiuhtemoc, to whom the
king's children were confided. These remaining Toltecs were afterwards
called from the name of their city Culhuas.[IV-75]
Brasseur finds in his two Nahua records data for certain events that
took place after the flight of Topiltzin Acxitl. Maxtlatzin, as he
claims, escaped from the final battle and intrenched himself in one
of the strong fortresses among the ruins of Tollan. The Chichimecs
soon took possession of the city in two divisions known as Toltec
Chichimecs and Nonohualcas. They even went through the forms of
choosing a successor to Acxitl, selecting a boy named Matlacxochitl,
whom they crowned as Huemac III. To him the chiefs rendered a kind of
mock allegiance, but still held the power in their own hands. Desperate
struggles ensued between the two Chichimec bands led by Huehuetzin and
Icxicohuatl, the followers of Tezcatlipoca under Yaotl, and the forces
of Maxtlatzin in the fortress. The result was the murder of the mock
king about 1064, and the final abandonment of Tollan soon after. It is
claimed by the authorities which record these events that Huemac II.
survived all these troubles and died at Chapultepec in 1070.[IV-76]
[Sidenote: DOWNFALL OF THE EMPIRE.]
It is not difficult to form a tolerably clear idea of the state
of affairs in Anáhuac at the downfall of the Toltec empire,
notwithstanding the confusion of the records. There is, as we have
seen, no evidence of a general migration southward or in any other
direction. It is true the records speak of a large majority of the
Toltecs as having migrated in different directions as a result of their
disasters, but it must be remembered that in America, as elsewhere,
historical annals of early periods had to do with the deeds and
fortunes of priests and kings and noble families; the common people
were useful to fight and pay taxes, but were altogether unworthy of
a place in history. It is probable that the name Toltecs, a title of
distinction rather than a national name, was never applied at all to
the common people. When by civil strife and foreign invasion their
power was overthrown, many of the leaders, spiritual and temporal,
doubtless abandoned the country, preferring to try their fortunes in
the southern provinces which seem to have suffered less than those
of the north from the Toltec disasters. Their exiles took refuge
in the Miztec and Zapotec provinces of Oajaca, and some of them
probably crossed to Guatemala and Yucatan, where they were not without
influence in molding future political events. The mass of the Toltec
people remained in Anáhuac; some of them kept up a distinct national
existence for a while in Culhuacan, and perhaps in Cholula; but most
simply became subjects of the invading chiefs, whose language and
institutions were for the most part identical with those to which they
had been accustomed. The population had been considerably diminished
naturally by the many years of strife, famine, and pestilence; but
this diminution was greatly exaggerated in the records. The theory
that the population was reduced to a few thousands, most of whom left
the country, leaving a few chiefs with their followers in a desolate
and barren land, from which even the invading hordes had retired
immediately after their victory, is a very transparent absurdity. The
Toltec downfall was the overthrow of a dynasty, not the destruction
of a people. The ensuing period was one of bitter strife between rival
bands for the power which had been wrested from the Toltec kings. The
annals of that period cannot be followed; but history recommences with
the success of some of the struggling factions, and their development
into national powers.
FOOTNOTES:
[IV-1] _Veytia_, _Hist. Ant. Mej._, tom. i., pp. 247-50. 'Era servido
de unos Sacerdotes llamados _Papahua Tlemacàzque_, que, à distincion
de los demàs, traìan el cabello en melenas sueltas, y al acabarse el
Cyclo Indiano, sacaban, y vendian el _Fuego Nuevo_ à los Pueblos
vecinos.' _Boturini_, _Idea_, p. 42. 'Allí tambien se enterraban los
principales y señores, sobre cuyas sepulturas se mandaban hacer
túmulos de tierra, que hoy se ven todavia.' _Sahagun_, _Hist. Gen._,
tom. iii., lib. x., p. 141.
[IV-2] Brasseur cites Torquemada and Duran as authorities for the
existence at this period of some remnants of the old Quinames, and of
other savage tribes whose names have been lost; but these authors in
the chapters cited say nothing to which such a meaning can fairly be
attributed.
[IV-3] See p. 192.
[IV-4] _Boturini_, _Catálogo_, p. 17, No. 12. 'Diferentes Historias
Originales en lengua Nàhuatl, y papel Europèo de los Reynos de
Culhuàcan, y Mexico, y de otras Provincias, el Autor de ellas dicho
Don Domingo Chimalpàin. Empiezan desde la Gentilidad, y llegan à los
años de 1591.' See also _Brasseur de Bourbourg_, _Hist. Nat. Civ._,
tom. i., p. lxxvi.
[IV-5] _Hist. Nat. Civ._, tom. i., p. 198, et seq. This author refers
occasionally in his foot-notes to the Spanish writers Torquemada,
Duran, and others, but such citations when looked up rarely prove to
have any bearing on the matter in question, being for the most part
only definitions of names employed in the text. It is much to be
regretted that there are no means of testing Brasseur de Bourbourg's
version of these important annals. See, however, on this point, a
future note of this chapter.
[IV-6] In addition to the two documents referred to, Camargo, _Hist.
Tlax._, in _Nouvelles Annales des Voy._, 1843, tom. xcviii., p. 145,
has the following, which may refer to the migration of this earliest
branch of the Nahua peoples; 'according to their account, it was in
five Tochtli that they arrived at the Seven Caves. Thence they went to
Amaquetepec, then to Tepenec, or Echo Mountain, where Mitmitzichi
(Mimich) killed Izpapalotl with his bow and arrows. Next they passed
to the province of Tomallan, which they conquered after a long war, to
Culhuacan, to Teotla Cochoalco, and to Teohuiznahuac where they wished
to shoot Cohuatlicue, queen of that province; but they made peace with
her. She married Mixcohuatl Amacohtle and by him had a son
Colchacovatl [probably Quetzalcoatl].'
[IV-7] See note on p. 213 for dates.
[IV-8] Also written Tula, Tulan, Tulla, Tullan, and Tulha.
[IV-9] Chalcatzin, Tlacamilitzin, Checatl, Cohuatzon, Mazacohuatl,
Tlapalhuitz, and Huitz. _Veytia_, tom. i., p. 207. Chalcatzin, Acatl,
Eccatl, Cohuatzin, Mazacohuatl Otziuhcohuatl, Tlapalhuiz, and Huitz.
_Ixtlilxochitl_, p. 393. Zaca, Chalcatzin, Ecatzin, Cohuazon,
Tzihuacohuatl, Tlapalmetzotzin, and Metzoltzin. _Id._, p. 450.
Tlacomihua or Acatl, Chalchiuhmatz, Avecatl, Coatzon, Tziuhcoatl,
Tlapalhuitz, and Huitz. _Id._, pp. 206-7. Tzacatl, Chalcatzin,
Ehecatzin, Cohuatzon, Tzihuac-Cohuatl, Tlapalmetzotzin, and Metzotzin.
_Torquemada_, tom. i., p. 37. Tzacatl, Telacalzin, Echecalzin,
Cohualzon, Tezihuaccoahuatl, Tlapalmezoltzin, and Melzolzin.
_Boturini_, in _Doc. Hist. Mex._, série iii., tom. iv., p. 230.
[IV-10] _Ixtlilxochitl._ Called also Achcauhtzin, _Cabrera_, _Teatro_,
p. 95. Icoatzin, _Veytia_, tom. i., p. 301.
[IV-11] _Torquemada_, tom. i., p. 37; _Clavigero_, tom. i., p. 127;
_Brasseur de Bourbourg_, _Hist. Nat. Civ._, tom. i., p. 215.
Chalchiuhtlanetzin, or Chalchiuhtlatonac. _Veytia_, tom. i., pp. 233,
301. Chalchiuhtlahuextzin, _Ixtlilxochitl_, p. 393.
Tlalchiuhtlanelzin. _Boturini_, in _Doc. Hist. Mex._, série iii., tom.
iv., p. 230. Ixtlilxochitl seems to imply, in another part of his
writings, _Hist. Chich._, p. 207, that the king was chosen among the
Toltecs themselves. This Sr Pimentel, in _Dicc. Univ._, tom. x., p.
611, deems much more probable than the course indicated in the other
accounts.
[IV-12] 503 or 510 or 509 or 556. _Ixtlilxochitl_. 700, et seq.
_Torquemada_. 713-19. _Veytia_. Brasseur has 718. 670, et seq.
_Müller_. All the authorities agree on 7 Acatl as the date of the
establishment of the kingdom. Clavigero interprets the date as 667.
[IV-13] See vol. ii., p. 140.
[IV-14] 608 A.D., according to _Ixtlilxochitl_, p. 450. On the
establishment of the Toltecs in Tollan and the reign of the first
king, see: _Ixtlilxochitl_, in _Kingsborough's Mex. Antiq._, vol. ix.,
pp. 206-7, 322-5, 336, 392-3, 450, 458, 460; _Veytia_, _Hist. Ant.
Mej._, tom. i., pp. 221-39; _Clavigero_, _Storia Ant. del Messico_,
tom. i., pp. 126-7, tom. iv., pp. 46, 51; _Sahagun_, _Hist. Gen._,
tom. iii., lib. x., pp. 106-15, 145, lib. xi., p. 312; _Torquemada_,
_Monarq. Ind._, tom. i., pp. 37, 254; _Boturini_, _Idea_, pp. 77, 139;
_Id._, in _Doc. Hist. Mex._, série iii., tom. iv., p. 230; _Gomara_,
_Conq. Mex._, fol. 299; _Motolinia_, _Hist. Indios_, in _Icazbalceta_,
_Col. de Doc._, tom. i., p. 5; _Vetancvrt_, _Teatro Mex._, pt ii., p.
11; _Cabrera_, _Teatro_, p. 95; _Arlegui_, _Chrón. Zacatecas_, p. 6;
_Brasseur de Bourbourg_, _Hist. Nat. Civ._, tom. i., p. 209, et seq.;
_Orozco y Berra_, _Geografía_, p. 138; _Prescott's Mex._, vol. i., pp.
12-13; _Müller_, _Amerikanische Urreligionen_, p. 524; _Mayer's Mex.
Aztec, etc._, vol. i., p. 95; _Chevalier_, _Mexique_, p. 55; _Gondra_,
in _Prescott_, _Hist. Conq. Mex._, tom. iii., p. 20; _Schoolcraft's
Arch._, vol. v., p. 95; _Waldeck_, _Voy. Pitt._, p. 46; _Pimentel_, in
_Dicc. Univ._, tom. x., pp. 610-11.
[IV-15] _Codex Chimalpopoca_, and _Memorial de Culhuacan_, as cited by
_Brasseur de Bourbourg_.
[IV-16] Respecting these titles see vol. ii., pp. 186-7, 201, vol.
iii., p. 434.
[IV-17] _Hist. Nat. Civ._, tom. i., p. 225.
[IV-18] 'On regarda aussi comme des dieux Camaxtle et Tezcatlipuca qui
vinrent de l'occident; mais ces prétendus dieux étaient sans doute des
enchanteurs diaboliques et possédés du démon, qui pervertirent toutes
ces nations.' _Camargo_, _Hist. Tlax._, in _Nouvelles Annales des
Voy._, 1843, tom. xcviii., p. 146. 'Fueron grandes capitanes
esforzados y entre ellos valerosos hombres; los quales señorearon por
grado ò por fuerza aquellas Provincias de Mexico, Tetzcuco y Tlaxcala,
cuyos propios naturales a habitadores y aborigenes eran las gentes que
se llaman Othomies.' _Las Casas_, _Hist. Apologética_, MS., cap. 122.
[IV-19] See vol. ii., pp. 335-6, 351-2, vol. iii., pp. 118, 403-6.
[IV-20] Ixtlilcuechahuac, otherwise called Tzacatecatl, Tlaltecatl,
and Tlachinotzin, in 771 A.D. _Veytia_, tom. i., p. 231. 608.
_Ixtlilxochitl_, p. 450. Ixliuechahuexe or Tzacatcatl, 614. _Id._, p.
325. Ixtlilcuechanac or Tlaltecatl Huetzin. _Id._, p. 393.
Tlilquechahuac Tlalchinoltzin, 572. _Id._, p. 207. Tlilque
Chaocatlahinoltzin. _Id._, p. 460. Aixtilcuechahuac. _Vetancvrt_,
_Teatro Mex._, pt ii., p. 11. 719 A.D. _Clavigero_, tom. i., p. 127.
Was reigning in 660. _Boturini_, _Idea_, p. 139. The preceding hardly
confirms Brasseur's statement that 'toutes les Relations
d'Ixtlilxochitl concordent ici avec le Codex Chimalp., pour donner le
nom de Huetzin au second roi de Tollan.' This is a pretty fair sample
of the abbé's references.
[IV-21] 666, or 613. _Ixtlilxochitl_, who also writes the name Huetzin
Totepeuh and Huitzin. 771. _Clavigero._
[IV-22] Totepauh and Totepeuhque. _Ixtlilxochitl_, pp. 326, 460; on p.
450 his reign is ignored.
[IV-23] Nacazxoc. _Torquemada_, and _Vetancvrt_. Nacaxzoch, Nacalxur,
Nacaxoc Mitl, and Nacazxot. _Ixtlilxochitl_, who on pp. 450 and 393
calls him the fourth king.
[IV-24] _Veytia._ 927 according to _Clavigero_. 822 or 768 according
to _Ixtlilxochitl_, who calls him Tlacomihua on pp. 207, 460, names
him as fifth king on p. 393, and ignores his reign on p. 450.
[IV-25] For the annals of Tollan during this period see
_Ixtlilxochitl_, pp. 207, 325-6, 393, 450, 460; _Veytia_, tom. i., pp.
239-58; _Torquemada_, tom. i., p. 37. _Clavigero_, tom. i., pp. 127-8;
_Sahagun_, tom. iii., lib. x., p. 114; _Boturini_, _Idea_, pp. 139-40;
_Vetancvrt_, _Teatro Mex._, p. 11; _Müller_, _Amerikanische
Urreligionen_, p. 524.
[IV-26] Chief among which titles was that of Tecuhtli, respecting
which see vol. ii., pp. 194-200.
[IV-27] 'On célébra de grandes fêtes à la naissance de Colchacovat.'
_Camargo_, _Hist. Tlax._, in _Nouvelles Annales des Voy._, 1843, tom.
xcviii., p. 146. See also note 6 of this chapter.
[IV-28] See vol. ii., pp. 269, 434, 608, vol. iii., pp. 350, 363.
[IV-29] This alliance rests altogether on the _Codex Chimalpopoca_ and
_Mem. de Culhuacan_. It is to be noted that Brasseur refers clearly to
_Torquemada_, _Monarq. Ind._, lib. xi., cap. 18, as an authority,
which chapter contains not a word bearing on the subject.
[IV-30] Torquemada, _Monarq. Ind._, tom. i., p. 37, relates the
succession of the Toltec kings at Tollan, agreeing substantially with
the accounts of Ixtlilxochitl, Veytia, and the rest. It is to be
noted, however, that on page 254 the same author gives another
account, inextricably confused, totally disagreeing with the
preceding, but agreeing in most of its names, with that derived by
Brasseur from the two records in his possession. This proves that the
version of the Toltec traditions followed by the Spanish writers,
referring everything to Tollan and ignoring all other nations and
kings, was not the only one extant when the Spaniards came. It
confirms to a certain extent Brasseur's account of other Toltec
nations and monarchs besides those at Tollan, and is therefore
important. I translate this version of the tradition from Torquemada,
without any attempt to reconcile its many inconsistencies with itself
and the versions already presented. It has the appearance of a
successive interpretation of the records of distinct kingdoms, or
distinct periods, tacked together and referred vaguely to Toltec
history by a writer who did not suspect the existence of any other
power than that at Tollan. 'When the Mexicans arrived in this region
of Tulla, it was already settled by many people; because, according to
the truth as found in the most authentic histories of these nations,
in 700 A.D., they began to settle here. Their first captain, or
leader, was named Totepeuh, who lived a long and tranquil life, being
a bold and famous chieftain. At his death those of the province of
Tulla raised to the throne another called Topil [Topiltzin], who
reigned fifty years and was succeeded by Huemac, mentioned elsewhere
in connection with the tricks of Quetzalcohuatl. [These are among the
very last rulers in Tollan by other accounts.] This Huemac was a very
powerful king, who was much feared and caused himself to be worshiped
as a god. He went out from Tulla to increase the extent of his
kingdom, occupying himself throughout his reign in gaining new
provinces, preferring the bustle of war to the quiet of peace. But
while he was engaged in wars abroad the Toltecs made Nauhyotzin king,
who was the second lord, and of Chichimec birth. He also left Tullan
and marched towards this lake with a large number of people to conquer
as much as possible of the territory thereabouts. He reigned more than
sixty years, and at his death the kingdom was given to
Quauhtexpetlatl, [a name not appearing elsewhere] who in his turn was
followed by Huetzin Nonohualcatl [according to Brasseur, Huetzin
probably succeeded Nonohualcatl at Culhuacan. All that follows
probably belongs to the Chichimec period much later, and relates to
the kings of Culhuacan]. After him reigned Achitometl, and,
afterwards, Quauhtonal, and in the tenth year of his reign the
Mexicans arrived at Chapultepec; so that when the said Mexicans were
in the city or province of Tulla, this prince was neither its king or
lord (as Gomara says), but continuing the account and succession of
these Toltec kings, we say that the said Achitometl was succeeded by
Mazatzin, [and not by Quauhtonal as above. This is unintelligible.
Mazatzin was, according to Brasseur, the first king at Tollan] and he
by Quetzal. After him came Chalchiuhtona, and then Quauhtlix, then
Yohuallatonac, followed by Tziuhtecatl. It is said that in the third
year of this king's reign the Mexicans arrived where the city of
Mexico now is. At Tziuhtecatl's death, Xiuhtemoctzin succeeded to the
throne, and he was followed by Coxcotzin.' Then follows an account of
the coming of Quetzalcoatl and his companions, in which the author is
evidently much confused between the first and second of that name.
Gomara, _Conq. Mex._, fol. 301-2, gives a similar account, differing,
however, in orthography and in some of the successions. The order of
succession, according to this writer, is in substance as follows: 1st.
Totepeuch, in 721, who died over 100 years after their arrival. 2d.
Topil, son of the former, ruled about 50 years. An interregnum ensued
of over 110 years; either had no kings or their names are forgotten.
3d, 4th. Two rulers chosen, Vemac and Nauhiocin, the latter a
Chichimec. Both left Tollan with their followers; the latter settled
near the lake, and reigned over 60 years. 5th. Quauhtexpetlatl. 6th.
Vecin. 7th. Nonoualcatl. [We have seen that Torquemada unites these
two names in one king.] 8th. Achitometl. 9th. Quauhtonal, in the 10th
year of whose reign came the Mexicans to Chapultepec. 10th. Mazacin.
11th. Queza. 12th. Chalchiuhtona. 13th. Quauhtlix. 14th.
Iohuallatonac. 15th. Ciuhtetl. 16th. Xiuiltemoc. 17th. Cuxcux, and so
on with the Chichimec and Aztec kings of much later periods. It is
very evident that these writers had access to the same documents which
Brasseur uses, but did not comprehend their meaning.
[IV-31] 'En esta ciudad (Tollan) reinó muchos años un rey llamado
_Quetzalcoatl_, gran nigromántico, é inventor de la nigromancia,' etc.
_Hist. Gen._, tom. ii., lib. viii., p. 266.
[IV-32] Brasseur, tom. i., p. 255, misinterpreting Torquemada, tom.
i., p. 255, calls him blonde; in another place, tom. ii., p. 48,
Torquemada distinctly states that he has black hair.
[IV-33] The invention of the calendar attributed to him by Mendieta,
_Hist. Ecles._, pp. 97-8, Sahagun, _Hist. Gen._, tom. ii., lib. vii.,
p. 264, and others, should evidently be referred to the Quetzalcoatl
of other times.
[IV-34] See vol. iii., pp. 239-87; also _Veytia_, _Hist. Ant. Mej._,
tom. i., pp. 161-205; _Mendieta_, _Hist. Ecles._, pp. 82-3, 92-3,
97-8; _Torquemada_, _Monarq. Ind._, tom. i., pp. 255, 282, 380, tom.
ii., pp. 20, 48-52, 79; _Herrera_, _Hist. Gen._, dec. ii., lib. vii.,
cap. ii.; _Las Casas_, _Hist. Apologética_, MS., cap. 122, 173;
_Sahagun_, _Hist. Gen._, tom. i., lib. iii., pp. 243-8, 25-9;
_Clavigero_, _Storia Ant. del Messico_, tom. ii., pp. 11-13; _Gomara_,
_Conq. Mex._, fol. 300; _Camargo_, _Hist. Tlax._, in _Nouvelles
Annales des Voy._, 1843, tom. xcviii., p. 145; _Ternaux-Compans_, in
_Id._, 1840, tom. lxxxvi., pp. 16-20; _Gondra_, in _Prescott_, _Hist.
Conq. Mex._, tom. iii., pp. 66-9; _Tylor's Researches_, pp. 154-5.
[IV-35] By calling them distinct persons it is not necessarily implied
that the first Quetzalcoatl ever had a real existence.
[IV-36] _Veytia_, _Hist. Ant. Mej._, tom. i., pp. 171-2.
[IV-37] Probably, as has been said, the same as Huetzin and
Texcaltepocatl.
[IV-38] 875. _Clavigero._ 927. _Veytia._ 770 or 716. _Ixtlilxochitl._
[IV-39] 'Los que de esta ciudad (Tollan) huyeron, edificaron otra muy
próspera que se llama _Cholulla_.' _Sahagun_, _Hist. Gen._, tom. ii.,
lib. viii., p. 207.
[IV-40] See references already given on Quetzalcoatl, and also
_Brasseur de Bourbourg_, _Hist. Nat. Civ._, tom. i., p. 265, et seq.
[IV-41] This king is called Mitl and Tlacomihua by Veytia and the
rest. Dates: 927. _Clavigero._ Veytia, tom. i., p. 252, has 779, which
may be a misprint for 979. 822 or 768. _Ixtlilxochitl._ Huemac's
expedition eastward, and the crowning of Nauhyotl, or Nauhyotzin,
during his absence is recorded by Torquemada, _Monarq. Ind._, tom. i.,
p. 254, and Gomara, _Conq. Mex._, fol. 301, as quoted in note 30 of
this chapter.
[IV-42] Respecting Tezcatlipoca, fables respecting his life on earth,
and his worship as a god, see vol. iii., pp. 199-248.
[IV-43] See vol. ii., pp. 141-2.
[IV-44] Brasseur, _Hist. Nat. Civ._, tom. i., p. 322, says that
Ixtlilxochitl in one place calls this king Nauhyotl. Although I have
been unable to find this statement in the works of the writer
mentioned, yet there can be little doubt of the two kings' identity.
[IV-45] Chalchihuitlicue, Toci, Teteionan, etc. See vol. iii., p. 350,
et seq., p. 367, et seq.
[IV-46] For description of Xochicalco see vol. iv., pp. 483-94.
[IV-47] On Nauhyotl's reign, see _Ixtlilxochitl_, in _Kingsborough's
Mex. Antiq._, vol. ix., pp. 207, 326, 393, 450, 460; _Veytia_, _Hist.
Ant. Mej._, tom. i., pp. 255-8; _Torquemada_, _Monarq. Ind._, tom. i.,
p. 37; _Clavigero_, _Storia Ant. del Messico_, tom. i., p. 127;
_Vetancvrt_, _Teatro Mex._, pt ii., p. 11; _Brasseur de Bourbourg_,
_Hist. Nat. Civ._, tom. i., pp. 319-31. The date 945 is from the
_Codex Chimalpopoca_. The Spanish writers make his reign much longer,
all except Clavigero representing him as having reigned, by the
consent of his subjects, several years over the time prescribed by
law. 979-1035. _Veytia._ 927-79. _Clavigero._ 822-80, or 768-826.
_Ixtlilxochitl._ Torquemada and Gomara, as quoted in note 30, state
that this king also marched eastward at the head of a large army to
add to his domain by conquest.
[IV-48] Also Xiuhquentzin, Xiuliquentzin, and Xiuhzaltzin,
_Ixtlilxochitl_, and Xiuhzaltzin, _Vetancvrt_.
[IV-49] See references in note 47 and following pages of each
authority.
[IV-50] _Brasseur de Bourbourg_, _Hist. Nat. Civ._, tom. i., pp. 331,
336. Klemm, _Cultur-Geschichte_, tom. v., p. 181, speaks of an
interregnum of forty-eight years after the death of Queen
Xiuhtlaltzin.
[IV-51] Called also Yztaccaltzin. _Ixtlilxochitl._ Atecpanecatl and
Iztacquauhtzin. _Codex Chimalpopoca_ and _Ixtlilxochitl_, according to
_Brasseur_.
[IV-52] 1039, 830, 884, according to the Spanish writers. See note 47.
Clavigero ignores this king, while Torquemada, followed by Boturini in
_Doc. Hist. Mex._, série iii., tom. iv., p. 230, and Vetancvrt,
_Teatro Mex._, p. 11, seems to identify him with his successor.
[IV-53] _Ixtlilxochitl_, p. 208, calls the name Quetzalxochitzin, and
makes her the wife rather than the daughter of Papantzin.
[IV-54] Bustamante, in _Sahagun_, _Hist. Gen._, tom. i., lib. iii., p.
246, erroneously charges Veytia with saying that Papantzin presented
to the king a vessel of pulque invented by Xochitl. Brasseur, for
reasons not very intelligible, refers to this period Sahagun's account
of the invention of pulque in Olmec times (see pp. 207-8 of this
volume), and also the efforts of the sorcerers to make Quetzalcoatl
drink pulque that he might be induced to leave Tollan. I have
attributed these tales to the times of Ceacatl. See p. 259 of this
volume, also vol. iii., p. 242, 253, 261.
[IV-55] 1051. _Veytia_. 900. _Ixtlilxochitl._
[IV-56] See respecting the first part of Huemac's reign,
_Ixtlilxochitl_, in _Kingsborough's Mex. Antiq._, vol. ix., pp. 207,
328-9, 460; _Veytia_, _Hist. Ant. Mej._, tom. i., p. 262, et seq.;
_Torquemada_, _Monarq. Ind._, tom. i., p. 37; _Brasseur de Bourbourg_,
_Hist. Nat. Civ._, tom. i., pp. 337-48.
[IV-57] Tobeyo. _Sahagun._ Tohuéyo, 'our neighbor.' _Brasseur._ It
does not seem to have been originally a proper name.
[IV-58] For a fuller account of the tale of Toveyo, see vol. iii., pp.
243-4. Also, _Sahagun_, _Hist. Gen._, tom. i., lib. iii., pp. 247-9.
[IV-59] Cohuanacox, Huetzin, Xiuhtenan, and Mexoyotzin.
[IV-60] _Ixtlilxochitl_, in _Kingsborough's Mex. Antiq._, vol. ix.,
pp. 207, 393; _Veytia_, _Hist. Ant. Mej._, tom. i., p. 271, et seq.;
_Sahagun_, _Hist. Gen._, tom. i., lib. iii., pp. 249-51. Brasseur,
_Hist. Nat. Civ._, tom. i., pp. 356-60, represents Cohuanacox and
Meyoxotzin as lords of Quiahuiztlan-Anahuac, or Vera Cruz, but gives
no farther details of their revolt. Huetzin, he calls the Prince of
Jalisco, stating that he marched at the head of a large army against
Huemac, but was defeated at Coatepec near Tollan by the bravery of
Toveyo, who drove him with great loss back to the frontiers of
Jalisco. For these facts he refers to no other authorities than those
mentioned in this note, and these contain no such information.
[IV-61] _Sahagun_, _Hist. Gen._, tom. i., lib. iii., p. 251. Brasseur
has no difficulty in interpreting this tale to indicate an
earthquake.
[IV-62] See vol. iii., pp. 245-8.
[IV-63] Vol. iii., p. 247. The other details, like the interview with
the Tlalocs, are from the _Codex Chimalpopoca_.
[IV-64] _Ixtlilxochitl_, in _Kingsborough's Mex. Antiq._, vol. ix.,
pp. 207-8, 329-30; _Veytia_, _Hist. Ant. Mej._, tom. i., p. 280, et
seq. Dates, 1097, et seq. _Veytia_. 984, et seq. _Ixtlilxochitl_.
There is no agreement about the duration of the plagues. They seem,
however, to have been continuous for at least five years.
[IV-65] _Ixtlilxochitl_, in _Kingsborough's Mex. Antiq._, vol. ix.,
pp. 207, 329, 393, 460. This author's dates are 937 and 882. _Veytia_,
_Hist. Ant. Mej._, tom. i., pp. 271-4. Date 1091. Date according to
Clavigero, 1031. _Codex Chimalpopoca_, in _Brasseur de Bourbourg_,
_Hist. Nat. Civ._, tom. i., pp. 370-5; Maxtlatzin is called the prince
of Xochimilco. According to the _Mem. de Culhuacan_, in _Id._, Huemac
died at this time.
[IV-66] _Sahagun_, _Hist. Gen._, tom. i., lib. iii., p. 254.
[IV-67] _Veytia_, _Hist. Ant. Mej._, tom. i., pp. 282-7;
_Ixtlilxochitl_, in _Kingsborough's Mex. Antiq._, vol. ix., pp.
329-31; _Brasseur de Bourbourg_, _Hist. Nat. Civ._, tom. i., pp.
376-85.
[IV-68] _Brasseur de Bourbourg_, _Hist. Nat. Civ._, tom. i., pp.
385-93. Veytia and Ixtlilxochitl are occasionally referred to on these
events, but the chapters referred to contain absolutely nothing on the
subject.
[IV-69] _Torquemada_, _Monarq. Ind._, tom. i., pp. 37-8.
[IV-70] _Brasseur de Bourbourg_, _Hist. Nat. Civ._, tom. i., pp.
400-2.
[IV-71] _Brasseur de Bourbourg_, _Hist. Nat. Civ._, tom. i., pp.
402-5.
[IV-72] Such is the account given by Ixtlilxochitl and Veytia.
Brasseur's version, although founded on the same authorities, differs
widely. According to this version, Topiltzin Acxitl remained in
Tollan; Quauhtli and Maxtlatzin with the aged Huemac marched to meet
the foe. After a fierce conflict near Tultitlan, lasting several days,
the army was driven back to Tollan. The king resolved to burn the city
and leave the country. For the burning of Tollan, Sahagun, _Hist.
Gen._, tom. i., lib. iii., p. 255, is referred to, where he says,
'hizo quemar todas las casas que tenia hechas de plata y de concha,'
etc., referring to the departure of Quetzalcoatl for Tlapallan. The
Quetzalcoatl alluded to may be either Acxitl or Ceacatl. Retreating
to Xaltocan and then towards Teotihuacan, a final stand was made by
Huemac, Xochitl, Maxtlatzin, and Huehuemaxal (Huehuetenuxcatl?)
against the Chichimecs. The Toltecs were utterly defeated, and of the
leaders Xochitl and Quauhtli fell, Acxitl concealing himself for
several weeks in the caves of the island of Xico. _Hist. Nat. Civ._,
tom. i., pp. 405-9.
[IV-73] _Ixtlilxochitl_, in _Kingsborough's Mex. Antiq._, vol. ix.,
pp. 208, 331-3, 393, 450, 460. This author estimates the total loss of
the Toltecs in the final war at 3,200,000, and that of the enemy at
2,400,000. He states that Topiltzin, before his departure, visited
Allapan, a province on the South Sea, and notified his few remaining
subjects that after many centuries he would return to punish his foes.
He reached Tlapallan in safety and lived to the age of 104 years
greatly respected. He records a tradition among the common people that
Topiltzin remained in Xico, and many years after was joined by
Nezahualcoyotl, the Chichimec emperor, and others. This author dates
the final defeat of the Toltecs in 1011, 959, 958, and 1004. _Veytia_,
_Hist. Ant. Mej._, tom. i., pp. 287-304. This writer gives the date as
1116; states that Topiltzin's youngest son, Xilotzin, was captured and
killed; gives 1612 as the number of Toltecs assembled in Culhuacan
before the king's departure. Topiltzin reached Oyome, the Chichimec
capital, in safety, and was kindly received by the emperor, Acauhtzin,
who succeeded to the throne in that year, to whom Topiltzin gave all
his rights to the kingdom of Tollan, on condition that he would punish
the enemies of the Toltecs. He died in 1155. According to Clavigero,
_Storia Ant. del Messico_, tom. i., p. 131, the Toltec empire ended
with Topiltzin's death in 1052. Most modern writers take the date from
Clavigero. Brasseur, _Hist. Nat. Civ._, tom. i., p. 410, says, 'Après
avoir donné à tous des conseils remplis de sagesse sur la future
restauration de la monarchie, il prit congé d'eux. Il traversa, sans
être connu, les provinces olmèques et alla prendre la mer à Hueyapan,
non loin des lieux où le grand Quetzalcohuatl avait disparu un siècle
et demi auparavant. L'histoire ajoute qu'il gagna, avec un grand
nombre de Toltèques émigrant comme lui, les contrées mystérieuses de
Tlapallan, où après avoir fondé un nouvel empire, il mourut dans une
heureuse vieillesse.'
[IV-74] On the Toltec empire, see _Prescott's Mex._, vol. i., pp.
11-14; _Chevalier_, _Mex. Ancien et Mod._, pp. 48-52; _Müller_,
_Amerikanische Urreligionen_, pp. 456, 522-5; _Mayer's Mex. Aztec,
etc._, vol. i., p. 95; _Schoolcraft's Arch._, vol. v., pp. 95-6;
_Orozco y Berra_, _Geografía_, pp. 96-7, 138-40; _Rios_, _Compend.
Hist. Mex._, pp. 5-6; _Villa-Señor y Sanchez_, _Theatro_, tom. i., pp.
1-3; _Helps' Span. Conq._, vol. i., p. 287; _Müller_, _Reisen_, tom.
iii., pp. 32-41; _Lacunza_, in _Museo Mex._, tom. iv., p. 445;
_Granados y Galvez_, _Tardes Amer._, pp. 14-17; _Ruxton_, in
_Nouvelles Annales des Voy._, 1850, tom. cxxvi., pp. 38-40;
_Domenech's Deserts_, vol. i., pp. 39-40; _Foster's Pre-Hist. Races_,
pp. 341-4; _Mayer's Observations_, p. 6; _Carbajal Espinosa_, _Hist.
Mex._, tom. i., pp. 216-24.
[IV-75] _Veytia_, _Hist. Ant. Mej._, tom. ii., pp. 18-19;
_Ixtlilxochitl_, in _Kingsborough's Mex. Antiq._, vol. ix., pp. 333-4,
393-4; _Torquemada_, _Monarq. Ind._, tom. i., p. 37; _Clavigero_,
_Storia Ant. del Messico_, tom. i., p. 131. The number of remaining
Toltecs is estimated at 16,000, who were divided into five parties,
four of them settling on the coasts and islands, and the fifth only
remaining in Anáhuac.
[IV-76] _Brasseur de Bourbourg_, _Hist. Nat. Civ._, tom. i., pp.
410-23. I suppose that this information was taken from the _Codex
Gondra_ already quoted--see p. 230 of this volume--and applied by the
same author in another work, and with apparently better reasons, to
the overthrow of the great original Nahua empire in the south.
CHAPTER V.
THE CHICHIMEC PERIOD.
The Chichimecs in Amaquemecan -- Migration to Anáhuac
under Xolotl -- The Invaders at Chocoyan and Tollan --
Foundation of Xoloc and Tenayocan -- Xolotl II., Emperor of
the Chichimecs -- Division of Territory -- The Toltecs at
Culhuacan -- Rule of Xiuhtemoc and Nauhyotl III. -- Pochotl,
Son of Acxitl -- Conquest of Culhuacan -- Death of Nauhyotl
-- Huetzin, King of Culhuacan -- Migration and Reception of
the Nahuatlaca Tribes -- The Acolhuas at Coatlichan and the
Tepanecs at Azcapuzalco -- Nonohualcatl, King of Culhuacan
-- Revolt of Yacanex -- Death of Xolotl II. -- Nopaltzin,
King at Tenayocan, and Emperor of the Chichimecs -- Reigns
of Achitometl and Icxochitlanex at Culhuacan -- Tendencies
toward Toltec Culture.
The Chichimec occupation of Anáhuac begins with the traditional
invasion under Xolotl, but in order to properly understand that
important event, it will be necessary to glance at the incidents which
preceded and led to it.
The little that is known of the early history of the Chichimecs has
been told in a former chapter; I will therefore take up the narrative
at the time of King Tlamacatzin's death at Amaquemecan,[V-1] which event
occurred in the same year as the final destruction of Tollan. As I have
already explained sufficiently my idea of the nature of the migrations
by which Anáhuac is represented as having been re-peopled, I may relate
these migrations literally, as they are given by the authorities,
without constantly reminding the reader of their general signification.
Tlamacatzin left two sons, Acauhtzin[V-2] and Xolotl,[V-3] who, after
wrangling about the succession for some time, finally agreed to divide
the kingdom between them.[V-4]
Now, for a great number of years a harassing system of border warfare
had been carried on between the Chichimecs and the Toltecs; the former
doubtless raided upon their rich and powerful neighbors for purposes of
plunder, and the latter were probably not slow to make reprisals which
served as an excuse for extending their already immense territory.
When the Toltec troubles arose, however, and the direful prophecies of
Hueman began to be fulfilled, the people of Anáhuac found that they had
enough to do to take care of themselves, and that their legions could
be better employed in defending the capital than in waging aggressive
wars upon the distant frontiers of the empire. They therefore recalled
their troops, and the Chichimec border was left undisturbed. It was not
long before the brother monarchs of Amaquemecan began to wonder at this
sudden cessation of hostilities, and determined to find out the cause,
for they were ignorant of the struggles and final overthrow of the
Toltec empire. They at once dispatched spies into the Toltec territory.
In a short time these men returned with the startling announcement that
they had penetrated the enemy's country for a distance of two hundred
leagues from Amaquemecan, and had found all that region deserted, and
the towns, formerly so strong and populous, abandoned and in ruins.
[Sidenote: XOLOTL'S INVASION.]
Xolotl, who seems to have been of a more ambitious and enterprising
disposition than his brother, listened eagerly to this report, which
seemed to promise the fulfillment of his dreams of independent and
undivided sway. Summoning his vassals to the capital, he told them
what his spies had seen, and in an eloquent speech reminded them that
an extension of territory was needed for their increasing population,
expatiated on the richness and fertility of the abandoned region,
pointed out to his hearers how easy it would be to avenge on their
crippled enemies the injuries of many years, and concluded by requiring
them to be ready to accompany him to conquest within the space of six
months.[V-5]
It is difficult to credit the statements of the old authors respecting
the number of Chichimecs that espoused Xolotl's cause. Ixtlilxochitl
and Veytia state that no less than three million two hundred and two
thousand men and women, besides children, rallied to his standard,
leaving one million six hundred thousand subjects of Acauhtzin,
and thus making it not a mere expedition, but a decided emigration.
Torquemada, who fears he will not be believed if he states the actual
number who took part in the exodus, takes pains to assure us that
the historic paintings mention over a million warriors, commanded by
six great lords, and over twenty (two?) thousand inferior chiefs and
captains, and as each of these had under him more than a thousand men,
the total number would approach nearer to the larger numbers than to
Torquemada's unwontedly modest statement. The number was ascertained
by census, taken at five different places to check the increase or
decrease caused by leaving colonists along the route, by new arrivals,
and especially by deserters. The counting was effected by each plebeian
casting a small stone into a heap set apart for his class, and each
lord or officer a larger stone into another heap. Ixtlilxochitl
mentions two of these _nepohualcos_, or 'counting-places,' one near
Oztotipac in Otompan district, and another three leagues from Ecatepec,
near Mexico; while Torquemada refers to twelve similar hillocks near
Tenayocan.[V-6]
[Sidenote: XOLOTL'S INVASION.]
Having taken leave of his brother Acauhtzin, Xolotl started on his
journey. Halts were made at a number of stations to gather supplies,
and when camp was broken, settlers were left--generally selected from
among the old and feeble--and their places filled by fresh recruits.
Owing to these detentions it took the army some time to reach Chocoyan,
or 'place of tears,' in Anáhuac, where many Toltec ruins were found.
After proceeding some distance farther, and making several halts,
Xolotl dispatched the six principal chiefs of his army, each with
an appropriate force, in various directions, with instructions to
explore the country, and reduce the inhabitants, if they found any, to
subjection; at the same time he recommended these officers to use the
people kindly, except where they offered resistance, in which case they
were to be treated as enemies.[V-7]
Xolotl himself proceeded with the body of the army, and after halting
in several places, he finally reached Tollan. But the ancient splendor
of the Toltec capital was departed, its streets were deserted and
overgrown with vegetation, its magnificent temples and palaces were
in ruins, and desolation reigned where so lately had been the hum
and bustle of a mighty metropolis.[V-8] The site of Tollan being too
important to be abandoned, Xolotl established some families there,
which formed the nucleus of a future population. He then continued
his march to Mizquiyahualan and Tecpan, and finally came to Xaltocan,
on the shore of the lake of the same name, where he and his followers
abode for a long time in the caves that abounded in that region, and
where they subsequently founded the town of Xoloc or Xolotl, which
afterwards became a city of considerable importance in Anáhuac.[V-9]
The narrative becomes somewhat confused at this point, owing to the
conflicting accounts of the various authorities. It seems, however,
that the Chichimecs remained for a long time, several years perhaps, at
the settlement of Xoloc, doing little but sending out scouting parties
to reconnoitre the immediately surrounding country. Finally, according
to the majority of the Spanish writers, Xototl dispatched certain
chiefs on regular exploring expeditions, and set out himself with
his son Nopaltzin and a large force; journeying by way of Cempoala,
Tepepulco, Oztolotl, Cohuacayan, and Tecpatepec, until he reached the
hill of Atonan. Here he descried a goodly region lying to the south and
east, which he at once sent his son Nopaltzin to take possession of,
while he returned to Xoloc.[V-10]
[Sidenote: CONDITION OF THE COUNTRY.]
Nopaltzin wandered for some time from place to place, seemingly making
it his object rather to search for an inhabited country than to take
possession of an uninhabited one. At first his efforts met with no
success, notwithstanding he ascended several high mountains for the
purpose of seeing afar off. At last he came to Tlalamoztoc, whence
his view extended over the country toward Tlazalan, and Culhuacan
valley,[V-11] and Chapultepec, on the other side of the lake; throughout
this region smoke arose in various places, denoting the presence of
human inhabitants. Without loss of time, the prince returned to his
father with the news of his discovery, passing the ruined city of
Teotihuacan on his way. Xolotl had in the meantime visited the large
Toltec city of Cuhuac (Culhuacan?), and had also received information
of Toltec settlements on the coast and in the interior. A consultation
was held, and it was decided that Tultitlan was the most eligible site
for a capital. Accordingly Xolotl left Xoloc in the care of a governor
and proceeded to that region and there founded Tenayocan opposite
Tezcuco, on the other side of the lake.[V-12]
Brasseur's version of these events is somewhat different. He does
not mention Xolotl's expedition to the hill of Atonan, though he does
not omit to relate that Toltec settlements were described from that
elevation by the reconnoitering parties sent out from the Chichimec
camp at Lake Xaltocan; neither does he in any way refer to Nopaltzin's
journey, at his father's command, to Tlalamoztoc. The reason of this
difference is that according to Brasseur's version Nopaltzin was not
the son of Xolotl, the first Chichimec emperor but of Amacui, one
of six great chiefs, who were the first to follow in the successful
invaders' wake, this they did not do, however, until after Xolotl had
established himself at Tenayocan.[V-13] It seems that this Amacui has
been confounded throughout with Xolotl by the majority of the Spanish
chroniclers; in their version of the events which followed the founding
of Tenayocan, during a period of nearly two hundred years, the deeds
of the former are all ascribed to the latter, or at least the narrative
is continued without any break, and no mention is made of any change of
kings.[V-14]
The Spanish writers relate that the chiefs of whom Amacui was one were
attracted to Anáhuac by the reports which reached them of Xolotl's
unopposed invasion, and of the richness of the land that he had
appropriated.[V-15] Upon their arrival in Anáhuac they respectfully asked
the Chichimec king's permission to settle near him, and to hunt in his
newly acquired territory. Xolotl evinced no jealousy, but welcomed the
new-comers with generous hospitality; doubtless the politic monarch
saw that such arrivals could not fail to strengthen his position, as
all who came were pretty sure to acknowledge his supremacy and ally
themselves to him, as chief of all the Chichimecs. From what source
Amacui derived the influence which he afterwards used for his own
aggrandizement is not known; it could scarcely have been from his
personal power as a prince, because we are told that the number of
his followers was small; but at all events, whatever were the means
he used, he succeeded, at Xolotl's death, in getting elected to the
throne.[V-16] This being in all probability the true version, the events
that are now to be recorded may be regarded as happening in the reign
of Amacui, or Amacui Xolotl, as he was styled on his accession.
[Sidenote: REMNANTS OF THE TOLTECS.]
One of the first acts of the new king, whom we may call Xolotl II.,
was to remove from his capital at Tenayocan and take up his residence
at Quauhyacac, at the foot of the mountains of Tezcuco. Calling
his chiefs together, he next proceeded to take formal possession
of the country. The ceremony, which consisted in discharging arrows
towards the cardinal points, and in burning wreaths of dry grass, and
scattering the ashes towards the four quarters, was performed in the
royal presence at a great number of places; the spots selected being
generally the summits of mountains. He also dispatched four lords,
with the necessary forces, in the direction of the four quarters,
instructing them to take possession of the country along their route,
but not to disturb the Toltecs, except those who offered resistance,
who were to be subjected by force. Either the progress made by
these four expeditions must have been very slow, or the extent of
country traversed by them must have been very great, for we are told
that they did not return until four years after their setting-out.
The most populous Toltec settlements were found at Culhuacan,
Quauhtitenco, Chapultepec, Totoltepec, Tlazalan, and Tepexomaco, all
ruled by lords, and at Cholula, where two priests held the reigns of
government.[V-17] The name of the ruler at Chapultepec was Xitzin, with
his wife Oztaxochitl and a son;[V-18] at Tlazalan was Mitl with his
wife Cohuaxochitl,[V-19] and two sons, Pixahua and Axopatl,[V-20] who,
instructed by their father, afterwards revived the art of working in
metals; at Totoltepec were Nacaxoc, his wife, and his son Xiuhpopoca;
at Tepexomaco were Cohuatl, his wife, and his son Quetzalpopoca; at
Cholula ruled Ixcax, the issue of the adulterous connection of the
pontiff with the high-priestess of the Goddess of Water. All these
princes hastened to acknowledge the supremacy of Xolotl II., though
without actually paying him homage. Besides this, the four lords who
had been dispatched to the four quarters, announced on their return
that they had visited a great number of places, among which were
Tehuantepec, Guatemala, and Goazacoalco.[V-21]
The invaders had hitherto met with no opposition from the few
Toltecs who were left in Anáhuac; their plans had all been effected
deliberately and slowly, but surely and without any trouble. Matters
having now begun to assume a settled aspect, the Chichimec king at once
turned his attention to a partition of lands among the nobles who had
accompanied him and assisted his enterprise, and, as is usual in such
cases, he dispensed with a free hand that which of right was not his to
give. To each lord he assigned a defined section of the territory and
a certain number of dependents, with instructions to form a town, to
be named after its founder.[V-22] Toltec cities retained their original
names, and orders were issued that their inhabitants should not be
interfered with, nor intruded upon by Chichimec settlers. One of the
most thickly settled districts was that lying north and north-east
of Tenayocan, named Chichimecatlalli, or 'land of Chichimecs.' Within
its boundaries were the towns of Zacatlan, Quauhchinanco, Totoltepec,
Atotonilco. Settlements were also formed on the coast, the whole
extent of country appropriated by the Chichimecs being, according to
Ixtlilxochitl, over two hundred leagues in circumference.[V-23] It was
about this time that Xolotl II., as supreme ruler, assumed the title
of Huey Tlatoani Chichimecatl Tecuhtli, 'great lord and king of the
Chichimecs.'[V-24]
* * * * *
[Sidenote: AFFAIRS IN CULHUACAN.]
At this juncture it will be necessary to glance at the state of affairs
in Culhuacan.[V-25] It has been related how Topiltzin, when he fled from
Anáhuac, left Culhuacan, the most populous of the Toltec settlements
at the time of the fall of the empire, to the care of Xiuhtemoc, an old
relative, who was to act as a kind of honorary king, or regent, and as
such receive obedience and tribute. The Toltec monarch also entrusted
to Xiuhtemoc the charge of his son Pochotl, then an infant, with
instructions that the young prince should be sent to the village of
Quauhtitenco, situated in a forest near the ancient capital, and there
brought up in secrecy and in ignorance of his royal birth. Another of
Topiltzin's relatives named Cocauhtli, who was married to Ixmixuch and
had a son called Acxoquauh, seems also to have assisted Xiuhtemoc in
governing Culhuacan, or at least to have had great influence there.[V-26]
For a number of years Xiuhtemoc continued to govern Culhuacan with
much wisdom, and the province flourished wonderfully under his
prudent administration. He never attempted to claim any other title
than 'father,' and was well beloved by his subjects. In the meantime
Pochotl, Topiltzin's son, grew to be a young man, of a suitable age
to be associated with Xiuhtemoc, according to his father's directions.
Xiuhtemoc seems, however, to have been in no hurry to draw the prince
from his obscurity. What his object was in this delay, is unknown; it
would appear at first sight as if he was scheming for the succession
of his own son Nauhyotl, but his patriotic conduct and loyal character
seems to render such a cause improbable. At all events Pochotl was
still at Quauhtenanco where Xiuhtemoc died.
His son Nauhyotl, a prince well liked by the people, immediately seized
the throne, and being of a more ambitious disposition than his father,
lost no time in assuming the royal titles and in causing himself to be
publicly proclaimed king and crowned with all the rites and ceremonies
sacred to the use of the Toltec monarchs, being the third of the
name on the throne of Culhuacan. According to Brasseur, two princes,
Acxoquauh and Nonohualcatl, were admitted in some way to a share in the
government.[V-27]
This bold act of usurpation[V-28] met with little or no outward
opposition, notwithstanding it was well known that Pochotl still lived.
This was doubtless due to the critical state of affairs in Culhuacan
at the time of Xiuhtemoc's death. The Chichimecs were steadily
increasing in power; Xolotl seemed disposed to adopt a more decided
policy toward the Toltecs than his predecessor, and it might at any
moment be necessary to check his encroachments. In this condition of
things it was natural that the energetic Nauhyotl, who had been brought
up at court under the immediate care and instruction of his politic
father, should be a more acceptable and fitting king than Pochotl, who
had been brought up in total ignorance of the duties of a prince, and
even of his own rights. Nevertheless, there were some who murmured
secretly on seeing Topiltzin's son defrauded of his rights, and
Nauhyotl being aware of this discontent, determined to set the public
mind at rest. He accordingly sent for Pochotl, publicly acknowledged
him as the descendant of the Toltec kings, declared his intention of
leaving the crown to him at his death, and gave him the hand of his
young and beautiful daughter Xochipantzin[V-29] in marriage, all of
which proceedings met with general approval both from the people and
from Pochotl himself, whose unexpected elevation does not seem to have
rendered him very exacting.[V-30]
* * * * *
[Sidenote: RULE OF XOLOTL II.]
Favored by the peaceful, non-interfering policy of Xolotl I., the
Toltecs at Culhuacan had increased rapidly in wealth and population.
Xolotl II. seems to have grown impatient of this rivalry, and to have
determined to define the position of Culhuacan and assert his own
supremacy in Anáhuac without farther delay. Of the way in which he
accomplished this end there is more than one version.
According to Veytia and others, he informed Nauhyotl that by right of
the cession of the land of Anáhuac made to the monarch of Amaquemecan
by Topiltzin,[V-31] he should require him to do homage and pay a small
tribute to the Chichimec empire in recognition of its supremacy; this
done, he would recognize him as king of the Toltecs. To this demand
Nauhyotl answered haughtily that Toltec kings acknowledged no superiors
but the gods, and paid tribute to no earthly sovereign. Xolotl I.,
he added, had been permitted to enter Anáhuac and people it, because
he had done so peaceably. Topiltzin's cession was invalid, and he,
Nauhyotl, merely governed during the minority of the rightful heir of
Pochotl, now deceased, and had no power to dispose of any rights to the
land.[V-32]
Such a reply could have but one effect on the fierce Chichimec. He
resolved to crush his rival at once before he became too strong, and
for this purpose gave orders to Nopaltzin to advance without delay
against Culhuacan. In the meantime Nauhyotl was not idle. A number
of canoes were brought out to defend the water-line, and he himself
issued forth at the head of a force which, though greatly inferior to
the Chichimec army in point of numbers, attacked the enemy without
hesitation, and succeeded in maintaining the field valorously until
evening. Gradually, however, Nopaltzin's numbers began to tell,
until at length the Toltecs were routed. The Chichimecs then entered
Culhuacan without difficulty, despite its advantageous position. The
carnage was immediately suspended and no disorder allowed. The Toltecs
had suffered great loss, and among the slain was Nauhyotl, whose death
was deeply deplored by his subjects and regretted by the conquerors.
[Sidenote: CULHUAS AND CHICHIMECS.]
Nopaltzin gave orders that the dead king should be buried with all the
usual honors, and after leaving a garrison in the town, departed to
carry the news of his success to his father. This battle was the first
in which the Chichimecs had engaged since their arrival in Anáhuac,
and Nopaltzin was much praised for its successful issue by Xolotl. The
Chichimec emperor now proceeded in person to Culhuacan, to assure the
inhabitants of his good will and to receive their homage. Pochotl's
first-born, Achitometl, then only five years of age, was solemnly
proclaimed king, with the condition that he should pay yearly a small
tribute in fish to the Chichimec government. After this amicable
arrangement, the intercourse between the two nations became daily
stronger, to the no small benefit of the Chichimecs.[V-33]
Torquemada gives another account of the events which led to the war.
Itzmitl, who succeeded to the lordship of Coatlichan on the death
of his father Tzontecoma, had a son named Huetzin by Malinalxochitl,
daughter of Cozcaquauhtli of Mamalihuasco,[V-34] for whom he was anxious
to secure a temporary regency until he should in natural course
succeed to the government of Coatlichan. Relying on a promise made
by Xolotl I. to Tzontecoma, Itzmitl asked Xolotl II. to award his
son a lordship, and pointed to Culhuacan as available since it was
an unappropriated Toltec settlement, to which he had a certain right
from the marriage of Tzontecoma with a member of its royal family.
Xolotl informed Achitometl, a grandson of Nauhyotl, of his wish that
Huetzin should stay with the king of Culhuacan until he succeeded to
his own inheritance.[V-35] Achitometl, pretending to favor the project,
immediately sent information to Nauhyotl, who at once took steps
to secure himself. Xolotl paid a visit to Culhuacan to make formal
arrangements for the reception of his protégé, and was received with
the most friendly assurances. But when Huetzin arrived, after the
departure of Xolotl, an armed force opposed his entrance, and he
precipitately retreated. This breach of faith caused a war, which
resulted in the death of Nauhyotl, and the elevation of Huetzin to the
throne.[V-36]
Brasseur's relation of these events, partly derived from the
manuscripts to which he had access, differs from the others in some
particulars, though it generally agrees with Torquemada's account.
According to this writer, Huetzin, who, it is here stated, was
Pochotl's grandson on the mother's side,[V-37] coveted and endeavored to
obtain the crown of Culhuacan prior to the arrangement made between his
father and Xolotl. To gain this end he had, on account of his descent,
the assistance of the Acolhuas, who were at all times disposed to
reëstablish the original Toltec dynasty, and the sympathy of Xolotl II.
and his son Nopaltzin, who were of course inclined to favor any scheme
that would cripple Nauhyotl. The king of Culhuacan defeated Huetzin's
plans for the time, however, by proclaiming Achitometl--Pochotl's
eldest son, by the princess Xochipantzin, and consequently Nauhyotl's
grandson--as his successor, thus restoring the ancient dynasty, and
doing away with the pretext under which the pretender had won so much
sympathy. It seems that the claims of Huetzin met with no farther
notice until the death of Quauhtexpetlatl, a son of Nauhyotl II., who
had accompanied his father into exile, and after his death had returned
to Culhuacan and been associated with Nauhyotl III., the present king.
Upon the death of this prince, which occurred in 1129, Xolotl entered
into an agreement with the lord of Coatlichan to procure for Huetzin,
the son of the latter, Quauhtexpetlatl's share in the government
of Culhuacan. Hence followed the struggle, detailed by Torquemada,
which resulted in Huetzin's elevation to the throne he had so long
coveted.[V-38]
* * * * *
[Sidenote: THE NAHUATLACA TRIBES.]
A digression is necessary at this point, in order to refer to the
traditional arrival in Anáhuac of the Nahuatlaca tribes, which occurred
at irregular intervals during a period extending from the early years
of the Chichimec occupation down to, and a little beyond, the events
recorded above.
[Sidenote: NAHUATLACA MIGRATION.]
The original home of the Nahuatlacas was Aztlan, the location of
which has been the subject of much discussion.[V-39] The causes that
led to their exodus from that country can only be conjectured;[V-40]
but they may be supposed, however, to have been driven out by their
enemies, for Aztlan is described as a land too fair and bounteous to
be left willingly in the mere hope of finding a better.[V-41] The native
tradition relates that a bird was heard for several days constantly
repeating the word _tihui, tihui_, meaning 'let us go,' 'let us go.'
This, Huitziton, foremost and wisest among the Nahuatlaca chiefs,
took to be a message from the gods directing the people to seek a new
home. In making a declaration of such moment he needed the support of
another influential man. He accordingly persuaded another chief called
Tecpatzin, who at first seemed sceptical, that the bird's note was
nothing less than a divine message, and the two announced it as such to
the people.[V-42]
Whether all the numerous tribes into which the Nahuatlacas were
divided, left Aztlan at the same time, or, if not, in what order they
left, it is impossible to tell. It seems, however, that after several
years' wandering, a number of them were together at a place called
Chicomoztoc, the famous 'seven caves.'[V-43] The little that is known of
their wanderings before reaching this point will be found in the next
chapter, in connection with the Aztec migration.
The list of tribes settled at Chicomoztoc at this time comprises only
seven according to most authors. They are named for the most part after
the locality in which they subsequently settled in and about Anáhuac,
and are as follows: the Xochimilcas, Chalcas, Tepanecs, Acolhuas,
Tlahuicas, Tlascaltecs, and Aztecs or Mexicans; to which some writers
add the Tarascos, Matlaltzincas, Malinalcas, Cholultecs, Huexotzincas,
Cuitlahuacs, Mizquicas, and Cohuixcas.[V-44] Some authors do not include
the Acolhuas and Tepanecs; no importance is, however, to be attached
to the traditional tribal divisions of the invading hordes before they
settled in Anáhuac.
It was at Chicomoztoc that the separation of the Aztecs from the rest
of the Nahuatlacas took place. The tradition relates that while the
people were seated beneath a great tree partaking of a meal, a terrible
noise was suddenly heard to issue from the summit of the tree; the
idol which stood upon the altar at its foot then called the chiefs of
the Aztec tribe aside and commanded them to order the other tribes to
depart in advance, leaving the Aztecs at Chicomoztoc. The number of
tribes that were thus sent in advance is not known; Torquemada says
eight, Acosta and Duran say six,[V-45] and others greater or smaller
numbers.
[Sidenote: ACOLHUAS AND TEPANECS.]
From the time of the separation we hear little more of the Nahuatlaca
tribes until we find them coming into Anáhuac and settling in various
parts of the country. In this manner we hear of the Xochimilcas,
'cultivators of flowers,' coming into the valley and occupying a
district south of Tezcuco Lake, where they founded Xochimilco; but
all we know of their former history is that they left Aquilazco, their
original home, which we may suppose to have been a district of Aztlan,
under a chief named Huetzalin,[V-46] who, dying on the journey, was
succeeded by Acatonal, who conducted the tribe as far as the ruined
city of Tollan and there died, after having ruled twenty-three years.
The tribe then proceeded under the conduct of Tlahuil Tecuhtli[V-47]
to the Culhuacan territory and attempted to settle there, one year
after the accession of Huetzin.[V-48] But the people of Culhuacan were
suspicious of the new comers and drove them to the other side of
the lake to a place called Teyahualco, at the same time forbidding
them to settle on any part of the lands belonging to the capital.
For some years the Xochimilcas remained quietly at Teyahualco, but
in 1141 Tlahuil Tecuhtli pounced suddenly upon Culhuacan, and before
its defenders could gain their arms he penetrated into the heart of
the city and sacked it remorselessly. The inhabitants soon rallied,
however, and not only drove the marauders out of the city, but pursued
them as far as the site of the ancient city of Ocopetlayuca. Here
Tlahuil Tecuhtli resolved to establish himself and, with the permission
of the king of Culhuacan, he forthwith founded the city of Xochimilco,
which subsequently became one of the principal places in Anáhuac.[V-49]
The Chalcas settled on the east side of the lake of Chalco and founded
a number of towns of which the principal was Chalco. For the Tlahuicas
no room could be found about the lake; they therefore proceeded to a
district south of Mexico, where before long a number of settlements
rose around their capital Quauhnahuac.[V-50] Of the other tribes
included by some authors among the Nahuatlacas, we find the Tarascos
settled in Michoacan, the Matlaltzincas in the province of that name,
and extending towards Michoacan; the Malinalcas in the province of
Malinalco; the Cuitlahuacs in the province of Cuitlahuac; the Mizquicas
in Mizquic; the Cohuixcas in Guerrero.[V-51]
[Sidenote: ACOLHUAS AND TEPANECS.]
The Tepanecs and Acolhuas become prominent in the affairs of Anáhuac
at this period, that is, during the reign of the Chichimec emperor
Xolotl II. They were among the numerous bands that contributed to the
overthrow of the Toltec empire, and are classed by several writers
among the Nahuatlaca tribes.[V-52] One of their chiefs, Tzontecoma of
Coatlichan, was, as we have seen, the grandfather of Huetzin, the
present king of Culhuacan. The event that brings them into prominent
notice at this time is their tendering allegiance to Xolotl II. In
doing this they claimed descent from the Citin,[V-53] illustrious for
nobility of race and for heroic deeds. According to many of the Spanish
writers the Otomís came into Anáhuac and tendered their allegiance
to Xolotl II. in company with the Acolhuas and Tepanecs. We have
already seen, however, that the Otomís were one of the most ancient
nations of Anáhuac, and were there long before the Toltecs; this
reputed entry of theirs was perhaps nothing more than their coming
in from the mountains and adopting, to a certain extent, a civilized
life.[V-54] The story goes that Xolotl II. and his son Nopaltzin were
flattered by the propositions of these powerful chiefs and entertained
their guests right royally. Nor did the Chichimec monarch delay
to confer upon the three principal chiefs substantial marks of his
favor and consideration. To the lord Acolhua with the Tepanecs he
assigned several districts south of Tenayocan, with Azcapuzalco for a
capital, and gave him the hand of his eldest daughter, Cuetlaxochitl,
in marriage; the lord of the Otomís received the emperor's second
daughter, and a district four or five leagues north of Azcapuzalco,
with Xaltocan for its capital; Tzontecoma, the third chief, a young
man, was awarded for the Acolhua home a district one league south of
Tezcuco, with Coatlichan for a capital, and, as Xolotl had no more
daughters, he was given for a wife the princess next in rank.[V-55] It
was in compensation for this inferior marriage that Xolotl afterwards
obtained the throne of Culhuacan for Tzontecoma's grandson, Huetzin,
according to Torquemada's account given on a preceding page. The
three marriages were celebrated at Tenayocan with extraordinary
pomp, and were followed by a succession of public games, gladiatorial
exhibitions, and amusements of all sorts, which lasted sixty days.
It is difficult to say in what relation the Acolhua and Tepanec princes
stood towards the Chichimec emperor. According to most of the Spanish
authorities, they swore allegiance to Xolotl, and took rank as the
first vassals of the empire, though they were exempted from payment of
tribute. It is Brasseur's opinion, however, that this statement must
not be accepted too literally. Nothing was more jealously guarded by
all these peoples than their independence and sovereign rights in the
land they occupied. At the same time, the right of first occupation
being held sacred by them, it was natural that the tribes that came
in after the Chichimecs, should address themselves to Xolotl, before
attempting any formal settlement. The act of the new tribes was,
therefore, an observance of international etiquette rather than an
acknowledgment of vassalage.[V-56]
[Sidenote: THE TOLTECS IN ANÁHUAC.]
The settlement of the Acolhuas and Tepanecs in Anáhuac resulted in
an improved order of things, and in the rapid advance of culture
throughout the country. Their comparatively high state of civilization
was not slow to impart itself to the ruder Chichimecs, who were proud
to ally themselves by marriage to the polished strangers, and eager
to emulate their refinement. For the same reasons the name Acolhua
soon came to designate the Chichimecs of the capital and surrounding
districts. Nor was it the people alone who received this impulse
from the new-comers. Xolotl began to perceive that if he wished to
establish a permanent and hereditary monarchy it would be necessary to
cure his fierce nobles of their nomadic tastes and habits by giving
them possessions, and thus making it to their interest to lead an
orderly and settled life. To this end he created a number of fiefs, and
distributed them among his lords, according to their rank and quality.
Those lying nearest to the centre of the empire were granted to the
princes of the royal family, or to chiefs of undoubted loyalty; while
to the more turbulent nobles distant provinces were assigned.[V-57]
* * * * *
For some time after the accession of Huetzin to the throne of
Culhuacan, where, the reader will recollect, he had been placed by
Xolotl II. after the defeat and death of Nauhyotl, it seems that
Nonohualcatl, Nauhyotl's eldest son,[V-58] and Ameyal, Pochotl's eldest
son by Nauhyotl's daughter, were permitted to retain their position as
heirs to the throne which they had enjoyed during the reign of the late
king. But this did not last very long; the ruse by which Ameyal had
endeavored to frustrate Xolotl's designs upon the throne of Culhuacan
was not forgotten, and before many months had elapsed the young prince
was despoiled of his dignities and cast into prison, where he was kept
closely confined for several years.
Although the Toltec element in Anáhuac was growing weaker every year,
and threatened to totally disappear in a short time, yet what little
there was left of it possessed great importance in the eyes of Xolotl
II. The Chichimec emperor, partly perhaps from motives of pride, partly
because he saw that it would tend to ensure his son's succession,
desired nothing so much as to ally his family by blood with the ancient
Toltec dynasty. With this end in view, the old monarch had for some
time been looking about for a suitable bride for his son Nopaltzin. At
length the lady was found in the person of Azcatlxochitl, sister of
Ameyal, and therefore daughter of Pochotl, the son of Topiltzin, the
last Toltec king. This princess, who was then about twenty-five years
of age, was possessed of singular beauty and rare accomplishments, and
was withal a model of modesty. Her father being dead, and her brother
in captivity, she lived in seclusion with her mother at Tlaximaloyan,
a town on the frontier of Michoacan. Whatever dislike the Chichimec
nobles may at first have had for this alliance, was speedily overcome;
the hand of the Toltec princess was formally demanded and given, and
soon afterwards the marriage was celebrated with great magnificence.
By this union Nopaltzin had three sons, Tlotzin Pochotl,[V-59] who
subsequently succeeded his father as Chichimec emperor, Huizaquen
Tochin Tecuhtli, and Coxanatzin Atencatl.[V-60] When these came of age,
their father obtained Tlazatlan from Xolotl for the eldest son to rule,
until he should succeed to the imperial throne; for the second son
he obtained a grant of Zacatlan, and for the third Tenamitec. Before
departing to his fief, Tlotzin was married to Tocpacxochitzin, daughter
of the lord of Quahuatlapal, one of the great chiefs that came with
Xolotl from Amaquemecan.[V-61]
Brasseur states that the tributes of the seigniory of Oztoticpac,
in the province of Chalco, were granted to Tlotzin at his birth,[V-62]
and there the prince usually resided during his youth, under the able
instruction of a noble Toltec named Tecpoyo Acauhtli, who, it is said,
accompanied his pupil to Tlazatlan, whither he went after his marriage,
and continued to educate him there.[V-63] It was at this latter place
that Tlotzin's son Quinantzin, who afterwards became emperor, was born.
[Sidenote: REIGN OF XOLOTL II.]
About this time Xolotl's peace was much disturbed by a conspiracy
which nearly put an end to his life. It seems that for a long time a
number of powerful Chichimec nobles had regarded with growing disfavor
the civilization which the emperor, his son, and his grandson, were
so anxious to advance, though whether this was their only reason for
conspiring against the old monarch's life is not clear. Of course
any plot which tended to weaken the Chichimec empire called for
the sympathy of the people of Culhuacan and the Toltecs generally
throughout the country,[V-64] and thus the discontented faction grew to
be quite formidable. At first the conspirators confined themselves
to grumbling, and made no active demonstration; but as time went on
and the aged emperor showed no signs of failing, their impatience for
his death grew unbearable, and finally they deliberately plotted his
assassination.
During the later years of his life Xolotl left the government almost
entirely in the hands of his son Nopaltzin, and passed the greater
part of his time in the royal gardens at Tezcuco. He had several times
expressed a wish to have an additional supply of water brought into
these grounds, and it was in gratifying his desire that the traitors
attempted to take his life. The new supply having been introduced
from a neighboring mountain stream, the conspirators waited until a
time when the emperor was supposed to be reposing in a low-lying part
of the gardens, and then suddenly breaking down a dam which had been
constructed for the purpose, they let the water overflow the grounds.
But their design was happily frustrated. It happened that Xolotl had
not lain down in the usual spot, but had sought an elevation, where
the flood could not reach him. From his conduct it would seem that he
had been apprised of the plot, for instead of being disconcerted, he
made merry over the disaster, saying: "I have long been convinced of
the love of my subjects; but I now perceive that they love me even
more than I imagined; I wished to increase the supply of water for
my gardens, and, behold, they even exceed my wishes; therefore I will
commemorate their devotion with feasts." And he accordingly gave orders
that the next few days should be devoted to public rejoicing, to the
great confusion of his enemies. But the old monarch's heart was sore
within him, nevertheless, and the treachery of his subjects weighed
heavily upon him.[V-65]
But the disaffection that had given rise to this iniquitous plot
was not quelled by its failure, and received a new impulse from a
love-quarrel which led to serious consequences. Before narrating
this event, it should be stated that Ameyal, henceforth known as
Achitometl,[V-66] had been released from captivity, probably through the
influence of his sister, Nopaltzin's wife, and that Nonohualcatl[V-67]
had succeeded to the throne of Culhuacan by reason of Huetzin's falling
heir to his father's seigniory of Coatlichan.[V-68]
[Sidenote: REVOLT OF YACANEX.]
Now, Achitometl had a daughter named Atotoztli, whose exceeding beauty
and high rank brought countless admirers to her feet. Most favored
among these, or most daring, it is not clear which, was Yacanex,[V-69]
lord of Tepetlaoztoc, and vassal of Huetzin. This noble presented
himself before Achitometl, and imperiously demanded his daughter's
hand. Angered at his insolence, the Culhua prince responded that
Atotoztli was promised to Huetzin, but that if she were not he could
never entertain a request made in such a manner. Yacanex, furious
at this rebuff, but not in a position to proceed to extremes at the
moment, returned to his fief and set about stirring up a rebellion
against his rival and suzerain, Huetzin. His own people rose to a man
at his call, and he was soon joined by several powerful neighboring
chiefs.[V-70] According to Brasseur, Yacanex, having gathered his forces,
marched to Culhuacan, and there repeated his demand to Achitometl; but
that prince reminded the rebellious noble of his promise to Huetzin,
and declared his determination to yield his daughter's hand to no one
else. Upon this Yacanex returned, with threats, to Tepetlaoztoc.[V-71]
There his army was swelled by a number of malcontents, among whom
were two of Huetzin's sons, who thought themselves robbed of their
inheritance, because their father had left the crown of Culhuacan to
Nonohualcatl when he succeeded his father at Coatlichan. The provinces
of Otompan and Tezcuco also broke out into open revolt, and before long
there was danger that the whole of Anáhuac would be involved in war.
Xolotl and Nopaltzin now began to feel seriously alarmed. Tochin
Tecuhtli, who, as we have seen, had been previously disgraced,[V-72]
and who had therefore joined the rebels, was secretly sent for, and
induced by fair promises to desert Yacanex and take command of the
imperial troops. He immediately proceeded to join Huetzin, and the two
with their united forces then marched against the rebels. But Yacanex
had taken up an unassailable position in the mountains, and for some
months could not be drawn into an engagement. At length, his strength
being greatly increased by the numbers that flocked to his standard, he
decided to risk a battle and descended into the plain. The engagement,
which lasted an entire day and was attended with great loss on both
sides, ended in the rout and almost total annihilation of the rebels.
Yacanex, with his ally Ocotox and a small remnant of his followers,
escaped to the mountains in the east; and Huetzin's two sons[V-73] fled
to Huexotzinco.[V-74]
[Sidenote: NOPALTZIN EMPEROR.]
At this time Nopaltzin, with his son Tlotzin and his grandson
Quinantzin, then about nine or ten years old, were sojourning in the
forest of Xolotl, near Tezcuco. Ocotox, who had escaped with Yacanex,
conceived the bold idea of capturing this royal party. But the princes
were secretly informed of the plot, and, gathering what men they could,
they rushed suddenly upon the concealed enemy with such fury that but
few escaped. Quinantzin, though so young, is said to have been foremost
in the melée and to have fought so valorously that Xolotl rewarded him
with the lordship of Tezcuco, and ceded him its revenues.[V-75] Tochin
Tecuhtli was well rewarded for his services; he received in marriage
the hand of Tomiyauh, daughter or grand-daughter of Upantzin, king
of Xaltocan, and was made lord of the seigniory of Huexotla, which
comprised the towns of Teotihuacan and Otompan; Huetzin returned to
Coatlichan and there married the Helen of the war, Atotoztli, daughter
of Achitometl.[V-76] Thus was this rebellion brought to an end in the
year 1151.[V-77]
A few years after these events Xolotl II. expired at Tenayocan in the
arms of his son Nopaltzin, to whom he left the crown, exhorting him to
maintain peace in the empire if possible.[V-78]
After the body of the late emperor had been interred with the customary
ceremonies, Nopaltzin was crowned Chichimecatl Tecuhtli, and formally
received the homage of his vassals. The coronation fêtes were on a
scale of unusual magnificence, and lasted forty days.[V-79]
In spite of the wishes of the late emperor, Nopaltzin's reign was
anything but a peaceful one. Anáhuac was at this time divided into a
great number of states, many of which had their peculiar languages,
manners, and customs. The principal of these divisions were Tenayocan,
Coatlichan, Azcapuzalco, Xaltocan, Quauhtitlan, Huexotla, and
Culhuacan. Each of these communities was exceedingly watchful of its
own interests and regarded all the others with more or less jealousy.
In the early part of his reign the people of Tulancingo rebelled, and
Nopaltzin marched in person to subdue them; it is doubtful, however, if
he would have succeeded had not Tlotzin opportunely come to his aid,
when, after a campaign of nineteen days, victory was obtained.[V-80] On
another occasion, Aculhua, King of Azcapuzalco, usurped the lands of
Chalchiuhcua, lord of Tepotzotlan, at a time when Nopaltzin was too
busy to prevent it.
In 1171 Nonohualcatl, king of Culhuacan, died and was succeeded by
Achitometl, or Ameyal.[V-81] This prince, whose life had been such an
eventful one, labored hard to advance civilization, and during his life
the city of Culhuacan made great progress. But his reign was a short
one, and he had been on the throne but a few years, when he died, and
was succeeded by his son Icxochitlanex.
Nopaltzin, following the example set by his father, did all in
his power to further Toltec culture. Great attention was paid to
agriculture; masters were appointed in the several towns to teach the
various arts, new laws were made and old ones revised, and civilization
began to assume a higher phase than it had hitherto done since the fall
of the Toltec empire.
FOOTNOTES:
[V-1] Whether this Amaquemecan was the original home of the Chichimecs
or not is uncertain. According to Brasseur, _Hist. Nat. Civ._, tom.
i., p. 355, it certainly was not, since he states that it was founded
in 958 by Xolotl Tochinteuctli. The ancestors of the Xolotl who
invaded Anáhuac, he adds, tom. ii., p. 199, 'sortis de Chicomoztoc,
avaient conquis le royaume d'Amaquemé, où ils avaient établi leur
résidence.' Concerning the location and extent of Amaquemecan the
authorities differ greatly. Thus Ixtlilxochitl gives its area as 2000
by 1000 leagues, in _Kingsborough_, vol. ix., p. 335. Torquemada,
_Monarq. Ind._, tom. i., p. 40, places its frontier 200 leagues north
of Jalisco, which Clavigero, _Storia Ant. del Messico_, tom. i., p.
132, thinks too near, since no traces of it exist, he says, within
1200 miles. Boturini, _Idea_, p. 141, places Amaquemecan in Michoacan.
Arlegui, _Chrón. Zacatecas_, p. 7, among the wild tribes north of New
Mexico. Cabrera, _Teatro_, p. 58, in Chiapas.
[V-2] Spelled also Achcauhtzin, and Axcauhtzin.
[V-3] 'L'étymologie du nom de _Xolotl_ offre de grandes difficultés.
Dans son acceptation ordinaire, il signifie esclave, valet, servant,
et cependant on le voit appliqué à plusieurs princes comme un titre
très-élevé. Lorenzana, dans ses annotations aux Lettres de Fernand
Cortès, le traduit par _Ojo_, œil, et on le lui donna, dit-il, à cause
de sa vigilance. Mais dans quelle langue a-t-il cette signification?'
_Brasseur_, _Hist. Nat. Civ._, tom. ii., p. 199.
[V-4] So says Torquemada, _Monarq. Ind._, tom. i., p. 39; but
according to Boturini, in _Doc. Hist. Mex._, série iii., tom. iv., p.
231, Ixtlilxochitl, in _Kingsborough_, vol. ix., p. 337, and Brasseur,
_Hist. Nat. Civ._, tom. ii., p. 200, Acauhtzin reigned alone.
Clavigero, _Storia Ant. del Messico_, tom. i., p. 133, affirms that
the old king divided the kingdom equally between his two sons.
[V-5] _Torquemada_, _Monarq. Ind._, tom. i., pp. 40-1, gives in full
Xolotl's speech to his lords. Ixtlilxochitl, in _Kingsborough's Mex.
Antiq._, vol. ix., p. 337, relates that he appointed Oyome as the
rendezvous. Brasseur de Bourbourg, as before stated, does not suppose
Xolotl to have shared the Chichimec throne with his brother Acauhtzin;
he therefore tells the story as if Xolotl induced the great nobles to
favor his project of invasion by his eloquence and argument, but used
no kingly authority in the matter.
Veytia, _Hist. Ant. Mej._, tom. i., pp. 302-3, tom. ii., pp. 3-4, 13,
assigns an altogether different cause for the Chichimec invasion of
Anáhuac. He affirms that when Topiltzin (Acxitl), the Toltec monarch,
fled from Tollan, he went to Acauhtzin, the Chichimec sovereign, to
whom he was distantly related, told him his sorrows, and ceded in his
favor all rights to a land which he refused to revisit; whereupon
Acauhtzin invested his brother Xolotl with the sovereignty of Tollan.
The date of the events recorded above is very uncertain. Veytia states
that the Chichimecs left their country for Anáhuac in 1117, one year
after the fall of the Toltec dynasty. _Hist. Ant. Mej._, tom. ii., p.
7. Ixtlilxochitl allows a period of four to six years to elapse before
their arrival at Tollan; as usual, this writer is not consistent with
himself in different parts of his work, and places the arrival in
various years between 962 and 1015. _Kingsborough's Mex. Antiq._, vol.
ix., pp. 208, 337, 395, 451. Torquemada, always avoiding exact dates,
gives on one page an interval of five years between the destruction of
the Toltec empire and the arrival of the Chichimecs, and on another
page an interval of nine years between the former event and the
departure from Amaquemecan. _Monarq. Ind._, tom. i., pp. 45-6.
Clavigero places the Chichimec arrival at Anáhuac in 1170. _Storia
Ant. del Messico_, tom. i., p. 132, tom. iv., pp. 40-51. Boturini, in
_Doc. Hist. Mex._, série iii., tom. iv., p. 233, allows a lapse of
nine years between the Toltec fall and the Chichimec arrival.
[V-6] _Torquemada_, _Monarq. Ind._, tom. i., p. 44; _Boturini_, in
_Doc. Hist. Mex._, série iii., tom. iv., pp. 231-2; _Ixtlilxochitl_,
in _Kingsborough's Mex. Antiq._, vol. ix., pp. 337, 375; _Veytia_,
_Hist. Ant. Mej._, tom. ii., pp. 4, 8-9. Clavigero, _Storia Ant. del
Messico_, tom. i., p. 134, expresses his disbelief in the numbers
given. 'Rien ne justifie les millions que lui assignent les auteurs;
ils ont compris évidement sous ce chiffre exagéré les diverses
émigrations qui se succédèrent depuis lors sans interruption dans la
vallée jusqu'à la fondation du royaume d'Acolhuacan.' _Brasseur_,
_Hist. Nat. Civ._, tom. i., p. 202.
[V-7] Brasseur gives the names of these six chiefs, as: Acatomatl,
Quautlapal, Cozcaquauh, Mitliztac, Tecpan, and Itzaquauh, giving
Ixtlilxochitl and Torquemada as his authorities; the latter writer,
however, _Monarq. Ind._, tom. i., p. 44, distinctly affirms that only
one chief, Acatomatl, was sent in advance.
[V-8] Clavigero, _Storia Ant. del Messico_, tom. i., p. 134, states
that they reached Tollan in eighteen months from the time of their
departure from Amaquemecan. Ixtlilxochitl gives the date as 5 Tecpatl.
_Kingsborough's Mex. Antiq._, vol. ix., p. 395.
[V-9] 'Les auteurs sont généralement d'accord pour placer la date de
cet établissement de l'an 1070 à 1080. Quelques-uns le portent
exactement à l'an 1068. _Xoloc_, aujourd'hui _Xoloque_, village de
fort peu d'importance, à 12 l. environ au nord de Mexico, et à 3 l. du
lac de San-Cristoval. Une autre explication met cette localité au pied
d'une colline, à une lieue environ vers le nord de Xaltocan.'
_Brasseur de Bourbourg_, _Hist. Nat. Civ._; tom. ii., p. 214. See
also, _Veytia_, _Hist. Ant. Mej._, tom. ii., pp. 8-10.
[V-10] Cempoala was twelve leagues north of Mexico; Tepepulco was four
leagues farther east. _Torquemada_, _Monarq. Ind._, tom. i., p. 42.
[V-11] Torquemada, _Monarq. Ind._, tom. i., p. 43, writes Tlatzalan
and Coyohuacan.
[V-12] Founded 1120, _Veytia_, _Hist. Ant. Mej._, tom. ii., p. 12.
_Ixtlilxochitl_, in _Kingsborough's Mex. Antiq._, vol. ix., pp. 338-9;
_Torquemada_, _Monarq. Ind._, tom. i., pp. 42-4.
[V-13] 'Le _Codex Xolotl_, qui fait partie de la coll. de M. Aubin,
donne positivement Amacui pour père et pour prédécesseur de
Nopaltzin.' _Brasseur de Bourbourg_, _Hist. Nat. Civ._, tom. ii., p.
224.
[V-14] 'Xolotl étant le titre du chef principal des Chichimèques, il
convenait à l'un aussi bien qu'à l'autre. Tout concourt, d'ailleurs, à
prouver que, dans le Xolotl des auteurs, il y a eu divers personnages;
c'est le seul moyen d'expliquer cette longue vie de près de deux cents
ans qu'ils lui accordent.' _Brasseur de Bourbourg_, _Hist. Nat. Civ._,
tom. ii., p. 224.
[V-15] _Torquemada_, _Monarq. Ind._, tom. i., pp. 46-7;
_Ixtlilxochitl_, in _Kingsborough_, vol. ix., pp. 339-40; _Veytia_,
_Hist. Ant. Mej._, tom. ii., p. 28; _Boturini_, in _Doc. Hist. Mex._,
série iii., tom. iv., p. 232; _Vetancvrt_, _Teatro Mex._, pt ii., p.
14.
[V-16] _Brasseur de Bourbourg_, _Hist. Nat. Civ._, tom. ii., pp.
224-6.
[V-17] 'Porque fué una de las que ménos padecieron en el estrago
pasado.' _Veytia_, _Hist. Ant. Mej._, tom. ii., p. 18.
[V-18] Torquemada, _Monarq. Ind._, tom. i., p. 44, spells this ruler's
name Ecitin, which, says Brasseur, 'signifie les trois lièvres, de
_Citli_, qui est le singulier, au pluriel _Citin_. S'agit-il ici d'un
seul individu ou de trois du nom de _Citin_, cité ailleurs comme celui
d'une famille célèbre de laquelle prétendaient descendre les
Alcohuas?' _Hist. Nat. Civ._, tom. ii., p. 209.
[V-19] 'Descendants du grand Nauhyotl.' _Id._
[V-20] Spelled Acxopal by Brasseur.
[V-21] _Veytia_, _Hist. Ant. Mej._, tom. ii., pp. 17-19;
_Ixtlilxochitl_, in _Kingsborough_, vol. ix., pp. 333-4, 339;
_Carbajal Espinosa_, _Hist. Mex._, tom. i., pp. 226-8.
[V-22] 'Repartióla por las sinosidades, cuevas, y rincones de las
serranias, proporcionándola á la caza.' _Granados y Galvez_, _Tardes
Amer._, p. 18; _Brasseur de Bourbourg_, _Hist. Nat. Civ._, tom. ii.,
pp. 232-3.
[V-23] For names of places peopled by the Chichimecs see
_Ixtlilxochitl_, in _Kingsborough_, vol. ix., pp. 460, 209. See also
_Id._, pp. 339, 395, 451; _Torquemada_, _Monarq. Ind._, tom. i., p.
45; _Clavigero_, _Storia Ant. del Messico_, tom. i., p. 134; _Veytia_,
_Hist. Ant. Mej._, tom. ii., pp. 14-5; _Vetancvrt_, _Teatro Mex._, pt
ii., pp. 12-13.
[V-24] To which his descendants added Huactlatohuani, 'lord of the
world.' _Ixtlilxochitl_, in _Kingsborough_, vol. ix., p. 451.
[V-25] The inhabitants of this province were known as Culhuas, and are
not to be confounded with the Acolhuas, notwithstanding many of the
old writers make no distinction between the two peoples.
[V-26] Veytia writes the names of those who governed at Culhuacan;
Xiuhtemoc, with his wife Ozolaxochitl, and son Nauhyotl; and
Catauhtlix with his wife Ixmixuch and son Acxocuauh. _Hist. Ant.
Mej._, tom. ii., p. 18. Torquemada writes them respectively:
Xiuhthemal, Oceloxroch, Coyol; Cocauhtli, Yhuixoch, Acxoquauh.
_Monarq. Ind._, tom. i., p. 45. Boturini writes: Xiuchtimatl,
Oceloxochitl, Coyotl; Cocoahtli, Yhyozochtl, Acxoquauhtli. _Doc. Hist.
Mex._, série iii., tom. iv., p. 232; _Ixtlilxochitl_, in
_Kingsborough_, vol. ix., p. 333.
[V-27] Brasseur states that according to the _Codex Chimalpopoca_,
Acxoquauh was a younger brother of Nauhyotl; we have already seen this
prince spoken of, however, as the son of Cocauhtli, Xiuhtemoc's
associate; see note 26. Nonohualcatl, says Brasseur, was, without
doubt, Nauhyotl's eldest son. 'C'est ce qui parait d'après la manière
dont ce prince succéda au trône après Huetzin, avant Achitometl ou
Ameyal.' _Hist. Nat. Civ._, tom. ii., p. 222.
[V-28] Brasseur, _Hist. Nat. Civ._, tom. ii., p. 222, objecting to the
term usurpation in this connection, writes: 'La loi toltèque excluait
du sang suprême tout prince qui se montrait d'avance incapable de
l'occuper. C'était probablement le cas où se trouvait Pochotl.
Ixtlilxochitl et Veytia, qui accusent Nauhyotl d'usurpation, avaient
oublié ou ignoraient la loi de succession toltèque.' It is not
probable, however, that Topiltzin either forgot or was ignorant of the
Toltec law of succession, when he directed that his son should be
associated with Xiuhtemoc when he came of suitable age.
[V-29] Also called Texochipantzin. Torquemada gives the name of
Pochotl's wife Huitzitzilin, though whether he refers to the same lady
is not certain. _Monarq. Ind._, tom. i., p. 56.
[V-30] _Veytia_, _Hist. Ant. Mej._, tom. ii., pp. 18-23;
_Ixtlilxochitl_, in _Kingsborough's Mex. Antiq._, vol. ix., p. 340;
_Brasseur de Bourbourg_, _Hist. Nat. Civ._, tom. ii., pp. 220-3.
[V-31] The reader will recollect that Veytia affirms that Topiltzin
Acxitl fled to his relative Acauhtzin, brother of Xolotl I., and ceded
to him his right to Anáhuac.
[V-32] According to Brasseur, these or similar overtures occurred in
the reign of Xolotl I. Xolotl's ambassadors, he says, 'avaient plus
d'une fois pressenti Xiuhtemal à ce sujet, mais celui-ci, trop prudent
et trop ami de sa patrie, appréhendant, sans doute, de rendre les
Chichimèques trop puissants, avait constamment éludé ses propositions
en faisant valoir les droits de Pochotl, à qui seul il appartiendrait
de prendre une décision dans cette matière délicate, une fois qu'il
aurait été mis en possession du trône.' _Hist. Nat. Civ._, tom. ii.,
p. 221.
[V-33] Year 1141. _Veytia_, _Hist. Ant. Mej._, tom. ii., pp. 30-5. 984
to 1190. _Ixtlilxochitl_, in _Kingsborough's Mex. Antiq._, vol. ix.,
pp. 209, 342-3, 396, 452.
[V-34] _Veytia_, _Hist. Ant. Mej._, tom. ii., pp. 45-6. According to
Brasseur, _Hist. Nat. Civ._, tom. ii., p. 238, this lady was the
eldest daughter of Pochotl. Tzontecoma was one of the Acolhua chiefs,
as will be seen hereafter.
[V-35] The meaning of this request is not clear. It was probably
Xolotl's design to get Huetzin into Culhuacan under pretense of
learning the art of government--though it would seem he might have
done this at his father's court--and then by some strategem place him
upon the throne.
[V-36] _Torquemada_, _Monarq. Ind._, tom. i., pp. 57-8. Ixtlilxochitl
and Veytia give a different version of this affair of Huetzin's.
Itzmitl, or Ixmitl, (known also as Tlacoxin, or Tlacoxinqui) proceeded
to Tezcuco, where Xolotl was superintending the construction of a
palace and garden, and reminded him of a promise of extra favors made
to Tzontecoma, by way of compensation for the inferior bride which he
had been compelled to accept; whereupon Xolotl gave the lordship of
Tepetlaoztoc to his son Huetzin. This occurred, says Veytia, in 1207,
more than 60 years after the Culhuacan war. _Hist. Ant. Mej._, tom.
ii., pp. 46-7; _Kingsborough's Mex. Antiq._, vol. ix., pp. 341-2.
[V-37] See note 34.
[V-38] _Brasseur_, _Hist. Nat. Civ._, tom. ii., pp. 237-51.
[V-39] Aztlan 'était située au nord-ouest de la Californie.... C'est
l'opinion d'un grand nombre d'écrivains. M. Aubin croit qu'ils
habitaient la péninsule appelée aujourd'hui la basse Californie, et
que là était Aztlan.' _Brasseur de Bourbourg_, _Hist. Nat. Civ._, tom.
ii., p. 292. Humboldt, _Vues_, tom. ii., p. 179, and _Essai Pol._,
tom. i., p. 53, followed by Gondra, in _Prescott_, _Hist. Conq. Mex._,
tom. iii., pp. 6-7, 19, place Aztlan north of 42° N. lat.; Foster,
_Pre-Hist. Races_, pp. 340-1, Vetancvrt, _Teatro Mex._, pt ii., p. 20,
refer to the account of Oñate's explorations in New Mexico, _Doc.
Hist. Mex._, série iii., tom. iv., pp. 32, 47-8, 111-12, 625, and
point to the golden Copalla, with its rumored Aztec-speaking people.
See also, _Acosta_, _Hist. de las Ynd._, p. 454; _Schoolcraft's
Arch._, vol. i., p. 68; _Ruxton_, in _Nouvelles Annales des Voy._,
1850, tom. cxxvi., pp. 40-9. Fontaine, _How the World was Peopled_,
pp. 149-50, reminds us that the Aztec _tl_ sound is found in the N.W.,
and considers the mounds in the N.E. to be evidences of Aztec
wanderings. _Pickering's Races_, in _U. S. Ex. Ex._, vol. ix., p. 41;
_Chevalier_, _Mexique_, pp. 54-5. Prichard, _Nat. Hist. Man_, vol.
ii., pp. 514-16, regards the Moquis in Arizona as the most northern
Aztec remnants. Clavigero, _Storia Ant. del Messico_, tom. i., pp.
156-9, places Aztlan north of the Colorado River, in accordance with
some maps of the 16th century, and regards this stream as the water
said to have been crossed on the migration, whilst Boturini, _Idea_,
pp. 126-8, holds this to be the Gulf of California. _Carbajal
Espinosa_, _Hist. Mex._, tom. i., pp. 298, 301; _Rios_, _Compend.
Hist. Mex._, p. 11. Orozco y Berra, _Geografía_, pp. 79-82, 134-5,
traces Nahuatlaca routes north of Mexico. Duran, _Hist. Indias_, MS.,
tom. i., cap. 1, looks to Florida for the ancient home. Mendieta,
_Hist. Ecles._, p. 144, identifies Aztlan with the later Chicomoztoc,
like Acosta and Duran, but locates it in the Jalisco region.
_Bartlett's Pers. Nar._, vol. ii., p. 283. Veytia, _Hist. Ant. Mej._,
tom. ii., p. 91, ventures a little farther north, to Sonora; see also,
_Möllhausen_, _Reisen_, tom. ii., pp. 143-55. Gallatin, in _Amer.
Ethno. Soc., Transact._, vol. i., p. 128, considers Aztlan to have
been near Culiacan, but on p. 205, and in _Nouvelles Annales des
Voy._, 1851, tom. cxxxi., p. 281, he seems to favor the more direct
north. Cabrera, _Teatro_, pp. 94-6, advances some argument for its
location in Chiapas. See also, _Müller_, _Amerikanische Urreligionen_,
pp. 532-3. Waldeck, _Voy. Pitt._, p. 45, remarks that the palm-tree on
the migration-map indicates a southern origin, but Gondra, in
_Prescott_, _Hist. Conq. Mex._, tom. iii., p. 7, considers that this
may be a thoughtless insertion of the painter. See remarks on pp.
216-18 of this volume, and pp. 681-4, 788-9 of vol. iv. For further
remarks on position of Aztlan, and origin of Nahuatlacas, see:
_Norman's Rambles in Yuc._, pp. 266-7; _Buschmann_, _Ortsnamen_, p.
54, et seq., _Brasseur de Bourbourg_, _Esquisses_, pp. 27-8; _Id._,
_Hist. Nat. Civ._, tom. ii., pp. 191-7; _Id._, _Popol Vuh_, pp.
clxxxiii.-cxcvi.; _Bradford's Amer. Antiq._, pp. 203-5; _Ruxton's
Adven. Mex._, pp. 192-4; _Cremony's Apaches_, pp. 89-90; _Gregg's Com.
Prairies_, vol. i., p. 284; _Smith's Human Species_, pp. 252-3;
_Mayer's Mex. Aztec, etc._, vol. ii., p. 323.
[V-40] Gallatin, _Amer. Ethno. Soc._, _Transact._, vol. i., p. 205,
thinks they may have had a share in the dismemberment of the Toltec
empire, or may have seized the opportunity offered by the Toltec
emigration to enter into the deserted lands. Cabrera states that they
were driven from Aztlan. _Teatro_, p. 94.
[V-41] Duran gives the description of Aztlan given by Cueuhcoatl to
Montezuma the elder: 'Nuestros Padres moraron en equel felice y
dichoso Lugar que llamáron Aztlán, que quiere decir "Blancura." En
este Lugar hay un gran Cerro en medio del agua, que llamaban
Culhuacan, por que tiene la punta algo retuerta hácia abajo, y à esta
causa se llama Culhuacan, que quiere decir "Cerro tuerto." En este
Cerro habia unas bocas ó cuebas ó concavidados donde habitáron
nuestros Padres y Abuelos por muchos años: alli tubiéron mucho
descanso debajo de este Nombre Mexitin y Azteca: alli gozaban de mucho
cantidad de Patos, de todo género de gazzas; de cuerbos marinos, y
Gallinas de agua, y de Gallaretas; gozaban del canto y melodia de los
Pájaros de las cabezas coloradas y amarillas; gozáron de muchas
diferencias de grandes y hermosos Pescados; gozáron de gran frescura
de arboledas, que habia por aquellas riberas, y de Fuentes cercadas de
sauces y de Sabinas y de Alisos grandes y hermosos; andaban en canoas,
y hacian camellones en que sembraban maiz, chile, tomates, huauhtli,
frisoles, y de todo genero de semillas de las que comemos,' &c. _Hist.
Indias_, MS., tom. i., cap. 27.
[V-42] _Ramirez_, in _García y Cubas_, _Atlas_; _Torquemada_, _Monarq.
Ind._, tom., i., p. 78; _Clavigero_, _Storia Ant. del Messico_, tom.
i., pp. 157-8; _Vetancvrt_, _Teatro Mex._, pt ii., p. 17; _Villa-Señor
y Sanchez_, _Theatro_, tom. i., p. 3; _Carbajal Espinosa_, _Hist.
Mex._, tom. i., pp. 399-300. The date of the departure is shown by the
maps to be Ce Tecpatl, which is calculated by Chimalpain, Gallatin,
Gama, and Veytia to be 1064, based on the hypothesis that the
adjustment of the calendar in the year Ce Tochtli, which took place
during the journey, corresponds to 1090. Brasseur would probably
assign a later date, since he writes: 'Les annales mexicaines nous
montrent généralement les premières tribus de cette nation à Aztlan en
l'an 1 Tecpatl, 1064.' _Hist. Nat. Civ._, tom. ii., p. 292.
[V-43] Chicomoztoc is placed by Clavigero about twenty miles south of
Zacatecas, but is regarded by Duran, Acosta, and others, as identical
with, or within the region of Aztlan. According to Brasseur, _Hist.
Nat. Civ._, tom. ii., p. 293, they arrived here 1116. Hellwald, in
_Smithsonian Rept._, 1866, p. 339, agrees with this date, by making
them arrive at Chicomoztoc 26 years after their departure from Aztlan,
which, he says, took place in 1090. Veytia, _Hist. Ant. Mej._, tom.
ii., p. 92, states that they arrived 104 years after their departure.
On the Gemelli map Oztotlan, 'place of grottoes,' is given as a place
where they halted for a long time, from 160 to 200 years after leaving
Aztlan, and may be the same as Chicomoztoc. Camargo, in _Nouvelles
Annales des Voy._, 1843, tom. xcviii., p. 145, says that the
Tlascaltecs, who according to most authors were one of the Nahuatlaca
tribes, arrived at Chicomoztoc in the year 5 Tochtli.
[V-44] See _Acosta_, _Hist. de las Ynd._, pp. 455-6; _Herrera_, _Hist.
Gen._, dec. ii., lib. ii., cap. x.; _Duran_, _Hist. Indias_, MS., tom.
i., cap. 2; _Carbajal Espinosa_, _Hist. Mex._, tom. i., pp. 228, 247;
_Clavigero_, _Storia Ant. del Messico_, tom. i., p. 151; _Hellwald_,
in _Smithsonian Rept._, 1866, p. 339; _Torquemada_, _Monarq. Ind._,
tom. i., p. 78; _Vetancvrt_, _Teatro Mex._, pt ii., p. 17;
_Motolinia_, _Hist. Indios_, in _Icazbalceta_, _Col. de Doc._, tom.
i., pp. 7-9; _Pimentel_, _Cuadro_, tom. i., p. 154; _Purchas his
Pilgrimes,_ vol. v., p. 864; _Gemelli Careri_, in _Churchill's Col.
Voyages_, vol. iv., p. 482; _Humboldt_, _Vues_, tom. ii., pp. 168-71;
_Sahagun_, _Hist. Gen._, tom. iii., lib. x., p. 145. Brasseur de
Bourbourg gives as the tribes that left Aztlan: the Huexotzincas,
Chalcas, Xochimilcas, Quitlahuacas, Malinalcas, Chichimecas,
Tépanecas, and Matlaltzincas. _Hist. Nat. Civ._, tom. ii., p. 292.
[V-45] _Monarq. Ind._, tom. i., pp. 78-9; _Hist. de las Ynd._, p. 454;
_Hist. Indias_, MS., tom. i., cap. 2. On Boturini's map the
hieroglyphs of the eight tribes are seen at Chicomoztoc for the last
time; the priests or leaders of the Aztecs alone pursue the remainder
of the course. As the Aztec hieroglyph does not appear to be included
among these eight, it might be assumed that the Aztecs were composed
of certain families belonging to one or more of the eight tribes, but
this does not appear to be the view taken by the authorities. Gondra,
in _Prescott_, _Hist. Conq. Mex._, tom. iii., pp. 25-6, remarks that
the map indicates a consultation of six of the families with their
god, and the departure of two. The non-recurrence of the tribal
hieroglyphs he explains by saying that the families are henceforth
designated only by the chiefs who lead them. This map cannot, however,
be expected to be more accurate than the sources from which
Torquemada, Acosta, and others, derived their information.
[V-46] Quetzalin according to Brasseur, who adds: 'Dans le texte, il y
a _Huetzalin_, ce qui est probablement une faute du copiste.' _Hist.
Nat. Civ._, tom. ii., p. 263. This chief may possibly be the same as
Huitziton.
[V-47] Veytia names this chief Xochimilco, which Brasseur says 'ne
peut être qu'une erreur.' _Id._, p. 264.
[V-48] _Id._ Ixtlilxochitl and Veytia place the arrival of the
Xochimilcas in Tlotzin's reign. _Kingsborough's Mex. Antiq._, vol.
ix., p. 458; _Hist. Ant. Mej._, tom. ii., p. 88. Duran says they were
the first to leave Chicomoztoc, and the third to arrive in Anáhuac.
This writer gives a number of places founded by them besides
Xochimilco. _Hist. Indias_, MS., tom. i., cap. 2., 13. Acosta says
they were the first to arrive. _Hist. de las Ynd._, p. 488.
[V-49] _Veytia_, _Hist. Ant. Mej._, tom. ii., pp. 88-9;
_Ixtlilxochitl_, in _Kingsborough's Mex. Antiq._, vol. ix., p. 458;
_Brasseur de Bourbourg_, _Hist. Nat. Civ._, tom. ii., pp. 263-4.
[V-50] Now Cuernavaca.
[V-51] _Orozco y Berra_, _Geografía_, pp. 92-3, 141-3.
[V-52] Many writers who do not directly connect the Acolhuas with the
Nahuatlacas, assert that they came from the same region, and were of
the same race. Clavigero places the ancient home in Teoacolhuacan,
near Amaquemecan. Veytia considers them to be the descendants of
Toltec colonists who were settled along the Pacific coast.
Ixtlilxochitl affirms that they were neighbors of the Huehue Tlapallan
Toltecs and of Chichimec stock.
[V-53] '_Citin_, pluriel de _Citli_, lièvre, nom apparemment d'une
tribu du Nord, comme les Pied-Noir, les Serpents, etc.' _Brasseur de
Bourbourg_, _Hist. Nat. Civ._, tom. ii., p. 232. Rios, _Compend. Hist.
Mex._, p. 7, says they derived their origin from the family of Citin
or Ulcua. Motolinia says of the Acolhuas: 'Este nombre los quedó de un
valiente capitan que tuvieron ... Acoli, que así se llama aquel hueso
que vá desde el codo hasta el hombro, y del mismo hueso llaman al
hombro Acoli.' He was very brave, and taller than other men. _Hist.
Indios_, in _Icazbalceta_, _Col. de Doc._, tom. i., p. 11. Gomara,
_Conq. Mex._, fol. 301, says that they claimed descent from a valiant
chief named Chichimecatlh, who once tied a strap round the arm of
Quetzalcoatl, near the shoulder. This was regarded as a great feat,
for it was said that he that could bind a god could bind all men.
[V-54] Brasseur de Bourbourg says nothing about the Otomís coming in
with the Acolhuas and Tepanecs at this time.
[V-55] This, according to Torquemada, _Monarq. Ind._, tom. i., pp.
51-4, who is followed by Brasseur, was Coatetl, daughter of
Chalchiuhtlatonac, or Chalchiuhtlanetzin, lord of Chalco, who, says
Brasseur, _Hist. Nat. Civ._, tom. ii., p. 231, 'paraît avoir été l'un
des frères ou des fils de Nauhyotl II.' According to other authors,
Tzontecoma's bride was named Cihuatetzin, and her father was a Toltec,
lord of Tlalmanalco. Each of these names is spelled in a great variety
of ways. See _Ixtlilxochitl_, in _Kingsborough's Mex. Antiq._, vol.
ix., pp. 341, 395, 452; _Veytia_, _Hist. Ant. Mej._, tom. ii., pp.
39-43; _Clavigero_, _Storia Ant. del Messico_, tom. i., pp. 136-7;
_Granados y Galvez_, _Tardes Amer._, pp. 19, 142-3; _Müller_,
_Reisen_, tom. iii., p. 45; _Müller_, _Amerikanische Urreligionen_, p.
526; _Villa-Señor y Sanchez_, _Theatro_, tom. i., p. 3; _Orozco y
Berra_, _Geografía_, p. 92.
[V-56] _Brasseur de Bourbourg_, _Hist. Nat. Civ._, tom. ii., pp.
233-4.
[V-57] _Brasseur de Bourbourg_, _Hist. Nat. Civ._, tom. ii., pp.
236-7.
[V-58] See note 27.
[V-59] Named also Huetzin, says Brasseur.
[V-60] Veytia, _Hist. Ant. Mej._, tom. ii., p. 47, writes the names
Tlotzin Pocothl, Toxtequihuatzin, and Atencatzin. Ixtlilxochitl, in
_Kingsborough's Mex. Antiq._, vol. ix., p. 210, Tlotzinpochotl,
Huixaquentochintecuhtli, Coxanatzin Atencatl; on p. 342 he differs in
the following: Toltzin, Toxtequihuatzin, Atencatzin Apotzoetzin; on p.
395, Tloxtequihuatzin; on p. 461, Tlotzinpochotl, Atzotgocoltzin,
Totzin. _Torquemada_, _Monarq. Ind._, tom. i., p. 62, Tlotzin,
Quauhtequihua, or Tochintecuhtli, Popozoc. _Clavigero_, _Storia Ant.
del Messico_, tom. i., p. 141, Apopozoc. Nopaltzin had also another
son, named Tenancacaltzin, who in later years gave much trouble to the
emperor Quinantzin, and who, according to the Spanish authorities, was
a bastard. Brasseur, however, finds reason to believe that this prince
was Nopaltzin's legitimate son by a former marriage. _Hist. Nat.
Civ._, tom. ii., p. 254.
[V-61] _Ixtlilxochitl_, in _Kingsborough's Mex. Antiq._, vol. ix., pp.
342, 395, 452; _Veytia_, _Hist. Ant. Mej._, tom. ii., pp. 47-9;
_Torquemada_, _Monarq. Ind._, tom. i., p. 63; _Clavigero_, _Storia
Ant. del Messico_, tom. i., p. 141.
[V-62] Commenting upon the statement of Ixtlilxochitl, _Hist. Chich._,
in _Kingsborough's Mex. Antiq._, vol. ix., p. 211, that Xolotl
abandoned to Tlotzin not only the revenues of the province of Chalco,
but also of several other provinces as far as Mizteca, Brasseur
writes: 'Il y a évidemment exagération; jamais les armes de Xolotl
n'allèrent aussi loin, et il est douteux même que les provinces
renfermées dans la vallée lui fussent toutes tributaires.' _Hist. Nat.
Civ._, tom. ii., p. 258.
[V-63] _Brasseur de Bourbourg_, _Hist. Nat. Civ._, tom. ii., p. 262.
[V-64] See _Id._, tom. ii., pp. 266-71.
[V-65] _Torquemada_, _Monarq. Ind._, tom. i., pp. 59-60;
_Ixtlilxochitl_, in _Kingsborough's Mex. Antiq._, vol. ix., p. 343;
_Clavigero_, _Storia Ant. del Messico_, tom. i., pp. 138-9.
[V-66] See _Brasseur_, _Hist. Nat. Civ._, tom. ii., p. 265. This
writer and Torquemada are the only authorities who use the name Ameyal
at any time.
[V-67] See note 27.
[V-68] Brasseur, _Hist. Nat. Civ._, tom. ii., p. 272, writes: 'C'était
probablement sur la promesse de recevoir la main de sa (Achitometl's)
fille que Huetzin avait renoncé au trône de Culhuacan.'
[V-69] Spelt also Yanex, Yacazozolotl, Yacatzotzoloc, and
Ixcazozolot.
[V-70] Among these were Ocotox, or Acotoch, and Coacuech, who,
according to _Ixtlilxochitl_, in _Kingsborough's Mex. Antiq._, vol.
ix., p. 212, were disaffected towards the empire because agriculture
had been forced upon them and tribute exacted in field produce;
Quauhtla, lord of Oztoticpac, and Tochin Tecuhtli, lord of Coyuhuacan,
who had fallen into disgrace in the following manner: Chiconquauhtli,
Xolotl's son-in-law, died suddenly, and was buried without notice
being sent to the emperor. Xolotl thereupon dispatched Tochin
Tecuhtli, to offer condolence to the widow, his daughter, and to
appoint Omicxipan, a noted noble of that province, governor. Tochin
Tecuhtli did as he was ordered, but instead of returning to Xolotl
with a report of his mission, he went to Huetzin of Coatlichan. To
punish this disrespect, or treason, as Torquemada calls it, Xolotl
deprived Tochin Tecuhtli of his lordship of Coyuhuacan and exiled him
to Tepetlaoztoc. _Torquemada_, _Monarq. Ind._, tom. i., pp. 58, 65;
_Clavigero_, _Storia Ant. del Messico_, tom. i., p. 142; _Vetancvrt_,
_Teatro Mex._, pt ii., p. 15; _Brasseur_, _Hist. Nat. Civ._, tom. ii.,
pp. 267-9.
[V-71] This is the account given by Brasseur, _Hist. Nat. Civ._, tom.
ii., p. 274. Most writers do not mention this expedition to
Culhuacan.
[V-72] See note 70.
[V-73] Ixtlilxochitl, p. 212, says he fled toward Pánuco, and
afterwards, p. 343, states that he was pardoned and re-instated.
Torquemada, _Monarq. Ind._, tom. i., p. 65, affirms that the rebel
chief was slain in battle, and that his allies fled to Huexotzinco,
where they died in misery. Clavigero, _Storia Ant. del Messico_, tom.
i., pp. 142-3, follows Torquemada. We must accept the former version,
however, as Yacanex subsequently re-appears upon the scene.
[V-74] _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. ii., p. 277.
[V-75] 'Para que en ella y su contorno mandase en calidad de
soberano.' _Veytia_, tom. ii., p. 56. He could scarcely have been sole
lord of Tezcuco, for Veytia himself says that Tlotzin reigned there.
[V-76] _Ixtlilxochitl_, pp. 212, 396-7; _Veytia_, tom. ii., pp. 50-8;
_Torquemada_, tom. i., p. 65; _Sahagun_, tom. ii., lib. viii., p. 278;
_Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. ii., pp. 271-7.
[V-77] _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. ii., p. 277.
[V-78] The exact year in which Xolotl II. died is uncertain. Brasseur,
whose chronology I have followed, does not give the date, though he
says it occurred some years after the death of Huetzin, which occurred
in 1154. Xolotl, says this author, at his death, 'ne pouvait guère
avoir plus de cent ou cent dix ans, et, en calculant les années de son
règne, à commencer de son arrivée dans l'Anahuac, il aurait pu durer
tout au plus de soixante à soixante-cinq ans.' _Hist._, tom. ii., pp.
277-8. Veytia, tom. ii., p. 69, writes that Xolotl died in 1232.
Torquemada, tom. i., p. 60, says that he was nearly 200 years of age
when he died. Ixtlilxochitl, pp. 212, 343, 397, 452, says, 117 years
after his departure from Amaquemecan, in the 112th year of his reign
in Anahuac, and gives, as usual, several dates for Xolotl's death,
namely: 1075, 1127, 1074, and 1121. _Rios_, _Compend. Hist. Mex._, p.
7, says that he died at the age of 160, after a reign of 99 years.
[V-79] Torquemada, tom. i., pp. 61-2, gives the speeches delivered on
the occasion.
[V-80] _Torquemada_, tom. i., p. 66; _Ixtlilxochitl_, pp. 212-13;
_Clavigero_, tom. i., pp. 140-2; _Veytia_, tom. ii., pp. 71-3, 78;
_Rios_, _Compend. Hist. Mex._, p. 8; _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. ii.,
pp. 281-8.
[V-81] We have seen that according to the account given by Veytia, and
others, of the events which led to the first trouble between the
Chichimecs and the people of Culhuacan, Achitometl succeeded to the
throne immediately after the death of Nauhyotl, no mention being made
of the reigns of Huetzin or Nonohualcatl. See pp. 303-4.
CHAPTER VI.
THE CHICHIMEC PERIOD.--CONTINUED.
Migration of the Aztecs -- Nations of Anáhuac at Beginning of
the Thirteenth Century -- The Aztecs submit to the Tepanecs
-- Reign of the Emperor Tlotzin -- Quinantzin, King of
Tezcuco and Chichimec Emperor -- Transfer of the Capital --
Tenancacaltzin usurps the Imperial Throne at Tenayocan -- The
Usurper defeated by Tepanecs and Mexicans -- Acolnahuacatl
proclaimed Emperor -- Quinantzin's Victories -- Battle at
Poyauhtlan -- Quinantzin again Emperor -- Toltec Institutions
at Tezcuco -- Events at Culhuacan -- Mexicans driven from
Chapultepec -- Alliance between Mexicans and Culhuas --
Religious Strife -- Foundation of Mexico -- Reign of the
Emperor Techotl -- Political Changes -- Ruin of the Culhua
Power -- Tezozomoc, King of Azcapuzalco -- Separation of
Mexicans and Tlatelulcas -- Acamapichtli II., King of Mexico
-- Quaquauhpitzahuac, King of Tlatelulco.
The last of the so-called foreign tribes that came into notice in
Anáhuac, from out the confusion that followed the downfall of the
Toltecs, was the Aztec, or Mexican, which settled at Chapultepec
in the last years of the twelfth century.[VI-1] According to their
traditions they set out on their migration from Aztlan together
with the Nahuatlaca tribes, whose arrival has already been noticed;
but were left behind by those tribes at Chicomoztoc, one of their
first stopping-places. The migration of the Aztecs from Chicomoztoc
is described much more fully than that of the tribes that preceded
them; but in the details of this journey, so far as dates, names, and
events are concerned, the traditions are inextricably confused. I have
already expressed my opinion that some of these traditions may refer
very vaguely to the pre-Toltec events in Nahua history, but that they
chiefly refer to the movements of the Nahua, or Chichimec, tribes which
occupied the Toltec provinces during the continuance of the empire,
and which after a long struggle became powerful in and about the
Valley of Mexico. We have no means of determining in a manner at all
satisfactory whether Aztlan and Chicomoztoc were in Central America or
in the region of Zacatecas and Jalisco; nor indeed of proving that they
were not in Alaska, New Mexico, or on the Mississippi, although there
is absolutely no evidence in favor of the latter locations; but we
know at least that all the halting-places of the migrating tribes after
Chicomoztoc were in the immediate vicinity of Anáhuac. The record as a
whole is exactly what might be expected, were the traditions of half
a dozen kindred bands respecting their wanderings about the central
plateau, and efforts to establish themselves in permanent homes, united
in one consecutive narrative; and I have little doubt that such was
substantially the process by which the Spanish version of the Aztec
migration was formed. Whatever the cause of the confusion that reigns
in that version, it is utterly useless to attempt its clearing-up;
and I dispose of the whole matter by simply presenting in a note the
dates and successive halting-places attributed to this migration by the
principal authorities; the opinions of these authorities respecting the
location of Aztlan and Chicomoztoc have been previously given.[VI-2]
[Sidenote: THE AZTEC MIGRATION.]
Some of the events and circumstances connected with the migration,
however, must be noticed, although there is little agreement as to the
place or date of their occurrence. At Aztlan the Aztecs are said to
have crossed each year a great river or channel to Teo-Culhuacan, to
make sacrifices in honor of the god Tetzauh. Prompted by the cry of a
bird, as has already been related, they left their home under command
of Huitziton, or Huitzilopochtli, probably identical with Mecitl, or
Mexi, whence was derived their name of Mexicas, or Mexicans. They seem
to have left Aztlan about 1090, and to have settled in Chicomoztoc,
after several halts, in 1116.[VI-3] Chicomoztoc, to which Brasseur adds
the name Quinehuayan, was also on the bank of a river, and the Aztecs
continued the profession of boatmen which they had practiced at Aztlan,
being subject to a tyrannical monarch to whom the name of Montezuma
is applied by some of the traditions. After the other Nahuatlaca
tribes had separated themselves from the Aztecs by divine command, the
leader, or high-priest, or god,--Huitzilopochtli--for the exact epoch
of his death and deification it is impossible to determine--informed
the latter that he had selected them as his peculiar people, for whom
he destined a glorious future. He ordered them to abandon the name
of Aztecs and adopt that of Mexicas, and to wear upon their forehead
and ears a patch of gum and feathers, as a distinguishing mark,
presenting them at the same time with arrows and a net as insignia.[VI-4]
This separation at Chicomoztoc, or the Seven Caves, presents strong
analogies to that which took place in Tulan Zuiva; it is not impossible
that the events related are identical, the earlier portions of this
tradition referring vaguely back to the primitive epochs of Nahua
history, while the later portions relate the events which followed the
Toltec destruction. After the separation, and while the Aztecs were yet
at Chicomoztoc,[VI-5] an event occurred to which is traditionally referred
the origin of the differences that in later years divided this people
into two rival parties, the Mexicans and Tlatelulcas. Two small bundles
mysteriously appeared among them one day when all were assembled; the
first opened contained an emerald of extraordinary size and beauty,
for the possession of which a quarrel ensued. The second bundle proved
to contain nothing more attractive than a few common sticks, and the
party into whose possession it fell deemed themselves most unfortunate,
until Huitziton made known to them a novel process of producing fire
by rubbing two sticks together.[VI-6] According to Brasseur's authorities
one of the princes of Chicomoztoc, named Chalchiuh Tlatonac, was
induced to depart with the Aztecs, assuming a rank second only to that
of the high-priest Huitziton. It is also claimed that certain Toltec
nobles with their followers, who had been driven from Chapultepec by
the Chichimecs, joined their fortunes with those of the Aztecs at an
early period of their migration, perhaps, however, before they left
Aztlan.[VI-7]
[Sidenote: DEATH OF HUITZITON.]
After leaving Chicomoztoc, and while in Michoacan according to most
authorities, although by some of them Huitzilopochtli is spoken of as
a god long before, the aged high-priest Huitziton died or disappeared
suddenly during the night. It is hinted that he was foully disposed of
by the priesthood, through jealousy of his popularity and power; but
whether responsible or not for his death, the priests resolved to take
advantage of it to advance their own interests. Consequently the next
morning a report was circulated that Huitziton had been called to take
his place among the gods with the great Tetzauh, or Tezcatlipoca, who
on his arrival had addressed to him the following craftily prepared
speech: "Welcome brave warrior, and thanks for having so well served
me and governed my people. It is time that thou take thy rest among
the gods; return, then, to thy sons the priests and tell them not to be
afflicted at thy absence; for although they may no longer behold thee,
thou wilt not cease to be in their midst to guide and rule them from
on high. For I will cause thy flesh to be consumed, that thy skull and
bones may remain to thy sons as a consolation, that they may consult
thee respecting the routes they have to follow and in all the affairs
of government, and that thou mayest direct them and show unto them
the land which I have chosen for them, where they will have a long and
prosperous empire." Brasseur adds to the speech, "where they shall find
a nopal growing alone on a rock in the midst of the waters, and on this
nopal an eagle holding a serpent in his claws, there they are to halt,
there will be the seat of their empire, there will my temple be built,"
although this is not given by Veytia or Torquemada, the authorities
referred to by the abbé. The god also gave directions that the bones
of Huitzilopochtli should be carried in an urn by the priests on
their migration, or according to some authorities that an idol should
be made and carried in an ark on the shoulders of four priests. The
four priests were of course designated for the important position of
_teomama_, or 'god-bearers,' who were to constitute the medium through
which the idol should make known his commands to the people. The people
dared make no opposition to the will of their god, and the plans of the
crafty priests were most successfully carried out.
But an episode that is related of this period, indicates that the plots
of the priests were perfectly comprehended by at least one person.
This was Malinalxochitl, the sister, friend, or mistress of Huitziton,
a brave princess who rendered great aid to the high-priest against
the machinations of his foes. She was charged, however, probably by
the hostile priests, with the possession of the black art. She could
kill with a glance, turn the course of rivers, and transform herself
into any form at will. After the death of Huitziton the priests, whose
tricks she very likely tried to expose, resorted to their new divinity
to rid themselves of Malinalxochitl. The idol from its ark was made to
issue an order that the sorceress should be abandoned while asleep.
With her followers she went to Mt Texcaltepec, where she afterwards
founded the town of Malinalco, and bore a son named Copil, or Cohuitl,
to whom she entrusted her revenge on the Mexicans.[VI-8]
While they were yet in Michoacan, on the banks of Lake Patzcuaro, a
trouble is said to have occurred which resulted in the separation of
the Tarascos from the Aztecs, and their settlement in this region. The
tale, to which very little importance is to be attached, from the fact
that the Tarascan language was different from the Aztec, is as follows:
A number of men and women were bathing together, when the rest, at
the instigation of the priests, took their clothing and departed. The
bathers were obliged to improvise a dress, which pleased them so much
that they retained it ever after in preference to the maxtli; but they
never forgave the Aztecs, resolved to remain where they were, and even
changed their language that they might have nothing in common with
that people. Camargo's version is that in crossing a river a part of
the travelers used their maxtlis to fasten together their rafts, and
were forced to borrow the women's huipiles to cover their nakedness;
and Veytia adds that so imperfectly did these garments perform their
office that the rest of the tribe, shocked at the appearance of their
companions, abandoned them in disgust, calling them Tarascos from a
circumstance that has been already given.[VI-9]
[Sidenote: AZTECS AT TOLLAN AND ZUMPANGO.]
Quauhtlequetzqui seems to have been the priest who of the four assumed
the highest rank after the death of Huitziton; and coming under his
command or that of their idol through him expressed, to Coatepec in the
vicinity of Tollan, the Mexicans, at the order of their god, stopped
the current of the river so as to form a kind of lake surrounding the
mountain. Their stay in this place was one of great prosperity and
increase in population and wealth; here they placed the sacred ark in a
grand temple; and here they were taught to make balls of india-rubber
and initiated by the gods into the mysteries of the _tlachtli_, or
game of ball, which afterward became their national diversion.[VI-10]
But the will of Huitzilopochtli was made known that this fair land
must be abandoned, and their wanderings recommenced. The people
murmured and showed signs of revolt, but the god appeared before them
in so frightful an aspect as to fill them with terror; some of the
malcontents were found dead near the temple with their hearts cut out;
the dam was broken, thus destroying the great charm of their new home;
and finally the will of the leader was obeyed, though not apparently
until several revolting chiefs with their followers had separated
themselves from the main body.[VI-11]
At Tzompanco, now Zumpango on the northern lake, the Mexicans--not
perhaps the main body, judging from the names given to the
leaders--were most kindly received, possibly as allies in the wars
waged by Tochpanecatl, the lord of that city. This lord's son Ilhuicatl
married Tlacapantzin, a Mexican girl, and, as Brasseur states, the
same lord gave his daughter Tlaquilxochitl as a wife to Tozcuecuex, the
Aztec leader, at the same time giving to the Mexicans through her the
possession of Tizayocan their next halting-place. From one of these
marriages sprung Huitzilihuitl, who afterwards became, according to
many authors, the first king, or ruler, of the Mexicans.[VI-12]
Several other intermarriages with tribes in Anáhuac are reported,
and also some hostilities during the subsequent frequent changes of
residence, but no important events are definitely reported before
the arrival and settlement at Chapultepec in 1194 as already stated,
although there is but little agreement in the dates, many traditions
assigning the arrival to a much later period. As has been before
stated, these traditions refer to different bands, and the disagreement
in dates would be natural even if the chronology of the records
had been correctly interpreted by the Spanish writers, which is not
probable. There can be little doubt of the comparative accuracy of
Brasseur's dates.
[Sidenote: THE AZTECS AT CHAPULTEPEC.]
At this period Nopaltzin was still on the throne of Tenayocan, but was
succeeded in 1211 by Tlotzin Pochotl.[VI-13] Acolnahuacatl, called by the
Spanish writers Acolhua II., reigned over the Tepanecs at Azcapuzalco;
Culhuacan was governed successively after Achitometl by Icxochitlanex,
Quahuitonal, Mazatzin, Cuetzal, Chalchiuh Tlatonac II., Tziuhtecatl,
Xihuiltemoc, and Coxcoxtli, down to about the end of the thirteenth
century; the Teo-Chichimecs, one of the invading bands that have so
vaguely appeared in preceding annals together with the Nahuatlaca
tribes, were settled at Poyauhtlan in the vicinity of Tezcuco, a
source of great uneasiness to all the nations, although nominally
friends of the emperor Tlotzin; and Quinantzin, the son of Tlotzin, was
chief lord at Tezcuco and heir to the imperial throne.[VI-14] The Aztecs
meantime fortified their naturally strong position at Chapultepec,
and in 2 Acatl, 1195, celebrated the completion of their cycle.[VI-15]
Huitzilihuitl, in spite of the sacerdotal opposition was made chief,
or as some say, king; the scattered Mexican bands, and even the main
body of the Mexicans under the high priest Quauhtlequetzqui, or his
successor of the same name, came to join those of Chapultepec; and the
colony began to assume some importance in the eyes of the surrounding
monarchs. The king of Azcapuzalco sought to make the Mexicans his
vassals, desiring their aid as warriors, but Huitzilihuitl proudly
refused to pay tribute. Their first war, something over thirty years
after their arrival, was with Xaltocan, against which province they
had aided the lord of Zumpango when first they entered the valley. The
armies of Xaltocan, under Huixton, attacked and defeated the Aztecs
near Chapultepec, forcing them to retreat within their fortifications,
acting probably by the encouragement of the Tepanecs.[VI-16] According
to Brasseur's authorities, the Tepanecs again proposed an alliance,
and on refusal, marched with their own army, and soldiers from other
nations, against Chapultepec, and at last forced Huitzilihuitl to
submit to the payment of tribute.[VI-17] Before yielding, however, the
Mexican chief sent ambassadors to Quinantzin at Tezcuco, offering him
the allegiance of his people and asking aid; but the Tezcucan lord was
not in condition to help them, and advised them to submit temporarily
to Acolnahuacatl,[VI-18] which they did about 1240.
[Sidenote: REIGN OF THE EMPEROR QUINANTZIN.]
The reign of Tlotzin, the Chichimec emperor, was, for the most part,
one of great prosperity, although his enemies were constantly on the
watch for an opportunity to overthrow his power. He seems to have
used his influence against a tendency exhibited by the Chichimecs
to a rudeness of manners, and independence of all control, which
threatened, in his opinion, a relapse into comparative barbarism.
He favored rather the elegance of Toltec manners, and the strictness
of Toltec discipline. In his efforts for reform he was seconded, or
even excelled, by his son, Quinantzin, lord of Tezcuco. Ixtlilxochitl
tells us that Tlotzin, soon after his ascension, made a long tour of
inspection through his territory, correcting abuses and enforcing the
laws, but exciting thereby the enmity of some vassal lords. Tenayocan
was properly the Chichimec capital, but the emperor spent much of
his time at Tezcuco, which had become one of the finest cities in
Anáhuac. For the embellishment of this city, many Toltecs are said to
have been called in from various towns, by the orders of Quinantzin.
Some of the officers placed in charge of the parks and public works
of Tezcuco, particularly Icuex and Ocotox, abused their trust, were
banished, headed revolts, and were defeated by Quinantzin. About this
time Tlotzin formed a new monarchy at Tezcuco, abdicating his own
rights there and giving the crown to his son, Quinantzin. Another son,
Tlacateotzin, was given the province of Tlazalan, subject to the crown
of Tezcuco, and still other sons, Tochintecuhtli and Xiuhquetzaltzin,
were made by Tlotzin, rulers of Huexotzinco and Tlascala, indicating
that the eastern plateau was at this time a part of the empire, though
it is not probable that a very strict allegiance was enforced. As
monarch, Quinantzin, from his royal palace of Oztoticpac, labored more
earnestly and successfully than before for a return to the old Toltec
civilization, thus exciting the opposition of many Chichimec nobles,
and preparing the way for future disasters. Tlotzin became, at last,
so fond of his son's beautiful home, that he practically abandoned
Tenayocan, appointing Tenancacaltzin, probably his brother, to rule in
his stead. The newly appointed lieutenant had no fondness for Toltec
reform, became secretly the chief of the opposition to the emperor,
and only awaited an opportunity to declare his independence. Tlotzin
Pochotl, at last, after an illness whose chief feature is said to have
been a profound melancholy, was carried, at his request, to Tenayocan,
where he died in 1246, after appointing Quinantzin as his heir. His
funeral was accompanied with great pomp and display; all the kings
of Anáhuac, both friends and foes, assisting in the ceremonies, and
eulogizing his character.[VI-19]
Taking the title of Chichimecatl Tecuhtli, or Emperor of the
Chichimecs, Quinantzin transferred the capital to Tezcuco,
re-appointing, it would seem, Tenancacaltzin as ruler of Tenayocan.
He immediately annexed the powers of Huexotla and Coatlichan to his
dominion, forcing the princes of those cities, Tochintecuhtli, or
Ihuimatzal, and Huetzin II., to reside in his capital, and forming
from the three kingdoms that of Acolhuacan. As emperor, he gave freer
vent than ever to his old inclinations to pomp and ceremony. Whenever
he appeared in public he caused himself to be borne in a magnificent
royal palanquin on the shoulders of four Chichimec nobles. The ill-will
which Quinantzin's strict discipline and Toltec inclinations had
previously excited; the fears aroused by his annexation of Huexotla
and Coatlichan, and other decided political measures; displeasure of
those of Tenayocan at the change of capital; and the humiliation of
the Chichimec nobles, in being obliged to bear the royal palanquin,
soon resulted in a revolution. By the support of the Tepanec king
at Azcapulzalco, Tenancacaltzin was proclaimed emperor at Tenayocan,
and all Anáhuac, save Culhuacan, Coatlichan, Xaltocan, and Huexotla,
were arrayed against the Tezcucan monarch, many of his own relatives
joining in the movement against him, and his brother, Tlacateotzin,
being driven from the dominion of Tlazalan. In so unequal a struggle
Quinantzin seems to have made no effort to overthrow the usurper,
but rather to have employed all the force that could be furnished by
his remaining vassals in fortifying his position at Tezcuco, where he
patiently awaited future opportunities for revenge and recovery of his
imperial throne.[VI-20]
[Sidenote: TENANCACALTZIN USURPS THE THRONE.]
Acolnahuacatl, the Tepanec king, seems to have supported the usurpation
of Tenancacaltzin not from any feelings of friendship, but from
ambitious motives for his own interests. He took no steps to accomplish
the conquest of Tezcuco, but on the contrary soon began to plot against
the usurping emperor. He made use of the Mexicans, who had suffered
much from the people of Tenayocan and were eager for vengeance, to
accomplish his purpose. Reinforced by some Tepanec troops in Aztec
dress, they made several raids for plunder against Tenayocan and the
adjoining towns. Thus provoked, Tenancacaltzin marched with an army to
punish the robbers, but was met at Tepeyacac, where now the church of
Guadalupe stands, by the Mexicans and Tepanecs combined, and utterly
defeated. The conquered emperor fled to Xaltocan, expecting aid from
the enemies of the Mexicans, but the princes of Xaltocan were also
friends of Quinantzin, to whom they delivered Tenancacaltzin, but
who refused to revenge his wrongs upon his uncle, and permitted him
to leave the country. The Tepanec king took possession of Tenayocan
and had himself declared emperor of the Chichimecs, Quinantzin
apparently making at first no opposition, but awaiting a more favorable
opportunity to regain his power.[VI-21]
* * * * *
[Sidenote: QUINANTZIN CHICHIMEC EMPEROR.]
I now come to the chain of events by which Quinantzin regained the
imperial throne and a power surpassing that of any preceding monarch.
The northern provinces of Meztitlan, Tulancingo, and Totoltepec,
excited by the rebels Icuex and Ocotox, formerly banished by
Quinantzin, raised the standard of revolt and marched to attack the
capital. They were even joined by the four eldest sons of the king,
according to Brasseur and Ixtlilxochitl, although other authorities
make this rebellion a distinct and later affair, and disagree somewhat
as to the time of the northern rebellion. Dividing his available
force into four divisions, Quinantzin took command of one division,
entrusting the others to his brothers Tochintzin, or Tochintecuhtli,
and Nopaltzin, and to Huetzin II. of Coatlichan, while his son
Techotl remained in command at Tezcuco. All the divisions were equally
successful and the rebels were driven back with great loss. Nopaltzin
killed Ocotox in personal combat but was himself killed later in the
battle. The king's rebel sons had not actually taken part in the fight,
and on offering their submission were, at the intercession of their
mother, pardoned, on condition of leaving Anáhuac and joining the
Teo-Chichimecs on the eastern plateau. This success in the north was
not without its effect in the valley. Many cities that had declared
their independence, or had become subjects of Acolnahuacatl, now
offered anew their allegiance to the monarch of Acolhuacan at Tezcuco.
Congratulations flowed in from Culhuacan and other friendly powers,
with various plausible excuses for not having aided Quinantzin in his
time of trouble. Prisoners taken during the war were released, and
some of the lords of the northern provinces were even restored to
their former positions on promise of future loyalty. Thus the wise
king laid the foundations of future success. The pardoned sons of
Quinantzin, before proceeding to Tlascala and Huexotzinco, joined the
Teo-Chichimecs at Poyauhtlan. This people, by their encroachments, had
made enemies of all the nations of Anáhuac; it is even said that they
had instigated the northern revolt in the hope that the formation of a
league against themselves might be prevented. But this hope was vain,
and soon after Quinantzin's victory, they were attacked before their
city by the united forces of the Tepanecs, Culhuas, Xochimilcas, and
Mexicans. A battle ensued described as the most terrible ever fought in
the valley, in which the Teo-Chichimecs held their ground, but which so
exhausted the forces on both sides that it was long before any nation
concerned was in condition to renew hostilities. The king of Acolhuacan
seems not to have taken part in this struggle, perhaps because of the
presence of his sons at Poyauhtlan and the fact that his relatives
were ruling the Teo-Chichimecs in Tlascala. The state of affairs was
now altogether favorable to Quinantzin, and after, as some authors
state, another campaign against the northern provinces, he began to
turn his attention toward his lost dominions about the lakes. The
emperor Acolnahuacatl, at Tenayocan, seems to have clearly perceived
that fortune favored his rival, and that in his exhausted condition
since the battle at Poyauhtlan, he could not possibly defend either the
imperial crown or even that of Azcapuzalco, and craftily resolved to
voluntarily abandon his claims to the former in the hope of retaining
the latter. His plans, as usual, were successful; Quinantzin accepted
his proposition without any manifestation of ill-will, and was crowned
emperor with the most imposing ceremonies in 1272, forming a friendly
alliance with the kings of Culhuacan and Azcapuzalco, and becoming
practically the master of Anáhuac. The Teo-Chichimecs soon after, by
the advice of their god, and with the consent of the emperor, migrated
eastward to Tlascala.[VI-22]
In his efforts to embellish his capital, and to restore his empire to
the glory and his subjects to the culture of the ancient times, it
has been stated that Quinantzin called in the aid of many Toltecs,
showing them great favor. A few years after his accession, two of
the Toltec tribes that had left the valley at the fall of the empire
and settled on the coast of the Pacific in Oajaca, the Tailotlacs and
Chimalpanecs, are said to have returned and to have been received by
the emperor and granted lands in Tezcuco, after having stayed some
time in Chalco. The new chiefs were even allowed to become allied by
marriage to the royal family. The new-comers seem to have belonged
to the partisans of Tezcatlipoca. Additional bands of Huitznahuacs,
Tepanecs, Culhuas, and Mexicans, from distant lands, are also vaguely
alluded to as having settled in Tezcuco, Azcapuzalco, and Mexico.[VI-23]
About the same time the northern province of Tepepulco revolted,
according to Torquemada,[VI-24] and was conquered by Quinantzin, spoken
of as Tlaltecatzin by this and several other writers. The province was
joined to the dominions of Tezcuco under a royal governor, its lord
having been put to death. Another source of prosperity for Tezcuco
seems to have been a fresh out-burst in Culhuacan of the old religious
dissensions between the partisans of Quetzalcoatl and Tezcatlipoca,
causing many of the inhabitants to make their homes in the Acolhua
capital where they were gladly received; although Ixtlilxochitl tells
us that Quinantzin erected no temples in his capital, and permitted
the erection of none, being content, and obliging all the citizens to
be so, with the simple religious rites of his Chichimec ancestors.[VI-25]
Xihuiltemoc, a descendant of Acxitl, the last king of Tollan, was on
the throne of Culhuacan at this time, and seems to have formed some
kind of an alliance with the Mexicans at Chapultepec, and to have
admitted to his city the worship of Huitzilopochtli--a fact that leads
Brasseur to think that the Culhua king was a partisan of Tezcatlipoca,
almost identical with Huitzilopochtli so far as the bloody rites in
his honor are concerned.[VI-26] In the last years of the thirteenth
century, about 1281, Xihuiltemoc was succeeded by Coxcoxtli whose
mother is said to have been a Mexican, but who was a devoted partisan
of Quetzalcoatl.[VI-27]
* * * * *
[Sidenote: THE AZTECS LEAVE CHAPULTEPEC.]
The Aztecs had, in the meantime, gained much in power, and although
few in numbers, compared with the other nations, had, by their skill
as warriors and the ferocity of their character, made themselves hated
by all, becoming, indeed, the pests of Anáhuac, although nominally
the allies of the Culhuas and Tepanecs. The story of their overthrow
at Chapultepec is a brief one, as told by the Spanish writers. Copil,
son of Huitziton's sister, the sorceress Malinalxochitl, had, as has
been already related,[VI-28] been sworn by his mother to vengeance on the
Mexicans. He now came to the lake region and used all his influence to
excite the surrounding nations against his enemies, denouncing them as
everything that is bad, and urging their extermination. Hearing of his
plots, the priest Quauhtlequetzqui went with a party to Tepetzingo,
where Copil was, killed him, tore out his heart and threw it into
the lake. The place was known as Tlalcocomocco, and here afterwards
sprang up the tunal which guided the Aztecs in founding their city;
here was also a hot spring, called Acopilco. Immediately after this
the Aztecs were attacked by many nations, chiefly the Culhuas and
Chalcas, driven to Acoculco, amid the reeds of the lake, and many of
their number carried captives to Culhuacan, among whom was their chief,
Huitzilihuitl, who was sacrificed. Afterwards they were given, by the
Culhuas, the district of Tizaapan, which abounded in snakes, lizards,
etc., on which chiefly they lived, paying heavy tribute to the king of
Culhuacan, and leading a very hard life for many years.[VI-29]
Brasseur throws much light upon the events of this period. It seems
that the Aztecs provoked Copil's efforts for their destruction by two
raids against Malinalco, which belonged to Culhuacan, and that the
Mexicans treacherously drew the son of Malinalxochitl into their power
by offering him the position of high-priest, according to a pretended
revelation of Huitzilopochtli's will. His daughter, Azcaxochitl, was
forced to become the mistress of Quauhtlequetzqui; all his nobles were
taken prisoners, and a band of Culhuas who came to Tlalcocomocco soon
after, were massacred. All the rulers of the valley, save, perhaps,
Quinantzin, were soon leagued together for the destruction of these
marauders and butchers. Huitzilihuitl made a valiant and long-continued
defence, defeating the Tepanecs in a fierce battle, but exciting
renewed horror by murdering and cutting in pieces Acolnahuacatl, king
of Azcapuzalco, and formerly emperor. They were at last conquered
through their rash bravery, since, while their army was fighting
the Culhuas whom they had been challenged to meet, another body of
the enemy took and burned Chapultepec, carrying off the surviving
inhabitants as prisoners. The Mexican army was then defeated, nearly
exterminated, and the remnants scattered in the lake marshes, while
Huitzilihuitl was taken, and, with his daughter and sister, put to
death in revenge for the murder of Copil and the Tepanec king. These
events occurred about 1297. For two years the scattered Mexican
remnants were subjected to every indignity, but in 1299, perhaps
through the influence of Acamapichtli, his son and heir, Coxcoxtli
was induced to grant this unfortunate people the small, barren, and
serpent-infested isle of Tizaapan.[VI-30]
[Sidenote: WAR WITH THE XOCHIMILCAS.]
The Spanish writers do not imply that Acolnahuacatl, king of the
Tepanecs, was killed by the Aztecs, or that he even fell in battle.
His son, Tezozomoc, was heir to the throne, but as he was very young,
his mother seems to have ruled as regent during his minority, and as
she was the wife of Coxcoxtli, the power was practically in the hands
of the Culhua monarch.[VI-31] Coxcoxtli thus saw his power in Anáhuac
largely increased, but he was continually annoyed with petitions
from the Mexicans for larger territory and permission to settle at
various points in his dominions, and at the same time harassed by the
encroachments of the Xochimilcas, particularly in the lake fisheries.
He at last proposed to grant the requests of the Aztecs on condition
that they would aid him in chastising the insolent and powerful
Xochimilcas. The services of the followers of Huitzilopochtli were
always in demand when there was fighting to be done. The secret plan of
the king was to place the new allies in the front to receive the force
of the attack; the heavier their loss the better, for his troops would
have an easy victory, and a dead Aztec was a much less troublesome
neighbor or subject than a live one. No arms were supplied to the
allies, but their priests taught them to make shields of reeds, and arm
themselves with clubs and obsidian knives. By a strange freak of fancy
they resolved to retain no captives, though a reward was offered for
them, but to disarm and release all they captured after having marked
them by cutting off the right ear of each. The fury of their attack
and their novel method of warfare struck terror into the hearts of the
enemy, who were defeated and driven back to their capital in confusion,
the Mexicans obtaining much plunder, and the Culhuas an extraordinary
number of prisoners. Returning to Culhuacan, the Culhua braves proudly
displayed their captives, ridiculing their allies, until the latter
pointed out the lack of ears among the victims of Culhua valor, and
calmly produced the missing features from their sacks; the effect was
complete, and they carried off the honors of the day. Coxcoxtli was
proud of such allies, their petitions were granted, and the two nations
were also connected by intermarriage.[VI-32]
[Sidenote: THE MOTHER OF THE GODS.]
The history of the Mexicans and Culhuas, during the early part of the
fourteenth century, down to the founding of the city of Tenochtitlan
in 1325, presents a confusion unequaled, perhaps, in any other period
of the aboriginal annals. A civil war on the eastern plateau at
Cholula, in which king Coxcoxtli was involved to a certain extent,
will be mentioned elsewhere, as it only slightly concerns the general
history of Anáhuac. Torquemada, Clavigero, and others, relate that
after the battle with the Xochimilcas, the Aztecs had secreted four
captives destined for sacrifice, and had, besides, asked the Culhua
king to provide them with a suitable offering and to be present at
the ceremonies. They were sent a dead body and a mass of filth which
the Mexicans, restraining their anger at the insult, placed upon the
altar and said nothing. When Coxcoxtli and his suite appeared, the
priests, after a religious dance, brought out the four captives and
performed the bloody rites of sacrifice before the guests. The Culhuas
left the place in disgust, and orders were immediately given that
the Mexicans should be driven from the territories of Culhuacan.[VI-33]
As Acosta and Duran tell the story, the Aztecs sent from Tizaapan,
where it seems many of them were still living, to the Culhua king,
requesting him to give them his daughter to rule over them and be
the mother of their god. The request was cheerfully granted and the
young princess conducted with great pomp to the town of her future
subjects. A great festival was prepared, the princess was privately
sacrificed to Huitzilopochtli, who, it seems, had signified his
intention of adopting her as his mother; her body was flayed, and
her skin placed as a garment on a youth, or an idol, which was set up
in the temple to receive the offerings of visitors. Among those who
came to make such offerings, as a compliment to their allies, were
Coxcoxtli and his nobles. Their rage at the sight that met their eyes
may be imagined. The bloody followers of Huitzilopochtli were driven
from their homes, and the allies their bravery had gained were lost
to them.[VI-34] Ixtlilxochitl, without mentioning their return to Culhua
favor by the Xochimilco war, says that the Aztecs escaped from their
bondage at Culhuacan on hearing that king Calquiyauhtzin intended to
massacre them, and resided, for a time, at Iztacalco, whence they made
inroads upon Culhua territory, but finally retreated to the island
where Tenochtitlan was founded.[VI-35] I append in a note an abstract
of Veytia's version of Nahua history during this and the immediately
preceding period, since this version agrees with others at but few
points.[VI-36]
Hardly more can be gathered from the preceding records than that the
Mexicans, after living for a time in Culhuacan, were forced, on account
of their bloody religious rites and of their turbulent disposition,
to leave that city, and to wander for several years about the lake
before settling where the city of Mexico afterwards stood. Coxcoxtli
is said to have been a devoted follower of Quetzalcoatl, and a zealous
persecutor of all other sects, so much so, that many families were
forced to abandon Culhuacan, and were gladly received at Tezcuco, as
has been stated. It seems to have been an ineradicable Toltec tendency
to indulge in religious controversy to the prejudice of their national
prosperity. Brasseur[VI-37] finds in his documents many additional
details of some importance respecting the period in question. The
religious strife in Culhuacan broke out into open war between the
sects of Quetzalcoatl and Tezcatlipoca, the former headed by the king
and his son Achitometl, the latter under another son, Acamapichtli,
and seconded by the Mexicans, who had been driven by persecution from
the city. This is the alliance alluded to by Veytia, when he states
that Acamapichtli, of Culhuacan, was chosen king of the Mexicans.
The rebellious son, at the head of the Mexicans, was victorious, and
compelled his father to flee from his capital, but did not at once
assume the title of king, and was, not long after, in his turn defeated
and driven from the city. This was the final departure of the Mexicans,
most of whom gathered at Iztacalco, where a band of their nation had
been for some years residing, under the chief Tenuch. Many, however,
settled at other points near at hand on the lake shores and islands,
and to this period is attributed also their invention of the Chinampas,
or floating gardens.
[Sidenote: FOUNDATION OF MEXICO.]
The localities thus occupied at this period, simultaneously or
successively, besides Iztacalco, were Mexicaltzinco, Acatzintitlan,
Mixiuhtlan, and Temazcaltitlan. At last the priests selected what they
deemed a suitable place for permanent settlement, the same spot where
Copil had been sacrificed, an island, or raised tract in the lake
marshes, and pretended to find there the nopal, eagle, and serpent
which had been promised by their god as a token that the proper
location had been found. The nopal grew on a rock in the midst of a
beautiful pool, into which one of the two discoverers was instantly
drawn, and admitted to an interview with the Tlalocs, who confirmed
the belief that here was to be their permanent home. According to
some authorities, a title to this site was obtained from the king of
Azcapuzalco. The first task was to erect a rude temple of rushes for
the ark of the idol Huitzilopochtli, which was located exactly over the
stone which bore the famous nopal; the huts of the people were built
around this as a centre, divided by divine command into four wards, or
districts. Then all set industriously to work, the men leveling and
filling in the site of their town, or fishing and killing wild ducks
on the lakes, the products being mostly bartered by the women in the
cities of the main land, for stone and wood for building material.
The first victim sacrificed to the god in his new temple was a Culhua
noble, of hostile sect, opportunely captured.[VI-38] Thus was founded,
in 1325,[VI-39] the city named--probably from Mexi, the original name
of Huitziton, and Tenuch, their chief leader at the time the city was
formed--Mexico Tenochtitlan.[VI-40]
* * * * *
[Sidenote: DEATH OF QUINANTZIN.]
Quinantzin continued in his glorious career at Tezcuco, allowing
the surrounding kings to weaken their power by their intrigues and
contentions one with another, while he devoted all his energies as a
diplomatist, and all the strength of his armies to the strengthening of
his imperial power, the enlargement and embellishment of his capital,
where refugees from all directions were kindly welcomed, the quelling
of rebellion in various provinces, and the conquest of new lands.
Not only did he promptly put down every attempt at revolt in his own
dominions, but insisted that the kings of Culhuacan and Azcapuzalco
should check the attempts of their revolting vassals. Huehuetlan,
Mizquic, Cuitlahuac, Zayollan, Temimiltepec, and Totolapan, are named
as the rebellious provinces thus subdued during the last years of this
emperor's reign. No monarch in Anáhuac could have resisted Quinantzin's
power, but he seems to have had no disposition to encroach on what he
deemed the legitimate domains of his brother sovereigns. In spite of
the opposition of the Chichimec nobles to his reforms, his tendency
to Toltec usages, and his fondness for display, the emperor after
his power had become firmly established enjoyed the love and respect
of all his subjects. His surname, Tlaltecatzin, 'he who lords the
earth,' is said to have been given him in consideration of his success
in subduing so many provinces. He died in 8 Calli, 1305,[VI-41] at an
advanced age, and his funeral ceremonies were conducted with all the
pomp that had been characteristic of him in life. Seventy rulers of
provinces are said to have assisted. His body, embalmed, was seated
in full royal apparel on the throne, an eagle at the feet, a tiger at
the back, and the bow and arrows in his hands. All the people crowded
to the palace to take a last look upon their emperor, and after eighty
days, according to Torquemada, his body was burned, and the ashes, in
an emerald urn with a golden cover, placed in a cave near Tezcuco; or,
as Veytia and Ixtlilxochitl say, buried in a temple of the Sun in the
Tezcocingo forest.[VI-42]
[Sidenote: LIMITS OF THE CHICHIMEC EMPIRE.]
Quinantzin's elder sons having proved rebellious during their father's
reign, and having, therefore, been banished, his youngest son, Techotl,
Techotlalatzin, or Techotlala, was chosen as his successor. Techotl
reigned from 1305 to 1357, a period during which the dominions attached
to the crown of Tezcuco were almost entirely undisturbed by civil
or foreign wars. Only one war is recorded, by which the province of
Xaltocan, peopled chiefly by Otomís, with the aid of the chiefs of
Otompan, Quahuacan, and Tecomic, attempted to regain her independence
of Chichimec imperial authority. The revolt was, however, promptly
repressed by the emperor and his allies after a campaign of two months.
Tezozomoc had now succeeded to the throne of Azcapuzalco, and with
his Tepanec forces, took a very prominent part in this war against
Xaltocan and the northern provinces. The Mexicans also sent an army
to this war, and received some territory as a result, the rest of the
provinces being joined to the domains of Tezcuco and Azcapuzalco.[VI-43]
Techotl's tastes and ambitions were similar to those of his father,
and his fifty-two years of peaceful and prosperous reign enabled him
to successfully carry out his projects. To him, as emperor, belonged
the allegiance of the kings of Culhuacan, Azcapuzalco, and Mexico
in the latter part of his rule, when the latter power had risen to
some prominence; but no tribute was paid by these kings, and their
allegiance was probably only nominal.[VI-44] Over the provinces that
belonged to Tezcuco, or rather the kingdom of Acolhuacan, Techotl ruled
in precisely the same manner as the other kings over their respective
territories. The lord of each province acknowledged his allegiance to
his king, paid tribute according to the wealth of his people, and was
bound to aid his sovereign, if so requested, in time of war; in other
respects he was perfectly independent, and governed his dominion with
almost absolute sway. The long list of vassal provinces and lords given
by the records[VI-45] show that the authority of the Chichimec emperor
extended far beyond Anáhuac, but do not enable us to fix definitely
its limits; it probably was but little less extensive than that of the
emperor at Culhuacan, in Toltec times, and was very similar to the
Toltec rule in its nature.[VI-46] Techotl's efforts seem to have been
directed to the complete re-establishment of Toltec culture; to the
building-up and embellishment of his capital; to the enacting of just
laws and their strict enforcement by the appointment of the necessary
courts and officials; to the work of attracting new settlers into
his kingdom and capital, by kind treatment of all new-comers, and a
toleration of all their religious beliefs and rites; and above all, to
the centralization of his imperial power, and the gradual lessening
of the prerogatives of his vassal lords. The refugees from different
nations were given separate wards of Tezcuco for a residence, and
were permitted to erect temples, and to perform all their various
rites. Human sacrifice and religious strife were alone prohibited.
The different creeds and ceremonials of Toltec times became almost
universal in his kingdom,[VI-47] although the emperor himself is said
to have ridiculed all these creeds and sacrifices, contenting himself
with the worship of one god, of whom he deemed the sun a symbol. He is
credited with having entertained sentiments on religious topics several
centuries in advance of his time.
In his efforts for the centralization of the Chichimec power, he
first summoned the chief lords of his provinces, some twenty-six in
number, to Tezcuco, and practically compelled them to live there,
although heaping upon them honors and titles which made it impossible
for them to refuse obedience to his wishes. All together constituted
a royal council, consulted on matters of national import; and from
them were selected sub-councils, to whose management were entrusted
the superintendence of various branches, such as the administration
of justice, military regulations, art and science, agriculture, etc.
Five of the leading lords were entrusted with the most important
and honorable positions, and placed at the head of the chief
councils.[VI-48] As an offset to the favors granted these lords at the
capital and in the general government, their prerogatives at home
were greatly diminished. The twenty-six provinces were subdivided
into sixty-five departments; the lords retained their original titles
and the absolute command of twenty-six of the departments, but over
the other thirty-nine governors were placed who were supposed to
be wholly devoted to the interests of the emperor. Techotl is even
said to have gone so far as to transfer the inhabitants belonging to
different tribes from one province to another, so that the subjects of
each chief, although the same in number as before, were of different
tribes, and, as the emperor craftily imagined, much less easily incited
to revolt in the interests of ambitious chieftains, who were ever
ready to take advantage of favorable circumstances to declare their
independence. If the Chichimec nobles objected to these extraordinary
measures, their opposition is not recorded.
[Sidenote: REIGN OF TECHOTL.]
At one of the grand assemblies of kings and lords, held at Tezcuco,
to deliberate on the general interests of the empire, in 1342,
Techotl announced his intention to leave his crown to his eldest son,
Ixtlilxochitl, and caused that prince to be formally acknowledged
as heir apparent to the imperial throne. It does not appear that any
opposition to his succession was made at the time,[VI-49] although as we
shall see, his right was not undisputed at the death of his father. At
one of these assemblies, as all the authorities agree, it was ordered
that the Nahua language should be employed exclusively at court, in
the tribunals, and in the transaction of all public affairs. It has
been inferred from this, by many writers, that the language of the
Chichimec nations was different from that of the Toltecs;[VI-50] but
such a supposition would be inconsistent with the whole tenor of the
aboriginal annals, and cannot be admitted. Among the new tribes that
occupied Anáhuac after the Toltecs, there were doubtless some that
spoke another tongue; the enforced use of the Nahua at court was
aimed at the chiefs of such tribes, and was a part of the emperor's
general policy. Of course it is just possible that one of the tribes
of foreign tongue had become powerful and constituted a large part of
the population of Tezcuco, but such a state of affairs is not probable,
and the statement of some writers that the many learned Culhuas and
Mexicans gathered at the Chichimec capital during this period, came
as teachers of the Nahua language at the court of Techotl, cannot
be accepted. Brasseur's idea, as implied throughout this period of
aboriginal history, that the Chichimecs were barbarians, gradually
civilized by the few Toltecs that remained in the country, and forced
by their kings to adopt Nahua language and institutions, I regard
as wholly imaginary. The struggles of Quinantzin and his successors
were directed, not to the introduction of Toltec usages, but to the
preservation of their culture, threatened by the spirit of anarchy and
independence that followed the downfall of the Toltec empire.
[Sidenote: DEATH OF TECHOTL.]
Feeling, at last, that his end was drawing near, and that the work to
which he had devoted his energies must be committed to other hands, the
aged monarch is reported to have held a long interview with his son and
heir, Ixtlilxochitl. Most earnestly he instructed his son concerning
his future duties, and warned him against dangers whose occurrence he
already foresaw. He feared, above all, the projects of Tezozomoc, the
Tepanec king, who had already, although nominally loyal to Techotl,
shown tokens of far-reaching ambition and the possession of great
executive ability, and who evidently remembered that Acolnahuacatl,
his predecessor, had once been emperor. Special advice was given to
Ixtlilxochitl, who was probably a very young man, although there is
some disagreement about the date of his birth,[VI-51] as to the best
policy to be followed with the king of Azcapuzalco, and after jealously
striving to imbue his successor with the spirit that had made his own
reign so glorious, the emperor died, as has been stated, in 8 Calli,
1357.[VI-52]
* * * * *
[Sidenote: AZTECS AT MEXICO TENOCHTITLAN.]
Having traced the glorious, though peaceful career of the emperor
Techotl, I have to close this chapter by narrating the events of Culhua
and Mexican history during a corresponding period; a period most fatal
to Culhuacan, the metropolis of Anáhuac in Toltec times, and the only
Toltec city that had retained its prominence through the dark days of
Chichimec invasion. We have seen the Mexicans expelled from Culhuacan
at the triumph of Achitometl over his brother Acamapichtli; and, after
a series of wanderings about the lake, founding their city of Mexico
Tenochtitlan in 1325. One year before the city was founded, however,
Acamapichtli seems to have regained his power, and this time, his
father Coxcoxtli having died, he assumed the title of king. His rule
was probably very advantageous to the Mexicans, his friends, during
their first years in their new city, while they were strengthening
their position; but in 1336 he died, murdered, as some of the records
imply, and was succeeded by his brother Achitometl II., the avowed
enemy of the Mexicans and their religious rites. His accession drove
many of the rival sect to Mexico, and he thus aided, involuntarily,
in building up the new power. The infant son of the dead king, also
named Acamapichtli, was saved either by his mother, or, as others say,
by the princess Ilancueitl.[VI-53] During the troubles between the rival
sects headed by Acamapichtli and Achitometl, large numbers of Culhuas
had left their city and either taken refuge in Tezcuco, or had joined
kindred tribes in different localities. On the final accession of
Achitometl this depopulating movement was continued to a greater extent
than ever before. According to Brasseur's documents, a war with Chalco
in 1339, fomented by Tezozomoc, who had succeeded to the Tepanec throne
eight years before, gave the finishing blow to the power of Culhuacan,
which was practically abandoned by king and people about 1347, her
weaker tributary provinces being in part appropriated by the stronger,
which now became independent of all save imperial power, although
a large portion fell into the hands of the kings of Azcapuzalco and
Acolhuacan. The larger part of the Culhuas proper were divided between
Quauhtitlan,--which soon became practically a Culhua, or Toltec, city,
under Iztactototl, grandson of Coxcoxtli, who succeeded in 1348,--and
Mexico.[VI-54]
The territory on which Mexico Tenochtitlan was built seems to have
belonged to the domain of Azcapuzalco, and the Mexicans were obliged to
pay to the Tepanec king a certain amount of tribute in fish and other
productions of the lake. Their prosperity, the improvements they were
constantly making in their city, and their strong position in the lake,
taken in connection with their well-known valor and ambition, excited
much jealousy among the surrounding nations. Possibly this jealousy
is alluded to in the fable of a fatal epidemic which prevailed at this
time, ascribed in the popular tradition to the fumes of fried fish and
other delicacies, wafted from the island town, which created so violent
a longing as to occasion illness.[VI-55] The Tepanecs were the only people
that had the power to oppress the Aztecs, which they are said to have
done, not only by the exaction of the regular tribute due them, but
by imposing special taxes, to be paid in articles of no value to the
receivers, but which could be obtained by the Mexicans only with great
difficulty or danger.[VI-56] Brasseur says that Tezozomoc even went so far
as to send his son Tlacotin to rule in Mexico after Tenuch's death,
and he dying after a short time, another son, Teuhtlehuac, became
governor.[VI-57] I find nothing in the Spanish writers respecting Tepanec
governors in Mexico, although none of them give any very definite idea
how the city was governed in the early period of its existence. Some
authors mention Tenuch as one of the chiefs that directed the original
Aztec migration; others, as we have seen, make him the chief of an
Aztec band at Iztacalco, just before the founding of the city, and
imply that he was the leader under the priesthood at the time of its
foundation, and for some time after; while still other writers state
that he was elected chief three years after the foundation.[VI-58]
At this period took place the division of the Aztecs into Mexicans
and Tlatelulcas, although Veytia dates it back before the foundation
of the city, and before many of the events already related. It was
caused by a quarrel between the priests and nobles, and was a secession
of the latter when unable to check the growing power of the former.
Torquemada attributes the separation merely to the overcrowded state
of the city; and the fable of the two bundles which originated the
dissension in early times has already been related.[VI-59] Brasseur sees
in this division the inevitable Nahua tendency to struggle bravely
and unitedly against misfortune, but at the first dawn of prosperity
to indulge in internal strife. The priesthood used their influence
to excite the lower classes against the nobility, and particularly
against their Tepanec governor, whom they denounced as a tyrant.
They finally succeeded in raising such a storm that Teuhtlehuac was
driven out, and his party, including most of the nobility, determined
to seek a new home. The connection of a Tepanec governor with the
matter, removes some of the difficulties involved in other versions,
but it is not easy to understand why Tezozomoc permitted his son to
be driven from Tenochtitlan. Whatever the circumstances which led to
the secession, the location of the new establishment was miraculously
pointed out. The nobles were attracted by a whirlwind to a sandy spot
among the reeds of the lake, about two miles from Tenochtitlan, and
found there the shield, arrow, and coiled serpent, which they deemed a
most happy augury. They obtained a title of the land from the Tepanec
king, on condition of a yearly tribute,[VI-60] and called their new home
Xaltelulco, afterwards, Tlatelulco.[VI-61]
[Sidenote: GROWTH OF MEXICO AND TLATELULCO.]
Both cities grew rapidly, and acquired much prosperity and power,
notwithstanding the separation, by reason of the large immigration
that they received, and of the rivalry that sprang up between the two
divisions. The additions to the population in Tenochtitlan were chiefly
Culhuas, who came in so large numbers as to outnumber, perhaps, the
original Mexicans; while Tlatelulco received a corresponding influx of
Tepanecs, and many from other neighboring nations. We have no further
details of their history down to the death of the emperor Techotl,
at Tezcuco, except that the establishment of a monarchy in each of
the two cities. The Mexicans were at first ruled by the priests, with
certain chiefs not definitely named; although by some Tenuch is still
spoken of as alive and ruling down to 1357. It was finally decided,
in an assembly of priests and wise men of the nation, to choose a
king, and the choice fell upon Acamapichtli II., son of Acamapichtli
of Culhuacan. The large Culhua element in Tenochtitlan doubtless had a
great influence in this choice; and other motives were the friendship
of the candidate's father for the Mexicans in past times, the
possibility of reconquering the old Culhua possessions and joining them
to the Aztec domain, and possibly the extreme youth of Acamapichtli,
which offered to the priesthood a prospect of easily controlling his
actions. The young candidate was summoned from Tezcuco, where he had
taken refuge, together with the princess Ilancueitl, who had rescued
him, who seems to have been regent during his minority, and who is
even said to have become his wife. 1350 was the date of the accession
of Acamapichtli II., the first king of Mexico Tenochtitlan.[VI-62]
Soon after, probably the following year, 1351, the Tlatelulcas also
determined to establish a monarchical form of government. They also
sent abroad for a king, and received a son of the Tepanec king,
Tezozomoc, named Quaquauhpitzahuac.[VI-63]
FOOTNOTES:
[VI-1] 1194, _Codex Chimalpopoca_; 1140 or 1189, _Ixtlilxochitl_;
1245, _Clavigero_; 1331, _Gondra_; 1298, _Veytia_, _Gama_, and
_Gallatin_.
[VI-2] I give here as compactly as possible the course of the Aztec
migration as given by the leading authorities:--Leave Aztlan 1
Tecpatl, 1064 A.D., and travel 104 years to Chicomoztoc, where they
remain 9 years; thence to Cohuatlicamac, 3 years, Matlahuacallan, 6,
Apanco, 5, Chimalco, 6, Pipiolcomic, 3, Tollan, 6, Cohuactepec
(Coatepec), 3, Atlitlalacayan, 2, Atotonilco, 1, Tepexic, 5, Apasco,
3, Tzonpanco, 7, Tizayocan, 1, Ecatepec, 1, Tolpetlac, 3, Chimalpan,
4, Cohuatitlan, 2, Huexachtitlan, 3, Tecpayocan, 3, Tepeyacac
(Guadalupe), 3, Pantitlan, 2 years, and thence to Chapultepec,
arriving in 1298, after a migration of 185 years, which necessitates
an addition of 49 years for their stay in Michoacan. _Veytia_, tom.
ii., pp. 91-8. According to Torquemada, tom. i., pp. 77-82, they
reached Huey Culhuacan one year after their start; the time consumed
in reaching Chicomoztoc is not given, and no dates are mentioned.
Otherwise the account agrees exactly with Veytia's, except that an
unnamed station is represented as having occupied 3 of the 6 years'
stay at Matlahuacallan; there are also a few slight differences in
orthography. Tezozomoc's account is as follows:--Aztlan, Culhuacan,
Jalisco, Mechoacan, Malinalco (Lake Patzcuaro), Ocopipilla,
Acahualcingo, Coatepec (in Tonalan), Atlitlanquian or Atitalaquia,
Tequisquiac, Atengo, Tzompan, Cuachilgo, Xaltocan and Lake Chinamitl,
Eycoac, Ecatepc, Aculhuacan, Tultepetlac, Huixachtitlan, Tecpayuca (in
2 Calli), Atepetlac, Coatlayauhcan, Tetepanco, Acolnahuac, Popotla
(Tacuba), Chapultepec (Techcatepec and Techcatitlan) in 2 Tochtli.
_Kingsborough_, vol. ix., pp. 5-8. Following Clavigero, tom. i., pp.
156-63, the Aztecs left Aztlan in 1160, crossed the Colorado River,
stayed 3 years at Hueicolhuacan, went east to Chicomoztoc, where they
separated from the Nahuatlaca tribes, then to Coatlicamac, and reached
Tula in 1196, remaining 9 years; then spent 11 years in different
places, reached Zumpanco in 1216, remaining 7 years, then Tizajocan,
Tolpetlac, Tepejacac, and Chapultepec in 1245 during Nopaltzin's
reign. Gallatin, in _Amer. Ethno. Soc., Transact._, vol. i., pp.
124-9, merely makes some remarks on Clavigero's account, fixing the
departure, however, in 1064, and noting the completion of the first
cycle in 1090 at Tlalixco. Gama, _Dos Piedras_, pt i., pp. 19-20,
makes them leave Aztlan in 1 Tecpatl, 1064, and arrive at Tlalixco, or
Acahualtzinco, in 1087, where they completed their first cycle in
1091, and remained 9 years. Acosta, pp. 454-62, says that 6 Nahuatlaca
tribes left Aztlan in 820, and were 80 years in reaching Mexico. The
Aztecs started in 1122, passed through Michoacan, and halted at
Malinalco and Coatepec before reaching Chapultepec. Herrera, dec.
iii., lib. ii., cap. x-xi, agrees with Acosta. Duran, MS., tom. i.,
cap. i, ii, iii, says they left Aztlan in Chicomoztoc, giving dates as
by Acosta; but he also gives as stations, Patzcuaro, Malinalco,
Ocipila, Acahualcingo, Coatepec, Tulla, Atlitlalacpan, Tequixquiac,
Tzumpanco, Xaltocan, Ecatepec, Tulpetlac, Tepaneca, and Chapultepec.
Sahagun, tom. iii., lib. x., pp. 145-6, vaguely states that the
Mexicans went westward from the Seven Caves to a province called
Culhuacan Mexico, whence they were ordered by their god to return, and
passed through Tulla, Ichpuchco, Chiquiuhio near Ecatepec, to
Chapultepec. According to _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. ii., pp. 290-308,
the other Nahuatlaca tribes left Aztlan from 1062 to 1068, but the
Aztecs in 1 Tochtli, 1090. They pass through Téo-Culhuacan,
Quahuitl-Icacan, 1091, Quinehuayan-Oztotl or Quinehuayan-Chicomoztoc,
1116, stay 11 years, Acahualtzinco or Tlalixco (now S. Juan del Rio),
1st cycle in 1143, stay 9 years, Tonalan, Lake Patzcuaro, Malinalco,
Cohuatlycamac or Coatepec, 1174, stay 9 years, Apazco, Tzompanco,
Tizayocan, Tepeyacac, Pantitlan, Popotlan, and arrive at Chapultepec
in 1194, having been several times broken up into different bands on
the way. Humboldt's--_Vues_, tom. ii., p. 176, et seq.--interpretation
of Gemelli Careri's map--see vol. ii., pp. 543-7, of this work--gives
the stations in the following order: From Colhuacan, the Mexican
Ararat, 15 chiefs or tribes reach Aztlan, 'land of flamingoes,' north
of 42°, which they leave in 1038, passing through Tocolco,
'humiliation,' Oztotlan, 'place of grottoes,' Mizquiahuala,
Teotzapotlan, 'place of divine fruit,' Ilhuicatepec, Papantla,
'large-leaved grass,' Tzompanco, 'place of human bones,' Apazco, 'clay
vessel,' Atlicalaguian, 'crevice in which rivulet escapes,'
Quauhtitlan, 'eagle grove,' Atzcapotzalco, 'ant-hill,' Chalco, 'place
of precious stones,' Pantitlan, 'spinning-place,' Tolpetlac, 'rush
mat,' Quauhtepec, 'eagle mountain,' Tetepanco, 'wall of many small
stones,' Chicomoztoc, 'seven caves,' Huitzquilocan, 'place of
thistles,' Xaltepozauhcan, 'place where the sand issues,'
Cozcaquauhco, 'a vulture', Techcatitlan, 'place of obsidian mirrors,'
Azcaxochitl, 'ant flower,' Tepetlapan, 'place of tepetate,' Apan,
'place of water,' Teozomaco, 'place of divine apes,' Chapoltepec,
'grasshopper hill.' Gondra, in _Prescott_, _Hist. Conq. Mex._, tom.
iii., pp. 5-7, repeats this interpretation. Ramirez, in _García y
Cubas_, _Atlas_, justly ridicules the 'Ararat' or deluge theory, and
confines the wanderings of the Aztecs to the regions about the lakes;
15 chiefs leave their home in Chalco Lake after tying 1st cycle. The
stations are mostly adopted from Humboldt, without any opinion
expressed of their accuracy, but there are a few additions and
corrections in definitions, as follows:--Aztlan, where 2d and 3d cycle
are tied, _Cincotlan_, 10 years, Tocolco, 4th cycle, Oztotlan, 5
years, Mizquiahuala, 5th cycle, _Xalpan_, 15 years, Tetepanco, 'wall
of many stones,' 5 years, _Oxitlipan_, 10 years, Teotzapatlan, 4
years, Ilhuicatepec, 4 years, Papantla, meaning doubtful, 2 years,
Tzonpanco, 'place of skulls or bones,' 5 years, Apazco, 4 years,
Atlicalaquian, 'where water collects,' 2 years, Cauhtitlan, 'near the
eagle,' 3 years, Azcapotzalco, 'in the ant-hill,' 6th cycle, 7 years,
1 year to Chalco, Pantitlan, 'place of tiers,' 'place of departure,'
neither quite correct; Tolpetlac, 2 years, _Epcohuac_, 'serpent,'
Cuauhtepec, 2 years, Chicomoztoc, 8 years, Huitzquilocal, 3 years,
Xaltepozauhcan, doubtful, 4 years, Cozcacuauhco, 4 years,
Techcatitlan, 5 years, Azcaxochic, 4 years, Tepetlapa, 5 years, Apan,
'on the water,' Teozomaco, 'in the monkey of stone,' 6 years,
Chapoltepec, 4 years. The same author from the Boturini map--see vol.
ii., pp. 547-50--derives the following: Left their island home, passed
through Coloacan, stayed 5 days in a place not named, thence to
Cuextecatlichocayan, Coatlicamac, 28 years, Tollan, 19, Atlicalaquiam,
10, Tlemaco, 5, Atotonilco, 5, Apazco, 12, Tzonpanco, 4, Xaltocan, 4,
Acalhuacan, 4, Ehecatepec, 4, Tolpetlac, 8, Coatitlan, 20,
Huixachtitlan, 4, Tecpayocan, 4, ----, Amalinalpan, 8, Pantitlan, 4,
Acolnahuac, 4, Popotla, 4, ----, Atlacuihuayan or Tacubaya, 4,
Chapoltepec, 20 years. Gondra, in _Prescott_, _Hist. Conq. Mex._, tom.
iii., pp. 23-30, interprets the Boturini map as follows:--Leave Aztlan
1168, pass through Colhuacan, Cuatlicamaca, 1216-25, Apanco, 1226-9,
Tlamaco, 1230-4, Tzompango, 1246, Azcapotzalco, 1250, Jaltocan,
1251-4, Colhuacan, 1258, Tolpetlac, 1262, Ecatepetl, 1270, Cuautitlan,
Chalco, Tecpayocan, 1295, Pantitlan, Atotonilco, 1303, Azcapotzalco,
1311, Apan, 1315, Acaxochitl, 1319, Tlacuihuallan, 1327, Chapoltepetl,
1331-51.
[VI-3] _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. ii., pp. 292-5, on the authority of
the _Mem. de Culhuacan_ and other original documents.
[VI-4] _Veytia_, tom. ii., pp. 135-6.
[VI-5] _Id._, pp. 136-8. Torquemada, tom. i., pp. 79-80, followed by
Clavigero and Vetancvrt, represents this event as having occurred at a
subsequent halting-place.
[VI-6] Veytia conjectures the emerald to typify the nobility of the
Tlatelulcas, a useless attribute when compared with Aztec science and
industry.
[VI-7] _Hist._, tom. ii., pp. 293-6; _Ixtlilxochitl_, vol. ix., p.
214. Veytia, tom. ii., p. 95, makes Chalchiuh Tlatonac another name of
Huitziton.
[VI-8] On Huitzilopochtli see vol. iii., pp. 288-324. Some of the
authorities imply that Huitzilopochtli died or at least appeared as an
idol long before this period, soon after their departure from Aztlan.
Boturini, _Idea_, pp. 60-1, states that Huitziton was taken up to
heaven in sight of the people. See also on his death and the
abandonment of Malinalxochitl; _Veytia_, tom. ii., pp. 93-101;
_Torquemada_, tom. i., pp. 78, 80-1; _Tezozomoc_, in _Kingsborough_,
vol. ix., pp. 6-8; _Duran_, MS., tom. i., cap. ii.-iv.; _Acosta_, pp.
459-61, 468; _Clavigero_, tom. i., pp. 160-1; _Brasseur_, _Hist._,
tom. ii., pp. 299-302; _Sigüenza_, in _Doc. Hist. Mex._, série iii.,
tom. i., pp. 39-43; _Ramirez_, in _García y Cubas_, _Atlas_; _Gondra_,
in _Prescott_, _Hist. Conq. Mex._, tom. iii., p. 25.
[VI-9] See vol. ii., p. 130; _Tezozomoc_, in _Kingsborough_, vol. ix.,
p. 6; _Duran_, MS., tom. i., cap. iii.; _Veytia_, tom. ii., pp. 103-5;
_Pimentel_, _Cuadro_, tom. i., p. 272; _Camargo_, in _Nouvelles
Annales_, tom. xcviii., pp. 131-2.
[VI-10] See vol. ii., pp. 297-9; _Veytia_, tom. ii., pp. 106-8;
_Tezozomoc_, in _Kingsborough_, vol. ix., pp. 7-8.
[VI-11] See besides references in preceding notes, _Vetancvrt_,
_Teatro_, pt ii., pp. 18-19; _Herrera_, _Hist. Gen._, dec. iii., lib.
ii., cap. xi.; _Gallatin_, in _Amer. Ethno. Soc., Transact._, vol. i.,
pp. 125-6; _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. ii., pp. 302-5.
[VI-12] Veytia, tom. ii., pp. 96-7, calls the bride of Ilhuicatl,
Tiacapapantzin; and Torquemada, tom. i., p. 82, Tiacapantzin. See also
_Clavigero_, tom. i., p. 163; _Duran_, MS., tom. i., cap. iii.;
_Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. ii., pp. 306-8.
[VI-13] Ixtlilxochitl, in _Kingsborough_, vol. ix., pp. 213, 346, 397,
gives the dates 1107, 1158, and 1105; the first date is 5 Acatl which
agrees with Brasseur's documents, but is interpreted as 1211 or one
cycle later than Ixtlilxochitl's interpretation. Veytia, tom. ii., pp.
79-80, gives the date 1263.
[VI-14] _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. ii., pp. 323, 378; _Torquemada_,
tom. i., p. 254. This author gives the succession of kings at
Culhuacan as Achitometl, Mazatzin, Quetzal, Chalchiuhtona, Quauhtlix,
Yohuallatonac, Tziuhtecatl, Xuihtemoctzin, and Coxcotzin. Veytia gives
the succession as follows: Achitometl, Xohualatonac, Calquiyauhtzin,
and Coxcox. It is impossible to reconcile this matter; but no events
of great importance in which the Culhuas were engaged seem to have
taken place until the reign of Coxcoxtli.
[VI-15] _Leon y Gama_, _Dos Piedras_, pt i., p. 20, and _Codex
Chimalpopoca_. Gallatin makes the date one cycle later or 1298.
[VI-16] _Torquemada_, tom. i., pp. 83-4. This author represents the
Aztecs as having been driven from Chapultepec at this time. There is
but little agreement respecting the order of events in Aztec history
previous to the foundation of Mexico.
[VI-17] _Codex Chimalpopoca_, in _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. ii., pp.
319-23.
[VI-18] Ixtlilxochitl, in _Kingsborough_, vol. ix., p. 348, and
Veytia, tom. ii., pp. 140-1, mention this application to Quinantzin,
but refer it to a much later period after the city of Mexico was
founded.
[VI-19] Veytia, tom. ii., pp. 81-8, 110-13, gives the date of
Tlotzin's death as 1298. Ixtlilxochitl, in _Kingsborough_, vol. ix.,
pp. 213, 346, 3981, 461, gives as dates, 1141, 1194, and 1140. See
also on his reign; _Torquemada_, tom. i., pp. 68-72; _Clavigero_, tom.
i., pp. 143-4; _Vetancvrt_, _Teatro_, pt ii., p. 16; _Brasseur_,
_Hist._, tom. ii., pp. 324-33.
[VI-20] _Torquemada_, tom. i., pp. 73-4, 85; _Veytia_, tom. ii., pp.
114-15; _Ixtlilxochitl_, in _Kingsborough_, vol. ix., pp. 347-8, 399,
452-3; _Clavigero_, tom. i., pp. 144-5; _Vetancvrt_, _Teatro_, pt ii.,
p. 16; _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. ii., pp. 333-8; _Müller_, _Reisen_,
tom. iii., p. 48.
[VI-21] Ixtlilxochitl, in _Kingsborough_, vol. ix., pp. 215, 347-8,
399, 452-3; Veytia, tom. i., pp. 116-17, 122-25, refers these events
to a considerably later period, and states that Huitzilihuitl
previously married a niece of Acolnahuacatl. _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom.
ii., pp. 338-44.
[VI-22] Veytia, tom. ii., pp. 143-54, relates this rebellion and
defeat of the northern provinces, and the consequent abdication of
Acolnahuacatl, attributing these events, however, to a much later
period, after the separation of the Tlatelulcas from the Mexicans,
giving the date as 1325. Most of the authorities do not definitely fix
the date, but Brasseur, _Hist._, tom. ii., pp. 344-55, gives
satisfactory reasons, supported by Camargo and Ixtlilxochitl, for
referring both this war and the battle at Poyauhtlan to the time when
the Mexicans were yet living under Huitzilihuitl at Chapultepec.
Veytia, tom. ii., pp. 162-73, unites the rebellion of the king's sons
and the fight against the Teo-Chichimecs, referring this latter war to
1350, and including the provinces of Huastepec, Huehuetlan, and
Cuitlahuac in the revolt. He represents the allied forces of Anáhuac,
100,000 strong, as serving in six divisions under the general command
of Quinantzin, already emperor. He also states that Quinantzin's queen
accompanied her sons in their exile. Of course there is great
diversity among the authorities in respect to names of leaders, and
details of the battles; but the general account given in my text is
the only consistent one that can be formed, since there is much even
in Veytia's account to support it. It is probable, in the light of
later events, that Quinantzin took no part in the war against the
Teo-Chichimecs, and quite possible that Camargo's statement that the
Teo-Chichimecs were victorious, though much exhausted, in the battle
at Poyauhtlan, results to a great extent from national pride in the
record of the Tlascaltecs. Torquemada, tom. i., pp. 84-6, 259-60,
seems to be the authority for the second campaign of Quinantzin in the
north, which was decided by a great battle at Tlaximalco in the region
of Monte Real. Ixtlilxochitl, in _Kingsborough_, vol. ix., pp. 215-16,
349-52, 398-400, 461-2, as usual favors in different places nearly all
the views of other authorities. See also _Camargo_, in _Nouvelles
Annales_, tom. xcviii., pp. 142-3; _Clavigero_, tom. i., pp. 144-5,
154.
[VI-23] _Veytia_, tom. ii., pp. 160, 228; _Ixtlilxochitl_, in
_Kingsborough_, vol. ix., pp. 216-17, 351, 399, 401, 453. The chief of
the Tailotlacs was Tempantzin, or Aztatlitexcan; and the Chimalpanecs
were under Xiloquetzin and Tlacateotzin. In this, as in other cases I
have not entered minutely into the names, marriages, and genealogies
of the nobles of Anáhuac, since my space does not permit a full
treatment of the subject, and a superficial treatment would be without
value.
[VI-24] _Monarq. Ind._, tom. i., p. 86. It is not quite certain that
this revolt, and that of some southern provinces, which occurred two
years later, were not connected with those that have been already
narrated. Torquemada rarely pays any attention to chronology.
[VI-25] _Kingsborough_, vol. ix., p. 217. It seems that Quinantzin's
successor granted permission to build temples.
[VI-26] _Hist._, tom. ii., pp. 377-80.
[VI-27] _Id._, p. 382; dates 1281, or 1300. According to Veytia, tom.
ii., pp. 160-1, and Ixtlilxochitl, p. 462, Xiuhtemoc, king of
Culhuacan, died in 1340, and was succeeded by Acamapichtli.
[VI-28] See pp. 327-8.
[VI-29] _Duran_, MS. tom. i., cap. iv.; _Acosta_, pp. 462-4;
_Herrera_, dec. iii., lib. ii., cap. xi. Torquemada, tom. i., pp.
83-4, 89, says the Aztecs were either brought as slaves from Ocolco to
Tizaapan, or were invited to Culhuacan and then enslaved. See also,
_Clavigero_, tom. i., pp. 164-5; _Vetancvrt_, _Teatro_, pt ii., pp.
20-1; _Veytia_, tom. ii., pp. 127-9. I make no effort to follow
Veytia's chronologic order which, in this part of the history, is
hopelessly confused and different from the other authorities.
[VI-30] _Hist._, tom. ii., pp. 380-98.
[VI-31] There is some confusion about the parentage of Tezozomoc and
Acamapichtli: 'Coxcoxtli épousa une fille d'Acolnahuacatl dont il eut
Tezozomoc, ou Acolnahuacatl épousa une fille de Coxcoxtli dont ce
prince serait issu. Quoique le MS. de 1528 donne Acolnahuacatl pour
père à Tezozomoc, le Mémorial de Culhuacan le donne pour le fils de
Coxcoxtli et frère d'Acamapichtli. Ixtlilxochitl dit également
qu'Acamapichtli était son frère.' _Id._, pp. 394-5. See _Ixtlilxochitl_,
in _Kingsborough_, vol. ix., pp. 349, 397, 401. He, however, seems to
make Acamapichtli also the son of Acolnahuacatl. Veytia, tom. ii., pp.
73, 161-2, fixes the date of the king's death at 1343. _Torquemada_,
tom. i., p. 68; _Granados y Galvez_, _Tardes Amer._, pp. 142-3.
[VI-32] _Veytia_, tom. ii., pp. 119-22. This author places this event
in the lifetime of Huitzilihuitl and of Acolnahuacatl. _Torquemada_,
tom. i., pp. 90-1; _Clavigero_, tom. i., pp. 165-7.
[VI-33] See references in last note; also _Humboldt_, _Vues_, tom. i.,
pp. 260-1; _Gondra_, in _Prescott_, _Hist. Conq. Mex._, tom. iii., pp.
80-1, 260-1.
[VI-34] _Acosta_, p. 464; _Duran_, MS., tom. i., cap. iv. He calls the
Culhua king Achitometl. _Herrera_, dec. iii., lib. ii., cap. xi.
[VI-35] In _Kingsborough_, vol. ix., p. 398.
[VI-36] Quinantzin succeeded to the empire, and appointed his uncle,
Tenancacaltzin, governor in Tenayocan, who usurped the throne in 1299;
Huitzilihuitl, of Mexicans, obtained in marriage a niece of king
Acolhua II. of Azcapuzalco; Coxcox succeeded Calquiyauhtzin as king of
Culhuacan; the Xochimilcas were defeated by the aid of the Mexicans,
and Acolhua II. became emperor in 1299; next, Acamapichtli used the
Mexicans to conquer Coxcox, and made himself king of Culhuacan in
1301, but died in 1303 and was succeeded by Xiuhtemoc; Huitzilihuitl
died in 1318, and the Mexicans chose as their king also, Xiuhtemoc of
Culhuacan, where many of them had settled, under the rule of
Acamapichtli, and where all now removed from Chapultepec, although
against the wishes of the Culhua people; at last, in 1325, for no very
definite reason, they were driven from Culhuacan and went to
Acatzintitlan, or Mexicaltzinco; then they applied to the emperor
Acolhua II. and were allowed to live for a time near Azcapuzalco,
while their priests were searching for the predestined location of
their future city; then took place the separation between the Mexicans
and Tlatelulcas; the Tlatelulcas obtain a King from the emperor after
having applied to Quinantzin in vain; Quinantzin regains the imperial
throne from Acolhua II.; and finally, Tenochtitlan was founded in
1327. _Veytia_, tom. ii., pp. 114-57.
[VI-37] _Hist._, tom. ii., pp. 402-3, 432-50.
[VI-38] On the foundation of Mexico, its date, and name, see--_Duran_,
MS., tom. i., cap. iv.-vi.; _Torquemada_, tom. i., pp. 92-3, 288-91;
_Veytia_, tom. ii., pp. 156-60; _Ixtlilxochitl_, in _Kingsborough_,
vol. ix., p. 461; _Tezozomoc_, in _Id._, pp. 5, 8-9; _Oviedo_, _Hist.
Gen._, tom. iii., p. 531; _Acosta_, pp. 465-6; _Clavigero_, tom. i.,
pp. 167-9; _Vetancvrt_, _Teatro_, pt ii., p. 21; _Codex Mendoza_, in
_Kingsborough_, vol. v., p. 40; _Arlegui_, _Chrón. Zacatecas_, pp.
8-9; _Cavo_, _Tres Siglos_, tom. i., p. 2; _Purchas his Pilgrimes_,
vol. iv., pp. 1066-7; _Gallatin_, in _Amer. Ethno. Soc._, _Transact._,
vol. i., pp. 144, 204-5; _Soc. Mex. Geog., Boletin_, tom. viii., pp.
405, 415; _Müller_, _Amer. Urrel._, p. 534; _Gondra_, in _Prescott_,
_Hist. Conq. Mex._, tom. iii., p. 356.
[VI-39] Date 1325, according to Clavigero, Gama, Chimalpain, Brasseur,
and Prescott; 1327, Veytia, following Sigüenza y Góngora; 1318, Duran;
1324, _Codex Mendoza_; 1140, 1141, or about 1200, Ixtlilxochitl; 1131,
Camargo; 1326, Tezozomoc, in _Veytia_; 1316, _Id._, in _Gondra_; 1225,
Chimalpain, in _Id._; 1317, Sigüenza, in _Id._; 1341, Torquemada, in
_Id._; 1321, Zapata, in _Veytia_; 1357, Martinez, in _Veytia_ and
_Gondra_.
[VI-40] On derivation of the name, see vol. ii., p. 559; also
_Torquemada_, tom. i., pp. 92-3; _Tezozomoc_, in _Kingsborough_, vol.
ix., p. 5; _Ixtlilxochitl_, in _Id._, p. 461. These authors derive
Tenochtitlan from the Aztec name of the nopal. Cavo, _Tres Siglos_,
tom. i., p. 2, Müller, _Amer. Urrel._, p. 534, and Carbajal Espinosa,
_Hist. Mex._, tom. i., p. 315, derive Mexico from _Metl-ico_ 'place
amid the magueys.'
[VI-41] 1357, Veytia; 1213, 1249, or 1253, Ixtlilxochitl; 1305,
Brasseur.
[VI-42] _Torquemada_, tom. i., pp. 86-7; _Clavigero_, tom. i., pp.
144-6; _Veytia_, tom. i., pp. 171, 176, 181; _Ixtlilxochitl_, in
_Kingsborough_, vol. ix., pp. 215-16, 352, 400, 453; _Sahagun_, tom.
ii., lib. viii., p. 275; _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. ii., pp. 422-5;
_Granados y Galvez_, _Tardes Amer._, p. 39.
[VI-43] Xaltocan is spoken of by Ixtlilxochitl and Veytia as having
been at this time subjected for the first time to the emperor. Its
inhabitants were Otomís, and the refugees are said to have built, or
rebuilt, the city of Otompan. Tezozomoc is represented as having borne
the principal part in the war, while the emperor Techotl joined in it
more to watch and restrain the allies than for anything else. Another
war in Tlascala, in which forces sent by Techotl, are said by
Torquemada, tom. i., pp. 265-8, to have participated, was, perhaps,
the same already mentioned in connection with the king of Culhuacan.
[VI-44] Azcapuzalco, Mexico, Coatlichan, Huexotla, Coatepec, and four
or five others are mentioned by Ixtlilxochitl, in _Kingsborough_, vol.
ix., p. 355, as paying no tribute; but some of these, according to
other authorities, were actually joined to the kingdom of Acolhuacan,
and had not even the honor of a tributary lord.
[VI-45] The list of those lords present at the funeral of Quinantzin
and the coronation of Techotl, is as follows: Tezozomoc, king of
Azcapuzalco; Paintzin, king of Xaltocan, lord of the Otomís;
Mocomatzin, Moteuhzomatzin, or Montezuma, king of Coatlichan;
Acamapichtli, king of Culhuacan and Mexico (this could not be, as
Mexico was not yet founded; Coxcoxtli was king of Culhuacan, but
Acamapichtli was, in one sense, chief of the Mexicans, and heir to the
throne of Culhuacan); Mixcohuatl, or Mixcohuatzin, king of Tlatelulco
(the Aztec Tlatelulco was not yet founded; Brasseur believes this to
refer to an ancient city of this name); Quetzalteuhtli, or
Quetzalatecuhtli, lord of Xochimilco; Izmatletlopac, lord of
Cuitlahuac; Chiquauhtli, lord of Mizquic (Chalco Atenco, according to
Brasseur); Pochotl, lord of Chalco Atenco (_Ixtlilxochitl_); Omaca, or
Omeacatl, lord of Tlalmanalco; Cacamaca, lord of Chalco; Temacatzin,
lord of Huexotzinco, (or as Brasseur has it, of Quauhquechollan);
Tematzin, prince of Huexotzinco (_Brasseur_); Cocaztzin, lord of
Quauhquelchula (_Ixtlilxochitl_); Teocuitlapopocatzin, lord of
Cuetlaxcohuapan, or Cuetlachcoapan; Chichimecatlalpayatzin,
high-priest of Cholula; Chichitzin, lord of Tepeaca; Mitl, prince of
Tlascala; Xihuilpopoca, lord of Zacatlan; Quauhquetzal, lord of
Tenamitec; Chichihuatzin, lord of Tulancingo; Tlaltecatzin, lord of
Quauhchinanco; Tecpatl, lord of Atotonilco; Iztaquauhtzin, lord of the
Mazahuas; Chalchiuhtlanetzin, lord of Coyuhuacan; Yohuatl
Chichimecatzin, lord of Coatepec; Quiyauhtzin, lord of Huexotla;
Tecuhtlacuiloltzin, lord of Acolman. _Ixtlilxochitl_, in
_Kingsborough_, vol. ix., p. 353; _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. ii., p.
428. Ixtlilxochitl says that these were not all, but merely the
leading vassals, all related to the emperor. A list of 46 is given in
_Ixtlilxochitl_, p. 355, and _Veytia_, tom. ii., pp. 214-15. 73 are
said to have attended one assembly, 66 another, and 30 another.
[VI-46] Veytia, tom. ii., pp. 182-3, and Brasseur, _Hist._, tom. ii.,
p. 427, state that the distant provinces of Quauhtemalan (Guatemala),
Tecolotlan (Vera Paz), Centizonac, Teoquantepec (Tehuantepec), and
Jalisco, were represented in the crowd that gathered at Techotl's
coronation, offering their homage and allegiance; but Ixtlilxochitl,
p. 353, says that these provinces would not recognize the emperor.
There is very little probability that the Chichimec power ever reached
so far, but not unlikely that communication took place between Mexico
and Central America at this period.
[VI-47] Veytia, tom. ii., pp. 195-6, implies that the new rites and
ideas came rather from Mexican than Toltec influence.
[VI-48] The general Council of State, composed of all the highest
lords, men of learning, ability, and character, was presided over by
the emperor himself. Of the five special councils the first was that
of war, under a lord who received the title of Tetlahto, and composed,
according to Brasseur, of lords of the Acolhua nation. The second was
the Council of the Exchequer, under a superintendent of finance, with
the title Tlami, or Calpixcontli, having charge of the collection of
tribute, and composed of men well acquainted with the resources of
every part of the country, chiefly as is said Chichimecs, Otomís, and
lords of Meztitlan. The third was the Diplomatic Council, whose
president had the title of Yolqui, and was a kind of Grand Master of
Ceremonies, whose duty it was to receive, present, entertain and
dispatch ambassadors. Many of this council were Culhuas. The fourth
was the council of the royal household, under the Amechichi, or High
Chamberlain. This council was composed largely of Tepanecs. A fifth
official, with the title of Cohuatl, superintended the work of the
royal gold and silver smiths and feather-workers at Ocolco, a suburb
of Tezcuco. The Spanish writers state that the president of each of
the councils must be a relation of the emperor, or at least a Tezcucan
nobleman. _Torquemada_, tom. i., p. 88; _Clavigero_, tom. i., p. 181;
_Veytia_, tom. ii., pp. 182-5; _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. ii., pp.
430-1.
[VI-49] There seems to have been some trouble between Ixtlilxochitl
and the Tepanec king Tezozomoc, even before Techotl's death.
Ixtlilxochitl was unmarried, although by his concubines he had many
children; and, as Veytia, tom. ii., pp. 217-18, has it, he took
Tezozomoc's daughter as a wife at his father's request, but sent her
back before consummating the marriage; or, according to Ixtlilxochitl,
p. 218, he refused to take Tezozomoc's daughter, who had already been
repudiated by some one, except as a concubine. The same author, p.
356, says this occurred after his father's death. He finally married a
Mexican princess. Tezozomoc was very much offended.
[VI-50] The emperor is said to have learned the Nahua language from
his Culhua nurse Papaloxochitl, and to have become so convinced of its
superiority that he ordered its adoption. _Ixtlilxochitl_, p. 217;
_Veytia_, tom. ii., pp. 194-5.
[VI-51] Veytia, tom. ii., pp. 217-8, says he was over sixty years old;
Ixtlilxochitl gives 1338 as the date of his birth, which would make
him less than twenty. The method of arriving at his age seems to be by
fixing the date of his son's birth, noting that his father's wife was
eight years old at her marriage, and taking into consideration the
reported Chichimec custom which required the husband to wait until his
wife was forty before consummating the marriage. Ixtlilxochitl was
endowed, at birth, with thirteen towns or provinces; his mother is
said to have been the sister of Coxcoxtli, king of Culhuacan.
[VI-52] 1353, or 1357, _Ixtlilxochitl_; 1409, _Veytia_. On Techotl's
reign see: _Ixtlilxochitl_, in _Kingsborough_, vol. ix., pp. 217-18,
353-6, 400-1, 453, 462; _Veytia_, tom. ii., pp. 178-231; _Torquemada_,
tom. i., pp. 87-9, 108; _Clavigero_, tom. i., pp. 180-1, 184;
_Sahagun_, _Hist. Gen._, tom. ii., lib. viii., p. 276; _Vetancvrt_,
_Teatro_, pt ii., pp. 16-17, 24; _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. ii., pp.
425-32, 457-61, 472-3.
[VI-53] _Gomara_, _Conq. Mex._, fol. 302; _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom.
ii., p. 451. Veytia, tom. ii., pp. 127-30, agrees, except in dates, so
far as the succession of Acamapichtli is concerned, and his friendship
for the Mexicans. He, however, says nothing of Achitometl II., dates
Acamapichtli's death in 1303, and states that he was succeeded by his
eldest son Xiuhtemoc. The _Codex Mendoza_, in _Kingsborough_, vol. v.,
p. 42, implies that Acamapichtli transferred his court in 1370 to
Mexico, giving, as Motolinia, in _Icazbalceta_, _Col. de Doc._, tom.
i., p. 6, says, the lordship of Culhuacan to one of his sons. See also
_Ixtlilxochitl_, pp. 218, 343, 349. Much of the confusion in the
Culhua succession is caused by the fact that there were two
Acamapichtlis, one, king of Culhuacan and in a certain sense the
leader of the Mexicans, and the other, king of Mexico at a later
date.
[VI-54] Gomara and Brasseur as above; also _Brasseur_, p. 465.
[VI-55] _Torquemada_, tom. i., p. 93; _Duran_, MS. tom. i., cap. x.
[VI-56] _Duran_, MS., tom. i., cap. vi.; _Tezozomoc_, in
_Kingsborough_, vol. ix., pp. 9-10; _Herrera_, dec. iii., lib. ii.,
cap. xii; _Acosta_, _Hist. de las Ynd._, pp. 471-3; _Torquemada_, tom.
i., pp. 99-101; _Clavigero_, tom. i., p. 176; _Vetancvrt_, _Teatro_,
pt ii., pp. 22-3.
[VI-57] _Hist._, tom. ii., p. 454.
[VI-58] _Veytia_, tom. ii., p. 159, writes the name Tenuhctzin, and
dates his election 1330. In the _Codex Mendoza_, in _Kingsborough_,
vol. v., p. 40, it is stated that the other chiefs still continued to
govern their clans. See also, _Clavigero_, tom. i., pp. 173-4;
_Torquemada_, tom. i., pp. 289-91; _Mendieta_, _Hist. Ecles._, p.
148.
[VI-59] See pp. 325-6, of this volume.
[VI-60] Veytia says they first applied to Quinantzin, placing this
event in the reign of Alconahuacatl, as emperor.
[VI-61] _Veytia_, tom. ii., pp. 135, 138, 140-1; _Torquemada_, tom.
i., pp. 93, 99, 291. Duran, MS., tom. i., cap. v., names four chiefs
who were at the head of the secessionists. Ixtlilxochitl, in
_Kingsborough_, vol. ix., p. 398, mentions two chiefs with their
adherents. Others speak of eight. Acosta, p. 468, writes Tlatelulco,
'place of terraces.' Gomara, _Conq. Mex._, fol. 113, defines the name
'islet.' Vetancvrt, _Teatro_, pt ii., p. 22, derives it from
_tlatelli_, 'booth,' because the market was located here. Brasseur,
_Hist._, tom. ii., pp. 467-8, says the original name was Xalliyacac,
'point of land,' which was in the territory belonging to Tlatelulco,
at the time a small village, but in the Toltec period a flourishing
city. See also, _Clavigero_, tom. i., p. 170.
[VI-62] There is great diversity among the authorities respecting the
parentage of Acamapichtli II., some of which may probably be
attributed to the confounding of two of the same name. Veytia, tom.
ii., pp. 186-8, 161, dates his accession 1361, says a political
contest of four years preceded his election, and calls him the son of
Huitzilihuitl by Atotoztli, daughter of Acamapichtli. Clavigero, tom.
i., pp. 173-4, Acosta, pp. 469-71, and Duran, MS., tom. i., cap.
v-vi., represent the new king as son of Opochtli, an Aztec chief, by
Atotoztli, a Culhua princess. Clavigero makes the date 1352;
Torquemada, tom. i., pp. 94-97, refers to him as a noble Aztec, son of
Cohuatzontli by the daughter of a Culhua chieftain. Ixtlilxochitl, pp.
344, 348-9, 456, gives as usual two or three versions of the matter,
saying in one place that the new king was the third son of the king of
Azcapuzalco. Gomara, _Conq. Mex._, fol. 302, brings him from
Coatlichan, whither he had escaped with his mother after the death of
her husband the Culhua king. 'Acamapichtli, king of Culhuacan, father
of the second Acamapichtli spoken of here, was a grandson of
Acxoquauhtli, son of Achitometl I., by Azcaxochitl, daughter of the
Mexican Huitzilatl. Acamapichtli I. had also married Ixxochitl,
daughter of Teotlehuac, who was a brother of Azcaxochitl and son of
the same Huitzilatl, and had had by her Acamapichtli II.' _Brasseur_,
_Hist._, tom. ii., pp. 469-70. See also: _Vetancvrt_, _Teatro_, pt
ii., p. 22; _Motolinia_, in _Icazbalceta_, _Col. de Doc._, tom. i., p.
6; _Herrera_, _Hist. Gen._, dec. iii., lib. ii., cap. xii.; _Purchas
his Pilgrimes_, vol. iv., pp. 1005-6. The question of the new king's
marriage is even more deeply involved. See same authorities.
[VI-63] _Torquemada_, tom. i., pp. 94-5; _Clavigero_, tom. i., pp.
174-5; _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. ii., p. 471. Date according to
Clavigero, 1353. Ixtlilxochitl, in _Kingsborough_, vol. ix., pp. 213,
348-9, 398, 453, and Veytia, _Hist. Ant. Mej._, tom. ii., p. 141, say
that the king's name was Mixcohuatl, or Epcoatzin, or Cohuatlecatl.
See also _Vetancvrt_, _Teatro_, pt ii., p. 22; _Sahagun_, _Hist.
Gen._, tom. ii., lib. viii., p. 273; _Granados y Galvez_, _Tardes
Amer._, pp. 174-5; _Müller_, _Reisen_, tom. iii., p. 49; and _Carbajal
Espinosa_, _Hist. Mex._, tom. i., pp. 317-9, with portrait.
CHAPTER VII.
THE CHICHIMEC PERIOD.--CONCLUDED.
Aztec History -- Reigns of Acamapichtli II. and
Quaquauhpitzahuac -- Rebuilding of Culhuacan -- Huitzilihuitl
II., King of Mexico -- Tlacateotzin, King of Tlatelulco
-- Chimalpopoca Succeeds in Mexico -- Funeral of Techotl
-- Ixtlilxochitl, Emperor of the Chichimecs -- Symptoms
of Discontent -- Plans of Tezozomoc, the Tepanec King
-- Secret council of Rebels -- Religious Toleration in
Tezcuco -- Conquest of Xaltocan and Cuitlahuac -- Birth of
Nezahualcoyotl -- War between Tezcuco and Azcapuzalco --
Victories of Ixtlilxochitl -- Siege and Fall of Azcapuzalco
-- Treachery of Tezozomoc -- Fall of Tezcuco -- Flight and
Death of Ixtlilxochitl -- Tezozomoc proclaimed Emperor --
Reorganization of the Empire -- Adventures of Nezahualcoyotl
-- Death of Tezozomoc -- Maxtla usurps the Imperial Throne
-- Murder of the Mexican Kings -- Nezahualcoyotl's Victory
-- Itzcoatl, King of Mexico -- Acolhua and Aztec Alliance --
Fall of Azcapuzalco -- The Tri-partite Alliance, or the New
Empire.
The next and final chapter of the Chichimec annals covers a period of
three quarters of a century, extending from the death of the emperor
Techotl in 1357, to the formation of the tri-partite alliance between
the Acolhuas, Aztecs, and Tepanecs, in 1431. It embraces the reigns of
three emperors, Ixtlilxochitl, Tezozomoc, and Maxtla; and is a record
of continued struggles for the imperial power between the Acolhuas and
Tepanecs, resulting in the humiliation of the latter and the triumph
of the former, through the aid of a third power, which is admitted as
an equal to the victor in the final reconstruction of the empire. The
rôle of the other nations of Anáhuac during this period, is that of
allies to one or the other of the powers mentioned, or, occasionally,
of rebels who take advantage of the dissensions of the ruling powers
to declare their independence, enjoyed as a rule only until such time
as the masters may have an opportunity to reduce them to their old
allegiance. We find the aboriginal record more and more complete as
we approach the epoch of the conquest, with much less confusion in
chronology, so far as leading events are concerned, although perfect
agreement among the authorities is yet far from being attained in the
minor details with which the narrative is crowded. A new source of
disagreement is, moreover, reached as we approach the final century
of the native annals--national prejudices on the part of the native
historians through whom those annals have been handed down, and a
constant tendency among such writers as Ixtlilxochitl, Tezozomoc,
Chimalpain, and Camargo, to exhibit in their highest colors the actions
of the nations from which they have descended, while ever disposed
to cloud the fame of rival powers. Fortunately, one authority serves,
generally, as an efficient check upon another in such cases.
[Sidenote: REIGN OF ACAMAPICHTLI II.]
[Sidenote: THE CHICHIMEC PERIOD.]
Before relating the general history of Anáhuac during the successive
reigns of the emperors Ixtlilxochitl and Tezozomoc, in which history
the Mexicans took a prominent part as allies of the latter, it
will be well to glance, briefly--for there is little to say on the
subject--at the course of events in the new cities on the lake marshes.
We left Tenochtitlan under the rule of its Culhua king, Acamapichtli
II., or rather under the regency of his queen, Ilancueitl; while
Quaquauhpitzahuac, son of the Tepanec king Tezozomoc, was on the throne
of Tlatelulco, both kingdoms being tributary to that of Azcapuzalco.
One of the last acts of the queen was the re-settlement of Culhuacan
in 1378, by means of a colony sent from Mexico under Nauhyotl, the
fourth of that name who had ruled in the Culhua city. This was done
partly from motives of pride in restoring the capital of her own
and her husband's ancestors, and partly to serve as a check on the
encroachments of the Chalcas in the south.[VII-1] In 1383 the queen died.
Ixtlilxochitl states that she bore her husband three sons, one of
whom was Huitzilihuitl; Clavigero tells us she was barren, but took
charge of the education of two of her husband's sons, Huitzilihuitl
and Chimalpopoca, by another wife; Torquemada confounds the two
Acamapichtlis, and is, consequently, greatly puzzled about Ilancueitl's
children; and finally, Brasseur shows that she was espoused at an
advanced age by the king solely for political motives, and that she
lived harmoniously with his other two wives, one of whom bore him
Huitzilihuitl, and the other Chimalpopoca.[VII-2] The reign of Acamapichtli
II. dates, in a certain sense, from the death of his queen, who for
many years had, at least, ruled jointly with him. The beginning of the
wars between the Mexicans and Chalcas, which were waged so bitterly
for many years, is attributed to Acamapichtli's reign, as are the
conquests of Quauhnahuac, Mizquic, and Xochimilco; but it must be
understood that it was only as the allies of the Tepanec king that
the Mexicans engaged in these wars. Torquemada and Acosta assert that
Acamapichtli's reign was a very peaceful one.[VII-3] It was after the
conquest of Quauhnahuac, later Cuernavaca, that the first gold-workers
came to ply their art in Tenochtitlan.[VII-4] After having ruled wisely and
justly, greatly enlarging and improving his capital, he died in 1403,
leaving the choice of a successor wholly to his nobles and priests.[VII-5]
There is great disagreement among the authorities respecting the length
of his reign, some dating it from his first call to the throne, and
others from the death of the queen. Immediately after the funeral of
Acamapichtli, an assembly of the wise men of the nation was held to
deliberate on the choice of a successor. The priests made an effort
to acquire the control by discontinuing the monarchy. They wished the
temporal affairs of the state to be managed by a senate or council,
with a military chieftain to lead their armies in war; but the majority
believed that their only hope of national safety and future power
was in a monarchy, and Huitzilihuitl II., the eldest son of the late
king was called to the throne during the same or the following year.
The speeches by which the old men convinced the assembly that their
yet precarious condition, considering their isolated position and the
powerful nations surrounding them, made it necessary to call to their
throne a wise, prudent, and powerful king, are recorded by Duran,
Tezozomoc, and Torquemada; as are the addresses of advice to the new
king at his coronation, in which he was reminded that his position
was no sinecure, but that on him depended the future greatness of the
Mexicans foretold by the gods. The choice of the people was ratified
by king Tezozomoc of Azcapuzalco; and at the same time it is reported
that Itzcoatl, a natural son of the late king, by a woman of rank, was
appointed commander of the Mexican armies. One of the means by which
the Aztecs struggled to attain to their predestined greatness, was by
contracting foreign matrimonial alliances with powerful nations; and
as Huitzilihuitl had yet no wife, an embassy was sent to Tezozomoc
with a most humble and flattering petition, begging that all-powerful
sovereign to favor his most obedient vassal by sending one of his
daughters, "one of his pearls, emeralds, or precious feathers," as
Torquemada expresses it, to share with the new king his poor home in
the marshes. The petition was granted, the princess Ayauhcihuatl was
given to Huitzilihuitl, and the following year his brother Chimalpopoca
won the hand of the beautiful princess Miahuaxochitl, daughter of the
lord of Quauhnahuac, who became the mother of Montezuma.[VII-6] By the
alliance with Quauhnahuac, the city of Tenochtitlan received a large
accession of artists and skilled workmen; while from Tezozomoc, who
is said by Veytia to have personally visited the city at the birth of
his grandson, the Mexicans obtained the removal of the tribute which
they had so long been obliged to pay, or, at least, its reduction to
a merely nominal amount, including a few wild fowl and fishes for the
royal table. From this time the Mexicans are said to have felt more at
their ease, to have paid more attention to the arts and sciences, and
to have abandoned their coarse garments of _nequen_ for more sumptuous
apparel.[VII-7]
[Sidenote: AZTEC ALLIANCES.]
[Sidenote: REIGN OF HUITZILIHUITL II.]
Very soon after Huitzilihuitl's accession to the throne, the
Tlatetulcan king Quaquauhpitzahuac died, and was succeeded by his
son Tlacateotzin, according to Brasseur's authorities; although
Veytia places at about this date the succession and marriage of
Quaquauhpitzahuac, soon followed by Tlacateotzin's birth, the latter
becoming king only in 1414. This subject of the Tlatetulcan succession
is inextricably confused, since some authors make Mixcohuatl precede
Quaquauhpitzahuac as first king; and Ixtlilxochitl, in one of his
relations, even puts another king, Amatzin, between the two. The matter
is not one of great importance, since it is certain that Tlacateotzin
reigned after 1414 during a most exciting period, being one of the
chief military leaders in Tezozomoc's army.[VII-8] The two cities had
by this time been extended greatly beyond their original limits, and
were separated only by a narrow tract of marsh, which was dry at low
water. Notwithstanding the fair promises made by the Tepanec king
to his vassals and allies on the lake, some of his tyrannical acts
seem to have been directed at them even at this early time, if we may
credit the statement that Nauhyotl IV., in command of the Aztec-Culhua
colony at Culhuacan for the past thirty-five years, was murdered by
Tezozomoc's orders in 1413.[VII-9] Tlatelulco was yet in its buildings and
some other respects superior to its rival, perhaps by reason of being
less under priestly control, or through the greater favor shown its
people by the Tepanecs. But Huitzilihuitl had done much to build up
and embellish Tenochtitlan, and particularly to promote her commercial
industries, by digging canals, multiplying the number of chinampas,
and by a wise system of trade regulations. He is also accredited
with a new code of laws, and with the introduction of war canoes
and the training of his soldiers in their skillful management.[VII-10]
Mendieta states that this king conquered Tultitlan, Quauhtitlan,
Chalco, Tulancingo, Xaltocan, Otompan, Tezcuco, and Acolman, during
his reign, but the reference is of course to the wars of the Tepanec
king by the aid of his Mexican allies; and Sahagun says he fought
against Culhuacan, referring doubtless to a former ruler of the same
name.[VII-11] Huitzilihuitl II. died in 1417,[VII-12] and his half brother,
Chimalpopoca, was immediately chosen to succeed him, in the absence
of any legitimate son. We have seen that there is much disagreement
respecting Huitzilihuitl's marriage and his children; some authors
even state that Chimalpopoca was his son, but the majority of the
best authorities agree that the new king was the son of Acamapichtli
II., and a brother of Huitzilihuitl. The latter's only legitimate son,
Acolnahuacatl, was killed, in childhood, by Maxtla, son of Tezozomoc,
in 1399, through fear that he might inherit the crown of Azcapuzalco,
as Clavigero states. Acosta, confounding this tradition with the fact
that king Chimalpopoca was long after killed by Maxtla's orders, tells
us Chimalpopoca was killed in childhood. Torquemada adds to the fact
of the young Acolnahuacatl's murder, another motive for the crime, in
a tale to the effect that Tezozomoc had given Maxtla's wife to the
Mexicans for a queen, hence the wrath and vengeance of the Tepanec
prince. The choice of the Mexicans is said to have been approved both
by the emperor Ixtlilxochitl and by Tezozomoc. Chimalpopoca's marriage
has already been noted, and the birth of his son Montezuma Ilhuicamina;
Veytia states that his wife, by whom he had seven children, was the
princess Matlalatzin, a daughter of the king of Tlatelulco. I shall
have occasion to speak again of this king.[VII-13]
* * * * *
[Sidenote: SUCCESSION OF IXTLILXOCHITL.]
To return to the general history of the Chichimec empire, the kings and
lords were assembled at Tezcuco to perform the last honors to the dead
emperor Techotl, and to celebrate the accession of his son and chosen
heir Ixtlilxochitl. We have seen that Techotl had by his great ability
and by a series of most extraordinary political measures checked the
independent spirit of his vassal lords, avoided all internal strife,
centralized the imperial power, and made himself almost absolute
master of Anáhuac. Another Techotl might perhaps have retained the
mastery; but we have seen that many of his acts were calculated to
excite the opposition of the Chichimec lords, that on his death-bed he
expressed his misgivings respecting future events, and that his son
had already made of the Tepanec king an enemy. It is quite possible
that the last years of Techotl's reign were marked with troubles
which have not been recorded, and that there were causes of enmity
towards Ixtlilxochitl which are unknown to us. Brasseur attributes
the misfortunes that ensued to Ixtlilxochitl's vacillating spirit and
love of ease; but his acts as recorded by the Spanish writers indicate
rather a peaceful and forgiving disposition, joined to marked and
brilliant abilities as a warrior. However this may be, trouble ahead
was indicated at the very funeral of his mighty and popular father.
Many lords invited to participate in the ceremonies were not present.
Veytia, and Ixtlilxochitl in one of his relations, say that only four
lords attended the obsequies; but the latter author elsewhere, and
also Boturini, make the number present over sixty, which is much more
probable. The absentees sent in various pretexts for not attending;
if they had come they would have been obliged to swear allegiance to
the new emperor or to openly rebel, an act for which they were not yet
ready. Torquemada and Clavigero tell us that Tezozomoc was present
at the funeral, but departed immediately after without giving his
adhesion to the new emperor. Ixtlilxochitl, however, was crowned king
of Acolhuacan by the princes present at Tezcuco, and in all probability
assumed at that time the title of Chichimecatl Tecuhtli, or emperor,
that was his due, although no author states this directly, and both
Ixtlilxochitl and Veytia state expressly that he was not crowned as
emperor for many years. Ixtlilxochitl says, however, in one place that
he was proclaimed 'lord paramount' by the assembled princes, and there
was no apparent motive for delay in this respect.[VII-14] Ixtlilxochitl was
at first disposed to resort to force and to avenge the insult offered
him. Putting his army in order and stationing his forces in and about
the capital, he sent a summons to Azcapuzalco, ordering the Tepanec
king to appear forthwith at court to pay allegiance to his emperor.
Tezozomoc, not yet ready for open revolt, pleaded illness, assured
Ixtlilxochitl of his good intentions and loyalty, and promised to come
as soon as his health would permit. The emperor understood that this
was but a pretext, but he was unwilling to resort to harsh measures if
they could be avoided, and was induced by his counselors, many of them
perhaps in full sympathy with Tezozomoc, to await the better health of
his opponent.[VII-15]
[Sidenote: PLOTS OF TEZOZOMOC.]
In the meantime Tezozomoc called a secret meeting of the disaffected
lords, with many of whom he may be supposed to have been already
in communication. The kings of Mexico and Tlatelulco were among
the allies on whom he counted most, and to whom he made the most
flattering promises in case of future success. In a long speech before
the assembly he expatiated upon the acts of the late emperor which
had been most calculated to offend the lords before him. He spoke of
their rights as independent Chichimec rulers, of which they had been
deprived and only repaid by empty honors at the imperial court; urged
upon them the necessity of making an effort to shake off the tyranny
that oppressed them while they retained the power to act; reminded them
of Ixtlilxochitl's youth and general unfitness to direct the affairs
of a mighty empire. He boasted of having himself already shown his
independence by absenting himself from the new emperor's coronation.
According to most authorities, he disclaimed any ambitious aims of
his own, or any intention to despoil Ixtlilxochitl of his domains as
king of Acolhuacan, his only avowed design being to restore to all
Chichimec lords their ancient independence; but others state that
he openly expressed his intention to wear the imperial crown. At any
rate, the assembled princes signified their approval of his views, and
looked to him for directions; pledged to secrecy for the present, they
were dismissed, and Tezozomoc began his preparations for the coming
struggle. But he proceeded slowly, for he knew that Ixtlilxochitl was
not a foe to be easily overcome.[VII-16] Ixtlilxochitl probably knew of
the meeting, but still took no active steps against the Tepanec king,
although, as the Spanish writers say, he was constantly arming and
disciplining his forces. It is said that immediately upon his accession
he removed all restrictions upon religious rites among the many
nationalities and sects which composed the population of Tezcuco, even
permitting human sacrifice, so strictly prohibited by his ancestors.
He thus laid the foundation for troubles analogous to those that had
destroyed Tollan and Culhuacan.[VII-17]
Tezozomoc carefully prepared his way to future power by establishing
Tepanec colonies in different localities. One of them was at Tultitlan,
near Quauhtitlan. We have seen the latter city pass under Culhua
control at the fall of Culhuacan; but after the reigns of king
Iztactototl and queen Ehuatlycue, the Chichimecs had regained control
in 1372. In 1395 an army, composed chiefly of Tepanecs and Mexicans,
under Xaltemoc, lord of Quauhtitlan, conquered and burned the Otomí
city of Xaltocan, and a large extent of territory between that city and
Tollan, of which Tezozomoc took for himself the larger share, giving
also portions to his allies for their services. In 1392 the Cuitlahuacs
had been conquered by the Mexicans and entrusted to a governor devoted
to the interests of Tezozomoc, who embraced every opportunity to place
his sons or his friends in positions where they might be of use to
him in the future.[VII-18] Ixtlilxochitl watched the aggressive movements
without interfering, from cowardice or weakness as one would think
were it not for subsequent events, and at last Tezozomoc proceeded
to test his adversary's feelings towards him, by sending, for three
years successively, a quantity of cotton to Tezcuco, at first with the
request, but finally with the order, that it should be woven into fine
fabrics and returned to Azcapuzalco. Twice the request was granted and
the cloths sent back with a polite message, still, as is said, at the
advice of the Acolhua counselors; and the Tepanec king evidently began
to think he had overrated his emperor's courage. He was disposed to
begin hostilities at once, but was induced by his allied counselors
rather to increase year by year the quantity of cotton sent to Tezcuco,
and thus to gradually accustom the Acolhua king to a payment of
tribute, while he was also constantly winning over to his side lords
that yet wavered. On the third year a very large amount of cotton was
sent, without any formal request, but with a mere message directing
that the staple be forthwith woven into the finest cloths, and to
ensure dispatch that it be divided among the Acolhua lords.
[Sidenote: PREPARATIONS FOR WAR.]
Ixtlilxochitl was at last fully aroused, refused to be controlled by
his advisers, and returned to Tezozomoc's message a reply substantially
as follows: "I have received the cotton kindly furnished by you,
and thank you for it. It will serve to make quilted garments to be
worn by my soldiers who go to chastise a pack of rebels who not only
refuse allegiance to their emperor, but relying on my forbearance,
have the impudence to ask for tribute. If you have more cotton send
it also; my soldiers do not need armor to fight against such foes,
but these quilted garments will give my armies a finer appearance in
their triumphal march." With this reply, or soon after, according to
Brasseur, a formal challenge was sent to Tezozomoc, whose gray hairs
and near relationship, as Ixtlilxochitl said, could no longer protect
him. The other authorities speak of no formal challenge, but of long
preparation on both sides for the approaching conflict. The Tepanec
king summoned his allies, chief among whom were the Mexicans and
Tlatelulcas, promised to divide the conquered domain of Acolhuacan
among them, and prepared to march on Tezcuco. Ixtlilxochitl also
called upon his vassal lords, including those of Coatlichan, Huexotla,
Coatepec, Iztapalocan, Tepepulco, Chalco, and others, explained to them
the ambitious plans of Tezozomoc, recalled to them the favors they had
received from his ancestors, and ordered them to aid him immediately
with all their resources. Many of the authors state that he wished
at this time to be crowned as emperor, but postponed the ceremonies
at the wish of his lords, until after the defeat of his enemy, when
they might be performed with fitting pomp. All the lords promised
their assistance, although some of them are supposed to have been in
sympathy with Tezozomoc. The Spanish writers represent these events as
having occurred from 1410 to 1412, but it is evident from what follows
that they are to be attributed to the last years of the fourteenth
century.[VII-19]
Brasseur, relying on a chapter of Torquemada's work,[VII-20] states that in
the challenge mentioned above, the region of Quauhtitlan was mentioned
as a battle-ground, and that it was followed by a three years' war,
in which Ixtlilxochitl succeeded, at least, in holding his ground, and
thereby greatly increased his strength by inspiring confidence in the
minds of his wavering vassals. Other authorities, however, state that
open hostilities were not engaged in for a long time after the affair
of the cotton, although preparations were made on both sides; and this
was probably the case, since I find nothing in Torquemada's account to
indicate that he intended to make this war distinct from that which,
according to all the authorities, took place some years later.
Ixtlilxochitl had married a sister of prince Chimalpopoca of
Mexico--half-sister to king Huitzilihuitl II.--by whom he had two
children, the princess Atototzin and prince Nezahualcoyotl, 'the
fasting coyote.'[VII-21] All the authorities agree on 1402 as the date of
his birth, although disagreeing somewhat respecting the month, day,
and hour, these variations being, perhaps, not worth discussion from
a historical point of view. The predictions of the astrologers at his
birth were most flattering for his future career, and he was entrusted
for education and training to a Toltec gentleman of high culture.[VII-22]
Xaltemoc of Quauhtitlan, who in 1395 had commanded the allied forces in
the conquest of Xaltocan, had, it seems, gained the good-will of both
the Chichimec and Culhua branches of the population of that city, the
power of which had been greatly increased; but this ruler, not lending
himself readily to the plans of Tezozomoc, is reported to have been
assassinated by the latter's orders in 1408, and his domain to have
been divided and put under sons or friends of the Tepanec tyrant, as
governors.[VII-23]
* * * * *
[Sidenote: WAR BETWEEN ACOLHUAS AND TEPANECS.]
The first act of open hostility took place in 1415, when Tezozomoc sent
an army in several divisions round the lake southward to devastate
the country, destroy the minor towns belonging to the emperor, to
join forces at Aztahuacan, take and fortify Iztapalocan, an important
city near by, and from that place to march on Tezcuco and capture the
emperor. The plan succeeded at first and many towns were pillaged. A
traitor led them by the best routes and gave them instructions as to
manner of assaulting, or, as Brasseur says, admitted them into the
city of Iztapalocan; but the inhabitants under the brave governor,
Quauhxilotzin, succeed in repulsing the Tepanec forces although not
without considerable loss of prisoners, to which misfortune was joined
the death of the brave governor, murdered by the hands of the same
traitor mentioned above. Ixtlilxochitl, hearing of the march of his
enemy, came to Iztapalocan from Tezcuco soon after the battle, with
a small army hastily gathered; but the Tepanecs finding that their
plan had failed in its main object, had retreated to Azcapuzalco,
and the emperor's force was too small to attack Tezozomoc in his
intrenchments.[VII-24]
Before beginning a campaign against Tezozomoc, Ixtlilxochitl called
a meeting of such vassal lords as were accessible, and had his son
Nezahualcoyotl proclaimed, with all the pomp of the old Toltec rites,
as his successor on the imperial throne. The high-priests of Huexotla
and Cholula assisted at the ceremonies, and the only lords present were
those of Huexotla,[VII-25] Coatlichan, and Iztapalocan; others who were
faithful were busy preparing their forces for war. The authorities do
not agree whether this meeting took place in Tezcuco or Huexotla, and
some imply that Ixtlilxochitl was crowned at the same time.[VII-26]
Tezozomoc, too old to lead his armies in person, gave his son
Maxtla and the kings of Mexico and Tlatelulco, the highest places
in command, making the latter, Tlacateotzin, commander-in-chief. He
also took especial care in strengthening his fortifications on the
frontier. Ixtlilxochitl divided his forces in three divisions; the
first, commanded by Tochintzin, grandson of the lord of Coatlichan,
was stationed in towns just north of the capital; the second, under
Ixcontzin, lord of Iztapalocan, was to protect the southern provinces;
while the third, under the emperor himself, remained near Tezcuco,
ready to render aid to his officers where it should be most needed.
They were ordered to remain within their intrenchments and await
the enemy's movements. The Tepanecs and their allies crossed the
lake in canoes, landed in the region of Huexotla, carried some small
settlements on the lake shores, and assaulted the Acolhuas in their
intrenched positions. Day after day they repeated the assault, and
were driven back each time with heavy loss, both sides in the meantime
receiving strong reinforcements. Finally Tochintzin feigned a retreat
towards Chiuhnauhtlan, drew the Tepanecs in pursuit, faced about
suddenly and utterly routed the forces of Tlacateotzin. The lake shore
was covered with the dead, and the defeated army retired in confusion
to Azcapuzalco. The good-natured emperor gave orders to discontinue
offensive operations, and sent an embassy proffering peace on condition
of submission to him as emperor, and offering to forget the past.
Tezozomoc haughtily declined the overtures, claimed a right, as the
nearest relative of the great Xolotl, to the title of Chichimecatl
Tecuhtli, and announced his intention to enforce his claims, naming
a day when his armies would again meet the Acolhuas on the field
of Chiuhnauhtlan. This may be the challenge already referred to as
recorded by Torquemada. At any rate, it was accepted, a large army was
concentrated at the point indicated, and another at Huexotla, which
place, as was ascertained, Tezozomoc really intended treacherously
to attack, and which he expected to find comparatively undefended.
Tlacateotzin crossed the lake as before in canoes with an immense army,
but as before was defeated in a succession of battles, and after some
days forced to retreat to the Tepanec capital, branches of the Acolhua
army in the meantime sacking several towns in the enemy's domain,
and punishing several lords who had deserted the emperor to join
Tezozomoc.[VII-27]
[Sidenote: IXTLILXOCHITL'S VICTORIES.]
Ixtlilxochitl's star was now in the ascendant; his valor and success
in war inspired new confidence; and many lords who had hitherto held
aloof, now declared their allegiance to the emperor. As usual, the
Tezcucan monarch was disposed to suspend his military operations, and
receive the allegiance which he supposed Tezozomoc would now be ready
to offer; but he soon learned that his adversary, far from abandoning
his projects, had succeeded, by new promises of a future division of
territory and spoils, in gaining over to his side the lords of two
powerful provinces, one of which was Chalco, adjoining the Acolhuan
domain on the north and south. Exasperated at his foe's persistence,
and having a larger army than ever before at his command, Ixtlilxochitl
determined to punish Tezozomoc and his allies in their own territory.
Leaving at and about Iztapalocan, and under the lord of that city, a
sufficient army to keep the Chalcas in check, he marched at the head
of a large army northward and round the lakes, taking in his course
Otompan and Tollan with many towns of minor importance. Now without
opposition, now after a bloody combat, town after town fell before the
advancing conqueror, whose fury was directed against Tepanec soldiers
and treacherous vassals, women and children being in all cases spared.
In the province of Tepotzotlan he was met by the regular Tepanec army
of 200,000 men under the Tlatelulcan king Tlacateotzin, who attempted
to stay the tide of invasion, but after a desperate conflict, was
forced back to Quauhtitlan, and then to Tepatec, where a second great
battle was fought. Defeated at every step, the allied rebels were at
last forced to retreat within the fortifications of Temalpalco, which
defended Tezozomoc's capital, Azcapuzalco. For four months, as some
authorities state, the siege of the city was prolonged, Ixtlilxochitl
endeavoring rather to harass the pent-up enemy, and gradually reduce
their number, than to bring about a general engagement. Finally, when
he could hold out no longer, Tezozomoc sent an embassy to the emperor,
throwing himself entirely upon his mercy, but pleading most humbly for
pardon, reminding Ixtlilxochitl of their near relationship, pledging
the submission of all his allies, and promising to come personally
to Tezcuco, on an appointed day, to swear the allegiance he had so
long and unjustly withheld. The too lenient emperor, tired of war and
bloodshed, granted the petition, raised the siege against the advice of
all his lords, returned to Tezcuco, and disbanded his armies. Brasseur
makes this campaign end in 1416; others in 1417. Ixtlilxochitl states
that the campaign lasted four years, and that Tezozomoc had under his
command 500,000 men.[VII-28]
[Sidenote: TREACHERY OF TEZOZOMOC.]
By this act Ixtlilxochitl sealed his fate. Some of his truest allies
who had fought for glory and loyalty, understanding Tezozomoc's
hypocrisy and deeming their labors thrown away, were disgusted at
their emperor's ill-timed clemency and withdrew their support. Many
more lords had undertaken the war with the expectation, in case
of victory, of sharing among themselves the Tepanec dominions. The
rank and file, with the lesser chieftains, had borne the toil and
danger of a long campaign, and now that it was ended, were denied the
spoils that belonged to them as victors. The discontent was loud and
wide-spread, and Ixtlilxochitl's prestige outside of Tezcuco and one or
two adjoining cities, was lost forever. The Tepanec king, without the
slightest idea of fulfilling his pledges, fomented the spirit of mutiny
by promising the lords as a reward of rebellion, what they had failed
to obtain in loyal combat, new domains from the Tezcucan possessions,
together with independence of imperial power. Another motive of
hatred on the part of Tezozomoc toward Ixtlilxochitl is mentioned by
Brasseur's documents as having come to the knowledge of the former
king about this time. His son's wife, a near relative of the Tezcucan
king, who had left her husband and Azcapuzalco for good reasons, was
now found to be living in or near Tezcuco as the mistress of an Acolhua
chief, thus degrading the honor of the Tepanec royal family.[VII-29]
[Sidenote: DEATH OF IXTLILXOCHITL.]
Having completed as secretly as possible his preparations for a
renewal of the war, Tezozomoc announced his readiness to swear
allegiance to his sovereign, and his intention to celebrate that
act and the return of peace by grand festivities. As his age and the
state of his health would not permit him, he said, to go to Tezcuco,
he appointed a suitable location[VII-30] for the ceremonies and invited
Ixtlilxochitl to be present with his son Nezahualcoyotl, accompanied
only by unarmed attendants, for the Tepanecs had not yet recovered,
he said, from their terror of the Acolhua soldiers. The emperor
at first consented, although by this time he had no faith in the
Tepanec monarch, and, abandoned in his capital by all his leading
nobles, bitterly repented of his unwise course; but at the last
moment he sent Prince Tecuiltecatl, his brother, or as some say his
natural son, in his stead to make excuses for his absence, and try
to have the ceremony postponed. The substitute was flayed alive on
his arrival at Tenamatlac, and Tezozomoc, finding that the prey had
temporarily escaped his trap, ordered his troops to march immediately
on Tezcuco, entered the Acolhua domains on the day after the murder,
and the following day surrounded the capital. The lords of Huexotla,
Iztapalocan, and Coatepec,[VII-31] were the only ones to render aid to the
emperor in this emergency. The city was gallantly defended by the small
garrison for many days,[VII-32] but at last the emperor with Nezahualcoyotl
and a few companions, by the advice of his lords, left the city at
night and took refuge in the forest of Tzincanoztoc, where he soon
learned that Toxpilli, chief of the Chimalpanec ward, had pronounced
for Tezozomoc and opened the city to the enemy. A scene of carnage and
plunder ensued, such of Ixtlilxochitl's partizans as survived fleeing
to Huexotzinco and Tlascala. From his retreat at Tzincanoztoc the
emperor sent to demand protection of the lord of Otompan, a man deeply
indebted to him for honors in the last campaign; but his petition was
denied, and his messenger, who was also his son or nephew, a famous
general, was murdered, his body torn in pieces, and his nails strung
on a cord for a necklace. By this time quite a company had gathered
about the emperor, and the enemy had also ascertained his whereabouts.
Aided by the natural strength of his position, he defended himself for
many days, until, without food or hope of succor, he decided to strive
for life no longer. The authorities differ widely in the details of
his death, and the matter is not sufficiently important to warrant a
repetition of all that has been said about it. Torquemada and Clavigero
state that he was drawn out of his last retreat by promised favorable
conditions of surrender, and was treacherously murdered; but most agree
that at the last approach of the foe, a band of Chalcas and men of
Otompan, he induced his son to conceal himself in a tree, turned alone
upon the enemy, and fell covered with wounds. At the close of his last
conversation with Nezahualcoyotl, he urged him to escape to his friends
in Tlascala, always to deal leniently with his enemies, for he did not
repent of his own mercy, though it had cost him so dear; he concluded
by saying: "I leave to thee, my son, no other inheritance than thy bow
and arrow; strive to acquire skill in their use, and let thy strong
arm restore the kingdom of thy Chichimec ancestors."[VII-33] The emperor's
death took place probably in 1419.[VII-34]
* * * * *
Respecting Tezozomoc's short reign of eight years, we find in the
records a general account of the leading events, but learn very little
about the order of their occurrence. Of the lords that had remained
faithful to Ixtlilxochitl to the last, those in Anáhuac were forced to
submit for a time to Tezozomoc or flee for protection to the eastern
plateau; but the ruler of more distant provinces, like those in the
east about Huexotzinco and Tlascala, and those in the north in the
Tulancingo region, beyond the reach of Tepanec power, utterly refused
allegiance to the new sovereign. Of the powers that had supported
Tezozomoc, few or none seem to have done so from any friendship to him,
or respect for his claims, but for the direct benefit which they hoped
to gain from the change. Some fought simply to gain their independence,
or re-establish the old Chichimec feudal system broken up by Techotl,
and such, at the close of the war, simply assumed their independence,
the stronger provinces retaining it, and the weaker being kept in
subjection by force of arms only, and keeping the Tepanec king so busy
during his short term that he had hardly leisure to consolidate his
empire. The other class of Tepanec allies had been drawn into the war
by Tezozomoc's extravagant promises of new honors, domains, and other
spoils; these awaited the complete establishment and re-organization of
the empire, and the fulfillment of the emperor's promises.
Tezozomoc proposed as a basis of reconstruction of the empire, the
division of power in Anáhuac among seven kings according to the old
feudal system, the conquered Acolhua domains to be divided among
the seven--himself, of course, taking the largest share, and each of
the other six to be independent in the government of their realms,
but to acknowledge him as emperor and to pay a regular tribute. The
seven kingdoms were to be Azcapuzalco, Mexico, Tlatelulco, Chalco,
Acolman, Coatlichan, and Huexotla, the last two being given to the
lord of Otompan and his son.[VII-35] King Chimalpopoca of Mexico was to
receive the province of Tezcuco and certain Cuitlahuac districts; to
king Tlacateotzin of Tlatelulco, was to be given portions of Huexotla
and Cuitlahuac. Some minor rewards were also awarded to the lesser
allied chiefs. The conditions were accepted, although not without some
dissatisfaction on the part of the Mexicans, who had expected much
more, and of such chiefs as were not among the seven chosen kings.
Amid grand ceremonies and festivities in an assembly of the allied
lords, Tezozomoc proclaimed himself emperor, and the six kings as
his colleagues, to be consulted in all matters of general government;
announced the transfer of his capital to Azcapuzalco; offered a general
amnesty to the followers of Ixtlilxochitl on condition of submission
to the new political arrangement; offered a reward for the capture of
Nezahualcoyotl, dead or alive, proclaiming that all should be treated
as traitors and punished with death who should dare to give aid or
shelter to the fugitive prince; and appointed officers to publicly
proclaim his accession and the new measures that accompanied it, in
every city in the empire.[VII-36]
[Sidenote: REIGN OF TEZOZOMOC.]
Some authorities state that the amnesty proclaimed by Tezozomoc in
favor of the Acolhua provinces, included freedom from tribute for
one year; however this may have been, the matter of tribute was not
arranged until after the grand assembly and the swearing of allegiance
to the new emperor, but was reserved by the crafty Tepanec as a means
of practically retaining for himself what he had apparently given to
the six kings, and what had in most cases proved satisfactory to them.
Finally the system of tribute was announced. The amount of tribute and
of personal service required was made much more burdensome than it had
ever been, greatly to the dissatisfaction of the people and subordinate
chiefs; then each king was to collect the tribute from his dominions,
to retain one third for himself, and to pay over at Azcapuzalco the
remaining two thirds into the imperial treasury. Thus the allied powers
discovered that Tezozomoc had outwitted them; that he had taken for
himself in the division of territory the lion's share; that he had
greatly increased the burden of taxation throughout the country; that,
not content with the revenues of his own states, and a nominal tribute
from his colleagues as a token of their allegiance, he claimed two
thirds of that from other states; and that while they had gained the
empty titles of kings and associates in the imperial power, they were
in reality only governors, poorly paid for the labor of collecting
taxes and administering the government. The Mexicans and Tlatelulcas
had been promised, moreover, or at least had expected, an establishment
on the basis of the old Toltec alliance, with their own kings as the
two allies of Tezozomoc, owing him only a nominal allegiance. Moreover
Chimalpopoca had now succeeded to the throne of Mexico, and he was a
friend of Nezahualcoyotl and had never been favorably disposed toward
the Tepanec monarch. The Mexicans, however, masked their discontent,
until such time as they should see an opportunity for revenge; the
other powers made open and loud complaint, so far as they dared to do
so. The final establishment of Tezozomoc's empire, so far as it was
ever established, is placed by the Abbé Brasseur in 1425.[VII-37]
* * * * *
[Sidenote: ADVENTURES OF NEZAHUALCOYOTL.]
Prince Nezahualcoyotl, after the death of his father, had been joined
by a few faithful friends and had succeeded in making his escape to
Tlascala and Huexotzinco, where he found the people and lords true
to him, and confident of their ability to repel any force the Tepanec
usurper could send against them, but not strong enough at this time to
warrant them in undertaking an offensive war against the allied forces
of Anáhuac for the restoration of Nezahualcoyotl to his ancestral
throne. They advised him to put himself in communication with the many
disaffected chieftains of the valley, and to await his opportunity,
which was sure to come, and that soon, promising him their aid in such
an emergency. The prince thereupon turned boldly about and returned
to Anáhuac in disguise. His adventures and hair-breadth escapes during
his wanderings are related in detail by the Spanish writers, but must
be omitted here as having no special importance in connection with the
general history of the country. He found friends in every direction,
and was especially protected by Chimalpopoca of Mexico. It is said that
he was present in disguise at the assembly when Tezozomoc was crowned,
and when he heard a reward offered for his murder, was with difficulty
prevented by his friends from making himself known, so great was his
rage. Finally his aunts, the queens of Mexico and Tlatelulco, went with
a large company of ladies to the palace of Tezozomoc, and interceded
for their nephew with so much earnestness that the king countermanded
his previous orders, and granted him permission to reside, in a private
capacity, at Mexico; and soon after he was even allowed to live at
Tezcuco in a palace that had belonged to him personally from his
birth.[VII-38]
Tezozomoc was now very old and infirm; for several years he had been
kept alive only by means of artificial warmth and the most careful
attentions. By a temperate life and freedom from all excess, in
addition to a robust constitution, he had prolonged his life even
beyond the usual limit in those days of great longevity, and retained
the use of all his mental faculties to the last. In his last days he
repented of the pardon that he had extended to Nezahualcoyotl; for
he dreamed that an eagle tore his head in pieces and consumed his
vitals, while a tiger tore his feet. The astrologers informed him
that the eagle and the tiger were Nezahualcoyotl, who would surely
overthrow the Tepanec power, punish the people of Azcapuzalco, and
regain his father's imperial power, unless he could be put to death.
The old monarch's last charge to his sons and to his nobles was that
Nezahualcoyotl should be killed, if possible, during his funeral
exercises, when he would probably be present. He died in 1427, naming
Tayauh, one of his sons, as his successor on the Tepanec and Chichimec
thrones, and charging him, after the Acolhua prince's death, to strive
by every means in his power to make friends among his vassal lords,
and to avoid all harsh measures. Maxtla, another son, seems to have had
more ability and experience than his brother, but his father feared the
consequence of his hasty temper and arbitrary manner, by which he had
already made a multitude of enemies.[VII-39] A large number of princes and
lords were assembled at the royal obsequies, among them Nezahualcoyotl
himself, against the advice of his friends, but relying on his good
fortune and on the assurance of a sorcerer in whom he had great faith,
that he could not be killed at that time. The heir to the throne was
disposed to have his father's recommendations carried out during the
funeral exercises, but Maxtla claimed that it would be bad policy--for
himself, probably, in consideration of his own ambitious plans--to
disgrace so solemn an occasion by murder. All the authorities agree
that Tezozomoc was the most unscrupulous and tyrannical despot that
ever ruled in Anáhuac; the only good that is recorded of him is his own
strict morality, and his strict and impartial enforcement of just laws
and punishment of crimes within his own dominions. His extraordinary
ability as a diplomatist and politician is evident from the events of
his career as related above.[VII-40]
[Sidenote: MAXTLA USURPS THE THRONE.]
Maxtla, although deprived of the succession to the imperial throne,
had been made king of Coyuhuacan, a province of which he had long
been ruling lord. He had, however, no intention of giving up his
claim to his father's crown; Tayauh was of a weak and vacillating
disposition, having no enemies, but also no friends except the kings
of Mexico and Tlatelulco who probably hated his brother rather than
favored him; Maxtla by reason of his high military rank had control of
the army; and only a few days after the funeral of Tezozomoc, he had
himself proclaimed emperor of the Chichimecs. He offered his brother
in exchange his lordship of Coyuhuacan, but the latter seems to have
gone to reside in Mexico. Chimalpopoca blamed the deposed sovereign
for having so easily relinquished his claims; and by his advice a plot
was formed some months later to assassinate the usurper. Tayauh was
to have a palace erected for himself at Azcapuzalco, Maxtla was to be
invited to be present at the ceremonies of dedication, and was to be
strangled with a wreath of flowers while being shown the apartments.
A page overheard and revealed the plot; Maxtla aided in the erection
of the palace for his brother, and had him stabbed in the midst of
the festivities, instead of waiting to be shown the rooms and himself
becoming the victim.[VII-41]
Chimalpopoca and Tlacateotzin had excused themselves from attending
the fêtes, else they very likely might have shared Tayauh's fate. Now
that the plot was revealed and their connection with it, they well knew
that Maxtla, who before had reasons to be unfriendly to them,[VII-42] would
neglect no opportunity of revenge. A strange story is here given, to
the effect that Chimalpopoca, overwhelmed by misfortune, resolved to
sacrifice himself on the altar of the gods, or, as some authorities
state, by announcing such a resolve to test the feelings of his people
and possibly to provoke a revolt in his favor. Maxtla, fearing the
latter motive, sent a force of men to Mexico and arrested the royal
victim just before the sacrifice was to be performed, taking him as a
prisoner to Azcapuzalco, or as others say, confining him in his own
prison at Mexico. Chimalpopoca died soon after this event, probably
killed by order of Maxtla, but there is no agreement as to the details
of his death, or that of Tlacateotzin which took place about the same
time.[VII-43] The death of the Aztec kings took place in 1428, and was
followed by a re-imposition, and even a doubling, of the tributes of
early days, accompanied by every kind of oppression and insult towards
the inhabitants of the lake cities.[VII-44]
* * * * *
[Sidenote: NEZAHUALCOYOTL PREPARES FOR WAR.]
Maxtla had resolved that Nezahualcoyotl, as well as Chimalpopoca and
Tlacateotzin, must die. Whether he came to intercede for Chimalpopoca,
or as other authors say was summoned by Maxtla, the Acolhua prince
visited Azcapuzalco at this time, and very narrowly escaped death at
the hands of the soldiers posted about the palace with orders to kill
him, by fleeing through the royal gardens and returning to Tezcuco.
A Tepanec force was immediately dispatched to the latter city, with
instructions to kill or capture him at a banquet to which he was
to be invited by the governor of the city,--a bastard brother of
Nezahualcoyotl, but his deadly foe,--but he was again fortunate enough
to elude their pursuit, and after having received offers of aid from
several lords in Anáhuac, escaped to Huexotzinco and Tlascala. He found
the provinces of the eastern plateau, including Zacatlan, Tototepec,
Cempoala, Tepepulco, Cholula, and Tepeaca, more enthusiastic than
ever in his favor, and moreover convinced that the time had come for
decisive action with a view to restore him to the imperial throne of
his ancestors. Armies were raised and placed at his disposal; word
came that the Chalcas would join in the enterprise; the sympathy of
the Mexicans and Tlatelulcas he was already assured of; he consequently
returned to Anáhuac and established his headquarters at a small village
near Tezcuco.[VII-45] After having, according to Veytia, taken Otompan and
some of the adjoining towns, the allied army was divided into three
corps. The first, composed of the Huexotzinca and Tlascaltec forces,
was to move on Acolman; the second, made up chiefly of Chalca troops,
was to attack Coatlichan; while Nezahualcoyotl himself, with the
remaining allied forces, was to operate against Tezcuco. The first two
divisions were perfectly successful, capturing the capitals, Acolman
and Coatlichan, and laying waste the surrounding territory. According
to Ixtlilxochitl and Veytia, Nezahualcoyotl was equally fortunate, took
possession of the Acolhua capital, and disbanded a large part of his
army; but the author of the _Codex Chimalpopoca_, partially confirmed
by Torquemada, and followed by the Abbé Brasseur, states that the
prince imperial failed at this time in his assault on the city, and
only succeeded in fortifying himself advantageously in the suburb of
Chiauhtla. Subsequent events make this the more probable version of the
matter.[VII-46]
* * * * *
[Sidenote: ITZCOATL, KING OF MEXICO.]
The murder of Chimalpopoca and Tlacateotzin caused the wildest
excitement in Tenochtitlan and Tlatelulco. From these acts, together
with the burden of tribute and the many insults heaped upon them, the
people well knew Maxtla's intention to destroy forever their kingdoms
and reduce them to their former condition of abject vassalage. A mass
meeting composed of all classes was held in Mexico, which anxiously
awaited the decision of the senate, where the question of their future
condition and policy was long and hotly discussed. The old and the
timid members were in favor of yielding to the demands of an emperor
whose power they could not hope successfully to resist; they implored
their colleagues not to plunge the people into war and the horrors
of future slavery by their rash spirit of independence. But the young
men of all classes, seconded by most of the nobility, were in favor of
war, chiding the cowardice of the rest, and boldly proclaiming their
choice of death rather than a dishonorable submission to the tyrant's
commands. Moreover, the gods had foretold their future greatness,
and should they render themselves unworthy of divine favor, and bring
disgrace on the memory of their valiant ancestors?[VII-47] It was decided
by a large majority to proceed to the election of a king who should
lead them to victory. According to the _Codex Chimalpopoca_, the first
choice of the assembly was Montezuma, eldest son of Chimalpopoca, but
he declined to accept the crown, pleading youth and inexperience, and
urged the claims of his uncle Itzcoatl, for many years commander of the
armies. The other authorities do not mention the choice of Montezuma.
However this may have been, Itzcoatl was unanimously elected, and
was crowned with the usual ceremonies and with something more than
the usual amount of speeches and advice, in view of the gigantic task
assumed by the new king, of shaking off the Tepanec yoke. Tempanecatl,
or Tlacaeleltzin, was sent to demand a confirmation of the people's
choice at the hands of the emperor Maxtla. But he found that the news
had preceded him and had been ill-received, war had practically begun,
and a blockade was established. The embassador succeeded in reaching
the royal presence; but though assured of Itzcoatl's loyalty, Maxtla
haughtily replied that Mexico must have no king, must be ruled by
Tepanec governors, or take the consequences of a fruitless revolt.
Tlacaeleltzin's return with these tidings caused a new panic among the
more timid of the Mexicans, but by renewed exhortations, by promises
of honors and booty in case of victory, their courage was brought to
the sticking point, and the same embassador was sent to Azcapuzalco
with a formal declaration of war.[VII-48] Only a few days after Itzcoatl's
coronation the Tlatelulcas also chose a king and joined the Mexicans
in their fight for national existence. There was some jealousy between
the two powers, but their interests were now identical. The choice of
the Tlatelulcas fell upon Quauhtlatohuatzin, a celebrated warrior, but
not of royal blood; and to this inferiority in the rank of her ruler is
attributed, by some authors, the inferior position thereafter occupied
by Tlatelulco, previously equal, if not superior, in power to her
sister city.[VII-49]
[Sidenote: SIEGE OF MEXICO.]
Such was the state of affairs in the early part of 1429, when the
news of Nezahualcoyotl's success reached Azcapuzalco and Mexico. All
communication had been cut off between the cities of the lake and
the mainland; many sharp attacks had been made by Itzcoatl on the
enemy's lines; but no general engagement had taken place. The Mexicans
began to find their condition critical; Maxtla expected to be at an
early date in possession of the Aztec strongholds, and deferred until
after such success all offensive operations against Nezahualcoyotl;
the besieged Aztecs naturally looked towards the Acolhua prince for
assistance against their common foe. Here the national prejudices of
the original native authorities, followed by Spanish writers, begin
to appear in the historic annals. Ixtlilxochitl and Veytia favoring
the Acolhua interests, represent the Aztecs, hard pressed by the
Tepanecs, as having humbly implored the aid of Nezahualcoyotl, who
graciously came to their relief; Tezozomoc, Duran, and Acosta make
the Mexicans conquer the Tepanec king unaided, and render assistance
to the Acolhua prince afterwards; while Torquemada, Clavigero, and
the authorities followed by Brasseur state, what in the light of
future events is much more probable, that the two powers formed an
alliance on equal terms, and for mutual advantage against the usurping
emperor. At any rate Montezuma[VII-50]--identical, as Clavigero and
Brasseur think, with Tlacaeleltzin--was sent to Nezahualcoyotl, in
company with two other lords. The ambassador succeeded in penetrating
the enemy's lines, although one of his companions was captured, made
known to Nezahualcoyotl the wishes and condition of the Mexicans, and
received assurances of sympathy, with promises to consult with his
allies, render aid if possible, and at least to have an interview with
Itzcoatl. His chief difficulty would seem to have been that most of
his allies not without reason detested and feared the Mexicans more
than the Tepanecs, and by too hastily following his own inclinations
and espousing the Aztec cause, he might risk his own success. The
fact that an alliance was finally concluded between these powers shows
clearly that neither alone could overthrow the formidable Maxtla, and
that it was no act of condescension or pity on the part of either, but
rather of necessity, to join their forces. On his return Montezuma was
captured by the Chalcas, or being sent, as some authorities state,
to Chalco for aid was retained for a time as a prisoner, but set at
liberty by his jailer, and reached Mexico in safety.[VII-51] This action
of the Chalcas is said to have so displeased the surrounding nations
that neither party would accept their alliance, but this may well
be doubted, considering the strength of that people. The Huexotlas,
according to Torquemada, withdrew their allegiance on hearing that the
Aztecs were to be aided. Nezahualcoyotl and Itzcoatl had an interview
soon after at Mexico,[VII-52] where the former was received with great
rejoicing, and a plan settled for the campaign against Maxtla, whose
territory was to be invaded by the allied armies. At about this time,
according to the _Codex Chimalpopoca_, the province of Quauhtitlan
succeeded after a succession of reverses and victories in shaking
off the Tepanec yoke and announced their friendship to the Mexicans,
although they were unable to render any open assistance in the early
part of the campaign.[VII-53]
[Sidenote: SIEGE OF AZCAPULZALCO.]
The campaign by which Maxtla was overthrown and the imperial power
wrested from the hands of the Tepanecs, lasted over a hundred
days. To relate in detail all that the authorities record of this
campaign, the marches and counter-marches, the attacks and repulses,
the exploits of the leaders and lesser chieftains, noting all the
minute variations in statement respecting the names of chiefs, places
attacked, number of troops engaged, and the chronological order of
events, would require a chapter much longer than my space will allow,
would be monotonous to the general reader, and could not probably
be made sufficiently accurate to be of great value to the student
of aboriginal military tactics. The general nature of the war and
the results of the victory may be told in a few lines. The allied
Acolhua, Tlascaltec, Cholultec, Mexican, and Tlatelulcan forces, under
Nezahualcoyotl, Itzcoatl, Montezuma, and other leaders, amounted to
three or four hundred thousand men. Most entered Mexico in canoes from
the east; but some divisions marched round the lake. At a preconcerted
signal, the lighting of a fire on Mt Quauhtepec, all the forces
advanced--probably in canoes, for it is not certain that causeways had
yet been constructed--on the Tepanec territory. The lord of Tlacopan,
by a previous understanding with the allies, opened that city to the
invaders, thus giving them a sure footing in the country of their foe,
and in a few days Azcapuzalco was closely besieged. Maxtla had an army
somewhat smaller than that of his opponents but they fought for the
most part behind intrenchments. The emperor personally took no part
in the battles that ensued, but placed his greatest general, Mazatl,
at the head of his armies. Day after day the conflict was waged at
different points about the doomed capital without decisive result,
although many local victories were won by both sides. At last, by a
desperate effort, Mazatl succeeded in driving the Mexicans back to
the lake shore; in the panic that ensued many Mexican soldiers threw
down their arms and begged for quarter; Itzcoatl deemed the battle
and his cause lost. Cursing the cowardice of his troops, he called
upon his nobles and chieftains to rush upon the foe and die bravely;
his call was responded to by large numbers, the troops followed with
new courage, and, re-inforcements having arrived opportunely, the
tide of battle was turned, Mazatl was slain in hand-to-hand combat by
Montezuma, and the Tepanec capital carried by assault. Large numbers of
the soldiers were put to the sword, a few bands escaped to the marshes
and mountains, the city was plundered and burned, and the emperor
was found in a bath and slain. Azcapuzalco never regained a prominent
place among the cities of Anáhuac; it was chiefly noted in later times
as a slave mart, and the disgraceful traffic is said to have been
inaugurated by the sale of the Tepanec inhabitants after the Acolhua
and Aztec victory. For a short time the victorious armies ravaged the
territories on the west of the lakes, which still remained faithful to
Maxtla, and were then recalled, and the allied troops dismissed, laden
with spoils, to their own provinces. Itzcoatl and Nezahualcoyotl had
no doubt of their ability to keep their foes in check and complete the
conquest by the aid of their own troops; they consequently returned to
Mexico to celebrate their victory.[VII-54]
The fêtes in honor of the victory and victors were long continued,
and conducted on a scale unprecedented in the Mexican capital. After
Itzcoatl and Nezahualcoyotl, Montezuma seems to have carried off the
highest honors. The altars ran with the blood of sacrificed human
victims, rites most repulsive, as is stated, to the Acolhua king, but
which he could not prevent on such an occasion. A prominent feature
of the ceremonies was the rewarding by lands and honors of the chiefs
who had distinguished themselves for bravery in the war, and, as
some authorities say, the punishment by exile of such as had shown
cowardice. The fêtes were immediately followed, perhaps interrupted,
by the tidings that Huexotla, Coatlichan, Acolman, and the adjoining
towns, had revolted; and the Mexican, Acolhua, and Tlatelulca forces,
with some assistance from the eastern plateau, marched through the
eastern part of the valley, and after a series of hard-fought battles
conquered the cities mentioned, together with Teotihuacan and in
fact nearly all the towns from Iztapalocan to the northern mountains,
excepting probably Tezcuco, although some authors include the conquest
of that capital in this campaign. In some of the cities no mercy was
shown to any class, but all were slain. Veytia moreover divides this
campaign into two, and places in the interval between them the final
establishment of the empire to be given later. Torquemada and Clavigero
connect the latter part of this campaign with a subsequent one against
Coyuhuacan.[VII-55]
[Sidenote: THE TRI-PARTITE ALLIANCE.]
At this time, in the year 1431, and before Nezahualcoyotl had regained
the capital of his father's empire, as Brasseur insists, took place
the events which closed the Chichimec period of aboriginal history,
the division of Anáhuac between the victors, the re-establishment of
the empire on a new basis. The result is well known, but respecting
the motives that led to it there is great confusion. It was decided to
re-establish with slight modifications the ancient Toltec confederacy
of three kingdoms, independent so far as the direction of internal
affairs was concerned, but allied in the management of foreign affairs
and in all matters affecting the general interests of the empire,
in which matters neither king could act without the consent of his
two colleagues. The three kingdoms were Acolhua with its capital at
Tezcuco, under Nezahualcoyotl with the title of Chichimecatl Tecuhtli;
the Aztec with Mexico for its capital, under Itzcoatl bearing the
title of Culhua Tecuhtli; and the Tepanec capital Tlacopan, under
Totoquihuatzin with the title Tepaneca Tecuhtli. A line drawn in a
general north and south direction through the valley and lake just east
of the city of Tenochtitlan, divided the Acolhua domains on the east
from those of Mexico on the west. The capital Tlacopan, with a few
surrounding towns, and as some say the Otomí province of Mazahuacan
in the northwest, made up the limited Tepanec domain.[VII-56] Tezcuco and
Mexico seem to have been in all respects equal in power, while Tlacopan
was far inferior to either. As a descendant and heir of the Chichimec
emperors, Nezahualcoyotl nominally took precedence in rank, presiding
at meetings, occupying the place of honor at public ceremonies with his
colleagues on his right and left, but had no authority whatever over
them, and was probably in respect to actual military power somewhat
inferior to Mexico. Provinces conquered by the allied forces, together
with all the spoils of war, were to be divided equally between Mexico
and Tezcuco after deducting one fifth for Tlacopan.[VII-57]
[Sidenote: TERMS OF THE ALLIANCE.]
[Sidenote: CLOSE OF THE PERIOD.]
The confusion among the authorities about the circumstances and motives
that led to the tri-partite alliance on the above basis, arises chiefly
from the patriotism of the native authors. The narrative as given by
Ixtlilxochitl and Veytia, to the effect that Nezahualcoyotl suspended
his triumphal march through his old dominion of Acolhuacan to assist
his friend and relative in overthrowing Maxtla, dismissed his allies,
and then, out of kindness, admitted Itzcoatl to an equal share with
himself in the empire, before completing the conquest of Tezcuco,
must evidently be accepted with many allowances. There is still more
evident exaggeration in the tale of Clavigero, Tezozomoc, and Duran,
that Itzcoatl overthrew the Tepanecs, held the power in his own hands,
and graciously put the Acolhua prince on the throne of Tezcuco in
consideration of his friendship and assistance. It is evident, as
already stated, that the alliance between Itzcoatl and Nezahualcoyotl
was formed for the protection of mutual interests; that no allied
troops were disbanded which could be retained; that if the conquest of
Tezcuco was postponed after the fall of Azcapuzalco, it was because the
allies had their hands full in other directions; and that in the final
division and establishment of the empire necessity and policy played a
much more prominent part than friendship or condescension. On the one
hand, if we suppose that the Aztec military force, as is very probable,
was at the time superior to that of the Acolhuas, it must be remembered
that Nezahualcoyotl had the prestige of being the legitimate heir to
the imperial throne of the Chichimecs, that he was popular in Anáhuac
and had the support of the eastern cities; while the Aztecs were
universally hated and could depend only on the valor of their chiefs
and the numbers of their army. It is not impossible that the delay
in taking possession of the Acolhua capital, was because the allies
of Nezahualcoyotl refused to complete the conquest until their prince
had some guaranty against the ambition of the Mexicans. On the other
hand, if we credit the statements of those who represent Nezahualcoyotl
as holding the balance of power in the first alliance, it is to be
noted that the struggle had been a desperate one, even with the aid of
Mexico; that it was yet far from ended, that revolts were occurring
in every direction, and that with the Aztecs as foes, the success of
Nezahualcoyotl was more than doubtful. On this supposition the delay
in taking Tezcuco is to be attributed, as indeed some authors claim,
to the fear of Itzcoatl that if he contributed further to increase
his ally's power he would soon be in a position to dictate terms.
Neither power could stand alone, Mexico against all Anáhuac, Tezcuco
against Mexico and her own independent and revolting vassals; hence the
foundation of the alliance on equal terms is perfectly comprehensible.
To account for the admission of Tlacopan to the alliance, we have the
facts that that city had rendered important service in the defeat of
Maxtla at Azcapuzalco; that she may very likely have been promised
a place in the empire in case of success; that in any event it was
policy to concentrate the yet powerful Tepanec element in a friendly
kingdom; and finally, as several authors state, that the families of
Totoquihuatzin and Nezahualcoyotl were closely related by marriage.
Some authorities state that Tlacopan was admitted through the influence
of Itzcoatl, others insist that it was Nezahualcoyotl's idea. The
inauguration of the new order of things, including the crowning of
Nezahualcoyotl, king of Acolhuacan, and the conferring of the proper
titles upon each of the colleagues, was celebrated in Mexico with great
pomp in 1431. Thus ends the Chichimec period, during which a small band
of turbulent marauders had passed through oppression and misfortune
to a leading place among the American nations. Many strong tribes were
yet to be persuaded or forced to submit to the new order of political
affairs; the measures by which this was accomplished, and the Aztec
power spread far and wide from Anáhuac as a centre, until it came
in contact with a greater power from beyond the ocean, will form the
subject of the following chapters.[VII-58]
FOOTNOTES:
[VII-1] _Codex Chimalp._, in _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. iii., p. 99. In
the explanation of the _Codex Tell. Rem._, in _Kingsborough_, vol. v.,
p. 148, vol. vi., p. 134, it is stated that king Acamapichtli burned
the temple of Culhuacan in 1399, probably referring to the quarrels of
Acamapichtli I. with Coxcoxtli, or Achitometl, at an earlier period.
[VII-2] _Ixtlilxochitl_, in _Kingsborough_, vol. ix., p. 213;
_Clavigero_, tom. i., pp. 176-7; _Torquemada_, tom. i., pp. 95-8;
_Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. iii., p. 100; _Gomara_, _Conq. Mex._, fol.
302; _Herrera_, dec. iii., lib. ii., cap. xii.; _Acosta_, _Hist. de
las Ynd._, pp. 470-3; _Duran_, MS., tom. i., cap. xiii; _Mendieta_,
_Hist. Ecles._, pp. 148-9; _Codex Mendoza_, in _Kingsborough_, vol.
v., p. 43.
[VII-3] _Codex Mendoza_, in Kingsborough, vol. v., p. 92; _Mendieta_,
_Torquemada_, _Acosta_, _Brasseur_, and _Clavigero_, as in preceding
note.
[VII-4] _Codex Chimalp._, in _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. iii., p. 111.
[VII-5] Date, 1404, _Duran_; 1402, after reigning 41 years, _Veytia_;
1405, _Boturini_; 1389, 37 years, _Clavigero_; 1406, 7 years, _Codex
Tell. Rem._; 1396, _Mendieta_; reigned 21 years, _Torquemada_,
_Sahagun_, _Codex Mendoza_; 1271, 51 years, _Ixtlilxochitl_; 46 years,
_Gomara_ and _Motolinia_; 40 years, _Acosta_ and _Herrera_; 1403, 53
or 21 years, _Brasseur_.
[VII-6] Acosta and Herrera write the name of Huitzilihuitl's wife
Ayauchigual. Veytia says her name was Miahuaxochitl, and that she was
the daughter of Tezozomoc. Torquemada, Clavigero, and Gomara make him
marry, first, Ayauhcihuatl, daughter of Tezozomoc, and afterwards,
Miahuaxochitl, princess of Quauhnahuac, the latter of whom bore
Montezuma I. Ixtlilxochitl says the king married his niece,
Tetzihuatzin, grand-daughter of Tezozomoc, one of whose children was
Chimalpopoca. Brasseur, relying on the _Codex Chimalp._ and _Mem. de
Culhuacan_, gives the account I have presented in the text. The _Codex
Tell. Rem._ says Huitzilihuitl married a daughter of the princess of
Coatlichan, and a grand-daughter of Acamapichtli, having by her no
sons. Tezozomoc and Duran name Chimalpopoca as Huitzilihuitl's first
son; Veytia says it was Montezuma I., and Torquemada, Clavigero, and
Brasseur name the first son Acolnahuacatl.
[VII-7] On the death of Acamapichtli II., and the succession and
marriage of Huitzilihuitl II., see _Duran_, MS. tom. i., cap. vi, vii;
_Clavigero_, tom. i., pp. 176-80; _Torquemada_, tom. i., pp. 98-106;
_Sahagun_, tom. ii., lib. viii., p. 268; _Ixtlilxochitl_, pp. 218,
353, 456-7; _Veytia_, tom. ii., pp. 219-26; _Tezozomoc_, in
_Kingsborough_, vol. ix., pp. 10-11; _Codex Tell. Rem._, in _Id._,
vol. v., pp. 148-9; _Gomara_, _Conq. Mex._, fol. 302; _Motolinia_, in
_Icazbalceta_, _Col. de Doc._, tom. i., p. 6; _Herrera_, dec. iii.,
lib. ii., cap. xii.; _Acosta_, _Hist. de las Ynd._, pp. 473-5;
_Sigüenza_, in _Doc. Hist. Mex._, série iii., tom. i., p. 50;
_Boturini_, in _Id._, p. 239; _Mendieta_, _Hist. Ecles._, p. 149;
_Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. iii., pp. 110-17.
[VII-8] According to Veytia, tom. ii., pp. 216-7, 246, 249-51,
Mixcohuatl reigned 75 years, was succeeded by Quaquauhpitzahuac in
1400, and he by Tlacateotzin in 1414. Ixtlilxochitl, pp. 213, 218,
353, 356, 453, 462, says Mixcohuatl died in 1271, reigned 51 years,
and was succeeded by his son Quaquauhpitzahuac; or that he died in
Techotl's reign and was followed by Tlacateotzin; or that
Quaquauhpitzahuac died in 1353; or was succeeded by Amatzin; or again,
that Tlacateotzin succeeded his father; and that he married a daughter
of Tezozomoc. Sahagun, tom. ii., lib. viii., p. 273, ignores
Mixcohuatl, as do Torquemada, tom. i., pp. 94-5, 99, 127-8, and
Clavigero, tom. i., pp. 175, 184. Both the latter authors make the
first king a son of Tezozomoc. Clavigero places his accession in 1353,
and that of Tlacateotzin, his successor, in 1399. Torquemada says the
first king reigned 35 years, and was followed by Tlacateotzin in the
tenth year of Huitzilihuitl's rule. Both Mexicans and Tlatelulcas seem
to have claimed the honor of having had the first king. See also
_Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. iii., p. 123.
[VII-9] _Codex Chimalp._, in _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. iii., p. 120.
[VII-10] _Duran_, MS., tom. i., cap. vii.; _Torquemada_, tom. i., pp.
106; _Veytia_, tom. ii., pp. 226-8, 246; _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom.
iii., pp. 127-8.
[VII-11] _Mendieta_, _Hist. Ecles._, p. 149; _Codex Mendoza_, in
_Kingsborough_, vol. v., p. 43; _Sahagun_, tom. ii., lib. viii., p.
268.
[VII-12] Date 1414, _Veytia_, tom. ii., pp. 246-7; _Boturini_, in
_Doc. Hist. Mex._, série iii., tom. iv., p. 239; _Codex Tell. Rem._,
in _Kingsborough_, vol. v., p. 149; 1353, _Ixtlilxochitl_, in _Id._,
vol. ix., pp. 218, 356, 457; 1409, _Clavigero_, tom. i., p. 186; 1417,
_Codex Chimalp._ in _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. iii., p. 129, and _Codex
Mendoza_, in _Kingsborough_, vol. v., p. 43.
[VII-13] On death of Huitzilihuitl II. and succession of Chimalpopoca,
see _Veytia_, tom. ii., pp. 246-9; _Torquemada_, tom. i., pp. 105-7;
_Clavigero_, tom. i., pp. 182-7; _Ixtlilxochitl_, pp. 218, 355-6, 457;
_Acosta_, _Hist. de las Ynd._, pp. 475-8; _Sahagun_, tom. ii., lib.
viii., p. 268; _Duran_, MS., tom. i., cap. vii, viii; _Mendieta_,
_Hist. Ecles._, p. 149; _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. iii., pp. 129-31;
_Codex Mendoza_, in _Kingsborough_, vol. v., p. 43; _Codex Tell.
Rem._, in _Id._, p. 149.
[VII-14] _Veytia_, tom. ii., pp. 231-3, 236, 245; _Torquemada_, tom.
i., pp. 108-9; _Clavigero_, tom. i., p. 185; _Ixtlilxochitl_, pp.
218-19, 356, 358-9, 401; _Boturini_, _Idea_, p. 142; _Brasseur_,
_Hist._, tom. iii., pp. 87-92.
[VII-15] _Veytia_, tom. ii., pp. 234-7; _Ixtlilxochitl_, p. 356.
[VII-16] _Ixtlilxochitl_, pp. 219, 356-7; _Torquemada_, tom. i., pp.
108-9; _Clavigero_, tom. i., p. 185; _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. ii.,
pp. 93-5.
[VII-17] _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. iii., pp. 95-6.
[VII-18] _Id._, pp. 97-106.
[VII-19] _Ixtlilxochitl_, pp. 219, 357, 401-2; _Torquemada_, tom. i.,
pp. 108-9; _Clavigero_, tom. i., pp. 185-6; _Veytia_, tom. ii., pp.
234-45; _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. iii., pp. 106-8.
[VII-20] _Monarq. Ind._, tom. i., pp. 108-9.
[VII-21] The former also called Tozquentzin and Atotoztli; and the
latter, Acolmiztli and Yoyontzin.
[VII-22] _Ixtlilxochitl_, pp. 218, 359, 401, 405, 453; _Duran_, MS.,
tom. i., cap. vi.; _Torquemada_, tom. i., p. 110; _Leon y Gama_, _Dos
Piedras_, pt ii., pp. 41-2; _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. iii., pp.
109-10; _Camargo_, in _Nouvelles Annales_, tom. xcviii., p. 146.
[VII-23] _Codex Chimalp._, in _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. iii., pp.
117-18.
[VII-24] _Ixtlilxochitl_, pp. 219, 358-9, 402. Dates according to this
author, April 15, 1359; Dec. 30, 1363; 1415. _Veytia_, tom. ii., pp.
255-6; date, Aug. 6, 1415. _Torquemada_, tom. i., p. 109; _Clavigero_,
tom. i., pp. 185-6; _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. iii., pp. 120-1.
[VII-25] Sahagun, tom. ii., lib. viii., pp. 277-8, gives a list of the
succession of lords at Huexotla from the earliest Chichimec times.
[VII-26] _Ixtlilxochitl_, pp. 219-20, 359, 402. He states that in this
meeting, or another held about the same time, there were many other
lords present, including those of Acolman and Tepechpan, who, although
pretending to be faithful, kept Tezozomoc posted as to the course
events were taking. See also _Veytia_, tom. ii., pp. 257-8;
_Torquemada_, tom. i., p. 110; _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. iii., pp.
121-2.
[VII-27] _Ixtlilxochitl_, pp. 359-60, 402-3; _Veytia_, tom. ii., pp.
257-68; _Torquemada_, tom. i., pp. 108-9; _Clavigero_, tom. i., p.
186; _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. iii., pp. 122-5.
[VII-28] Clavigero, tom. i., p. 186, states that Ixtlilxochitl granted
this peace, not because he had any faith in Tezozomoc or was disposed
to be lenient to his allies, but because his army was equally
exhausted with that of the enemy, and he was unable to continue
hostilities. This is hardly probable, although he had doubtless
suffered more than the records indicate. See also _Ixtlilxochitl_, pp.
220, 360-2, 403, 453; _Veytia_, tom. ii., pp. 268-76; _Torquemada_,
tom. i., pp. 108-10; _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. iii., pp. 122-7.
[VII-29] _Codex Chimalp._, in _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. iii., pp.
129-30.
[VII-30] Chiuhnauhtlan, as the Spanish writers say; Brasseur says it
was at Tenamatlac, a Tepanec pleasure-resort in the mountains of
Chiucnauhtecatl.
[VII-31] Brasseur says Coatlichan, which is more likely.
[VII-32] 50, and 16, are Ixtlilxochitl's figures in different places;
Veytia says 10, and Brasseur 40.
[VII-33] _Ixtlilxochitl_, pp. 220-3, 362-4, 403-4, 453-4, 462-3;
_Veytia_, tom. ii., pp. 278-99; _Torquemada_, tom. i., pp. 110-13;
_Clavigero_, tom. i., pp. 187-9; _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. iii., pp.
129-38.
[VII-34] Oct. 29, 1418, _Veytia_; 1410, _Clavigero_; 1410,
_Ixtlilxochitl_, p. 463; April 22, 1415, _Id._, p. 454; Sept. 21,
1418, _Id._, p. 404; 1419, _Brasseur_. Torquemada implies that
Ixtlilxochitl's reign lasted only seven years. Sahagun, tom. ii., lib.
viii., p. 276, says he ruled 61 years, during which time nothing
worthy of mention occurred. Ixtlilxochitl in one place, p. 223, says
that the last Tepanec wars lasted 3 years and 273 days; elsewhere, p.
364, that they lasted 50 consecutive years, and that millions of
people perished.
[VII-35] Torquemada states that Tezozomoc reserved Coatlichan for
himself.
[VII-36] Ixtlilxochitl tells a strange story, to the effect that
Tezozomoc's officers were directed to ask the children in each
province, who was their king; such as replied 'Tezozomoc,' were to be
caressed and their parents rewarded; but those that answered
'Ixtlilxochitl,' or 'Nezahualcoyotl,' were put to death without mercy.
Thus perished thousands of innocent children. In _Kingsborough_, vol.
ix., pp. 223, 463.
[VII-37] _Veytia_, tom. i., pp. 300-6, 315-17; _Ixtlilxochitl_, pp.
224-5, 365-8, 404, 454, 463; _Torquemada_, tom. i., pp. 113-16;
_Clavigero_, tom. i., pp. 190-3; _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. iii., pp.
138-48; _Boturini_, _Idea_, pp. 143-4; _Motolinia_, in _Icazbalceta_,
_Col. de Doc._, tom. i., p. 254.
[VII-38] On Nezahualcoyotl's adventures during this period, down to
about 1426, see _Ixtlilxochitl_, pp. 224-5, 366-9, 404-5, 463-4;
_Veytia_, tom. ii., pp. 304, 311-14, 317-19; _Clavigero_, tom. i., pp.
190-1, 193-4; _Torquemada_, tom. i., pp. 116-7; _Brasseur_, _Hist._,
tom. iii., pp. 148-50.
[VII-39] There is much confusion respecting these sons of Tezozomoc.
Ixtlilxochitl in one place, pp. 368-9, names Maxtla, Tayauh, and
Atlatota Icpaltzin, or Tlatecaypaltzin, as the sons summoned to his
death-bed. In another place, p. 464, he calls two of them Tiatzi, or
Tayatzi, and Tlacayapaltzin. Torquemada names them Maxtla, Tayatzin,
and Tecuhtzintli. All imply that Maxtla was the eldest son. Brasseur,
following the _Codex Chimalpopoca_, states that Tezozomoc had eight
legitimate sons, of whom Maxtlaton was the seventh and Quetzalayatzin
(Tayauh, or Tayatzin), the sixth.
[VII-40] _Veytia_, tom. ii., pp. 321-9, tom. iii., pp. 3-11; date,
Feb. 2, 1427. _Ixtlilxochitl_, pp. 217, 225-7, 368-70, 405, 454, 464;
dates, March 20, 1427, March 24, 1427, 1424. _Torquemada_, tom. i.,
pp. 68, 117-21, 253; _Clavigero_, tom. i., pp. 194-6; date, 1422.
_Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. iii., pp. 148-54; date, March 24, 1427.
[VII-41] See on the usurpation of Maxtla and the death of his brother,
_Ixtlilxochitl_, pp. 226, 371, 464-5; _Veytia_, tom. iii., pp. 11-18;
_Torquemada_, tom. i., pp. 119-21; _Clavigero_, tom. i., pp. 196-8;
_Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. iii., pp. 155-7; _Vetancvrt_, _Teatro_, pt
ii., p. 26.
[VII-42] On account of their friendship for Nezahualcoyotl and Tayauh.
Another cause of enmity between Chimalpopoca and Maxtla, is said to
have been the dishonor of the former's wife by the latter, she having
been enticed to Azcapuzalco by the aid of two Tepanec ladies.
[VII-43] Veytia, tom. iii., pp. 18-32, says that immediately after the
assassination of Tayauh, a posse of men was sent to seize
Chimalpopoca, whom they found engaged in some religious rites in the
temple. Several authors state that the king died in prison, having
been previously visited by Nezahualcoyotl, who risked his own life to
save him. Veytia says Nezahualcoyotl found him much reduced from
starvation, went for food, and found him dead on his return.
Torquemada, tom. i., pp. 122-8, following Sigüenza, says he hung
himself to avoid starvation. Ixtlilxochitl, pp. 226-8, 371-3, 457,
464-5, in one place states that he died in Nezahualcoyotl's arms. In
another relation he says that Maxtla in his rage at Nezahualcoyotl's
escape sent to Mexico and had Chimalpopoca killed in his stead, the
assassins finding him in the temple carving an idol. Acosta, _Hist. de
las Ynd._, pp. 475-9; Herrera, dec. iii., lib. ii., cap. xii.;
Tezozomoc, in _Kingsborough_, vol. ix., pp. 11-12, and Duran, MS.,
tom. i., pp. 129-37--state that during Tezozomoc's reign the Tepanec
nobles, fearful that Chimalpopoca, as the grandson of Tezozomoc would
succeed to the Tepanec throne, sent to Mexico and had him assassinated
while asleep; adding that the grandfather Tezozomoc, died of grief at
this act! Brasseur, _Hist._, tom. iii., pp. 158-9, 164, implies that
Maxtla only arrested the proposed sacrifice, and agrees with
Ixtlilxochitl's statement that the king was murdered at Mexico while
at work in the temple.
The Tlatelulcan king was killed by the same party. He at first escaped
from his palace, but was overtaken on the lake while striving to reach
Tezcuco, and his body was sunk. Such is the account given by most
authors; Ixtlilxochitl says he drowned himself; while Torquemada
records two versions--one that he was killed for treason against
Nezahualcoyotl; and the other, that he was killed by Montezuma I. of
Mexico. See also on the death of the Aztec kings--_Clavigero_, tom.
i., pp. 200-3; _Motolinia_, in _Icazbalceta_, _Col. de Doc._, tom. i.,
p. 6; _Granados y Galvez_, _Tardes Amer._, p. 154; _Vetancvrt_,
_Teatro_, pt ii., pp. 26-7; _Codex Mendoza_, in _Kingsborough_, vol.
v., p. 44; _Codex Tell. Rem._, in _Id._, vol. vi., p. 135.
[VII-44] Date, July 23, 1427, or 1424, _Ixtlilxochitl_; May 31, 1427,
_Sigüenza_; March 31, 1427, _Vetancvrt_; July 19, 1427, _Veytia_;
1423, _Clavigero_; 1427, _Codex Mendoza_; 1426, _Codex Tell. Rem._;
1428, _Codex Chimalpopoca_.
[VII-45] The Spanish writers state that about this time the king of
Chalco became disaffected, and a messenger, Xolotecuhtli, was sent to
win him over through the influence of his wife, who was a sister of
Huitzilihuitzin, Nezahualcoyotl's chief counselor. The Chalca king
said his change of allegiance was on account of his hatred and fear of
the Mexican king, but consented at last to leave the matter to his
people, who decided unanimously in favor of Nezahualcoyotl.
[VII-46] I have omitted in this account of Nezahualcoyotl's flight,
return, and victorious campaign, the numerous details of the prince's
adventures and escapes, the names of lords to whom he applied and the
tenor of each reply, the wonderful omens that on many occasions
foretold success to his plans, told at so great length by the
authorities, but comparatively unimportant, and altogether too bulky
for my space. See on this period of history: _Veytia_, tom. iii., pp.
14, 33-79, 92-107; _Ixtlilxochitl_, pp. 228-35, 373-81, 405-6, 465-7;
_Torquemada_, tom. i., pp. 125-40; _Clavigero_, tom. i., pp. 202-10;
_Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. iii., pp. 171-3; _Vetancvrt_, _Teatro_, pt
ii., pp. 26-7.
[VII-47] This discussion is placed by different authorities before or
after the choice of a king. This is a matter of no great importance;
the opposition to war probably continued down to the commencement of
hostilities, but the election of a warlike king was of itself
equivalent to a declaration of war, in view of Maxtla's well-known
designs; consequently, I have placed it before the election.
[VII-48] An extraordinary treaty is spoken of by Tezozomoc, Duran,
Acosta, and Clavigero, by the terms of which the nobles bound
themselves in case of defeat to give up their bodies to be sacrificed
to the gods; while the people bound themselves and their descendants
in case of victory to become the servants of the nobles for all future
time. Veytia states that titles of nobility, and permission to have
many wives, were among the inducements to bravery held out to the
plebeians. It is not impossible that the contract alluded to may have
been invented or exaggerated in later times by the nobles to support
their extravagant claims upon the people. Torquemada and Ixtlilxochitl
refer to no such contract, and to no claim for the Tepanec recognition
of their king; but state that the election of Itzcoatl on the one
side, and the heavy tributes with the dishonor of Itzcoatl's wife on
the other, led to the establishment of the blockade.
[VII-49] On the succession and declaration of war in Mexico,
see--_Torquemada_, tom. i., pp. 128-34. This author says nothing of
the succession of a new king in Tlatelulco. _Clavigero_, tom. i., pp.
206-13; _Veytia_, tom. iii., pp. 78-91, 137; _Acosta_, _Hist. de las
Ynd._, pp. 479-83; _Duran_, MS., tom. i., cap. viii., ix.,
_Ixtlilxochitl_, pp. 235-6, 381, 383, 406, 465; _Tezozomoc_, in
_Kingsborough_, vol. ix., pp. 11-15; _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. iii.,
pp. 165-8; _Vetancvrt_, _Teatro_, pt ii., p. 27; _Granados y Galvez_,
_Tardes Amer._, p. 154.
[VII-50] This name is written in many ways; Moteuhzoma or Moteuczoma
being probably more correct than the familiar form of Montezuma.
[VII-51] Totzintecuhtli, king of Chalco, is said to have sent the
prisoner first to Huexotzinca and then offered him to Maxtla to be
sacrificed; but the kings sent him back and refused to do so
dishonorable a deed.
[VII-52] Brasseur says the first interview was at Tenayocan.
[VII-53] See _Veytia_, tom. iii., pp. 91-2, 108-22; _Clavigero_, tom.
i., pp. 209-11; _Ixtlilxochitl_, pp. 236, 381-2, 406-7, 464-6;
_Torquemada_, tom. i., pp. 136-40; _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. iii., pp.
173-9; _Duran_, MS., tom. i., cap. ix.
[VII-54] The chief point of difference between the authorities on this
campaign, is the relative honor due to the different allies and
leaders, and especially the share which the Mexicans and Acolhuas
respectively had in the overthrow of the Tepanec tyrant. Clavigero
places this war in 1425, and thinks that causeways were already built.
Veytia gives the date 1428, notes that the Mexican troops were richly
clad, while the forces of Nezahualcoyotl wore plain, white garments,
and makes the siege last 140 days. Ixtlilxochitl also gives the date
1428, and the length of the war 100 and 115 days. According to
Brasseur, Nezahualcoyotl found time during the siege of Azcapuzalco to
reconquer Acolman and Coatlichan, which had revolted. He calls the
Tepanec leader Mazatzin, and gives the date as 1430. See
_Ixtlilxochitl_, pp. 236-7, 382-4, 407, 466; _Veytia_, tom. iii., pp.
120-39; _Duran_, MS., tom. i., cap. ix.; _Clavigero_, tom. i., pp.
214-20; _Torquemada_, tom. i., pp. 140-3; _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom.
iii., pp. 180-5; _Acosta_, _Hist. de las Ynd._, pp. 483-5.
[VII-55] See _Clavigero_, tom. i., pp. 221-3; _Torquemada_, tom. i.,
pp. 142-6; _Veytia_, tom. iii., pp. 136-47, 155-60; _Ixtlilxochitl_,
pp. 237-8, 383-5, 407, 466-7; _Tezozomoc_, in _Kingsborough_, vol.
ix., pp. 16-17; _Duran_, MS., tom. i., cap. ix.; _Acosta_, _Hist. de
las Ynd._, pp. 484-5; _Vetancvrt_, _Teatro_, pt. ii., p. 28;
_Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. iii., pp. 187-9.
[VII-56] The line is said to have extended from Totoltepec in the
north to a point in the lake near Mexico, which would be in a S.W.
course. Thence it extended to mount Cuexcomatl probably towards the
S.E. Subsequent events seem often to indicate that these lines were
intended to be indefinitely prolonged, and to bound future conquests.
Brasseur, _Hist._, tom. iii., p. 266, takes this view of the matter,
although on p. 191 he implies the contrary.
[VII-57] Such was the basis of the alliance according to
Ixtlilxochitl, Veytia, Zurita, and Brasseur. All agree respecting the
inferior position of Tlacopan and her share of the spoils, but
Ixtlilxochitl, p. 455, makes both pay a small tribute to Tezcuco.
Veytia makes Nezahualcoyotl superior in nominal rank as above;
Ixtlilxochitl in most of his relations makes him and Itzcoatl equal in
this respect; while Torquemada, Clavigero, Gomara, and Duran make
Itzcoatl supreme, and give to Mexico two thirds instead of one half of
the spoils after deducting the share of Tlacopan. The chief support of
the latter opinion is the great proportional growth of the Mexican
domains in later times; but practically Mexico received much more even
than the two thirds allotted to her by these authors. I think it more
likely that Mexico in her great military power and love of conquest
took much more than her proper share, at first with the consent of her
colleagues and later without such consent; and it is also possible
that the division agreed upon referred only to conquests accomplished
under certain conditions not recorded, or, a supposition which agrees
very nearly with the actual division in later times, that each of the
three kingdoms was to have the conquered provinces that adjoined its
territory, and that Mexico obtained the largest share, not only on
account of her ambition, but because the most desirable field for
conquest proved to be in the south-east and south-west. See preceding
note.
[VII-58] Totoquihuatzin was the grandson of Tezozomoc, and his
daughter was either concubine or wife of Nezahualcoyotl. Torquemada
and Clavigero state that the people of the region about Tezcuco
petitioned Itzcoatl to allow Nezahualcoyotl to rule over them,
because, as the latter suggests, this territory had been given to
Chimalpopoca by Tezozomoc. To Nezahualcoyotl, during his stay in
Mexico, are attributed a palace and hunting-park at Chapultepec,
together with several reservoirs and the idea of an aqueduct to supply
water to the city. Veytia claims to have seen traces of the boundary
line between the Aztec and Acolhua domains. It extended from Mount
Cuexcomatl in the south, between Iztapalapan and Culhuacan, through
the northern lake at Zumpango to Totoltepec. This would, however, be
far from a straight line. See respecting the establishment of the new
alliance:--_Ixtlilxochitl_, pp. 237-8, 383, 407, 454, 467; _Veytia_,
tom. iii., pp. 155-68; _Torquemada_, tom. i., pp. 143-4, 154-6;
_Clavigero_, tom. i., pp. 221-5; _Duran_, MS., tom. i., cap. ix., x.,
xiv.; _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. iii., pp. 187-93; _Gomara_, _Conq.
Mex._, fol. 303; _Prescott's Mex._, vol. i., p. 19; _Vetancvrt_,
_Teatro_, pt ii., p. 28.
CHAPTER VIII.
THE AZTEC PERIOD.
Outline of the Period -- Revolt of Coyuhuacan --
Nezahualcoyotl on the Throne of Tezcuco -- Conquest of
Quauhtitlan, Tultitlan, Xochimilco, and Cuitlahuac --
Conquest of Quauhtitlan -- Destruction of the Records --
Death of Itzcoatl and Accession of Montezuma I. -- New
Temples at Mexico -- Defeat of the Chalcas -- Troubles with
Tlatelulco -- Conquest of Cohuixco and Mazatlan -- Flood and
Six Years' Famine -- Conquest of Miztecapan -- The Aztecs
Conquer the Province of Cuetlachtlan and reach the Gulf Coast
-- Final Defeat of the Chalcas -- Campaign in Cuextlan --
Birth of Nezahualpilli -- Improvements in Tenochtitlan --
Embassy to Chicomoztoc -- Death of Montezuma I. and Accession
of Axayacatl -- Raid in Tehuantepec -- Chimalpopoca succeeds
Totoquihuatzin on the Throne of Tlacopan -- Nezahualpilli
succeeds Nezahualcoyotl at Tezcuco -- Revolt of Tlatelulco --
Conquest of Matlaltzinco -- Defeat by the Tarascos -- Death
of Axayacatl.
[Sidenote: OUTLINE OF AZTEC HISTORY.]
The annals of the Aztec period constitute a record of successive
conquests by the allied Tepanec, Acolhua, and Mexican forces, in which
the latter play the leading rôle, and by which they became practically
masters of the whole country, and were on the point of subjugating
even their allies, or of falling before a combination of their foes,
when they fell before a foe from across the sea. Besides the frequently
recurring campaigns against coveted provinces or revolted chieftains,
we have the constant growth of Tenochtitlan and Tezcuco; the
construction of causeways, canals, aqueducts, and other public works;
the erection of magnificent temples in honor of blood-thirsty gods; and
nothing more, save the inhuman sacrifice of countless victims by which
this fanatic people celebrated each victory, each coronation of a new
king, each dedication of a new temple, strove to avert each impending
disaster, rendered thanks for every escape, and feasted their deities
for every mark of divine favor. From two sources there is introduced
into this record a confusion unequaled in that of all preceding
periods. The national prejudices of the original authorities have
produced two almost distinct versions of each event, one attributing
the leading rôle and all the glory to Tezcuco, the other to Mexico.
The other source of confusion is in the successive campaigns against
or conquests of the same province, as of Chalco for example. This
province, like others, was almost continually in a state of revolt;
and there was no king of Mexico who had not to engage in one or more
wars against its people. In the aggregate about the same events are
attributed to the Chalca wars, but hardly two authorities group these
events in the same manner. Some group them in two or three wars, others
in many, and as few attempt to give any exact chronology, the resulting
complication may easily be understood. To reconcile these differences
is impossible; to give in full the statement of all the authorities
on each point would amount to printing the whole history of the period
three or four times over, and would prove most monotonous to the reader
without serving any good purpose; the choice is therefore between an
arbitrary grouping of the events in question and the adoption of that
given by Brasseur de Bourbourg. As the latter has the claimed advantage
of resting on original documents in addition to the Spanish writers, I
prefer to follow it. In respect to the difficulty arising from a spirit
of rivalry between Mexico and Tezcuco, I shall continue the assumption
already made that the two powers entered into the alliance on terms of
equality, carefully noting, however, the views of the authorities on
both sides respecting all important points.
While Nezahualcoyotl was still residing in Mexico, a desperate attempt
was made to retrieve the defeat at Azcapuzalco, by Coyuhuacan, the
strongest of the remaining Tepanec provinces. The rulers of this
province applied for aid to all the lords in the region, picturing the
danger that hung over all from the Aztec power and ambition; but for
some reason, probably fear of the new alliance, all refused to take
part in the war, and the Tepanecs were left to fight their own battles.
They began by robbing and insulting Mexican market-women visiting their
city for purposes of trade; afterwards invited the Mexican nobles to a
feast and sent them back clad in women's garments; and finally openly
declared war. Their strong towns of Coyuhuacan and Atlacohuayan soon
fell, however, before the allied armies under Itzcoatl and Montezuma,
and the whole south-western section as far as Xochimilco was brought
under subjection,[VIII-1] Itzcoatl making a triumphal return into his
capital in 1432.
[Sidenote: OCCUPATION OF TEZCUCO.]
It was determined in the following year that Nezahualcoyotl should
return to Tezcuco and take possession of his ancestral throne of
Acolhuacan. A large army was fitted out for the conquest, but its
aid was not required; for the lords that had thus far held out in
the capital, realized that their cause was hopeless, fled to Tlascala
and in other directions, allowing the king to enter Tezcuco without
resistance, where he was gladly received by the people, was publicly
crowned by Itzcoatl, and proclaimed a general amnesty, which course
soon brought back many even of the rebel lords.[VIII-2] Soon after his
return he made a visit to Tlascala, concluding with that power a
treaty of alliance, and afterwards ruling in great harmony with all
his allies; at least, such is the version of the Abbé Brasseur, and
Clavigero speaks of no trouble at that period; but other Spanish
writers, although not agreeing among themselves, give a very different
version of the events that occurred immediately after the occupation of
Tezcuco. According to the statements of Ixtlilxochitl and Veytia,[VIII-3]
Itzcoatl soon repented of having allowed Nezahualcoyotl the supreme
rank of Chichimecatl Tecuhtli, and made some disparaging remarks about
his colleague. Nezahualcoyotl, enraged, announced his intention to
march on Mexico within ten days; Itzcoatl, frightened, made excuses,
and sent twenty-five virgins as a conciliatory gift, who were returned
untouched; a bloody battle ensued, and the Mexican king was obliged to
sue for peace, and submit to the payment of a tribute. Ixtlilxochitl
even says that the Acolhuas entered Mexico, plundering the city and
burning temples. Torquemada[VIII-4] mentions a difficulty between the two
monarchs, and Nezahualcoyotl's challenge, but states that Itzcoatl's
excuses were accepted and an amicable arrangement effected. Boturini
refers the quarrel and challenge to the later reign of Axayacatl.
Ortega, Veytia's editor, denies that any difficulties occurred;[VIII-5]
and, indeed, the story is not a very reasonable one, which is perhaps
Brasseur's reason for ignoring it altogether.
Once seated on the throne of Acolhuacan, Nezahualcoyotl devoted himself
zealously to the reconstruction of his kingdom, following for the most
part the plan marked out by his grandfather Techotl, and establishing
the forms of government that endured to the time of the conquest, and
that have been fully described in a preceding volume. Unlike the king
of Mexico, and against his advice, he restored to a certain extent the
feudal system, and left many of his vassal lords independent in their
own domains, instead of appointing royal governors. He was prompted
to this course by a sense of justice, and by it his popularity was
greatly increased; the plan was very successful; but whether it would
have succeeded in later years without the support of the Mexican and
Tepanec armies, may perhaps be doubted. Many however, of the strongest,
the most troublesome, and especially the frontier provinces, or cities,
were placed under the king's sons or friends. Full details of the
governmental system introduced by this monarch, of the many councils
which he established, are given by the authorities but need not be
repeated here. Particular attention was given to science and arts, and
to educational institutions, which continued to flourish under his son,
and for which Tezcuco was noted at the arrival of the Spaniards. The
city was definitely divided into six wards called after the inhabitants
of different nationalities, Tlailotlacan, Chimalpanecan, Huitznahuac,
Tepanecapan, Culhuacan, and Mexicapan, and was enlarged and embellished
in every direction with new palaces, temples, and both public and royal
parks and pleasure-grounds.[VIII-6]
[Sidenote: CONQUEST OF XOCHIMILCO.]
In 1434 the Chichimec-Culhua city of Quauhtitlan was brought under
subjection to Mexico, or at least entrusted to governors appointed by
Itzcoatl, who made certain troubles among the people in the choice of
a ruler an excuse for marching an army into that part of the country.
Tultitlan was also conquered, probably in the same expedition.[VIII-7]
Xochimilco was now one of the largest cities in Anáhuac, and by reason
of its location partially on the lake, and of a deep moat which guarded
the land side, was also one of the strongest. Cuitlahuac was even more
strongly defended; but both cities were forced to yield to the Mexicans
and their allies during this year and the following. Many Tepanecs had
taken refuge in these towns after the fall of Azcapuzalco, and their
rulers, trusting to their increased force and the strength of their
defences, were disposed to regard the Aztecs without fear. Some authors
accuse the Xochimilcas of having provoked a war by encroachments;
others state that they were formally summoned by Itzcoatl to submit
and pay tribute or resort to the lot of battle. They made a brave
resistance, but Itzcoatl's forces crossed their moat by filling it with
bundles of sticks and brambles, and entered the town, driving the army
to the mountains, where they soon surrendered. Authorities differ as to
the treatment of the people and the government imposed, as they do in
the case of most of the conquered cities; but Xochimilco was certainly
made tributary to the Mexican king. The Cuitlahuacs were conquered in a
later expedition. The cause of the war, as Tezozomoc tells us, was the
refusal to send their young girls to take part in a festival at Mexico.
The battle was fought for the most part in canoes, the city was taken,
as is said, by a detachment of students under the command of Montezuma,
and many prisoners were brought back to be sacrificed in honor of the
god of war. According to Tezozomoc and Duran, the people of Xochimilco
with those of Coyuhuacan were ordered to furnish material and build a
causeway, the first, it is said, which led from Mexico to the mainland.
Herrera and Acosta tells us that after the conquest of Cuitlahuac,
Nezahualcoyotl, seeing that it was useless to resist the destiny of the
Mexicans, voluntarily offered his allegiance to Itzcoatl and retired to
the second rank in the alliance. The latter adds that to content the
monarch's subjects with such a measure, a sham battle was fought, in
which the Acolhua armies pretended to be defeated.[VIII-8]
* * * * *
[Sidenote: AFFAIRS IN QUAUHTITLAN.]
An opportunity was soon offered the allied powers to test their
strength outside the limits of the valley, where reports of their
valor and rapidly growing power had preceded them. The rich city of
Quauhnahuac in the south-west, had once, as we have seen, formed an
alliance by marriage with the Mexicans, but friendly relations seem to
have ceased. In a difficulty between the lords of Quauhnahuac and
Xiuhtepec, a neighboring city, about the hand of the former's
daughter, the latter called upon the Mexicans for aid, which they were
only too ready to grant. The three kings, together with the Tlahuica
forces of Cohuatzin, lord of Xiuhtepec, marched against the fated
town, entered it after hard fighting, burned its temple, imposed a
heavy tribute of cotton, rich cloths, and fine garments, thus taking
the first step in their victorious march toward the South Sea.[VIII-9]
The re-building and re-peopling of Xaltocan, by colonies of Mexicans,
Acolhuas, and Tepanecs, and by a gathering of scattered Otomís, is
attributed by the _Codex Chimalpopoca_ to the year 1435. At the same
time were laid the foundations of a new temple in honor of Cihuacoatl,
and work on the grand temple of Huitzilopochtli, begun long before,
was actively prosecuted. So zealous was king Itzcoatl in advancing the
glory of his people that he is reported by Sahagun[VIII-10] to have
destroyed the ancient records which related the glorious deeds of more
ancient peoples. Nothing further is recorded during Itzcoatl's reign
save the execution of the death penalty on certain Chichimec families
of Quauhtitlan, who refused to participate in some of the religious
rites in honor of the Aztec gods, a short campaign against the
province of Ecatepec, and a vaguely mentioned renewal of hostilities
with Chalco.[VIII-11]
I have already noticed the statements of Acosta and Herrera, that after
the conquest of Cuitlahuac Nezahualcoyotl resigned his supremacy in
favor of the Mexican king. Other authors, as Tezozomoc, Duran, Gomara,
and Sigüenza y Góngora, also imply that from the end of Itzcoatl's
reign, the Mexican king was supreme in the alliance; but their
statements disagree among themselves, and with previous statements
by the same authors to the effect that the Mexican king was supreme
monarch at the foundation of the alliance. Although Itzcoatl and his
successors, by their valor and desire of conquest, took a leading
part in all wars, and were in a sense masters of Anáhuac, there is
no sufficient evidence that they ever claimed any superiority in rank
over the Acolhua monarch, or that any important difficulties occurred
between the two powers until the last years of the Aztec period.[VIII-12]
The king died in 1440, recommending the allies above all things to live
at peace with each other, ordering work to be continued on the temple
of Huitzilopochtli, and making provision for statues of himself and his
predecessors on the throne of Mexico. He was succeeded by his nephew,
Montezuma Ilhuicamina, or the elder, who was already commander of the
armies and high-priest of Huitzilopochtli.[VIII-13]
[Sidenote: REIGN OF MONTEZUMA I.]
His election having been confirmed by the kings of Tezcuco and
Tlacopan, Montezuma I. was crowned with something more than the
usual ceremonies, both because of his high ecclesiastical position
and because he was the first monarch crowned by the Mexicans as a
perfectly independent nation. According to several authors this king
made an expedition against the Chalcas before his coronation to obtain
the necessary prisoners for sacrifice.[VIII-14] From the first days of his
reign Montezuma gave great attention to the building of temples in his
capital, obtaining many of his workmen from Tlacopan, and his plans
from the skilled architects of Tezcuco. He seems to have instituted
the custom so extensively practiced in later years, of erecting in
Mexico temples in honor of the gods of foreign provinces conquered or
about to be conquered, making these gods subordinate to Huitzilopochtli
as their worshipers were subject to the Mexicans. Two temples are
especially mentioned by the documents which Brasseur follows; one
called Huitznahuateocalli, and the other that of Mixcohuatepec.
The latter was built to receive the relics of the ancient chief
Mixcohuatl,[VIII-15] which had been preserved for centuries in their temple
at Cuitlahuac, an object of veneration to all of Toltec descent. A
quarrel between Tezozomoc and Acolmiztli, rival lords of that city,
afforded a sufficient pretext for sending thither a Mexican army;
the temple caught fire, by accident as was claimed, and the lord who
had received aid could not refuse Montezuma's request for the now
shelterless relics, which were transferred to their new resting-place
in Tenochtitlan. This was in 1441.[VIII-16]
The Chalcas whom we have often found fighting, now on the side of
the Acolhuas, now on the side of the Tepanecs, but always hating
the Mexicans most bitterly, seem to have managed their alliances so
shrewdly up to this time, as to have avoided becoming involved in the
ruin that at different times had overwhelmed the leading powers of
Anáhuac. Since the formation of the new alliance, in which they had
no part, their soldiers had fought many skirmishes with the allied
forces, but the latter had made no united effort to conquer them.
Having become numerous and powerful, the Chalcas now dared, in 1443, to
measure their strength against the allies, their chief purpose being
to humble Mexico. They provoked hostilities by seizing and putting to
death a party of noble young men who were hunting near their frontier.
The party included some members of the Mexican royal family, and two
sons of Nezahualcoyotl. The dead bodies of the latter were embalmed
and made to do service in the palace of Toteotzin, lord of Chalco,
as torch-bearers. The effect of such an indignity was immediate, and
brought upon the perpetrators the whole strength of the allied kings.
The Mexicans and Tepanecs approached by water, the Acolhuas by land;
they were met by the Chalca army, and for several weeks the conflict
raged fiercely without decisive advantage on either side. Kings
Montezuma and Totoquihuatzin commanded in person; Nezahualcoyotl's
forces were under his two eldest sons. Another son, Axoquentzin, only
about seventeen years old, performed prodigies of valor and turned the
tide of victory. Visiting his brothers in camp, he was about to eat
with them, when they ridiculed his youth and told him that was no place
for a boy who had done no deed of valor. Ashamed and angry, he seized
arms and rushed alone against the enemy, taking captive one of their
mightiest warriors--their aged lord Toteotzin himself, Ixtlilxochitl
says--and creating a panic which caused ultimate defeat. The victory
was complete, the Chalca army was scattered, the city taken and made
tributary to the central powers, although these people were able
subsequently to cause the victors much trouble. Nezahualcoyotl was so
angry at the murder of his sons that for once he shared to some extent
the bloodthirsty spirit of the Aztecs, and gladly gave up the Chalca
captives, among whom was their chief, to the sacrificial block.[VIII-17]
[Sidenote: CONQUEST OF TLATELULCO.]
The exact status of Tlatelulco under the tri-partite alliance is not
clearly recorded; but the inferior position accorded that city had
doubtless caused much jealousy and dissatisfaction, which had already
produced some trouble, though not open rupture, between the two
kings, if we may suppose Quauhtlatohuatzin to have been at this date
considered as a king. During Montezuma's absence in the Chalca war,
the Tlatelulca chief ventured so far as to engage in plots against
the existing state of things; Montezuma, on his return declared war;
the people were reduced to submission, their ruler was killed, and
Moquihuix, supposed to be in the interests of the Mexicans, was put in
his place.[VIII-18] On his return from the Chalca war, and while Montezuma
was punishing the treason of the Tlatelulca chief, Nezahualcoyotl was
engaged in quelling a revolt in the northern province of Tulancingo,
where the rebels had burned some towns and driven out the Acolhua
garrisons. The province was now finally conquered and joined to the
domain of Acolhuacan under royal governors. Nezahualcoyotl is also
said to have founded a new town in this region, and sent colonists from
Tezcuco to dwell in it.[VIII-19]
The rich provinces of Cohuixco and Mazatlan, just south of Anáhuac
and of the province of Quauhnahuac, at the time the southern limit
of Mexican conquest, had long been coveted by the Aztec kings; and
in 1448 the desired opportunity presented itself. The Cohuixcas
attacked and put to death a large number of traveling merchants from
Mexico, provoked to the outrage doubtless by the arbitrary conduct
of the latter, who deemed that the great power of their own nation
freed them from all obligation to obey the laws of nations which
they visited. The murder of the traders was more than a sufficient
cause of war to the belligerent allies, and by a campaign concerning
which no details are recorded, the two provinces, or at least most of
their towns, were conquered and annexed as tributaries to the Aztec
domains.[VIII-20] During the following years the Aztecs were called upon
to suspend their foreign conquests and to struggle at home against
water and snow and frost and drought and famine, foes that well nigh
gained the mastery over these hitherto invincible warriors. In 1449
heavy and continuous rains so raised the waters of the lake as to
inundate the streets of Tenochtitlan, destroying many buildings and
even causing considerable loss of life. The misfortune was bravely
met; the genius of Nezahualcoyotl, the engineering skill of the
valley, and the whole available laboring force of the three kingdoms
were called into requisition to guard against a recurrence of the
flood. A dike, stretching from north to south in crescent form, was
constructed for a distance of seven or eight miles, separating the
waters of the lake into two portions, that on the Mexican side being
comparatively independent of the fresh water flowing into the lake
in the rainy season. The dike was built by driving a double line of
piles, the interior space being filled with stones and earth, the whole
over thirty, or, as many authors say, sixty feet wide, and forming a
much-frequented promenade. This work may be considered a great triumph
of aboriginal engineering, especially when we consider the millions
spent by the Spaniards under the best European engineers in protecting
the city, hardly more effectually, against similar inundations. The
Chalcas seem to have taken advantage of the troubles in Mexico to
revolt, but were easily brought into subjection by an army under
Montezuma.[VIII-21]
[Sidenote: FAMINE AND PLAGUES.]
The famine and other plagues already alluded to began two years later,
and continued for a period of six years.[VIII-22] The authorities do not
altogether agree respecting the exact order of the visitations, but
severe frosts, a heavy fall of snow, long-continued drought, consequent
failure of all crops, famine, and epidemic pestilence are mentioned
by all. All the valley and many provinces without its limits were
visited by the famine; indeed, Totonacapan, or northern Vera Cruz,
is reported to have been the only part of the country that entirely
escaped its effects. The suffering and mortality among the lower
classes were terrible; the royal granaries were thrown open by order
of Nezahualcoyotl and Montezuma, but the supply of maize was soon
exhausted, and the fish, reptiles, birds, and insects of the lakes were
the only sources of food. Thousands of the poor sold themselves into
slavery, some at home, others in foreign provinces, to obtain barely
food enough to sustain life. Several Mexican colonies attribute their
origin to this period of want. The rulers could not prevent the sale
of slaves, but they forbade children to be sold at less rates than
four or five hundred ears of corn each, according as they were boys or
girls. This national disaster was, of course, attributed to the anger
of the gods, and the utmost efforts were made to conciliate their irate
divinities by the only efficacious means known, the sacrifice of human
victims. But since fighting and conquest had ceased, such victims were
exceedingly scarce. Nezahualcoyotl would allow none but prisoners of
war to be sacrificed in his dominions, arguing that such forfeited
their lives by being defeated, and that it made but little difference
to them whether they died on the field of battle or on the sacrificial
altar. Moreover, only strong soldiers were believed to be acceptable to
the gods in such an emergency; the sickly and famishing plebeians and
slaves could not by their worthless lives avert the divine wrath. The
result of this difficulty was one of the most extraordinary compacts
known in the world's history. It was agreed in a solemn treaty that
between the Mexicans, Tepanecs, and Acolhuas in the valley, and the
Cholultecs, Tlascaltecs, and Huexotzincas of the eastern plateaux,
battles should take place at regular intervals, on battle-grounds set
apart for this purpose, between foes equal in number, for the sole
purpose of obtaining captives for sacrifice. Such battles were actually
fought during the years of famine, and perhaps in later years, although
the almost constant wars rendered such a resort rarely necessary. In
the last years of the famine Nezahualcoyotl laid the foundations of a
great teocalli at Tezcuco, in 1455 the tying-up of the cycle and the
renewal of the sacred fire were celebrated, and the following year of
1456 was one of great abundance. The time of want and disaster was at
last completed; a period of plenty and prosperity ensued.[VIII-23]
[Sidenote: CONQUEST OF MIZTECAPAN.]
With returning plenty and prosperity at home, came back the spirit
of foreign conquest. The first to fall before the allied forces was
the province of Cohuaixtlahuacan, or Upper Miztecapan, lying in the
south-west, in what is now Oajaca, and adjoining that of Mazatlan,
which had already been added to the Aztec domain. As in the case
of the last-mentioned province and of many others, ill-treatment of
Mexican traders was the alleged motive of the war. The Miztec king,
called Dzawindanda in his own country and Atonaltzin by the Mexicans,
had caused many of the traveling merchants to be put to death and had
finally forbidden the whole fraternity to trade in or to pass through
his territory. There is every reason to believe that this prohibition
was merited by the conduct of the Mexicans. At this time, and still
more so in later years, the monarchs of Anáhuac made use of their
merchants as spies to report upon the wealth and power of different
provinces, to ascertain the best methods of attack, and to provoke a
quarrel when the conquest had once been determined upon. The province
of Miztecapan was a rich field of traffic and was moreover on the
route to the rich commercial towns on the southern coast of Anáhuac
Ayotlan, where the products of the countries both north and south of
the isthmus were offered for sale at the great fairs. The Mexicans
attended these fairs in companies which were well armed and were
little less than small armies, trusting in their own strength and that
of their sovereign, and showing but little respect for the laws of
provinces traversed. Atonaltzin was a proud and powerful ruler, and
was not at all unwilling to measure his strength against that of the
central nations. Montezuma sent an embassy to hear his complaints;
Atonaltzin sent back by the same embassy a great quantity of valuable
gifts, samples, as he said, of the tribute the Mexicans might expect
if they should succeed in conquering his armies in the war which must
decide which king was to pay tribute to the other. Montezuma's reply
was to march at the head of a large army towards Tilantongo, the
capital of Cohuaixtlahuacan. The result was that the allied forces were
utterly routed and driven back with great loss to their home. Montezuma
had underrated the strength of his adversary and had undertaken the
conquest without sufficient preparation.
A few months were now spent in new preparations on both sides for
a renewal of the struggle. The Aztecs in some way formed a secret
alliance with the lord of Tlachquiauhco, near Tilantongo, who was an
enemy to Atonaltzin. The Miztecs on the other hand obtained aid from
the Tlascaltecs and Huexotzincas, who before the Aztec alliance had
been the leading traders of the country, and who were jealous of the
commercial enterprise shown and success achieved by their rivals.
The war began with an assault by the Miztec leader and his eastern
allies on Tlachquiauhco; but the Mexicans, Acolhuas, and Tepanecs,
under Montezuma, inflicted this time as severe a defeat as they had
suffered before; Atonaltzin was forced to surrender, and the whole
province was annexed to the domain of the victors, as were Tochtepec,
Zapotlan, Tototlan, and Chinantla, soon after. The auxiliary army of
the Tlascaltecs and Huexotzincas was almost annihilated. The record
closes with a romantic episode of Montezuma's love for Atonaltzin's
queen; the Miztec king was killed shortly after by his own subjects,
not improbably at the instigation of the Aztecs, and the assassins
brought his queen with the news of his death to Mexico. A palace was
built for her, but she is said to have resisted the Aztec monarch's
ardor, and to have remained faithful to her first husband. The conquest
of Cozamaloapan and Quauhtochco, also in the Miztec region, followed
during the same year and the following, provoked as before by the
pretended murder of traveling merchants.[VIII-24]
[Sidenote: CONQUEST OF CUETLACHTLAN.]
Elated by their success in the south-west, the allied kings next turned
their attention toward the south-eastern province of Cuetlachtlan, in
what is now central Vera Cruz, lying between the Aztec possessions
and the thriving commercial towns of the Xicalancas on the gulf
coast in the Goazacoalco region. According to Veytia, Torquemada,
and Clavigero, the chiefs of the province, incited by the Tlascaltecs
and promised aid by them and the other cities of the eastern plateau,
declared or adopted measures to provoke the war. Duran and Tezozomoc,
on the contrary, represent the Mexicans as having sent an embassy to
the south-eastern provinces, demanding a tribute of rare shells, or
even of live shell-fish, and threatening war as an alternative. The
ambassadors were to include the Totonac territory in their demands,
but were seized and murdered in Cuetlachtlan, their dead bodies being
subjected to great indignities, at the instigation of the Tlascaltecs.
The army immediately dispatched from the lake cities was one of the
strongest which had yet fought for the glory of the Aztec alliance,
and numbered among its leaders three Mexican princes, Ahuitzotl,
Axayacatl, and Tizoc, who afterwards occupied the throne, and Moquihuix
the ruler of Tlatelulco. The alliance of the Olmec province with
Tlascala and the other cities seems not to have been known at Mexico
when the army began its march, and when it became known excited so
much apprehension that orders were sent to the generals in command to
fall back and postpone the conflict until further preparations could be
made. All were disposed to obey the royal command, save Moquihuix, who
bravely announced his purpose to attack and defeat the enemy with his
Tlatelulca soldiers unaided. His enthusiasm had an electric effect on
the whole army; there was no longer any thought of retreat; the battle
was fought in disobedience of orders, near Ahuilizapan, now Orizava;
the army of the enemy was defeated; the Aztecs were masters of a broad
tract, extending from Anáhuac south-eastward to the sea; and over six
thousand captives were brought back to die on the sacrificial block.
Duran and Tezozomoc state that the nations of the eastern plateau did
not give the aid they had promised, treacherously leaving the province
of Cuetlachtlan to its fate; but this is consistent neither with the
character nor interests of the Tlascaltecs, and it is more likely
that their army shared the defeat. The victors were received at Mexico
with the highest honors, the kings, priests, and nobles marching out
to meet them; the leaders were rewarded for their bravery with lands
and honors, particularly Moquihuix, who received besides the hand of a
Mexican princess nearly related to the royal family; and the blood of
the six thousand captives furnished an offering most acceptable to the
gods at the dedication of a temple that had just been completed.
A revolt of the province of Cuetlachtlan is recorded by Duran and
Tezozomoc at a later date not definitely fixed, when the Mexican
governor was murdered, the payment of tribute suspended, and the
ambassadors sent to ascertain the cause of such suspension, shut up
in a tight room and suffocated with burning chile. The Tlascaltecs, as
before, offered aid which was not forthcoming; the guilty parties were
put to death by order of the Aztec monarchs, and the tributes of the
province were doubled.[VIII-25]
[Sidenote: REVOLT OF THE CHALCAS.]
The Chalcas never missed an opportunity for revolt, and did not fail
to take advantage of the events which obliged the hated Aztecs to give
their whole attention to foreign wars. During the war in Cuetlachtlan,
they are said to have defied the Aztec power by refusing certain
blocks of stone from their quarries needed for building-purposes in
the capital, and also to have seized and imprisoned several Mexicans
of high rank. Among the latter was a brother of Montezuma, whom,
according to several authorities, they offered to make king of Chalco;
he refused to betray his country, but at last, influenced by entreaties
and threats, pretended to consent. At his request a high platform was
erected for the performance of certain ceremonies designed to fire
the hearts of the Chalcas in the new cause; but from its summit the
captive prince denounced the treachery of his captors, called upon
the Mexicans to avenge him, predicted the defeat and slavery of the
people of Chalco, and threw himself headlong to the earth below. The
total annihilation of this uncontrollable people was determined upon
by the kings of Mexico, Tezcuco, and Tlacopan; and a peculiar air of
mystery enshrouds the war which followed. During the whole period of
preparation, of conflict, and of victory, the people of the capital
engaged in solemn processions, chants, prayers, sacrifices, and other
rites in honor of the Aztecs who had perished in past Chalca wars.
Signal fires blazed on the hills and in the watch-towers; and it is
even said that the gods sent an earthquake to warn the Chalcas of their
impending doom. The battle raged for a whole day before the fated city
and the Aztecs were at last victorious, as they had been in a previous
war against the same city. Great numbers of the enemy fell in battle
or were put to the sword during the pursuit; the almost deserted town
was entered by the Aztec army; surviving Chalcas were scattered in
all directions; many took refuge in the cities of the eastern plateau,
others perished in the mountains rather than to submit to their hated
foe; but enough were finally pardoned by Montezuma and allowed to
return to their city to cause not a little trouble in later years.[VIII-26]
Other events recorded as having occurred before 1460 are few in number.
The most important was the conquest and annexation to the Tezcucan
domain of many towns in the north-eastern provinces of Tziauhcohuac,
Atochpan, and Cuextlan, the home of the Huastecs in the Pánuco region
on the gulf coast. In this campaign the allied troops were under two
of Nezahualcoyotl's sons, and this was the only important addition to
the Acolhua possessions since the date of the tri-partite alliance;
yet there is no evidence that Nezahualcoyotl expressed or felt any
dissatisfaction at the rapid growth of the Mexican domain; he was not
ambitious of conquest, and doubtless received his full share of other
spoils and of tribute. At about the same time the Mexicans conquered
several strong cities on the southern edge of the Cholultec plateau,
such as Tepeaca, Quauhtinchan, and Acatzingo, thus threatening the
independence of the eastern republics; outrages on traveling merchants
were as usual the real or pretended excuse for these conquests.
Tenochtitlan and Tlatelulco had now grown so far beyond their original
limits as to form really but one city, the boundary line being a narrow
and shallow ditch. This ditch was now deepened and widened at the joint
expense of the two powers, and formed into a navigable canal. Great
improvements were also made, particularly in the market buildings of
Tlatelulco, which had now become the commercial headquarters of the
whole country north of Tehuantepec. The commercial interests of the
empire had been most jealously promoted by the reigning monarchs, and
the Aztec merchants had contributed no less than the Aztec armies to
the glory and prosperity of their nation.[VIII-27]
[Sidenote: BIRTH OF NEZAHUALPILLI.]
In 1463 Nezahaulcoyotl married a daughter of the king of Tlacopan,
obtaining her hand, if we may credit Ixtlilxochitl and Torquemada,
in a manner that reflected no credit on his honor. She had been from
an early age the wife of Temictzin, a Tlatelulca general, somewhat
advanced in years, but the marriage had not yet been consummated on
account of her youth. The Acolhua monarch desiring by marriage to leave
a legitimate heir to the throne, and becoming enamored of the young
Azcaxochitl's charms, sent her husband away to the wars, and managed
to have him killed. After her period of mourning was past, the fair
Azcaxochitl was made queen of Tezcuco; the nuptial feasts lasted eighty
days among great rejoicings of nobles and people; and within a year the
queen gave birth to Nezahualpilli, the emperor's only legitimate son
and his successor.[VIII-28] The year 1465 is given as the date of the final
submission of the Chalcas; that is the surrender and return to the city
of the last bands that had since their defeat lived under chieftains
of their own choice in the mountains, and kept up some show of
hostility to Mexico.[VIII-29] In 1466, the causeway and aqueduct extending
from Chapultepec to Mexico, and supplying the capital with pure water
through a pipe of burned clay, were completed. This work had been
planned by Nezahualcoyotl during his residence at Mexico, and had been
commenced by Itzcoatl. Work was continually pushed forward on the grand
temple of Huitzilopochtli, and many teocallis were built at this period
in each of the three allied capitals. One in Tezcuco is particularly
mentioned, which was very richly decorated with gold and precious
stones, and was dedicated by Nezahualcoyotl to the invisible god of
the universe. This pyramid was completed in 1467, but, according to
the _Codex Chimalpopoca_, fell as soon as finished. It was necessary to
rebuild the structure, and that it might be done rapidly, the Tezcucan
monarch called upon Montezuma for laborers from his tributary city of
Zumpango and other northern towns. The permission was given, but the
people of Zumpango refused to send workmen, and raised a revolt, which
was, however, quelled by the Acolhua forces in a short campaign.[VIII-30]
[Sidenote: MISSION TO CHICOMOZTOC.]
A remarkable story told by Duran and attributed to the reign of
Montezuma I., may be introduced here as well as anywhere, although
it is more than doubtful whether it should receive any credit as a
historic record. In the midst of the glory acquired by his valor,
Montezuma determined to send an armed force to the region of the Seven
Caves whence his people came. Though armed they were to bear rich
presents, with orders to explore the country and search for the mother
of Huitzilopochtli, who if yet alive would be pleased to know of her
son's prosperity and glory, and would gladly receive the gifts of his
chosen people. The intention was made known to Tlacaeleltzin--a famous
prince who seems to be identical with Montezuma before the latter
became king, but of whom many wondrous tales are told even after the
latter ascended the throne--who gave his approval, but recommended that
a peaceful embassy of wise men and sorcerers be sent on this mission.
At Coatepec in the region of Tollan, after performing various religious
rites, the sixty sorcerers chosen for the expedition were transformed
into different animal forms and transported with their treasure to
the land of their fathers, to the lake-surrounded hill of Culhuacan.
Here they found certain people who spoke their language and to them
announced their purpose. The priests of this people remembered well
the departure of the Aztec tribes, and were surprised to learn that
their original leaders were dead, for their companions left behind were
yet alive. The messengers were promised an interview with Coatlicue,
mother of their god, and had a most tiresome journey up the sandy
hill with their gifts, much to the wonder of the guiding priests, who
wondered what they could live upon in their new home to have become
so effeminate. At last they found the aged mother of Huitzilopochtli
weeping bitterly, and stating that since her son's departure she had
neither washed her body and face, combed her hair, nor changed her
garments; neither did she propose to attend to her toilet until his
return. The old woman expressed, however, considerable interest in the
affairs of Mexico, and made known some prophecies of her son about
the coming of a strange people to take the land from the Mexicans.
The messengers were finally dismissed with presents of fowls, fish,
flowers, and clothing, for Montezuma; and, re-adopting their disguises,
were brought back in eight days to Coatepec, where they discovered that
twenty of their number were missing. These lost members of the company
were never heard of more.[VIII-31]
Montezuma died in 1469,[VIII-32] leaving his country in a more flourishing
condition than it had ever known, notwithstanding the six years' famine
that had occurred during his reign. He left to his people or to his
nobles the choice of his successor from among his three grandsons--by
his daughter Atotoztli and Tezozomoc, son of Itzcoatl--Tizoc,
Axayacatl, and Ahuitzotl, expressing, however, a preference for the
second, who was now commander of the Mexican armies. His remains were
enclosed in an urn and deposited in the walls of the grand temple now
approaching completion, and his wishes were followed in the choice of
a successor.[VIII-33]
[Sidenote: RAID IN TEHUANTEPEC.]
Before the coronation of the new monarch could be celebrated with
fitting solemnity, and in a manner worthy of his predecessors, victims
for sacrifice must be captured in large numbers; and it had now
become an established custom for each newly elected king to undertake
in person a campaign with the sole object of procuring captives.
Axayacatl, in complying with the usage, distinguished himself by
the most daring raid yet undertaken by Aztec valor. Passing rapidly
southward by mountain routes at the head of a large force, and avoiding
the Miztec and Zapotec towns of Oajaca, he suddenly presented himself
before the city of Tehuantepec, routed the defending army, drawing them
into an ambush by a pretended retreat, entered and pillaged the city,
captured the rich commercial city of Guatulco some distance above on
the coast, left a strong garrison in each stronghold, and returned
to Mexico laden with plunder and with thousands of captives in his
train, almost before his departure was known throughout the country.
Brasseur tells us that he crossed the isthmus in this campaign, and
for the time subjected to Aztec rule the province of Soconusco, even
reaching the frontiers of Guatemala; but Torquemada is given as the
authority for this statement, and this author implies nothing of the
kind, consequently we may doubt it. The sacrifice of captives from
distant and strange lands, together with the rich spoils brought back
from the south-sea provinces, imparted unusual éclat to the coronation
ceremonies; the successful warrior was congratulated by his colleagues
at Tezcuco and Tlacopan; and the people felt assured that in Axayacatl
they had a monarch worthy of his subjects' admiration.[VIII-34]
During the same year, perhaps, a battle was fought against Huexotzinco
and Atlixco on the frontier, in which the three kings took part
personally; and it is recorded that in the midst of the conflict
Tezcatlipoca appeared to the Aztec armies, cheering them on to victory.
On the return of the victors, Axayacatl and Moquihuix of Tlatelulco
each erected a new temple to the gods of Huexotzinco to propitiate
those divinities in case of the war being resumed, which was foretold
by the oracles. The Mexican temple was called Coatlan, and that in
Tlatelulco Coaxolotl; the latter was a grander structure than the
former and its erection in a spirit of rivalry excited some ill-feeling
on the part of the Mexicans, and was not without an influence in
fomenting the troubles that broke out between the cities a few years
later.[VIII-35] An eclipse of the sun which took place about the time
the temples were completed, was thought to portend disaster, and was
followed within a period of two years by the death of the Tepanec and
Acolhua monarchs. Totoquihuatzin, king of Tlacopan, died in 1470 at an
advanced age and after a long and prosperous reign, during which he had
gained the respect of his subjects and colleagues, fighting bravely in
the wars of the empire and accepting without complaint his small share
of the spoils as awarded by the terms of the alliance. He was succeeded
by his son Chimalpopoca.[VIII-36]
[Sidenote: DEATH OF NEZAHUALCOYOTL.]
The burning of an immense tract of forest lying to the west of
Azcapuzalco toward the Matlaltzinco region, is recorded by one
authority as having occurred in 1471;[VIII-37] and in the next year
took place the death of Nezahualcoyotl, the king of Acolhuacan, and
considered as the greatest and wisest of the Chichimec monarchs. His
adventures in early life while deprived of his ancestral throne have
cast a glamour of romance about his name; and the fortitude with which
he supported his misfortunes, his valor in regaining the Tezcucan
throne, and the prominent part taken by him in the wars of the allies,
are enthusiastically praised by his biographers. His chief glory,
however, depends not on his valor as a warrior, but on his wisdom and
justice as a ruler. During his reign his domain had been increased
in extent far less than that of Mexico; but he had made the city of
Tezcuco the centre of art, science, and all high culture--the Athens
of America, as Clavigero expresses it, of which he was the Solon--and
his kingdom of Acolhuacan a model of good government. Such was his
inflexibility in the administration of justice and enforcement of the
laws, that several of his own sons, although much beloved, were put to
death for offenses against law and morality. Official corruption met no
mercy at his hands, but toward the poor, the aged, and the unfortunate,
his kindness was unbounded. He was in the habit of traveling incognito
among his subjects, visiting the lower classes, relieving misfortune,
and obtaining useful hints for the perfection of his code of laws,
in which he took especial pride. Ever the promoter of education and
culture, he was himself a man of learning in various branches, and a
poet of no mean talent.[VIII-38] His religious views, if correctly reported
by the historians, were far in advance of those of his contemporaries
or of the Europeans who in the cause of religion overthrew Tezcucan
culture; he seems to have been unable to resist the Aztec influence in
favor of human sacrifices, but he deserves the credit of having opposed
the shedding of blood and ridiculed the deities that demanded it. The
only dishonorable action of his life is the method by which he obtained
his queen, and that may have received a false coloring at the hands
of unfriendly annalists. Some of his poems were afterwards regarded as
prophecies, in which was vaguely announced the coming of the Spaniards.
He died in 1472, leaving over a hundred children by his concubines, but
only one legitimate son.[VIII-39]
Feeling that his death was near, Nezahualcoyotl had assembled his
family and announced Nezahualpilli as heir to the throne. He informed
his older natural sons that only by leaving the throne to a legitimate
successor could he hope to secure a peaceful succession and future
prosperity. He expressed great esteem for his oldest son Acapipioltzin,
who was now at the head of his armies, and great confidence in
his ability, calling upon him to serve as guardian and adviser of
Nezahualpilli, at the time only eight years old, during his minority,
and to protect his interests against possible attempts of his other
brothers to usurp the crown. Acapipioltzin promised to obey his wishes,
and was ever after faithful to his promise. Several authors say that
the king gave orders that his death should not be announced until
after his son was firmly seated on the throne; others state that it
was a popular belief among the common people that Nezahualcoyotl had
not died, but had been called to a place among the gods. After the
funeral of the dead king, at which assisted an immense crowd of nobles,
even from foreign and hostile provinces, such as Tlascala, Cholula,
Tehuantepec, Pánuco, and Michoacan, three of his sons showed such
evident designs of disloyalty to the appointed successor, that the
young prince was removed to Mexico by his Aztec and Tepanec colleagues,
and the ceremony of coronation was performed there. Axayacatl is said
to have spent most of his time in Tezcuco during Nezahualpilli's
minority, and it is not improbable that he took advantage of his
colleague's youth to strengthen his own position as practically head of
the empire.[VIII-40]
[Sidenote: CONQUEST OF TLATELULCO.]
In the year of Axayacatl's accession three hills trembled in
Xuchitepec, that is, there was an earthquake foreboding disaster,
which came upon the people in 1472, in the shape of an Aztec army under
Axayacatl. During a raid of a few days, the province was ravaged and a
crowd of captives brought back to die on the altars of Huitzilopochtli.
Such is Torquemada's account, which is interpreted by Brasseur as
referring to a raid across the isthmus into the Guatemalan province of
Xuchiltepec, or Sochitepeques, but there seems to be very little reason
for such an interpretation when we consider that there were two towns
named Xuchitepec in the immediate vicinity of Anáhuac.[VIII-41]
[Sidenote: DEATH OF MOQUIHUIX.]
All the authorities relate with very little disagreement that in 1473
Tlatelulco lost her independence, and was annexed to Mexico under
a royal governor. Hitherto this city, notwithstanding the troubles
during the reign of Montezuma resulting in the death of her king and
the elevation of Moquihuix, had been more independent and enjoyed
greater privileges than any of the other cities tributary to the
Mexican throne. But the Tlatelulcas viewed the rapid advance of Mexican
power with much jealousy; they could not forget that for many years
their city had been superior to her neighbor; they were proud of
their wealth and commercial reputation, and of the well-known valor of
their prince Moquihuix. We have seen that there had been considerable
dissatisfaction about the building of the temples a few years earlier;
and frequent quarrels had taken place in the market-places between
the men and women of the two cities. Duran and Tezozomoc relate
certain outrages on both sides at the beginning of the final struggle.
Moquihuix at last, counting on the well-known hatred and jealousy of
the different nations in and about the valley toward the Aztec king,
formed a conspiracy to shake off the power of Axayacatl, and invited
all the surrounding nations except Tlascala, whose commercial rivalry
he feared, to join it. Except Tlacopan, Tezcuco, and Tlascala, nearly
all the cities of the central plateaux seem to have promised aid,
and the plot began to assume most serious proportions, threatening
the overthrow of the allied kings by a still stronger alliance.
But, fortunately for his own safety, Axayacatl was made aware of the
conspiracy almost at the beginning. It will be remembered that a near
relative of his--his sister, as most authorities state--had been given
to Moquihuix for a wife in reward for his bravery in the south-eastern
campaign. She had been most grossly abused by her husband, and learning
in some way his intentions, had revealed the plot to her brother, who
was thus enabled to obtain from his allies all needed assistance,
and to be on his guard at every point. I shall not attempt to form
from the confused narratives of the authorities a detailed account
of the battles by which Tlatelulco was conquered. At the beginning of
open hostilities the wife of Moquihuix fled to Mexico. A simultaneous
attack by all the rebel forces had been planned; but none of the rebel
allies actually took part in the struggle, approaching the city only
after the battle was over and devoting their whole energy to keep from
Axayacatl the knowledge of their complicity. Moquihuix, confident of
his ability to defeat the unprepared Mexicans without the aid of his
allies, having excited the valor of his chieftains and soldiers by
sacrificial and religious rites, giving them to drink the water in
which the stone of sacrifice had been washed, began the conflict before
the appointed time. For several days the conflict raged, first in one
city, then in the other; but at last the Mexicans invaded Tlatelulco,
sweeping everything before them. The surviving inhabitants fled to the
lake marshes; the remnants of the army were driven in confusion to the
market-place; and Moquihuix amid the imprecations of his own people for
the rashness that had reduced them to such straits, was at last thrown
down the steps of the grand temple, and his heart torn from his breast
by the hand of Axayacatl himself. The city was for a time devoted to
plunder; then the inhabitants were gathered from their retreats, after
having been compelled--as Tezozomoc, Acosta, and Herrera tell us--to
croak and cackle like the frogs and birds of the marshes in token
of their perfect submission; heavy tributes were imposed, including
many special taxes and menial duties of a humiliating nature; and
finally the town was made a ward of Tenochtitlan under the rule of a
governor appointed by the Mexican king. The re-establishment of peace
was followed by the punishment of the conspirators. The Tlatelulca
leaders had for the most part perished in the war, but two of them,
one being the priest Poyahuitl who had performed the religious rites
at the beginning of hostilities, were condemned to death. The same
fate overtook all the nobles in other provinces whose share in the
conspiracy could be proven. So terrible was the vengeance of Axayacatl
and so long the list of its victims, that the lords of Anáhuac were
filled with fear, and it was long before they dared again to seek the
overthrow of the hated Aztec power.[VIII-42]
A strange anecdote is told respecting the fate of Xihuiltemoc, lord
of Xochimilco, who had either taken part in the Tlatelulca war on the
rebel side, or more probably had failed to aid the Mexican king in
a satisfactory manner. Both Axayacatl and Xihuiltemoc were skilled
in the national game of _tlachtli_, or the ball game, and at the
festivals in honor of his victory, the former challenged the latter to
a trial of skill. The Xochimilca lord, the better player of the two,
was much embarrassed, fearing either to win or to allow himself to be
beaten, but the king insisted, and wagered the revenues of the Mexican
market and lake for a year, together with the rule of certain towns,
against the city of Xochimilco, on the result. Xihuiltemoc won the
game, and Axayacatl, much crest-fallen, proclaimed his readiness to
pay his wager; but either by his directions, or at least according to
his expectation, his opponent was strangled with a wreath of flowers
concealing a slip-noose, by the people of the towns he had won, or as
some say by the messengers charged to deliver the stakes.[VIII-43]
[Sidenote: CONQUEST OF MATLALTZINCO.]
Thus far the Aztec conquests had been directed toward the south-east
and south-west, while the fertile valleys of the Matlaltzincas,
immediately adjoining Anáhuac on the west, had for some not very clear
reason escaped their ambitious views. A very favorable opportunity,
however, for conquest in this direction presented itself in 1474, when
the Matlaltzincas were on bad terms with the Tarascos of Michoacan,
their usual allies, and when the lord of Tenantzinco asked the aid
of the Mexicans in a quarrel with Chimaltecuhtli the king. Axayacatl
was only too glad to engage in an undertaking of this nature, but, in
order to have a more just cause of interference--for, as Duran says,
the Aztecs never picked quarrels with other nations!--he peremptorily
ordered the Matlaltzincas to furnish certain building-material and a
stone font for sacrificial purposes, and on their refusal to comply
with his commands, marched against their province at the head of the
allied troops, and accompanied, as Torquemada says, by his colleagues.
Town after town in the southern part of the province fell before his
arms, and were placed under Mexican governors. Such were Xalatlauhco,
Atlapolco, Tetenanco, Tepemaxalco, Tlacotempan, Metepec, Tzinacantepec,
and Calimaya. Some Aztec colonists were left in each conquered town,
and Torquemada tells us that people were taken from the other towns
to settle in the first, Xalatlauhco. Tezozomoc relates that the king
at one time in this campaign concealed himself in a ditch with eight
warriors, and fell upon the rear of the enemy who had been drawn on by
a feigned retreat of the Aztecs, causing great panic and slaughter.
Flushed with victory, the allies pressed on to attack Xiquipilco
in the north, the strongest town in the province, and Toluca, the
capital. Xiquipilco is spoken of as an Otomí town under the command
of Tlilcuetzpalin, with whom Axayacatl had a personal combat during
this battle, being wounded so severely in the thigh that he was lame
for life, and narrowly escaped death. Tezozomoc claims that the Otomí
chieftain was hidden in a bush and treacherously wounded the Mexican
king, who was in advance of his troops; Ixtlilxochitl, ever ready
to claim honor for his ancestors, tells us that it was the Acolhua
commander who saved Axayacatl's life; while Clavigero and Ortega
imply that a duel was arranged between the two leaders. The enemy
was defeated, their leader and over eleven thousand of his men were
taken captives, and the town surrendered, as did Toluca a little
later, and other towns in the vicinity. The news of the conquest was
received with great joy at the capital; the senate marched out to meet
and receive the victorious army on its return; triumphal arches were
erected at frequent intervals, and flowers were strewn in the path of
the victors. The captives were sacrificed in honor of the god of war,
or as Tezozomoc says, at the dedication of a new altar in his temple,
except the brave Tlilcuetzpalin and a few comrades who were reserved
to grace by their death another festival, which took place somewhat
later. During this Matlaltzinca war a very severe earthquake was
experienced.[VIII-44]
A year or two later the Matlaltzincas revolted and obtained the promise
of assistance from the Tarascos, who were anxious to measure their
strength against that of the far-famed Aztecs. But the Tarasco monarch
was unused to the celerity of Mexican tactics, and Axayacatl's army,
thirty-two thousand strong, had entered Matlaltzinco, re-captured
Xiquipilco and other principal towns, crossed the frontiers of
Michoacan, and captured and burned several cities, including
Tangimaroa, or Tlaximaloyan, an important and strongly fortified place,
before the news of their departure reached Tzintzuntzan, the Tarasco
capital. But the Tarasco army, superior to that of the Aztecs, and
constantly re-inforced, soon reached the seat of war, attacked the
invaders with such fury that they were driven back, with great loss, to
Toluca. This was doubtless the disaster indicated by an eclipse during
the same year. After thus showing their power by defeating the proud
warriors of the valley, the Tarascos did not follow up their advantage,
but returned to their own country, leaving the Mexicans still masters
of Matlaltzinco. Another attempt at revolt is vaguely recorded some
years later, but in 1478 the Matlaltzinca cities were permanently
joined to the Mexican domain, and the leading Matlaltzinca divinities
transferred to the temples of Tenochtitlan.[VIII-45]
[Sidenote: DEATH OF AXAYACATL.]
Axayacatl died in 1481, just after his return, as Duran informs us,
from Chapultepec whither he had gone to inspect his image carved on
the cliff by the side of that of Montezuma I. Brasseur states that
his days were shortened by the excessive number of his concubines.
He was succeeded, according to the wish of his predecessor, by Tizoc,
Tizocicatzin, or Chalchiuhtona, his brother, who was succeeded in his
office of commander of the army by Ahuitzotl. Duran insists that the
throne was again offered to the mythical Tlacaeleltzin, who declined
the honor but offered to continue to be the actual ruler during Tizoc's
reign.[VIII-46]
FOOTNOTES:
[VIII-1] _Duran_, MS., tom. i., cap. x.; _Clavigero_, tom. i., pp.
222-3; _Tezozomoc_, in _Kingsborough_, vol. ix., pp. 18-25;
_Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. iii., pp. 194-5; _Acosta_, _Hist. de las
Ynd._, pp. 486-7; _Torquemada_, tom. i., p. 145. Duran and Clavigero
place these events after Nezahualcoyotl had gone to Tezcuco. The
former states that Tezcuco was one of the cities applied to for aid
against the Mexicans, and introduces here the story of the people on
the lake shore having been made ill by the smell of fish in
Tenochtitlan; and the latter states that Huexotla aided Coyuhuacan in
this war. Torquemada places the war in the second year of Itzcoatl's
reign, and implies that the Mexicans were forced to make several
expeditions before they were completely successful.
[VIII-2] _Torquemada_, tom. i., pp. 145-6; _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom.
iii., pp. 196-8.
[VIII-3] _Ixtlilxochitl_, pp. 239-40, 407-8; the alliance with
Tlascala is spoken of on pp. 247-8. _Veytia_, tom. iii., pp. 168-82.
[VIII-4] _Monarq. Ind._, tom. i., p. 175.
[VIII-5] _Boturini_, _Idea_, p. 26; _Ortega_, in _Veytia_, tom. iii.,
p. 178.
[VIII-6] See _Ixtlilxochitl_, pp. 239-47, 258-61, 386-8, 407-9, 454-5,
467-8; _Veytia_, tom. iii., pp. 182-209, 223-9; _Torquemada_, tom. i.,
pp. 146-7, 167-9; _Clavigero_, tom. i., pp. 225-6, 242-7; _Brasseur_,
_Hist._, tom. iii., pp. 197-202. Coatlichan, Tepetlaoztoc, Tepechpan,
Chiuhnauhtla, Tulancingo, Quauchinanco, Xicotepec, and Teotihuacan are
mentioned among the provinces whose lords were restored. Ixtlilxochitl
and Veytia say that the same system of provincial government was
forced on Mexico by Nezahualcoyotl.
[VIII-7] _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. iii., pp. 202-3; _Veytia_, tom.
iii., p. 236; _Torquemada_, tom. i., p. 150; _Clavigero_, tom. i., p.
228; _Vetancvrt_, _Teatro_, pt ii., p. 28.
[VIII-8] Ixtlilxochitl, pp. 384, 458, and Veytia, tom. iii., pp.
149-52, 234-5, state that Nezahualcoyotl accomplished the conquest of
Xochimilco with the aid of a few Tlascaltecs, leaving Itzcoatl
entirely out of the affair. Clavigero, tom. i., pp. 226-7, tells us
that the Xochimilcas determined to make war on the Mexicans before
they became too strong. Duran, MS., tom. i., cap. xii., xiii., relates
an evil omen for the Xochimilcas, in the transformation of a dish of
viands, round which they were seated in deliberation, into arms, legs,
hearts, and other human parts. See also _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom.
iii., pp. 203-5; _Tezozomoc_, in _Kingsborough_, vol. ix., pp. 25-30;
_Sahagun_, tom. ii., lib. viii., p. 268; _Acosta_, _Hist. de las
Ynd._, pp. 488-90; _Torquemada_, tom. i., pp. 140, 148-9; _Vetancvrt_,
_Teatro_, pt ii., p. 28; _Herrera_, _Hist. Gen._, dec. iii., lib. ii.,
cap. xiii.
[VIII-9] Ixtlilxochitl, pp. 248-9, says that Quauhnahuac and eight
other towns were awarded to Nezahualcoyotl, Tepozotlan, Huastepec and
others to Itzcoatl, besides the share of Tlacopan not specified. The
same author gives here without details of chronology, a list of
subsequent conquests by the allies at this period, which we shall find
scattered throughout this and the following reigns; such are:--Chalco,
Itzucan, Tepeaca, Tecalco, Teohuacan, Cohuaixtlahuacan, Hualtepec,
Quauhtochco, Atochpan, Tizauhcoac, Tochtepec, Mazahuacan, Tlapacoia,
Tlauhcocauhtitlan, and Tulancingo. See also on conquest of
Quauhnahuac, _Clavigero_, tom. i., pp. 227-8; _Torquemada_, tom. i.,
pp. 149-50; _Veytia_, tom. iii., pp. 235-6; _Vetancvrt_, _Teatro_, pt
ii., p. 28; _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. iii., pp. 205-7.
[VIII-10] _Hist. Gen._, tom. iii., lib. x., pp. 139-41; see p. 190, of
this volume, and vol. ii., p. 528.
[VIII-11] _Codex Chimalp._, in _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. iii., pp.
208-11; _Torquemada_, tom. i., p. 150.
[VIII-12] _Tezozomoc_, in _Kingsborough_, vol. ix., pp. 30-2; _Duran_,
MS., tom. i., cap. xv.; _Gomara_, _Conq. Mex._, fol. 303; _Sigüenza_,
in _Doc. Hist. Mex._, série iii., tom. i., p. 59; Torquemada, tom. i.,
pp. 149-50, denies the story that Nezahualcoyotl submitted to
Itzcoatl. Vetancvrt, _Teatro_, pt ii., pp. 33-4, makes them still of
equal rank. Tezozomoc makes no mention of any events in Itzcoatl's
reign after the conquest of Cuitlahuac. Duran, cap. xiv, states that
his conquests included Chalco, Quauhnahuac, Huexotzinco, and
Coatlichan. Clavigero, tom. i., pp. 228-9, 232-3; Torquemada, tom. i.,
p. 157, and Veytia, tom. iii., pp. 236-7, place in Itzcoatl's reign
the origin of the troubles with Tlatelulco which will be spoken of
hereafter. According to the _Codex Mendoza_, in _Kingsborough_, vol.
v., p. 44, Itzcoatl, or Izcoaci, conquered 24 cities.
[VIII-13] Date, 1440. _Duran_, MS., tom. i., cap. xiv-xv.; _Codex
Mendoza_, in _Kingsborough_, vol. v., p. 45; _Mendieta_, _Hist.
Ecles._, p. 150; _Ixtlilxochitl_, pp. 249, 457; _Vetancvrt_, _Teatro_,
pt ii., p. 28; _Boturini_, in _Doc. Hist. Mex._, série iii., tom. iv.,
p. 239; _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. iii., pp. 211-12. Duran also gives
1445 and Ixtlilxochitl 1441. 1436, _Veytia_, tom. iii., pp. 237-8;
_Clavigero_, tom. i., p. 229; _Bustamante_, _Mañadas de la Alameda_,
tom. ii., p. 174. See also on the succession; _Herrera_, _Hist. Gen._,
dec. iii., lib. ii., cap. xiii.; _Acosta_, _Hist. de las Ynd._, pp.
490-3; _Sahagun_, tom. ii., lib. viii., p. 268; _Torquemada_, tom. i.,
pp. 150, 171; _Tezozomoc_, in _Kingsborough_, vol. ix., p. 30;
_Motolinia_, in _Icazbalceta_, _Col. de Doc._, tom. i., p. 6;
_Gomara_, _Conq. Mex._, fol. 303.
[VIII-14] _Veytia_, tom. iii., p. 239; _Acosta_, _Hist. de las Ynd._,
p. 491; _Herrera_, dec. iii., lib. ii., cap. xiii.; _Vetancvrt_,
_Teatro_, pt ii., p. 29.
[VIII-15] See pp. 241-2, 250, 255, of this volume.
[VIII-16] _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. iii., pp. 213-17; _Veytia_, tom.
iii., pp. 239-40; _Clavigero_, tom. i., p. 230; _Torquemada_, tom. i.,
pp. 150-1; _Duran_, MS. tom. i., cap. xvi. The latter author is
careful to state that Montezuma did not request, but simply ordered
aid in building his temples from Tlacopan and Tezcuco.
[VIII-17] _Veytia_, tom. iii., pp. 240-2; _Torquemada_, tom. i., pp.
150-4; _Clavigero_, tom. i., pp. 230-1; _Ixtlilxochitl_, pp. 255-7,
467-8; _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. iii., pp. 217-24; _Sahagun_, tom.
ii., lib. viii., p. 268; _Vetancvrt_, _Teatro_, pt ii., p. 29.
[VIII-18] _Torquemada_, tom. i., pp. 156-7; _Clavigero_, tom. i., pp.
232-3; _Veytia_, tom. iii., pp. 242-3; _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. iii.,
pp. 224-5; _Granados y Galvez_, _Tardes Amer._, p. 176; _Vetancvrt_,
_Teatro_, pt ii., p. 30; _Sahagun_, tom. ii., lib. viii., pp. 273-4.
[VIII-19] _Ixtlilxochitl_, p. 248; _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. iii., p.
225. The former author says that this conquest extended to
Quauhchinanco and Xilotepec, but implies that it took place
immediately after the treaty with Tlascala, which followed
Nezahualcoyotl's accession to the Tezcucan throne.
[VIII-20] The towns mentioned as included in this conquest are
Cohuixco, Oztoman, Quetzaltepec, Ixcateopan, Teoxcahualco, Poctepec,
Yauhtepec, Yacapichtla, Totolapan, Tlachmalacac, Tlachco, Chilapan,
Tomazolapan, Quauhtepec, Ohuapan, Tzompahuacan, and Cozamaloapan. See
_Veytia_, tom. iii., p. 243; _Clavigero_, tom. i., p. 233;
_Torquemada_, tom. i., p. 157; _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. iii., pp.
225-7; _Vetancvrt_, _Teatro_, pt ii., p. 30; _Ixtlilxochitl_, p. 249.
[VIII-21] Several authors give the dates as 1446. _Veytia_, tom. iii.,
pp. 247-8; _Clavigero_, tom. i., pp. 233-4; _Torquemada_, tom. i., pp.
157-8; _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. iii., pp. 228-32. This author gives
the width of the dike as about 30 feet. _Vetancvrt_, _Teatro_, pt ii.,
p. 30.
[VIII-22] 1448-54, _Veytia_; 1451-6, _Brasseur_; 1447-54, _Codex Tell.
Rem._; 1404-7 (1444-7?) 11 years after accession of Montezuma,
_Duran_.
[VIII-23] _Duran_, MS., tom. i., cap. xviii., xix., xxx., says the
snow fell knee-deep in the valley. He also tells us that very many
sold as slaves during the famine were ransomed and returned
afterwards; this, however, does not apply to such as went to
Totonacapan, since these remained in that province. _Ixtlilxochitl_,
pp. 250-1, 257, says that the slaves sold to the Totonacs were all
sacrificed to secure a continuance of productiveness in the province.
This author also names Xicotencatl, a Tlascaltec noble, as the person
who suggested the battles for captives. _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom.
iii., pp. 232-6, implies that the name Totonacapan, 'region of our
subsistence,' was given on account of the events described, although
the same author has spoken frequently of the Totonacs at a period many
centuries earlier. See also, _Tezozomoc_, in _Kingsborough_, vol. ix,
pp. 63-6; _Torquemada_, tom. i., pp. 158, 171; _Clavigero_, tom. i.,
pp. 233-5; _Sahagun_, tom. ii., lib. viii., p. 269; _Veytia_, tom.
iii., pp. 248-9; _Codex Tell. Rem._, in _Kingsborough_, vol. v., p.
150. Acosta, _Hist. de las Ynd._, p. 493, and Herrera, dec. iii., lib.
ii., cap. xiii, merely state that it was agreed to reserve Tlascala as
a battle-field whereon to exercise the armies, and to obtain captives.
Torquemada throws some doubt on this agreement.
[VIII-24] Date, 1458-9, according to Brasseur; 1456 according to the
other authors. Duran, MS., tom. i., cap. xxii., xxiii., and Tezozomoc,
in _Kingsborough_, vol. ix., pp. 51-3, say nothing of the aid rendered
by the Tlascaltecs and Huexotzincas. See also _Clavigero_, tom. i.,
pp. 236-7; _Veytia_, tom. iii., pp. 249-51; _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom.
iii., pp. 237-52; _Torquemada_, tom. i., pp. 159-61; _Vetancvrt_,
_Teatro_, pt ii., pp. 30-1.
[VIII-25] According to Veytia's chronology, this conquest took place
in 1457; Brasseur puts this and the following events in 1458-9. See
_Veytia_, tom. iii., pp. 251-3; _Ixtlilxochitl_, p. 467; _Clavigero_,
tom. i., pp. 237-8; _Torquemada_, tom. i., pp. 161-2; _Vetancvrt_,
_Teatro_, pt ii., p. 31; _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. iii., pp. 252-7;
_Duran_, MS., tom. i., cap. xxi., xxiv.; _Tezozomoc_, in
_Kingsborough_, vol. ix., pp. 48-51, 53-6.
[VIII-26] On the conquest of Chalco, see _Duran_, MS., tom. i., cap.
xvi., xvii.; _Tezozomoc_, in _Kingsborough_, vol. ix., pp. 33-40;
_Clavigero_, tom. i., pp. 238-40; _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. iii., pp.
258-61; _Acosta_, _Hist. de las Ynd._, pp. 492-3; _Herrera_, dec.
iii., lib. ii., cap. xiii.; _Veytia_, tom. iii., pp. 253-4.
[VIII-27] According to the _Codex Tell. Rem._, in _Kingsborough_, vol.
v., pp. 150-1, the conquest of Goazacoalco took place about this time,
in 1461. Ixtlilxochitl, pp. 249-50, implies that the Tlascaltecs
fought on the side of Nezahualcoyotl in the conquest of Cuextlan. See
_Veytia_, tom. iii., p. 254; _Acosta_, _Hist. de las Ynd._, p. 493;
_Clavigero_, tom. i., p. 240; _Torquemada_, tom. i., p. 164;
_Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. iii., pp. 261-2, 267-9; _Tezozomoc_, in
_Kingsborough_, vol. ix., pp. 40-6; _Vetancvrt_, _Teatro_, pt ii., p.
32; on the commerce of the Aztecs, see vol. ii., pp. 378-99.
[VIII-28] Clavigero, tom. i., p. 232, states that the Tepanec princess
was the emperor's second wife; and Ixtlilxochitl implies that
Nezahualpilli was her second son. There is also no agreement
respecting her name or that of her father and husband. All agree that
this child was born in 1464 or 1465. See _Ixtlilxochitl_, pp. 253-4,
257, 467; _Veytia_, tom. iii., pp. 244-6; _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom.
iii., pp. 271-3; _Torquemada_, tom. i., pp. 154-6; _Vetancvrt_,
_Teatro_, pt ii., pp. 29-30.
[VIII-29] _Codex Tell. Rem._, in _Kingsborough_, vol. v., p. 151;
_Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. iii., p. 277.
[VIII-30] _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. iii., pp. 277-80; _Ixtlilxochitl_,
p. 257.
[VIII-31] _Duran_, MS., tom. i., cap. xxvii.
[VIII-32] 1464, _Veytia_; 1468, _Vetancvrt_, _Ixtlilxochitl_, _and
Boturini_; 1469, _Ixtlilxochitl_, _Brasseur_, _Codex Chimalp._, _Codex
Tell. Rem._, _Codex Mendoza_.
[VIII-33] Duran, MS., tom. i., cap. xxviii-xxix., xxxi-ii., and
Tezozomoc, in _Kingsborough_, vol. ix., pp. 58-63, 66, attribute to
Montezuma I. the conquest of Oajaca, and the establishment there of a
Mexican colony. They may refer to the conquest of the land of the
Miztecs already related, or to that of more southern parts of Oajaca
at a later period. They also state that Axayacatl was the son of
Montezuma. Duran tells us that Montezuma before his death had his
image sculptured on the cliff at Chapultepec; and that Axayacatl was
nominated king by Tlacaeleltzin, who declined the throne. The _Codex
Mendoza_, in _Kingsborough_, vol. v., pp. 45-6, followed by Mendieta,
_Hist. Ecles._, p. 150, give the number of provinces conquered by
Montezuma as thirty-three. Ixtlilxochitl, pp. 257, 457, says Montezuma
left several sons. Torquemada, tom. i., pp. 169, 172, says he left
one, not named, but that he disinherited him for the good of the
nation. Acosta, _Hist. de las Ynd._, pp. 493, 495, and Herrera, dec.
iii., lib. ii., cap. xiii., make Tizoc precede Axayacatl, both being
sons of Montezuma. Camargo, in _Nouvelles Annales_, tom. xcviii., p.
178, makes Ahuitzotl precede Axayacatl. Vetancvrt, _Teatro_, pt ii.,
p. 32, says that Axayacatl, Tizoc, and Ahuitzotl were sons of
Montezuma's uncle by a daughter of Itzcoatl. Motolinia, in
_Icazbalceta_, _Col. de Doc._, tom. i., p. 6, and Gomara, _Conq.
Mex._, fol. 303, represent Montezuma as having been succeeded by his
daughter. See also on the death and character of Montezuma I., and the
accession of Axayacatl:--_Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. iii., pp. 280-2;
_Clavigero_, tom. i., p. 241; _Veytia_, tom. iii., pp. 254-5;
_Boturini_, in _Doc. Hist. Mex._, série iii., tom. iv., p. 240; _Codex
Tell. Rem._, in _Kingsborough_, vol. v., pp. 149, 151; _Sahagun_, tom.
ii., lib. viii., pp. 268-9.
[VIII-34] Duran, MS., tom. i., cap. xxxii., says that the first five
years of Axayacatl's reign were undisturbed by war. See on the
Tehuantepec raid and the Coronation: _Torquemada_, tom. i., p. 172;
_Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. iii., pp. 283-7; _Vetancvrt_, _Teatro_, pt
ii., p. 32; _Clavigero_, tom., i. pp. 241-2; _Acosta_, _Hist. de las
Ynd._, pp. 496-7. Veytia, tom. iii., p. 256, and Clavigero speak of
wars in the first years of his reign against the revolting provinces
of Cuetlachtlan and Tochtepec.
[VIII-35] Date according to the Spanish writers, 1468. According to
the _Codex Tell. Rem._, in _Kingsborough_, vol. v., p. 150,
Huexotzinco had seized upon the province of Atlixco in 1456, driving
away the people of Guacachula, the former possessors. Only Torquemada,
tom. i., pp. 172-3, and Brasseur, _Hist._, tom. iii., pp. 287-8,
mention the apparition of Tezcatlipoca. See also _Clavigero_, tom. i.,
pp. 242, 248; _Veytia_, tom. iii., pp. 256-7; _Vetancvrt_, _Teatro_,
pt ii., pp. 32-3.
[VIII-36] Date 1469 according to Spanish writers; 1470 according to
_Codex Chimalpopoca_. _Veytia_, tom. iii., p. 261; _Brasseur_,
_Hist._, tom. iii., p. 288; _Clavigero_, tom. i., p. 242;
_Torquemada_, tom. i., p. 173; _Vetancvrt_, _Teatro_, pt ii., p. 32.
[VIII-37] _Codex Chimalp._, in _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. iii., p.
288.
[VIII-38] See vol. ii., pp. 246-7, 294, 471-2, 491-7.
[VIII-39] Date 1470, _Ortega_ and _Clavigero_; 1462 or 1472,
_Ixtlilxochitl_; 1472, _Codex Chimalpopoca_.
[VIII-40] On the character and death of Nezahualcoyotl, and the
succession of Nezahualpilli, see: _Ixtlilxochitl_, pp. 254-62, 408-9,
467-8; _Torquemada_, tom. i., pp. 156, 164-9, 173-4; _Clavigero_, tom.
i., pp. 232, 242-8; _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. iii., pp. 288-301;
_Vetancvrt_, _Teatro_, pt ii., pp. 33-4; _Veytia_, tom. iii., pp. 247,
261-7.
[VIII-41] _Torquemada_, tom. i., p. 176. The author says, however,
that the province was 'on the coast of Anáhuac.' _Brasseur_, _Hist._,
tom. iii., pp. 301-2.
[VIII-42] Authorities on the Tlatelulca war:--_Duran_, MS., tom. i.,
cap. xxxii-xxxiv.; _Tezozomoc_, in _Kingsborough_, vol. ix., pp.
66-76; _Torquemada_, tom. i., pp. 176-80; _Sahagun_, tom. ii., lib.
viii., pp. 269, 274; _Veytia_, tom. iii., pp. 256-61; _Brasseur_,
_Hist._, tom. iii., pp. 302-15; _Clavigero_, tom. i., pp. 248-52;
_Vetancvrt_, _Teatro_, pt ii., pp. 34-5; _Granados y Galvez_, _Tardes
Amer._, pp. 176-8; _Mendieta_, _Hist. Ecles._, p. 150; _Acosta_,
_Hist. de las Ynd._, p. 498; _Herrera_, dec. iii., lib. ii., cap.
xiv.; _Ixtlilxochitl_, pp. 262-3; _Gallatin_, in _Amer. Ethno. Soc.,
Transact._, vol. i., p. 120.
[VIII-43] _Torquemada_, tom. i., pp. 180-1; _Ixtlilxochitl_, pp.
263-4, 458; _Vetancvrt_, _Teatro_, pt ii., p. 35; _Brasseur_, _Hist._,
tom. iii., pp. 316-17.
[VIII-44] According to the _Codex Tell. Rem._, in _Kingsborough_, vol.
v., p. 151, this war and earthquake took place in 1462. Torquemada,
tom. i., pp. 181-2, places them in the sixth year of Axayacatl's
reign. Duran, MS., tom. i., cap. xxxv.-xxxvi., and Tezozomoc, in
_Kingsborough_, vol. ix., pp. 76-82, state that Tlilcuetzpalin
escaped. See also, _Ixtlilxochitl_, p. 264; _Clavigero_, tom. i., pp.
252-3; _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. iii., pp. 317-22; _Veytia_, tom.
iii., pp. 267-8; _Herrera_, dec. iii., lib. iv., cap. xviii.;
_Vetancvrt_, _Teatro_, pt ii., p. 35.
[VIII-45] Most of the details of this war are from _Brasseur_,
_Hist._, tom. iii., pp. 322-5. Duran, MS., tom. i., cap.
xxxvii.-viii., and Tezozomoc, in _Kingsborough_, vol. ix., pp. 82-7,
state simply that to procure victims for the dedication of a new
sacrificial stone, the Aztecs marched to the borders of Michoacan and
were defeated by superior numbers, returning to Mexico. The victims
were finally obtained at Tliliuquitepec. Other authors represent the
Aztecs as victorious, they having added to their possessions Tochpan,
Tototlan, Tlaximaloyan, Ocuillan, and Malacatepec. See _Torquemada_,
tom. i., p. 182; _Clavigero_, tom. i., p. 253; _Vetancvrt_, _Teatro_,
pt ii., pp. 35-6; _Codex Tell. Rem._, in _Kingsborough_, vol. v., p.
151.
[VIII-46] Clavigero, tom. i., p. 253, gives the date 1477. According
to the _Codex Mendoza_, in _Kingsborough_, vol. v., p. 47, it was
1482. All the other authorities agree on 1481. See on family,
character, and death of Axayacatl, and succession of Tizoc: _Veytia_,
tom. iii., pp. 269-71; _Duran_, MS., tom. i., cap. xxxviii-ix.;
_Tezozomoc_, in _Kingsborough_, vol. ix., pp. 88-91, 143;
_Ixtlilxochitl_, pp. 264-5; _Torquemada_, tom. i., p. 182;
_Vetancvrt_, _Teatro_, pt ii., p. 36; _Acosta_, _Hist. de las Ynd._,
pp. 494-5; _Sigüenza_, in _Doc. Hist. Mex._, série iii., tom. i., p.
70; _Herrera_, dec. iii., lib. ii., cap. xiii.; _Gallatin_, in _Amer.
Ethno. Soc., Transact._, vol. i., p. 164.
CHAPTER IX.
THE AZTEC PERIOD--CONCLUDED.
Reign of Tizoc -- Nezahualpilli defeats the Huexotzincas
-- Ahuitzotl, King of Mexico -- Campaigns for Captives --
Dedication of Huitzilopochtli's Temple -- Seventy Thousand
Victims -- Totoquihuatzin II., King of Tlacopan -- Mexican
Conquests -- Conquest of Totonacapan -- Aztec Reverses
-- Successful Revolt of Tehuantepec and Zapotecapan --
Conquest of Zacatollan -- Anecdotes of Nezahualpilli -- New
Aqueduct, and Inundation of Mexico -- Montezuma II. on the
Throne -- Condition of the Empire -- Montezuma's Policy --
Unsuccessful Invasion of Tlascala -- Famine -- Conquest of
Miztecapan -- Tying-up of the Cycle in 1507 -- Omens of
coming Disaster -- The Spaniards on the Coast of Central
America -- Trouble between Mexico and Tezcuco -- Retirement
and Death of Nezahualpilli -- Cacama, King of Acolhuacan --
Revolt of Ixtlilxochitl -- Final Campaigns of the Aztecs --
The Spaniards on the Gulf Coast -- Arrival of Hernan Cortés.
[Sidenote: REIGN OF TIZOC.]
Tizoc's coronation was preceded by a campaign in the north-east, where
the provinces stretching from Meztitlan to the gulf had taken advantage
of the Tlatelulca and Matlaltzinca wars to shake off the yoke of their
conquerors. Tezozomoc and Duran represent this campaign as having
been undertaken by Tizoc, after most extensive preparations, for the
purpose of obtaining captives, but attended with little success, only
about forty prisoners having been secured. The former author tells us
that this war took place during Nezahualcoyotl's reign. Acosta implies
that the failure resulted from Tizoc's cowardice or bad generalship.
Ixtlilxochitl, followed by Brasseur, makes Nezahualpilli the leader
in this his first war, accompanied by both his colleagues. He seems
to have felt, notwithstanding his extreme youth, much shame at not
having performed any glorious deed of arms, ruling as he did over so
valorous a people as the Acolhuas, and even to have been ridiculed
on the subject by his elder brothers; but in this war he made for
himself a lasting reputation worthy of his ancestors and his rank.
The war is represented by these authors as a succession of victories
by which Cuextlan and the surrounding provinces were brought back
to their allegiance. No reverses are alluded to. The captives taken
were sacrificed at Tizoc's coronation, the new king attempting to
surpass his predecessors by giving a series of magnificent festivals
which continued for forty days.[IX-1] An expedition against Tlacotepec,
mentioned by Torquemada without details, seems to be the only other war
in which Tizoc engaged during his reign.[IX-2] He either lacked the valor
and skill in war which distinguished his predecessors, or like the
Tezcucan monarchs believed he could best promote his nation's welfare
by attention to peaceful arts. Very little is recorded of this king;
his reign was very short, and was marked by no very important events.
During this period, however, occurred a war between Nezahualpilli and
Huehuetzin, the lord of Huexotzinco. This war seems to have been caused
by the plots of Nezahualpilli's brothers who had obtained the aid of
Huexotzinco. According to Brasseur the Acolhua king and Huehuetzin
were born in the same day and hour, and the astrologers had predicted
that the former would one day be conquered by the latter, whose defeat
would, however, be celebrated by the Acolhuas. Huehuetzin ascertained
from the malcontent Acolhua princes a statement of the forces that were
to march against him, with a description of Nezahualpilli's armor,
and directed all his men to make it their chief object to kill the
king. But Nezahualpilli learned the intention of his opponent, clad a
captain with his armor, placed him at the head of one division of his
army, while he himself in disguise took command of the other division.
So furious was the attack upon the mock king that he was killed,
his soldiers driven back, and the Huexotzincas elated with victory;
but in the meantime the main body of the Tezcucan army came up and
attacked the foe as they were chanting their song of victory. The real
Nezahualpilli killed Huehuetzin in personal combat, after receiving
a serious wound in the foot; the Huexotzincas were utterly routed
and their city was sacked, the Acolhua king returning to his capital
laden with honors and spoils. At his return to Tezcuco Nezahualpilli
enclosed an area of land equal to the space that had separated him from
his army during the battle, or, as some say, equal to that occupied
by the Huexotzinca army, erecting within the enclosure a grand palace
with magnificent gardens and immense granaries. He also completed the
temple of Huitzilopochtli commenced by his father, and sacrificed at
its dedication the captives brought from the last war; for although
he is said to have inherited to some extent his father's repugnance
to human sacrifice, he certainly consented to such sacrifices on
several occasions. Tizoc also completed in 1483 the grand temple of
Huitzilopochtli at Mexico, on which his predecessors had expended so
much labor.[IX-3] The Mexican king, however, died in 1486, after a reign
of six years. His death is reported to have occurred from the effects
of poison, or, as the records have it, of magic spells, administered
by certain sorceresses at the command of Techotl, lord of Iztapalapan,
with the connivance of Maxtla, lord of Tlachco, probably from motives
of personal spite. Some authors, as Duran, Acosta, and Herrera, assert
that he was poisoned by his own subjects, who were disgusted with
his cowardice and inferiority to his predecessors; but his former
position as commander of the Mexican armies is opposed to the charge
of cowardice, as is the indignation of the people at his murder and the
summary execution of all connected with the crime.[IX-4]
[Sidenote: ACCESSION OF AHUITZOTL.]
Ahuitzotl, the last of the three brothers, was now called to the
throne, the famous Tlacaeleltzin still refusing the crown, if we may
credit Duran and Tezozomoc. During the first year of the new king's
reign successful campaigns are vaguely recorded against the Mazahua
region adjoining the city of Xiquipilco, against the towns of the
Tziuhcoacas and Tochpanecas, subject to the kingdom of Jalisco, against
the south-eastern provinces of the Miztecs and Zapotecs, and even
against the Chiapanec frontiers, while Nezahualpilli in the meantime
conquered Nauhtlan on the gulf coast. No details of these campaigns are
given save that the fortress of Huaxyacac, in Oajaca, since known as
Monte Alban,[IX-5] was built and garrisoned by the Aztecs; but the object
of these wars was to procure captives for the coronation of Ahuitzotl
and for the dedication of the grand temple of Huitzilopochtli, which
took place in 1486 or 1487.[IX-6] This dedication was witnessed by
millions of visitors, including representatives from all parts of
the country, from hostile as well as friendly provinces, the former
being given the best positions to view the festivities, and being
loaded with rich presents at their departure. The chief feature of the
exercises was the sacrifice of captives, of whom from seventy to eighty
thousand perished on the altar. The victims were arranged in two lines,
stretching from the temple far out on the causeways; the kings began
the bloody work with their own hands, and the priests followed, each
continuing the slaughter until exhausted, when another took his place.
This was the most extensive sacrifice that ever took place in Anáhuac,
and it was followed by others on a somewhat smaller scale in the lesser
cities, among which one at Xalatlauhco in the Matlaltzinca region is
particularly mentioned.[IX-7]
[Sidenote: AHUITZOTL'S CONQUESTS.]
The campaign against the frontiers of Chiapas, during which some
strongholds were taken by the Mexicans, as Chinantla and Cinacantlan,
but which was altogether unsuccessful in the conquest of the
Chiapanecs, is placed by Brasseur in 1488, the year after the
dedication of the temple.[IX-8] In 1489 Chimalpopoca, king of Tlacopan,
made a brilliant campaign against Cuextlan, although leaving many
slain on the battle-field of Huexotla; but he died soon after his
return, and was succeeded by his son Totoquihuatzin II. Earthquakes
and the appearance of phantoms in the air had indicated approaching
disasters. Sahagun also mentions an eclipse about this time.[IX-9] In
the same year the allied troops conquered the southern provinces of
Cozcaquauhtenanco, Quapilollan, Quauhpanco, and Quetzalcuitlapillan
according to the Spanish authors, although Brasseur makes that place
retain its independence down to the coming of the Spaniards. In 1490
Quauhtla, one of the strongest towns of Cuextlan on the gulf coast, was
taken, giving Montezuma, afterwards king, an opportunity to display his
valor and form a reputation, which he sustained in an engagement with
the Huexotzincas a little later. A battle at Xonacatepec also against
the Huexotzincas, aided by the forces of Totolpanco, is attributed to
the same year. The captives obtained in these battles were sacrificed
at the dedication of the temple of Tlacatecco, and during the
ceremonies another temple in the ward called Tlillan was discovered to
be on fire, and burned to the ground. The conflagration was popularly
regarded as a visitation from the gods, and excited much superstitious
fear.[IX-10]
Next in the catalogue of Aztec expeditions against revolting provinces
was that in 1491, against the Huastecs of the north-east, who were
this time assisted by the Totonacs. Something has been said of this
ancient people in a preceding chapter on the pre-Toltec period. Of
their history since they left, as their traditions claim, the central
plateaux for the region of Zacatlan, and afterward for the gulf coast,
nothing is recorded save some troubles with the Teo-Chichimecs on the
first appearance of that people, a subsequent alliance with them, and
a list of eight Totonac kings given by Torquemada. Their home was now
the coast region of central and northern Vera Cruz, where, divided
into thirty seigniories tributary to their monarch, and allied with the
Tlascaltecs, they had thus far escaped the power, if not the attention,
of the Aztecs. But in an evil hour they consented to help the revolting
Huastecs on their northern frontier. Glad of an excuse to annex to
his empire the fertile lands and flourishing towns of the Totonac
coast, Ahuitzotl marched through Cuextlan, easily reducing the rebel
chiefs to submission, and then directed his course southward, taking
town after town until the whole province in terror gave up all hope of
resistance and became subjects of the Aztec monarchs, paying tribute
regularly down to the coming of the Spaniards, who landed and began
their march towards Mexico in Totonac territory.[IX-11] On his return
from the north-east, the south-western provinces demanded the warlike
king's attention. The usual murder of traders had taken place, and the
lords, as one author tells us, had refused to attend the dedication of
Huitzilopochtli's temple at the capital. Oztoman was the centre of the
revolting district, and with the neighboring cities of Teloloapan and
Alahuiztlan was taken by assault. The inhabitants of the three towns,
except the captives taken for sacrifice and the thousands massacred in
the assault, were mostly brought to the valley and distributed among
the towns about the lake; while the conquered districts were given
to Aztec colonies, composed of poor families selected from Mexico,
Tlacopan, and Tezcuco, under the command of the warriors who had
distinguished themselves in the war.[IX-12]
[Sidenote: REVERSES TO AZTEC ARMS.]
A series of reverses to Aztec arms has next to be recorded. In 1494,
as Ixtlilxochitl states, in a battle at Atlixco, Tlacahuepatzin, a
son of the former king Axayacatl, was taken prisoner and sacrificed
to Camaxtli the war god of the eastern plateau. The following year
the Acolhua army was defeated in a battle at Tliltepec.[IX-13] But the
most important events of these and the following years were the
campaigns in Miztecapan, Zapotecapan, and Tehuantepec. Under the
Zapotec king Cociyoeza a general revolt of all these provinces took
place, accompanied by a suspension of tribute and a general plunder and
murder of Aztec merchants throughout the whole country. At this time
probably took place the exploit of the Tlatelulca merchants recorded
by Sahagun.[IX-14] Traveling in a large company through the southern
regions, they were at Quauhtenanco in Miztecapan when the persecution
against their class began. As the only means of saving their lives
and property, by a bold move they took possession of the town, which
had unusual facilities for defence, seizing the lord and prominent men
of the city, and holding them as hostages for the good conduct of the
inhabitants. Here they maintained their position against all attacks
during a period of four years, and even were able by occasional sorties
to capture many officers and soldiers from the armies sent against
them, whom they kept and fattened for the altars of their god at
home. Their valor won great honors for themselves and for their class
after their return to Mexico. Meanwhile all the territory and towns
previously conquered by the Aztecs in Tehuantepec were retaken; most
of the Mexican garrisons in the country of the Zapotecs and Miztecs
farther north were forced to surrender; and besides the merchant
garrison of Quauhtenanco, and the strong fortresses of Huaxyacac and
Teotitlan near where the capital city of Oajaca now stands, the Aztec
power was completely overthrown. Other wars nearer home, which have
been alluded to above, at the time that they heard of these events,
claimed the attention of the allied monarchs to such an extent that
they could not direct their united force against the rebellious
provinces; but soon an army of sixty thousand men, under the command
of an able officer, was dispatched southward to quell the revolt and
to capture Cociyoeza dead or alive. This army seems to have carried
all before it in its march through the upper Zapotec regions; but
no details are recorded, except that they took the sacred city of
Mitla in their course, and sent her priests to die on the altars of
Huitzilopochtli.[IX-15]
[Sidenote: DEFEAT IN TEHUANTEPEC.]
The march of the Aztec general was directed towards Tehuantepec, and
near that city on a series of ravine-guarded plateaux the Zapotec king
and his allies had fortified an immense area supposed to be sufficient
to support his army by cultivation, and awaited the approach of the
invaders. The ruins of Guiengola[IX-16] are supposed to be the remains
of this extensive system of defensive works. Burgoa even claims that
the king went so far as to form artificial ponds and to stock them
with fish as a further provision against future want. The wily monarch
seems to have purposely refrained from making any effort to defeat the
Aztecs on their march through the upper country, simply giving orders
to such chieftains as remained to guard their homes, to harass the
enemy continually, and reduce their numbers as much as possible without
bringing on a general engagement. As soon as the invaders, wearied with
their long march and constant skirmishing, had entered the labyrinth
of ravines through which lay their road to Tehuantepec, the brave
defenders rushed down from their mountain forts, and in a series of
bloody battles almost annihilated the invading force. The Aztecs could
neither retreat nor advance, and day by day the leader saw his army
melting away, by death and capture, prisoners being put to death by
torture, except a few that were sent back to tell their comrades of the
strength and ferocity of their foes. When the situation became known in
Mexico, Ahuitzotl is said to have sent a second army larger than the
first to relieve the blockaded force; and this re-inforcing movement
was repeated three times within a year, but the Aztecs could not force
the passage of Guiengola, or if allowed to pass could only comfort
their brothers in arms by dying with them. The allied Aztec monarchs
were at last fairly defeated, and sent an embassy with propositions of
peace and alliance, professing great admiration for Cociyoeza's valor
and genius.[IX-17]
Such is the version given by Burgoa. Nothing is known of the
negotiations which ensued, but Brasseur deduces from subsequent
events that by the terms of the treaty formed, the Zapotec king was
to retain possession of Tehuantepec; Soconusco was to be given up to
Mexico; free passage was to be accorded to Mexican travelers, and the
fortress of Huaxyacac was to remain in the hands of the Aztecs. It is
also stated by Burgoa that Cociyoeza was to marry a Mexican princess.
These conditions would indicate that the condition of affairs was not
after all so desperate for the Aztecs in the south as the preceding
account implies. Nothing is said of the fate of the Miztec provinces
according to the terms of the treaty;[IX-18] but we know that after the
ratification of the alliance, the merchant garrison of Quauhtenanco was
relieved from its state of siege, and with the aid of re-inforcements,
conquered the whole adjoining province of Ayotlan on the South Sea, and
then returned to their homes, where they were received with the highest
honors at the hands of the monarchs and of the people, who greeted them
with festivities, the details of which are given by Sahagun.[IX-19]
[Sidenote: MARRIAGE OF PELAXILLA.]
It seems not to have been stipulated which one of the Mexican
princesses should be given to the Zapotec king; and a strange version
is given of the manner in which this matter was settled. Cociyoeza was
bathing one evening in one of the miniature lakes connected with his
royal gardens. After he had removed his clothing, a beautiful female
form appeared by his side in the moonlight, and announced herself as
the sister of Montezuma of Mexico, who had heard of his valor, and
had caused herself to be miraculously transported to his side by the
magic arts of the Aztec enchanters. She assisted him in his bath, left
with him the bathing utensils of her brother which she had brought,
showed a peculiar mark on the palm of her hand, by which she might be
identified, and disappeared as mysteriously as she had come. Cociyoeza
had before looked forward to his marriage with some misgivings, but
now, violently enamored with the charms of his nocturnal visitor, he
made haste to send an embassy with the richest gifts his kingdom could
afford to bring back his Aztec bride. A grand display was made in
Mexico at the reception of this embassy, doubtless intended to impress
upon its members an idea of Mexican power and wealth. The Zapotec
nobles were brought into the presence of the assembled court beauties,
and noticed that one princess had frequent occasion to arrange her
tresses in such a manner as to show her palm and its peculiar mark.
They were thus enabled at once to select the fair sister of Montezuma,
Pelaxilla, or Cotton-Flake, who was borne in a litter on the shoulders
of noblemen with great pomp to the court of Teotzapotlan the Zapotec
capital, where a succession of brilliant fêtes were given in her honor;
and soon after the nuptial ceremonies were performed at Tehuantepec
amid great popular rejoicings.[IX-20]
It was, perhaps, not without hidden motives of future treachery that
Ahuitzotl had insisted on a matrimonial alliance between the Aztecs
and Zapotecs; at any rate, he is reported to have made an attempt some
years later to assassinate Cociyoeza through the assistance of his
wife. Ambassadors were sent to communicate with her on this matter, but
Pelaxilla revealed the plot to her husband, who immediately sent back
the embassy laden with gifts, and prepared his forts and his armies
for war. The Aztecs, however, knowing that their plot was discovered,
made no attack; they demanded permission to send troops through Zapotec
territory for the conquest of Amaxtlan and Xuchiltepec, south of the
isthmus, which was granted; but Cociyoeza, suspecting treachery, took
the precaution to furnish a large army to attend the Aztecs through
his territory, both coming and going, under pretense of furnishing an
escort. Ahuitzotl's forces seem to have been successful, although no
particulars are recorded.[IX-21]
The events related bring the history of the Aztec empire down to
the year 1497, and about the same time the province of Zacatollan
on the Pacific, south-west of Michoacan, was annexed to the domain
of Tezcuco--a fact which does not seem to agree with any version of
the terms of the tri-partite alliance--by the exploit of an Acolhuan
officer named Teuhchimaltzin. It seems that some efforts had already
been made by Nezahualpilli's orders for the conquest of this province,
but without success, when Teuhchimaltzin, stimulated perhaps by the
achievements of the Tlatelulca merchants at Quauhtenanco, obtained
permission to enter the country disguised as a merchant, with a few
companions, promising to subdue the province by taking the king,
dead or alive. He was, however, soon recognized and captured, and
the day was appointed for his sacrifice; but while the king Yopicatl
Atonal with his nobles was drinking and dancing on the night before
the sacrificial festivities, Teuhchimaltzin escaped from his prison,
joined the dancers, and at last, when all were overcome with frequent
libations, cut off the king's head and escaped with it to the frontier
where an army seems to have been in waiting. When the nobles awoke and
found what had taken place, they forthwith dispatched an embassy after
the escaped prisoner, and for some reason that Ixtlilxochitl does not
make very clear, offered to surrender the province to the Tezcucan
monarch. Thus Zacatollan was added to Nezahualpilli's possessions,
Teuhchimaltzin was honored as a hero, and an addition was made to the
stock of tales by which sober Tezcucans were wont to illustrate the
evils of intemperance.[IX-22]
[Sidenote: PUNISHMENT OF CHALCHIUHNENETZIN.]
In 1498 took place in Tezcuco the public execution of one of
Nezahualpilli's wives. This monarch had a great many wives and
concubines--more than two thousand, if we may believe Ixtlilxochitl,
his descendant. Among the former were three nieces of Tizoc, one
of them a daughter of Axayacatl, and a sister of Montezuma II., and
very likely all three sisters, although there is great confusion on
this point. Axayacatl's daughter was named Chalchiuhnenetzin; she
was very young, and was assigned a secluded palace while awaiting the
consummation of the marriage. She soon showed an extraordinary fondness
for decorating her apartments with richly decked statues, the king
noticing new ones at each visit; she said they were her gods, and her
future husband was willing to humor her tastes, strange though they
appeared. But one day he noticed a noble of the court wearing a ring
that he had seen in the hands of Chalchiuhnenetzin, and the following
night went to visit her. The maids in waiting said she had retired
and was sleeping, but he insisted on seeing her, and found her couch
occupied by a sort of puppet counterfeit of herself. His suspicions
now fully roused, he ordered all the attendants arrested, pushed his
search farther, and at last found his virgin bride dancing in very
primitive costume with three noble lovers, one of whom was he who wore
the tell-tale ring. Further investigation revealed that this Aztec
Messalina had been in the habit of giving herself up to every young man
that struck her fancy, and when weary of her lovers had caused them to
be put to death, and represented in her apartments by the statues above
referred to. After the parties had been tried and found guilty by the
proper courts, the king sent to all the cities round about Anáhuac and
summoned all the people to witness the punishment of his false wife.
With her three surviving lovers and about two thousand persons who had
in some way abetted the deception of the king, the amorous queen was
publicly strangled. All acknowledged the justice of the act, but the
Mexican royal family, it is said, never forgave the public execution of
the sentence.[IX-23]
[Sidenote: ANECDOTES OF NEZAHUALPILLI.]
Nezahualpilli is said to have inherited all the good qualities of his
father. Like Nezahualcoyotl he was a patron of the arts and sciences,
but is reported to have given his chief attention to astrology,
passing many nights in reading the stars from a lofty observatory
erected for the purpose in the grounds of his palace. Sorcerers and
magicians were always welcome at his court, whither they were often
summoned both to advise the monarch on affairs of state and to impart
to him a knowledge of their arts. Like his father he was famed for his
inflexibility in the administration of justice and his kindness toward
the poor and unfortunate. A small window in one part of his palace
overlooked the market-place, and at this window the king was wont to
sit frequently, watching the actions of the crowd below, noting cases
of injustice for future punishment, and of distress and poverty that
they might be relieved. How he condemned to death a judge for deciding
unjustly against a poor man and in favor of a noble, and how he had his
favorite son Huexotzincatzin executed for having publicly addressed
his concubine, the lady of Tollan, has been related in a preceding
volume.[IX-24] Many other anecdotes are told to illustrate the king's
love of what he deemed justice. One of his sons began the construction
of a palace somewhere in the Tezcucan domains without having either
consulted his father or complied with the law requiring some brilliant
deed in battle before a prince was entitled to a palace of his own.
The guilty son was put to death. Members of the royal family seem to
have had the greatest faith in the king's judgment and to have accepted
his decisions without complaint. There was great rivalry between his
two brothers Acapipioltzin and Xochiquetzal respecting the credit of
a certain victory in the province of Cuextlan. Each had a band of
partisans who were accustomed on public occasions to celebrate the
deeds of their favorite by songs and dances. So far did the rivalry
proceed that a resort to arms was imminent, when Nezahualpilli appeared
on the scene on the occasion of some festivity and joining the dance
on the side of his oldest brother Acapipioltzin, decided the dispute
in his favor without complaint on the part of the younger brother.
The condemnation of two men, a musician and a soldier, for adultery,
was on one occasion brought to the king for his approval. He ordered
the musician to be executed, but the soldier to be sent for life to do
duty in the frontier garrisons, declaring that such thereafter should
be a soldier's punishment for the fault in question. Nezahualpilli
could also on occasion be most indulgent towards his children; for
instance, his son Ixtlilxochitl early displayed an extraordinary
fondness for having his own way. At the age of three years he expressed
his emphatic disapproval of his nurse's views and conduct by pushing
that lady into a deep well, and then amused himself by throwing stones
upon her. When seven years old he raised a company of boy soldiers
and skirmished about the city much to the terror of peaceful citizens.
Hearing that two members of the royal council had advised his father to
kill so unmanageable a child, he proceeded one night with a selected
detachment of his juvenile veterans to the house of the counselors
and assassinated them both. Nezahualpilli seems to have looked with
much leniency upon these youthful irregularities of his son, who
at fourteen distinguished himself in battle and at seventeen was a
captain. We shall hear of him again in the last years of Aztec history.
The king on another occasion demanded from a brother a very excellent
teponaztli in his possession and his daughter for a royal concubine;
on his refusal the teponaztli was taken by force, and his disobedient
brother's house was razed as the property of a rebel. Two sons were
strangled for having appropriated captives actually taken by their
soldiers; a daughter for having spoken to the son of a lord; and two
concubines for drinking pulque. A judge was hung for hearing a case in
his own house instead of in the appointed hall of justice; and another
for unduly prolonging a trial was condemned to have the front door of
his residence walled up. This king is accredited with having abrogated
the law which condemned the children of slaves to the condition of
their parents, and with many other reforms calculated to ameliorate
the condition of his people. The possession of supernatural powers was
popularly attributed to him, and often in infancy he astonished his
nurses by appearing before them in the form of a bird or beast.[IX-25]
* * * * *
In the years 1498 and 1499 it is recorded that Ahuitzotl attacked
Atlixco without warning, and was defeated by the Huexotzincas who,
under a famous general Tultecatl sent re-inforcements to aid the armies
of Atlixco; and also that, by aiding Cholula in a quarrel with Tepeaca,
the same king greatly increased his power on the eastern plateau. The
following year Tultecatl, before whose valor the Aztecs had been forced
to retreat, was driven from his own country in consequence of certain
religious dissensions, and applied at one of the Mexican towns for
protection. He was put to death, however, with all his companions, by
Ahuitzotl's order, and the dead bodies were forwarded to Huexotzinco to
show the rebellious inhabitants of that city with what relentless zeal
the Aztec ruler pursued his foes.[IX-26]
[Sidenote: INUNDATION OF MEXICO.]
Ahuitzotl, finding the water supplied by the Chapultepec aqueduct
insufficient for the use of the city, and moreover desirous of
accomplishing during his reign some great work of practical utility,
determined to conduct to his capital the waters of a spring called
Acuecuexatl, near Huitzilopochco, in the province of Coyuhuacan.
Tzotzomatzin, the lord of the province, was unwilling that the spring
should be thus used, but his opposition was effectually overcome by
strangling him. Many tales are told by different writers about his
opposition to the scheme, and his death. Some say that he wished the
water for the supply of his own cities; others, that he told Ahuitzotl
the spring was liable at any time to overflow and flood the city,
and was killed by the latter in a fit of passion at his persistence
in that opinion; and still others represent him as a great magician,
who frightened away the Mexican king's ambassadors who were sent to
negotiate with him in the matter, by appearing before them in the
form of a ferocious beast, or serpent. Tezozomoc says he put the cord
round his own neck to save his people from the wrath of the Aztecs;
and Duran, that he did not die, but simply left Coyuhuacan at this
time. Difficulties being thus removed, the aqueduct was constructed of
stone and mortar, in a very short time, owing to the number of workmen
employed, and its completion was celebrated with the proper ceremonies
and sacrifices. But soon--some say in the midst of the ceremonies--so
great was the volume of water introduced, that the city was inundated
by the rising of the lake, and immense damage resulted to public and
private buildings. It is, of course, impossible that the waters of any
spring in Anáhuac could have caused this effect; indeed, Torquemada
says the catastrophe was preceded by heavy rains for a year, and Ortega
also tells us that the rains came down in torrents at the completion
of the aqueduct; it is, therefore, altogether probable that the flood
was not caused by the waters of the canal, but was simply attributed
to that cause from superstitious motives, perhaps resulting from the
predictions of Tzotzomatzin, and his death. So rapid was the rise
of the waters, that king Ahuitzotl, who was in the lower part of his
palace, had great difficulty in escaping, and in his haste struck his
head against a door-post, receiving a wound which, a few years later,
proved fatal. The engineering skill of Nezahualpilli, with the laboring
force of the whole empire, was at once called into requisition to
stop the flood and repair damages. The old dike that had before saved
the city was strengthened and raised; the city was repaired and paved
with _tetzontli_, or porous amygdaloid, the use of which is said to
date from this period; but to stop the waters of the unruly spring
human efforts were unavailing, and the aid of the gods was invoked
with magic rites. First the priests, whose bodies were painted blue in
honor of the Tlalocs, stood round the fountain and uttered prayers,
burned incense, and scattered perfumes; then the divers plunged into
the waters, each with a young child whose heart was torn out, and
whose blood stained the waters; and finally the priests entered the
water, and, as some say, Nezahualpilli with them. Half an hour after
their emergence the waters became so quiet that the laborers were able
to wall up the spring and stop the overflow. Other cities about the
lake had suffered as much, or even more, than Mexico, particularly
Cuitlahuac, which is said to have been uninhabitable for two years.
Much damage was also done to the crops in the valley, and the next year
was one almost of famine. The flood occurred in 1500, and at least two
years passed before Anáhuac had recovered from its effects.[IX-27]
[Sidenote: ACCESSION OF MONTEZUMA II.]
Campaigns against Cuextlan, Tlacuilollan, and Xaltepec, are vaguely
reported during the last two years of Ahuitzotl's life, and may be
distinct from any of the wars that have been mentioned, but no details
are given, save that from Tlacuilollan twelve hundred captives were
brought back to Mexico.[IX-28] The king died in 1503,[IX-29] as is
generally supposed from the effects of the blow mentioned above;
although Tezozomoc attributes his death to chagrin and remorse at the
misfortune of the flood, and Duran hints that he was poisoned. His
likeness is said to have been sculptured with those of his
predecessors on the cliff at Chapultepec. Ahuitzotl's leading passion
was his love of war, so strong as to amount almost to a hatred of
peace. He was also passionately fond of music, of display, and of
women. He was cruel, vindictive, and superstitious; and the quality of
generosity attributed to him was probably closely connected with his
reputed love of display and flattery. Immediately after his death
Montezuma II., son of Axayacatl, was called to the throne; although,
according to Ixtlilxochitl, his elder brother Macuilmalinatzin was the
first choice of the electors, but was rejected by the advice of
Nezahualpilli, who doubted his possession of the requisite qualities
for the ruler of a great nation. Montezuma had already distinguished
himself on many occasions in battle, and was at the time of his
election high-priest of Huitzilopochtli. When the news of his election
reached him he is said to have been employed in sweeping the temple,
from a spirit of real or feigned humility. The usual campaign for
captives was successfully directed against Atlixco, and foreign nobles
from hostile as well as friendly provinces came in crowds by
invitation to witness the coronation ceremonies.[IX-30]
[Sidenote: POLICY OF MONTEZUMA.]
Ahuitzotl left the Aztec empire in the height of its power and glory,
yet even before his death the seeds of future disaster may be said
to have been sown or even to have taken root, since the hitherto
unparalleled sacrifice of human victims on the altars of the capital
had filled the whole country with terror and added much to the hatred
of which the Aztecs had been the objects from the date of their first
appearance in the valley; the rapid increase of the Mexican power
and their well-known greed of conquest had added to the hatred of the
conquered the jealous fears of such nations as still retained their
independence; and finally the reverses suffered in Tehuantepec, in
Michoacan, and in several battles against the eastern nations, had
taught the peoples of North America that the allied armies of the
central plateaux were not altogether invincible. The dangers that thus
began to threaten the empire, however, were all external, and might
perhaps have been averted or long deferred by a series of successful
wars under brave but wise kings. Under the preceding kings, the common
interests of all classes in the success of the government, had been a
prominent element of national glory. Commercial enterprise had done as
much as valor in war to promote the conquests of kings and to build
up the capitals; the common soldier might by bravery and brilliant
achievements in battle hope to reach the highest military rank; the
menial service of the royal palace with many posts of honor had been
entrusted largely to plebeian hands; and in fact Aztec policy had
been strikingly analogous to that which distinguished the French
nation under the first Napoleon. The granting of titles and honors
to the merchants had naturally excited much opposition among those
who derived their titles of nobility from a long line of Chichimec or
Toltec ancestors; and what made the matter even more galling to their
pride, was the fact that these parvenu nobles by reason of their wealth
were able to completely outshine their confrères of purer blood but
slender purses, in all public displays as well as in their palaces and
style of living. Montezuma II. from the first days of his reign openly
espoused the cause of the ancient nobility against the merchants and
plebeians. What is known of his character renders it probable that he
was prompted to this course chiefly by his own extremely aristocratic
tastes; but it is not impossible that he gained his election by
committing himself to such a policy. He began by dismissing all
plebeians employed about the royal palaces and appointing youths of
noble blood in their places. He was warned that such a course would
separate the interests of the common people from those of royalty and
prove dangerous in the future; but he replied that he wished nothing
in common with plebeians, who must be taught to keep their place and
give up their absurd aspirations. His policy toward the merchants
and the army was more cautious but equally decided. Advantage was
taken of every opportunity to humble and oppress the hated class, by
constantly clogging with new restrictions the wheels of trade, and by
the promotion whenever practicable of noble officers. Montezuma was,
however, a valiant and skillful warrior, and sacrificed oftener his
inclinations to his interests in the treatment of his armies than in
other cases. His policy of course gradually alienated the classes on
which the prosperity of the empire chiefly rested, and ensured the fall
of the Aztec power whenever disaffection should have an opportunity to
ally itself with foreign foes. The bursting of the storm was averted
for some fifteen years by the strength of the Acolhua and Tepanec
alliance, and by the strength of the Mexican army. Montezuma's reign
was a succession of campaigns against revolting provinces, interspersed
with the erection of magnificent temples, frequent and extensive
immolations of human victims, and omens of disaster sent by the gods
to trouble the mind of the superstitious monarch. When at last the day
drew near when Mexico must struggle single-handed for the retention
of her supremacy against a combination of all the Nahua powers, the
last chance for success in such an unequal contest disappeared with
the re-inforcement of the enemy by Spanish valor, Spanish armor, and
Spanish horses; and Montezuma personally had not even the melancholy
satisfaction of seeing his foes fall before the same wave of foreign
invasion which had destroyed forever his own power.[IX-31]
[Sidenote: WAR AGAINST TLASCALA.]
Tlascala had thus far never been the object of an invasion by the
united forces of the allies, although, as we have seen, frequent
battles had been fought on the frontier, and the Tlascaltec armies
as allies of other nations had been several times defeated. During
the reigns of Montezuma I. and Axayacatl, however, the Tlascaltec
territory had become completely surrounded by Aztec possessions,
through the conquest of Cuetlachtlan, Cuextlan, and Totonacapan. Their
communication with the coast having thus been cut off, the Tlascaltec
commerce had been almost entirely destroyed, and for a period extending
down to the Conquest, this brave people were obliged to do without
many luxuries, and even necessities of life. Their lack of salt
is particularly recorded; a small supply was occasionally smuggled
into the state by the nobles, but the common people are said to have
abstained entirely from its use, and to have completely lost their
relish for this article. The other cities of the eastern plateau had
in the meantime become either the subjects or allies of the Mexicans.
Immediately after his accession to the throne, Montezuma II. determined
to direct his armies against this last unsubdued territory in the
east. The excuse was an embassy sent by the Tlascaltecs, probably to
Axayacatl, complaining of the oppression to which their merchants
were subjected on the coast, the claims of the embassy having been
received with insulting indifference, and threats having been freely
uttered on both sides. Huexotzinco and Cholula seem both to have allied
themselves with Mexico in this affair; but, on the other hand, Tlascala
had received constant additions to her population and armies in the
refugees from all parts of Anáhuac, who were continually applying
for protection to the only nation beyond the power of the Aztecs.
The war was begun by the Huexotzincas and Cholultecs, who invaded
Tlascala, killed in battle one of their chief leaders, Tizatlacatzin,
and penetrated to within one league of the capital; but they were
driven back, and the Huexotzinca towns were in turn ravaged by the
Tlascaltecs, sending couriers to Montezuma to hasten the march of
his forces. The Tlascaltecs, hearing of the approach of the Aztecs,
fell upon them before they could effect a junction with their allies,
and defeated them, inflicting heavy losses, and killing among others
Tlacahuepantzin, the son of the Mexican king.[IX-32] After the funeral
ceremonies in honor of his son, Montezuma made another attempt to
subdue the Tlascaltecs, sending against them the whole available force
of the empire; but after a hard-fought battle the invaders were again
driven back, and although skirmishes, and even battles, took place
afterwards between the two nations, yet the Aztec allies never repeated
their attempt to crush Tlascala, and the brave little republic retained
her independence until by the aid of Cortés she was able to take her
revenge on the tyrannical Mexicans and treacherous Cholultecs.[IX-33]
In 1505 the crops were destroyed by the excessive heat, and although
the public granaries were generously opened to the public by
Nezahualpilli and Montezuma--for the latter, notwithstanding his
aristocratic tendencies, was generous towards his people so long as
they claimed nothing more than a right to exist--many perished of
starvation or sold themselves and children as slaves. Totonacapan
was again apparently the only province unaffected by the famine.
Another plague in the form of rats which over-ran the country in
immense numbers is recorded at about the same time; but the volcano
of Popocatepetl ceased for twenty days to emit smoke, a good omen,
as the wise men said and as it proved, for the next year was one of
great plenty.[IX-34] During the year of the famine a campaign against
Guatemala, or as some authors say Quauhnelhuatlan, which may have been
a Guatemalan province, is recorded as having yielded many captives
for the inauguration of the temple of Centeotl, built in recognition
of her services in staying the drought and sending a year of plenty.
The festivities on the completion of certain repairs to the causeway
and aqueduct of Chapultepec at about the same time were marred by
the burning of a temple in Mexico. It is related that the Tlatelulcas
seeing the flames, thought the city was invaded by an enemy and rushed
in to help protect it, but that Montezuma chose to regard this as an
act of rebellion and temporarily removed all Tlatelulcas from their
positions at court.[IX-35]
[Sidenote: REVOLT OF THE MIZTECS.]
Before the end of 1506, two campaigns were made against the Miztecs
by the last of which the whole province was permanently subdued.
The pretext of the first was the refusal of Malinalli, lord of
Tlachquiauhco, to give Montezuma for his royal gardens a very rare
plant in his possession. An army was dispatched to bring the plant
and punish the people; Tilantongo, Achiuhtla, and Tlachquiauhco fell
before the Mexican soldiers; and the rare _tlapalizquixochitl_, or
'red flower,' was transplanted to Mexico, although the Oajacan records
insist, according to Burgoa, that it died on the way. The Miztecs next
determined upon a final effort to shake off the Mexican yoke, which
well nigh succeeded. Cetecpatl, king of Cohuaixtlahuacan, invited the
garrison of the impregnable Huaxyacac and other Aztec fortresses to a
grand banquet, and on their return they were set upon by the ambushed
troops of Nahuixochitl, lord of Tzotzolan, and all put to death, save
one that escaped to tell the news. The Miztecs, now thoroughly aroused,
adopted the tactics that had proved so effective in Tehuantepec,
fortified their positions in the mountains near Tzotzolan, and awaited
the attack. The first army sent by Montezuma was defeated and driven
back with great loss. A second army representing the whole strength of
the Aztec allies now marched southward under Cuitlahuatzin, Montezuma's
brother; but the Miztec forces could not be dislodged from their
strong position until Cozcaquauhtli, lord of Huauhtlan and a brother
of Cetecpatl, betraying his people, or faithful to his ruler Montezuma
as the Mexican writers put it, opened his city to the enemy, revealed
all Cetecpatl's plans, and led Cuitlahuatzin by secret paths to a
commanding position whence the attack was made and the Miztecs routed.
Nahuixochitl soon came up with a fresh army from Tututepec, but was in
his turn defeated. The whole province, including Tututepec and other
cities on the shores of the Pacific, was then over-run and permanently
subjected to Mexican authority. The captives included the leaders,
and were brought back to Mexico in time to grace with their blood
the festival of _tlacaxipehualiztli_, or 'flaying of men,' although
according to some authorities the leaders, Cetecpatl and Nahuixochitl,
were reserved for a later occasion.[IX-36]
[Sidenote: TYING-UP OF THE LAST CYCLE.]
Also in 1506 the Huexotzincas and Cholultecs had a quarrel, in which
the former had the advantage and by a raid burned a few houses in
the city of the latter. Knowing that Montezuma had great veneration
for the city of Quetzalcoatl, the Huexotzincas thought it best to
send ambassadors to explain the matter. The envoys for some reason
not made clear greatly exaggerated the matter, representing Cholula
as having been utterly destroyed and the inhabitants driven to the
mountains. Greatly enraged the allied kings sent an army to chastise
the perpetrators of such an outrage on the holy city; but the
Huexotzincas escaped their punishment by stating the truth of the
matter and delivering up for sacrifice the envoys with their ears and
noses cut off. An expedition at the same time against Itztitlan and
Itzcuintepec, and another according to Ortega and Torquemada against
Atlixco, together with a war in Tecuhtepec, furnished a large number
of captives, some of whom were sacrificed at the dedication of the
Tzompantli[IX-37] or 'place of skulls,' while the rest were reserved for
the tying-up of the cycle and lighting of the new fire which took
place the following year, accompanied by ceremonies that have been
described in a preceding volume. This was the last ceremony of the
kind the Mexicans ever had the opportunity to perform; before another
cycle had elapsed, the native gods had lost their power, their rites
had been abolished, and replaced by others that did not include human
sacrifices. The rites of the Inquisition were as cruel as those they
replaced, but the number of victims in America was comparatively
small.[IX-38]
The year 1507 was marked by the occurrence of an eclipse and an
earthquake, by the drowning of eighteen hundred soldiers in the Miztec
country, and according to Ixtlilxochitl, by the execution of Tezozomoc,
lord of Azcapuzalco and father-in-law of Montezuma, for adultery.
In his trial it is related that the Mexican judges voted for his
banishment, the Tepanec added that the end of his nose should be cut
off, but Nezahualpilli, who had the final decision, ordered him to be
strangled, much to the displeasure of Montezuma. During the same year
the allies sent an expedition to the region of Mitla, which plundered a
few towns and captured a small number of prisoners. The provocation of
this war is not recorded. Immediately after its return an army was sent
under Cuitlahuatzin against Quauhquelchula in the Huexotzinca region.
The result was a victory with a goodly array of captives, but obtained
only after a serious loss, including five Mexican leaders. The captives
served for the inauguration of the temple previously burned, as has
been noted, but now rebuilt, and also for the festival of the 'flaying
of men.' According to Tezozomoc and Duran the provocation of this war
was the burning of the temple of the goddess Toci in Mexico, or as
Tezozomoc understands it, the _tociquahuitl_, a wooden signal tower
on the hill of Tocitlan. Duran also informs us that a representation
of Mexican nobles attended by invitation the festivals in honor of
Camaxtli, at which were sacrificed the Aztec captives taken during
the war. A renewal of hostilities with Huexotzinco is mentioned in the
eighth year of Montezuma's reign.[IX-39]
[Sidenote: OMENS OF DISASTER.]
With the new cycle began a period, during which, down to the appearance
of the Spaniards at Vera Cruz, almost every event was invested with
a mysterious significance, every unusual phenomenon of nature, every
accident, every illness, every defeat in battle, failure of crops,
excessive heat or cold, rain or snow, thunder and lightning, shooting
star or comet, earthquake or eclipse,--each and all portended evil
to the Aztec empire, evil which some seem even at the time to have
connected with the olden predictions of Quetzalcoatl respecting
the coming of a foreign race to take possession of the country. The
superstitious monarchs, priests, and nobles were in a constant state of
terror. There are but two ways of accounting for this state of affairs;
first by supposing that the supernatural element in the various events
referred to, the terror which they caused in the minds of the natives,
and many of the events themselves, were pure inventions of the native
historians formed after the coming of the Spaniards to support the
claims of their sages to a foreknowledge of events, or simply for
the sake of telling a marvelous tale; and second by supposing that
the terror of Montezuma and his companions, and their disposition to
carefully note and construe into omens of evil each unusual occurrence,
was caused by a knowledge more or less vague that the Spaniards were
already on the American coasts. While there is every reason to believe
that there are both inventions and exaggerations in the records written
after the coming of foreigners, I am disposed to attribute the effects
referred to above chiefly to the actual presence of Europeans. For
about fifteen years the Antilles had been more or less completely in
the possession of the Spaniards; five years before the opening of the
new cycle Columbus had coasted Central America and even established
a colony in Veragua. It is altogether improbable that no knowledge of
the white men and their wonderful winged vessels had reached Mexico,
however vague and exaggerated that knowledge may have been. The Aztec
traders were not now such indefatigable and trustworthy spies as in
former times, but they would hardly have failed to bring to Mexico
exaggerated rumors of approaching disaster. It is also quite possible
that various articles of European manufacture, or even human remains
of white men, had been washed on the Totonac or Xicalanca shores.
That Montezuma and his companions attached considerable weight to the
traditional predictions of Quetzalcoatl and Hueman there is no reason
to doubt. The predictions referred to may have been the threats of some
exiled chieftain of ancient times, or the vain imaginings of a fanatic
priest uttered to maintain his reputation among his followers; possibly
the result of some native cosmographer's theorizing respecting other
lands across the ocean; not quite impossibly the remnant of an ancient
knowledge of trans-oceanic peoples; and of course not the result of
any prophetic foreknowledge; but like all other pretended prophecies
they became at once most valid and authentic on the occurrence of
circumstances which might be interpreted as their fulfillment.
[Sidenote: MONTEZUMA AND NEZAHUALPILLI.]
The signs and omens that followed those already mentioned I shall
briefly relate without paying much attention to their chronologic
order; very little else than these omens and the means adopted to
avert their consequences is recorded from 1508 to 1512. An army sent
to the province of Amatlan perished with cold and by falling trees
and rocks; and a comet with three heads, perhaps the one already
mentioned, hung over Anáhuac.[IX-40] Then a wonderful pyramidal light
appeared in the east, reaching from the earth to the sky, visible for
forty days, or, as some say, for a whole year, in all parts of the
country, from midnight till morning, very similar, according to the
description, to the Aurora Borealis. Nezahualpilli was so affected
by these signs that he gave orders to discontinue all hostilities.
An interview was held between him and Montezuma, although for some
time they had not been on speaking terms. Nezahualpilli saw clearly
in the strange omens the approaching end of the empire and his own
death, but was resigned to the decrees of fate; Montezuma, on the
contrary, instead of resignation felt only anger, and is even said by
Tezozomoc and Duran to have strangled many of his sorcerers for their
unfavorable interpretation of the signs, and their failure to avert
evil omens. At last a game of _tlachtli_ was agreed upon between the
two monarchs to decide whose interpretation should be accepted; and
to show how little importance he attached to his wealth and power,
Nezahualpilli is said to have wagered on the result his kingdom of
Acolhuacan against three turkey cocks. He won the game, but still
Montezuma was not disposed to yield to the fates, and still persecuted
his magicians in the hope to elicit a more favorable prognostication,
but in vain; the magicians all agreed with the Tezcucan monarch. About
the same time the towers of Huitzilopochtli's temple took fire in a
clear night without apparent cause, and were reduced to ashes in spite
of all efforts to extinguish the flames; and another temple was set
on fire by lightning. This was the temple of the god of fire, and was
now burned for the second time.[IX-41] In this period, in the reign of
the second Montezuma, Brasseur puts the story of a mysterious aerial
journey of the two kings to the ancient home of the Aztecs, referring
perhaps to that already taken from Duran and applied to the time of
Montezuma I.[IX-42] Torquemada, Clavigero, and Vetancvrt, tell us of the
resurrection of Papantzin, a sister of Montezuma, who brought back
from the land of the dead to her royal brother an account of the new
people who were to occupy the land, and of the new religion they would
bring. This lady is said to have been the first Mexican to receive the
rites of Christian baptism, and the priests took pains to send a duly
authenticated account of her miraculous resurrection to Spain. The
intimate connection of this tale with the religious prejudices of the
invaders, renders it unnecessary to seek even a foundation in truth for
the report. Sahagun also speaks of a resurrected woman who predicted
the fall of the empire, living twenty-one years thereafter and bearing
a son. Boturini attributes this return from the dead to a sister of
the king of Michoacan at a much later date, while the Spaniards were
besieging Mexico.[IX-43] In 1509, as several authors say,[IX-44] the waters
of the lake became violently agitated, without wind, earthquake, or
other natural cause, and in consequence the city was inundated. The
fishermen of the lake caught a large bird like a crane, wearing a round
transparent crown, through which Montezuma saw the stars, though it
was in the daytime, and also many people that approached in squadrons,
attired like warriors, and seeming half men, half deer. The bird
disappeared before the sorcerers could satisfactorily interpret this
strange thing. Double-bodied and double-headed men also were seen, and
on being brought before the king suddenly disappeared; and the same
happened with men who had no fingers and toes. In 1511 armed men were
seen fighting in the air; and a bird appeared whose head seemed human;
and a large stone pillar fell near the temple of Huitzilopochtli, no
one knowing whence it came. An earthquake and a deluge at Tusapan,
are reported; at Tecualoia a most ferocious and horrible beast was
captured; a female voice was several times heard bewailing the fate of
her children. At Tlascala a bright light and a cloud of dust arising
from the summit of Mount Matlalcueje to the very heavens, caused
the people to fear the end of the world was coming. The sorcerers of
Cuetlachtlan also saw many wonderful visions; but among the peoples
outside of Anáhuac the fearful phenomena and the predicted coming of a
foreign people were less terrible than to the Aztecs, for with their
terror was mingled hope of relief from the Aztec yoke. A wild hare
invaded Nezahualpilli's garden, but the king would not allow the animal
to be killed, for in the same manner, he said, would a strange people
presently invade his country. Tezozomoc and Duran give a long and
detailed account of Montezuma's sufferings. It seems that he was not
content with his own dreams and omens, but instructed his subjects to
report to him all their visions; at last he was so distracted that he
determined to hide himself from impending calamities in a cave, but was
prevented from such a course by a series of supernatural events more
absurd, if possible, than those that have been narrated. Herrera tells
us that Montezuma had in his possession a box washed on the eastern
shore containing wearing-apparel and a sword of a style unknown to the
natives.[IX-45]
* * * * *
[Sidenote: VISIONS AND OMENS.]
In the meantime military operations had not been suspended, for the
anger of the gods could only be averted by sacrifice, and victims could
only be obtained by war; but the details of these campaigns and their
order are nowhere definitely recorded. It is stated, however, that in
1511, the Cuetlachtecas, encouraged by the visions of their magicians,
and by the troubles that had fallen upon Anáhuac, refused openly to
pay their tributes, and yet remained unpunished.[IX-46] In the same or
following year, the Cakchiquel records note the arrival of a numerous
embassy of the Yaqui, or Mexicans, at their court. Nothing whatever
is said of the object of this mission, or its results; but the Abbé
Brasseur has no doubt that the object sought was information respecting
the actions of the Spaniards on the coast of Central America.[IX-47]
Although Nezahualpilli seems to have lost most of his interest in
political affairs, and to have contented himself with simply awaiting
future developments, no superstitious terror in Montezuma's breast
could overcome his ruling passion, ambition; and according to the
authorities he was inclined to take advantage of his colleague's
listlessness for his own aggrandizement. Ixtlilxochitl relates an
act of treachery against the Tezcucan monarch, which, in view of the
author's well-known prejudice against Montezuma, may be received with
much doubt; according to this author, the Mexican king represented
to Nezahualpilli that the anger of the gods was caused to some extent
by the failure to offer captives from Tlascala, and the substitution
of victims from distant provinces obtained not in holy battle but
in a mere attempt to extend the imperial domain. He proposed a joint
campaign against Tlascala; Nezahualpilli consented, saying that his
inaction had not been the result of cowardice, but he had ceased to
fight simply because the year of 1 Acatl was near at hand when the
empire must fall. He sent an army under his two sons, but Montezuma had
secretly notified the Tlascaltecs that the Acolhua's motive was not the
capture of victims, but the conquest of the republic, promising to take
no part himself in the battle. The Tlascaltecs were very angry and the
Aztec army stood calmly by and saw the Acolhua forces led into ambush
and massacred. The whole march of Nezahualpilli's army had been marked
by the occurrence of many omens of evil. Immediately on his return
Montezuma openly proclaimed his opposition to his colleague and ordered
a suspension of all Tezcucan tributes from the cities about the lake.
While there are reasons to doubt this act of treachery and the openness
of his opposition to Nezahualpilli, it is evident that the two kings
regarded each other from this time as enemies.[IX-48]
[Sidenote: MONTEZUMA, AZTEC EMPEROR.]
In 1512, with great festivities and the sacrifice of twelve thousand
captives--taken it is said in a war against the revolting Miztec
province of Tlachquiauhco--was dedicated a new sacrificial stone.
It was only after a long search that a suitable stone was found near
Coyuhuacan, and after it was formed and sculptured with the fitting
devices, notwithstanding the honors paid it on the way to the capital,
it broke through one of the causeways and carried with itself to the
bottom of the lake the high-priest and many of his attendants. It was
afterwards recovered and placed in its appointed place. Tezozomoc and
others tell many marvelous tales of this stone, how it spoke frequently
on the way, and how after sinking it found its way back to its original
location. Tezozomoc also states that in connection with the ceremonies
at this time Montezuma publicly proclaimed himself Zemanahuaca
Tlatoani, equivalent to 'emperor of the world.'[IX-49]
[Sidenote: LIMITS OF THE AZTEC EMPIRE.]
During the next few years Montezuma seems to have determined by
brilliant exploits in battle to defy the predictions of his magicians
and to shake off his own superstitious fears. In 1512, according to
Torquemada, the Xuchitepecs and Icpactepecs were subjugated; in 1513,
the Yopitzincas, who had attempted the destruction of the Mexican
garrison at Tlacotepec, were defeated; in 1514, the city of Quetzalapan
in Cuextlan was taken with many captives, although at the cost of
several Aztec leaders of high rank; and in 1515 took place the conquest
of Cihuapohualoyan and Cuexcomaixtlahuacan, including the siege of the
strongholds of Quetzaltepec, Totoltepec and Iztactlalocan, narrated at
considerable length by Duran, who represents this war as having been
caused by the refusal of the inhabitants to furnish a peculiar kind of
sand needed by the Mexican lapidaries in polishing precious stones.[IX-50]
Torquemada and Ortega relate that an expedition was at about this time
sent southward to Honduras, Vera Paz, and Nicaragua, all of which were
subjected to the Mexican power, the two former without much opposition,
the latter only after a hard battle, a defeat, and subsequent treachery
on the part of the Aztecs.[IX-51] There is every reason to believe that
this report is unfounded, and that the countries south of the isthmus,
save perhaps Soconusco, were never conquered by the Mexicans. I need
not enter into any discussion here respecting the limits of the Aztec
empire; since the annals recorded in the preceding pages, with a résumé
of the subject in a preceding volume,[IX-52] are sufficient. In general
terms the empire extended from the valley of Mexico westward only
to the adjoining province of Matlaltzinco, Michoacan having always
retained her independence; north-westward only a few leagues beyond
the limits of the valley; in the north-east, east, and south-east it
embraced the whole country to the gulf coast from the Rio Pánuco in the
north to the Rio Alvarado in the south, excepting the small territory
of Tlascala; in the south-west and south it reached the Pacific coast,
along which it extended from Zacatollan to Tututepec; and it also
included some towns and garrisons in Soconusco, and on the frontiers
of Chiapas. Or, according to modern political geography, the empire
embraced the states of Mexico, Puebla, Vera Cruz, Guerrero, and western
Oajaca, with small portions of Tamaulipas, San Luis Potosí, Querétaro,
and Chiapas. The whole of Oajaca, including Tehuantepec, was at one
time subjected, but the Zapotecs regained their independence, as we
have seen, before Montezuma's reign. Beyond these limits doubtless
many raids were made, and towns, with small sections of territory, were
reduced momentarily to Mexican provinces; hence the varying statements
of different authors on this subject.[IX-53]
* * * * *
The appearance of the Spaniards on the distant American coasts, the
predictions of disaster which all the soothsayers agreed in deriving
from constantly recurring omens, the approaching subjugation of
his people to a race of foreigners in which Nezahualpilli firmly
believed, and above all the haughty and treacherous manner and deeds
of Montezuma, who now made no secret of his intention to make himself
supreme monarch of the empire, had a most depressing effect on the
Tezcucan king. He retired with his favorite wife and a few attendants
to the palace of Tezcocingo, announcing his intention of spending
his remaining days in retirement, but six months later he returned
to Tezcuco, retired to his most private apartments, and refused to
see visitors. Some time afterwards, when his family insisted on being
admitted to his presence, his death was announced to them, having been
concealed for some time by the attendants acting under his orders.
The peculiar circumstances of his decease caused the invention of the
popular tale, according to which he had not died but had gone to the
ancient Amaquemecan, the home of his Chichimec ancestors. His death
occurred in 1515.[IX-54]
[Sidenote: REVOLT OF IXTLILXOCHITL.]
For some unknown reason Nezahualpilli had not named his successor
on the throne, and the choice thus devolved upon the royal council
in conjunction with the kings of Mexico and Tlacopan. So far as can
be determined from conflicting accounts the sons of the deceased
monarch and heirs to the throne were as follows in the order of their
age:--Tetlahuehuetquizitzin, Cacama, Cohuanacoch, and Ixtlilxochitl.
The eldest son was deemed incompetent to rule the kingdom, Cacama was
chosen by the council, and the choice warmly approved by Montezuma,
who was Cacama's uncle. When the decision was announced to the other
brothers, Cohuanacoch approved it, but Ixtlilxochitl protested against
the choice of Cacama, insisting that his oldest brother should be
proclaimed king. Something has already been said about this prince's
fiery temper in early years,[IX-55] and age seems to have had no effect
in calming his violent character. But on this occasion he seems to
have been actuated not only by his own ambition to reign or to control
the reigning monarch, but by patriotic motives and a desire for his
country's freedom. He denounced, probably not without reason, the
council as acting wholly in the interests of the treacherous Montezuma,
who had insulted his father, and aspired to the imperial power; and
he regarded Cacama as a mere man of wax to be molded at will by the
crafty monarch of the Mexicans. The details of the quarrel are given
at considerable length by the authorities, but are hardly worth
reproducing here; the trouble seems to have lasted, if the chronology
of the records may be credited, two years, much of which time was
passed by Cacama at Mexico with his uncle. At last, however, finding
his efforts unavailing, Ixtlilxochitl left Tezcuco with his partisans
and went to the province of Meztitlan with the intention of exciting a
revolt in his own behalf, while Cacama in 1517 proceeded to his capital
to receive the crown of his father.[IX-56]
Ixtlilxochitl was in a high degree successful in the northern
provinces, whose inhabitants were almost unanimous in their approval
of his opposition to Montezuma, and gladly ranged themselves under his
banners. Marching southward from Meztitlan at the head of a hundred
thousand men, he was received as king in Tepepulco and other towns
until he reached Otompan, where he met considerable resistance, but at
last entered the city and made it thereafter his capital. He also took
possession of all the northern towns, such as Acolman, Chiuhnauhtlan,
Zumpango, and Huehuetoca. The news of his proceedings in the north
reached Tezcuco just after the coronation ceremonies of Cacama, or,
as some say, during their continuance. Montezuma seems to have made
one effort to quell this northern revolt and to have sent one of his
bravest generals against Ixtlilxochitl, but this general, Xochitl, was
defeated, captured, and burned alive by the fiery Chichimec prince;
no farther attack was made by the Mexican king. During the course of
this year, 1517, the Totonacs secretly gave in their allegiance to
Ixtlilxochitl, and of course Tlascala, the inveterate foe of Mexico,
supported his cause. Montezuma's failure to renew his efforts against
the rebel, and the increasing spirit of revolt among the Aztec
provinces are in great measure accounted for, when it is remembered
that at this time the Spaniards, under Hernandez de Córdova, again
appeared on the coast of Yucatan and Tabasco,[IX-57] and the exaggerated
reports of their appearance and deeds served to cause a renewal of
the old terror in Mexico, and a corresponding hope, not altogether
unmingled with fear, in the oppressed provinces. Cacama, either
influenced by the same fears, or more probably encouraged to yield to
his own kindly feelings towards his brother by Montezuma's failure
to proceed against Ixtlilxochitl, sent an embassy to his brother,
who, from his new headquarters at Otompan, had shown no intention of
marching against Tezcuco, proposing an amicable settlement of their
difficulties. Ixtlilxochitl replied that he had none but the kindest
feelings towards his brother and the kingdom of Acolhuacan, but renewed
his denunciations of Montezuma, and his warnings against that monarch's
ambitious designs. A division of the kingdom was finally decided upon,
Ixtlilxochitl retaining the sovereign power in the northern provinces,
Cacama retaining his throne at Tezcuco and his place in the Aztec
alliance, and Cohuanacoch receiving a large amount of revenue for his
constant support of the king. Ixtlilxochitl faithfully observed the
terms of the treaty, but retained all his enmity against the Mexicans;
he had an opportunity to strike a decisive blow against the hated power
a little later as an ally of the Spaniards.[IX-58]
[Sidenote: FINAL WARS OF MONTEZUMA.]
Yet wars were still waged by the allied kings as before, for the only
hope of averting impending disaster was by drenching with human blood
the altars of the gods. Several campaigns are recorded as having
yielded captives in considerable numbers, but no details are given.
Battles against the Tlascaltecs were continued down to the very last;
the Mexicans fighting generally as allies of the Huexotzincas. In one
of these battles the Huexotzinca chief Tlachpanquizqui by a valiant
feat of arms obtained pardon for serious crimes which he had committed,
and great rewards besides. He captured the famous Tlascaltec warrior
Tlalhuicol and brought him to Mexico. But the honor of his capture was
all that Montezuma desired; for he immediately offered Tlalhuicol his
freedom, which was refused. The Tlascaltec was then put in command
of a Mexican army and sent against the Tarascos, whom he defeated,
taking their stronghold of Tangimaroa, or Tlaximaloyan, and subduing
many towns on his way. He returned laden with spoils to Mexico, was
entreated to accept the permanent position of Commander-in-chief of
the Aztec armies, or at least to accept his release and return to his
country; but the brave Tlalhuicol deemed it a dishonor to return or
even to live after his capture, and earnestly entreated the privilege
of dying like other prisoners of rank on the gladiatorial stone. His
request was sorrowfully granted, eight of Anáhuac's best warriors fell
before him in the conflict, but by the ninth he was subdued, and his
heart was offered as a pleasing sacrifice to the god of war.[IX-59]
In the same year, 1517, it is related that Montezuma in his zeal to
appease the irate deities, ordered the grand temple of Huitzilopochtli
to be covered from top to bottom with gold, precious stones, and rare
feathers. His Minister of Finance, ordered to supply the cost of this
extravagant act of piety by imposing a new tax on the people, objected
and warned the tyrant that his subjects would endure no increase of
taxation. His objections were removed by putting him to death, but we
hear nothing farther of the golden covering.[IX-60] The following year, or
1518, took place at Mexico the last of the long series of sacrificial
immolations on a large scale, at the dedication of the temple of
Coatlan, on which occasion were sacrificed the captives that the last
campaigns had yielded.[IX-61] But almost before the groans of the dying
victims had died away there came to the ears of the Aztec sovereign
the startling tidings that the eastern strangers had again made their
appearance, this time on the Totonac coasts of his own empire. Juan de
Grijalva and his companions had followed the gulf coast northward, and
reached the spot where now stands the city of Vera Cruz.[IX-62]
[Sidenote: ARRIVAL OF JUAN DE GRIJALVA.]
All Aztec officials in the coast provinces had strict orders to keep
a constant look-out for the eastern strangers, and in case of their
arrival to treat them kindly, but by pretence of traffic and by every
possible means to ascertain who they were, whence they came, and the
nature of their designs. In accordance with these orders Pinotl the
Aztec governor of Cuetlachtlan and his Mexican subordinates were
foremost among the visitors to the wonderful ships of Grijalva;
paintings were quickly but carefully prepared of the strangers,
their ships, their weapons, and of every strange thing observed, and
with the startling news and the pictured records the royal officials
hastened to Mexico and communicated their information to Montezuma. The
king, concealing as well as possible his anxiety and forbidding the
messengers to make the news public, immediately assembled his royal
colleagues and his council of state, laid the matter before them and
asked their advice. The opinion was unanimous that the strangers were
the children of Quetzalcoatl, returning in fulfillment of the ancient
prophecies, and that they should be kindly received, as the only means
of conciliating the good will of the numerous followers of the ancient
prophet. An embassy was sent with rich presents to the coast, but they
were too late; the Spaniards had departed, with a promise, however, of
returning at an early date.
The events that followed down to the fulfillment of that promise by the
arrival of Hernan Cortés in 1519 are not very definitely recorded, but
these months formed a period of the greatest anxiety on the part of the
Aztec rulers and of mingled dread and hope for their numerous enemies.
Interest in the one absorbing topic caused all else to be forgotten;
there was no thought of conquest, of revolt, of tributes; even the
bloody rites of Huitzilopochtli were much neglected and the star of
the peaceful Quetzalcoatl and his sect was in the ascendant. Prophets
and old men throughout the country were closely questioned respecting
their knowledge of the old traditions; old paintings and records were
taken from every archive and carefully compared with those relating to
the new-comers; the loss of the precious documents burned by Itzcoatl
was now seriously felt; the glass beads and other trinkets obtained
from the Spaniards, and even carefully treasured fragments of ship
biscuit, were formally deposited with all the old Toltec ceremonies in
the temple of Quetzalcoatl. Many fictitious paintings were palmed off
on the credulous Montezuma as ancient records in which the children of
Quetzalcoatl were pictured in an amusing variety of absurd forms, but
some of the documents agreed very closely with the late paintings of
Montezuma's agents, showing that others had bethought them to represent
on paper Grijalva's company or some preceding band of Spaniards.[IX-63]
* * * * *
At last the presence of Cortés on the southern coasts, and his
progress towards the Aztec possessions, was announced, and an
embassy was dispatched to await his arrival, and to receive him with
every attention and with the richest gifts the empire could afford.
Subsequent events belong to the history of the Conquest, and must be
narrated in another work; the remaining chapters of this volume being
required for such fragments as have been preserved respecting the
aboriginal history of other nations and tribes outside the central
plateaux of Mexico.
[Sidenote: ANÁHUAC IN 1519.]
I close the chapter and the annals of the Aztec period, with a brief
glance at the general condition of affairs in and about Anáhuac in
1519, and the most extraordinary combination of circumstances that
made it possible for Hernan Cortés to overthrow with a handful of
Spanish soldiers a mighty aboriginal empire. The power known as Aztec,
since the formation of the tri-partite alliance not quite a century
before under the Acolhua, Mexican, and Tepanec kings, had gradually
extended its iron grasp from its centre about the lakes to the shores
of either ocean; and this it had accomplished wholly by the force of
arms, receiving no voluntary allegiance. Overburdened by taxation;
oppressed and insulted by royal governors, Aztec tribute-gatherers, and
the traveling armies of Tlatelulca merchants; constantly attacked on
frivolous pretexts by blood-thirsty hordes who ravaged their fields and
carried away the flower of their population to perish on the Mexican
altars; the inhabitants of each province subjected to this degrading
bondage entertained towards the central government of the tyrants on
the lakes feelings of the bitterest hatred and hostility, only awaiting
an opportunity to free themselves, or at least to annihilate their
oppressors. Such was the condition of affairs and the state of feeling
abroad; at home the situation was most critical. The alliance which
had been the strongest element of the Aztec power was now practically
broken up; the ambitious schemes of Montezuma had alienated his firmest
ally, and the stronger part of the Acolhua force was now openly arrayed
against him under Ixtlilxochitl at Otompan, leagued with the Tlascaltec
leaders for the overthrow of the Mexican power. It is probable that the
coming of the Spaniards retarded rather than precipitated the united
attack of the Acolhuas and the outside provinces on Montezuma. But
again, to meet the gathering storm, the Mexican king could no longer
count on the undivided support of his own people; he had alienated the
merchants, who no longer, as in the early days, did faithful duty as
spies, nor toiled to enrich a government from which they could expect
no rewards; the lower classes no longer deemed their own interests
identical with those of their sovereign. Last but far from least among
the elements of approaching ruin was the religious sentiment of the
country. The reader has followed the bitter contentions of earlier
times in Tollan and Culhuacan, between the rival sects of Quetzalcoatl
and Tezcatlipoca. With the growth of the Mexican influence the bloody
rites of the latter sect had prevailed under the auspices of the god
Huitzilopochtli, and the worship of the gentler Quetzalcoatl, though
still observed in many provinces and many temples, had with its priests
been forced to occupy a secondary position. But the people were filled
with terror at the horrible extent to which the latter kings had
carried the immolation of human victims; they were sick of blood, and
of the divinities that thirsted for it; a re-action was experienced
in favor of the rival deities and priesthood. And now, just as the
oppressed subjects of ecclesiastical tyranny were learning to remember
with regret the peaceful teachings of the Plumed Serpent, and to look
to that god for relief from their woes, their prayers were answered,
Quetzalcoatl's predictions were apparently fulfilled, and his promised
children made their appearance on the eastern ocean. The arrival of
Cortés at this particular juncture was in one sense most marvelous;
but in his subsequent success there is little to be wondered at; nor is
it strange that the oppressed Nahuas received almost with outstretched
arms the ministers of the new faith thus offered them by the Spaniards.
FOOTNOTES:
[IX-1] _Tezozomoc_, in _Kingsborough_, vol. ix., pp. 93-8; _Duran_,
MS., tom. i., cap. xl.; _Acosta_, _Hist. de las Ynd._, p. 495;
_Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. i., pp. 326-31; _Ixtlilxochitl_, pp. 265-6.
[IX-2] _Torquemada_, tom. i., p. 182.
[IX-3] _Ixtlilxochitl_, pp. 263, 269-70, 410; _Torquemada_, tom. i.,
pp. 183-4; _Clavigero_, tom. i., pp. 254-5; _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom.
iii., pp. 331-4; _Veytia_, tom. iii., pp. 272-5; _Vetancvrt_,
_Teatro_, pt ii., p. 36. Several authors attribute the completion of
the temple to Ahuitzotl.
[IX-4] _Duran_, MS., tom. i., cap. xl.; _Acosta_, _Hist. de las Ynd._,
p. 495; _Herrera_, dec. iii., lib. ii., cap. xiii.; _Veytia_, tom.
iii., pp. 271, 276-8; _Clavigero_, tom. i., pp. 253-4, 256. This
author gives the date as 1482. _Torquemada_, tom. i., pp. 182-5;
_Vetancvrt_, _Teatro_, pt ii., pp. 36-7; _Sahagun_, tom. ii., lib.
viii., p. 269; _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. iii., pp. 334-5; _Codex Tell.
Rem._, in _Kingsborough_, vol. vi., p. 141, date 1487; _Tezozomoc_, in
_Id._, vol. ix., pp. 98-100; _Ixtlilxochitl_, pp. 265, 267; _Codex
Mendoza_, in _Kingsborough_, vol. v., pp. 47-8. Ixtlilxochitl claims
that Tizoc died a natural death, and that Techotl died during his
reign.
[IX-5] See vol. iv., pp. 377-84.
[IX-6] Brasseur, _Hist._, tom. iii., pp. 337-40, tells us that the
Xiquipilco campaign furnished captives for the coronation, while the
products of the other wars were reserved for the dedication.
Tezozomoc, in _Kingsborough_, vol. ix., pp. 99-108, speaks of the
conquest of some city in Chiapas; while Acosta, _Hist. de las Ynd._,
p. 499, states that a place called Quaxutatlan was taken by means of
an artificial floating island. It is impossible to form from the
authorities any idea of these wars and their chronological order. See,
_Duran_, MS., tom. i., cap. xli.-ii.; _Ixtlilxochitl_, p. 467;
_Sigüenza_, in _Doc. Hist. Mex._, série iii., tom. i., p. 72;
_Vetancvrt_, _Teatro_, pt ii., p. 37; _Clavigero_, tom. i., p. 257;
_Veytia_, tom. iii., p. 278; _Torquemada_, tom. i., p. 186.
[IX-7] On the dedication, see vol. ii., p. 577; _Ixtlilxochitl_, p.
268; _Duran_, MS., tom. i., cap. xliii-iv.; _Motolinia_, in
_Icazbalceta_, _Col. de Doc._, tom. i., p. 254; _Clavigero_, tom. i.,
p. 257; _Torquemada_, tom. i., p. 186; _Vetancvrt_, _Teatro_, pt ii.,
p. 37; _Codex Tell. Rem._, in _Kingsborough_, vol. v., p. 152;
_Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. iii., pp. 341-5. Considering the number of
the victims sacrificed, it is probably more correct to suppose that
several sacrificers were occupied at the same time.
[IX-8] _Hist. Nat. Civ._, tom. iii., pp. 345-6; with reference to
_Torquemada_, tom. i. lib. ii., cap. lxiii. which contains nothing on
the subject.
[IX-9] Tezozomoc, in _Kingsborough_, vol. ix., pp. 109-12, 154, places
the Cuextlan war before the dedication, and calls Chimalpopoca's
successor Tlaltecatzin. See also _Sahagun_, tom. ii., lib. viii., pp.
269-70; _Vetancvrt_, _Teatro_, pt ii., pp. 37-8; _Torquemada_, tom.
i., p. 187; _Veytia_, tom. iii., pp. 294-5; _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom.
iii., pp. 345-7; _Clavigero_, tom. i., p. 258; _Ixtlilxochitl_, p.
268.
[IX-10] _Torquemada_, tom. i., pp. 187, 191; _Clavigero_, tom. i., pp.
258-9; _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. iii., pp. 348-9; _Veytia_, tom. iii.,
pp. 295-6; _Duran_, MS., tom. i., cap. xl.; _Codex Tell. Rem._, in
_Kingsborough_, vol. v., p. 152.
[IX-11] _Torquemada_, tom. i., pp. 278-80; _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom.
iii., pp. 349-52.
[IX-12] _Tezozomoc_, in _Kingsborough_, vol. ix., pp. 120-7; _Duran_,
MS., tom. i., cap. xliv., tom. ii., cap. xlv.; _Brasseur_, _Hist._,
tom. iii., pp. 352-5. This author also refers to Torquemada and
Ixtlilxochitl, who have nothing to say of this war and colony,
although the latter, p. 271, speaks of the conquest of Zapotlan and
Xaltepec, which may have been in the same campaign.
[IX-13] _Ixtlilxochitl_, p. 271.
[IX-14] _Hist. Gen._, tom. ii., lib. ix., pp. 337-8.
[IX-15] _Codex Tell. Rem._, in _Kingsborough_, vol. v., p. 151. The
date is put at 1494 by this document.
[IX-16] See vol. iv., pp. 368-71.
[IX-17] _Burgoa_, _Geog. Descrip. Oajaca_, tom. ii., pt ii., fol. 367,
et seq.
[IX-18] _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. iii., pp. 355-62.
[IX-19] _Hist. Gen._, tom. ii., lib. ix., p. 337, et seq.
[IX-20] _Burgoa_, _Geog. Descrip. Oajaca_, tom. ii., pt ii., fol.
367-76.
[IX-21] _Burgoa_, as in note 20; _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. iii., pp.
362-9. A full account, mostly from Burgoa, is given in the _Soc. Mex.
Geog., Boletin_, tom. vii., pp. 167, 175-7, 183-7. Other authorities
touch very vaguely upon the events related above; most of them utterly
ignoring the defeat of the Aztecs. Duran, MS., tom. ii., cap.
xlvi-vii., liv-v., puts the marriage in Montezuma's reign, and says
that the Tehuantepec king was told by his wife of the plot against his
life by 10,000 soldiers who had entered the capital in small groups as
guests; he caused the whole 10,000 to be put to death. According to
the _Codex Tell. Rem._, in _Kingsborough_, vol. v., p. 153, the king
of Tehuantepec never afterwards allowed a Mexican to set foot in his
country. This document makes Pelaxilla a daughter of Montezuma.
Clavigero, tom. i., p. 262, says that the Aztec forces penetrated
Guatemala at this time, referring to the Xuchiltepec campaign.
Ixtlilxochitl, pp. 268, 271-2, states that the allies took 17,400
captives from the Zapotecs in 1499. According to Remesal, _Hist.
Chyapa_, p. 2, Chiapas was made tributary to Mexico about 1498. See
also for slight references to events that may be connected with these
campaigns in the south-west. _Tezozomoc_, in _Kingsborough_, vol. ix.,
pp. 127-37; _Torquemada_, tom. i., p. 193; _Piñeda_, in _Soc. Mex.
Geog., Boletin_, tom. iii., p. 347.
[IX-22] _Ixtlilxochitl_, pp. 270-1.
[IX-23] On the family affairs of Nezahualpilli, see _Torquemada_, tom.
i., p. 184; _Clavigero_, tom. i., pp. 255-6; _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom.
iii., pp. 372-5; _Ixtlilxochitl_, pp. 265, 267, 271-2; _Vetancvrt_,
_Teatro_, pt ii., pp. 36-7; _Veytia_, tom. iii., pp. 275-6.
[IX-24] Vol. ii., pp. 446-50.
[IX-25] For these and other anecdotes of Nezahualpilli,
see:--_Ixtlilxochitl_, pp. 267, 273-7; _Duran_, MS., tom. ii., cap.
1.; _Torquemada_, tom. i., pp. 180-90; _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. iii.,
pp. 385-92; _Granados y Galvez_, _Tardes Amer._, pp. 48-9.
[IX-26] _Clavigero_, tom. i., pp. 259-60; _Torquemada_, tom. i., p.
191; _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. iii., pp. 375-7; _Veytia_, tom. iii.,
pp. 296-9; _Vetancvrt_, _Teatro_, pt ii., p. 38.
[IX-27] Respecting this flood, see: _Ixtlilxochitl_, pp. 272-3;
_Tezozomoc_, in _Kingsborough_, vol. ix., pp. 137-41; _Torquemada_,
tom. i., pp. 192-3, 293; _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. iii., pp. 377-82;
_Duran_, MS., tom. i., cap. xlviii.-ix.; _Veytia_, tom. iii., pp.
299-302; _Clavigero_, tom. i., pp. 260-2; _Sahagun_, tom. ii., lib.
viii., p. 269; _Vetancvrt_, _Teatro_, pt ii., pp. 38-9; _Acosta_,
_Hist. de las Ynd._, pp. 500-1; _Bustamante_, _Mañanas_, tom. ii., pp.
208-9; vol. ii., p. 566 of this work.
[IX-28] _Torquemada_, tom. i., p. 193; _Clavigero_, tom. i., p. 262.
In the _Codex Mendoza_, in _Kingsborough_, vol. v., p. 48, is given a
list of forty-five towns conquered by Ahuitzotl.
[IX-29] Clavigero and Vetancvrt make the date 1502. Ixtlilxochitl in
one place, p. 457, says 1505.
[IX-30] Duran, MS., tom. ii., cap. li-v., states that the first wars
were directed against Nopallan, Icpatepec, and Toltepec; and that
during the campaign Montezuma ordered the death of the tutors of his
children and the attendants of his wives. Tezozomoc, in
_Kingsborough_, vol. ix., pp. 141-53, adds Huitzpac and Tepeaca to the
towns mentioned by Duran. See also on death of Ahuitzotl and accession
of Montezuma II.: _Clavigero_, tom. i., pp. 262-7; _Torquemada_, tom.
i., pp. 193-5; _Veytia_, tom. iii., pp. 303-9; _Brasseur_, _Hist._,
tom. iii., pp. 382-97; _Ixtlilxochitl_, pp. 265, 277, 457; _Acosta_,
_Hist. de las Ynd._, pp. 501-6; _Herrera_, dec. iii., lib. ii., cap.
xiv.; _Vetancvrt_, _Teatro_, pt ii., p. 29; _Codex Mendoza_, in
_Kingsborough_, vol. v., pp. 51-2; _Gomara_, _Conq. Mex._, fol. 303;
_Sigüenza_, in _Doc. Hist. Mex._, série iii., tom. i., pp. 74-6.
[IX-31] See on the policy and government of Montezuma II., vol. ii. of
this work, passim; also, _Duran_, MS. tom., ii., cap. liii.;
_Tezozomoc_, in _Kingsborough_, vol. ix., pp. 145-6; _Ixtlilxochitl_,
p. 278; _Clavigero_, tom. i., pp. 267-75; _Veytia_, tom. iii., pp.
309-19; _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. iii., pp. 398-402; _Torquemada_,
tom. i., pp. 196, 205-6; _Acosta_, _Hist. de las Ynd._, pp. 505-7;
_Codex Mendoza_, in _Kingsborough_, vol. vi., p. 14; _Vetancvrt_,
_Teatro_, pt ii., p. 39; _Herrera_, dec. iii., lib. ii., cap. xiv.;
_Villa-Señor y Sanchez_, _Theatro_, tom. i., pp. 4-5.
[IX-32] Camargo says the combined armies were beaten at this battle.
Torquemada places the event in the third year of Montezuma's reign.
Ixtlilxochitl, Duran, and Tezozomoc represent Tlacahuepantzin as the
brother of Montezuma, and Ixtlilxochitl implies that he was sent to
this war, placed in 1508, in the hope of his death. This brother is
perhaps the same person spoken of by Ixtlilxochitl on p. 443. Duran
and Tezozomoc seem to regard this as a war against Cholula and
Huexotzinco.
[IX-33] On the war with Tlascala, see: _Clavigero_, tom. i., pp.
275-80; _Torquemada_, tom. i., pp. 197-203; _Veytia_, tom. iii., pp.
320-7; _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. iii., pp. 402-9; _Vetancvrt_,
_Teatro_, pt ii., pp. 40-1; _Camargo_, in _Nouvelles Annales_, tom.
xcviii., pp. 178-86; _Duran_, MS., tom. ii., cap. lvii-lxi.;
_Ixtlilxochitl_, pp. 271, 278; _Tezozomoc_, in _Kingsborough_, vol.
ix., pp. 160-78; _Oviedo_, tom. iii., p. 497.
[IX-34] This famine occurred in the third year of Montezuma's reign,
according to Clavigero; in fourth year, as Torquemada says; and
Ixtlilxochitl puts it in 1505 and 1506. See _Torquemada_, tom. i., pp.
203-4, 235. _Ixtlilxochitl_, p. 278; _Clavigero_, tom. i., pp. 282-3;
_Vetancvrt_, _Teatro_, pt ii., p. 41; _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. iii.,
pp. 409-10; _Veytia_, tom. iii., pp. 331-2; _Sahagun_, tom. ii., lib.
viii., p. 270; _Codex Tell. Rem._, in _Kingsborough_, vol. v., p.
153.
[IX-35] _Clavigero_, tom. i., p. 283; _Veytia_, tom. iii., pp. 332-4;
_Torquemada_, tom. i., pp. 204, 207; _Vetancvrt_, _Teatro_, pt ii., p.
41; _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. iii., pp. 410-11; _Duran_, MS., tom. i.,
cap. lv., lix.; _Tezozomoc_, in _Kingsborough_, vol. ix., pp. 170-1.
[IX-36] Ixtlilxochitl says the war was afterwards carried into
Guatemala and Nicaragua. Brasseur tells us that the treacherous
Cozcaquauhtli was made king of Cohuaixtlahuacan; others say ruler of
Tzotzolan. According to Torquemada, the war was in the fifth year of
the reign, and preceded by an eclipse of the sun. Tezozomoc refers to
a campaign against Xaltepec and Cuatzonteccan in Tehuantepec.
Vetancvrt gives as the date the seventh year of the reign. Clavigero
makes Cozcaquauhtli the brother of Nahuixochitl. See _Torquemada_,
tom. i., pp. 196-7, 207-9, 215; _Clavigero_, tom. i., pp. 275, 283-4;
_Burgoa_, _Geog. Descrip. Oajaca_, tom. ii., pt i., fol. 166-7;
_Vetancvrt_, _Teatro_, pt ii., pp. 41-2; _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom.
iii., pp. 411-17; _Tezozomoc_, in _Kingsborough_, vol. ix., pp. 153-6,
162-4, 180; _Ixtlilxochitl_, pp. 279-80; _Veytia_, tom. iii., pp.
334-7, 359; _Duran_, MS., tom. ii., cap. lxv.
[IX-37] Ixtlilxochitl, p. 278, speaks of a conquest of Zocolan in
1506, and of Totecpec in 1507. Duran, MS., tom. i., cap. lv., speaks
of the conquest, at about this time, of Quatzoutlan and Toltepec,
where Montezuma ordered that all persons over fifty years of age
should be put to death. _Clavigero_, tom. i., pp. 284-6; _Veytia_,
tom. iii., pp. 337-40; _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. iii., pp. 417-20;
_Torquemada_, tom. i., pp. 209-10.
[IX-38] The lighting of the new fire took place at midnight, March
21-2, 1507, at the beginning of the year 2 Acatl, between the days 7
Tochtli and 8 Acatl. _Codex Chimalp._, in _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom.
iii., p. 423. The _Codex Tell. Rem._, in _Kingsborough_, vol. v., pp.
153-4, says that the tie of the years had usually taken place in 1
Tochtli (1506), but was changed by Montezuma to 2 Acatl (1507). Most
other authors name 1506 as the year of the fête; but perhaps they mean
simply that 1 Tochtli the last of the seventh cycle corresponds for
the most part, although not exactly of course, to 1506. See
_Boturini_, in _Doc. Hist. Mex._, série iii., tom. iv., p. 240;
_Veytia_, tom. iii., p. 340; _Torquemada_, tom. i., pp. 210-11;
_Clavigero_, tom. i., pp. 285-6; _Vetancvrt_, _Teatro_, pt ii., p. 41;
see also vol. ii., p. 341, and vol. iii., pp. 393-6.
[IX-39] Brasseur, _Hist._, tom. iii., pp. 427-8, names
Macuilmalinatzin, the brother of Montezuma, among the killed, and
applies, probably with some reason, to this war the suspicions of
Ixtlilxochitl, respecting foul play on the part of the Mexican king
already referred to--(see note 32). See also: _Veytia_, tom. iii., pp.
343-4; _Torquemada_, tom. i., p. 211; _Clavigero_, tom. i., p. 286;
_Ixtlilxochitl_, pp. 278-9; _Tezozomoc_, in _Kingsborough_, vol. ix.,
pp. 171, 177; _Vetancvrt_, _Teatro_, pt ii., pp. 41-2; _Codex Tell.
Rem._, in _Kingsborough_, vol. v., p. 154; _Duran_, MS., tom. ii.,
cap. lxii.
[IX-40] Ixtlilxochitl dates the Amatlan war in 1514; Brasseur puts the
war in 1510; Torquemada denies that the comet had three heads.
[IX-41] This was very likely the occasion already noted when the
Tlatelulcas rushed into the city, supposing it to be invaded.
[IX-42] See pp. 422-4, of this volume; _Torquemada_, tom. i., p. 213.
[IX-43] Clavigero throws discredit on Boturini's version; I find it
difficult to feel implicit faith in that of Clavigero.
[IX-44] Torquemada says in 1499.
[IX-45] On these evil omens, see _Ixtlilxochitl_, pp. 278-80;
_Veytia_, tom. iii., pp. 344-59; _Torquemada_, tom. i., pp. 211-14,
233-9; _Clavigero_, tom. i., pp. 286-92; _Vetancvrt_, _Teatro_, pt
ii., pp. 42-3, 126; _Tezozomoc_, in _Kingsborough_, vol. ix., pp.
177-8, 183-9; _Codex Tell. Rem._, in _Id._, vol. v., p. 154;
_Herrera_, dec. iii., lib. ii., cap. viii., ix.; _Brasseur_, _Hist._,
tom. iii., pp. 428-41; _Acosta_, _Hist. de las Ynd._, pp. 510-14;
_Camargo_, in _Nouvelles Annales_, tom. xcix., pp. 139-40; _Duran_,
MS., tom. ii., cap. lxiii., lxvi-ix.; _Sahagun_, tom. ii., lib. viii.,
pp. 270-1; _Boturini_, _Catálogo_, pp. 27-8.
[IX-46] _Torquemada_, tom. i., p. 214; _Veytia_, tom. iii., p. 361;
_Vetancvrt_, _Teatro_, pt ii., p. 42.
[IX-47] _Hist. Nat. Civ._, tom. iii., pp. 442-7, reference to _Mem. de
Tecpan-Atitlan_.
[IX-48] _Ixtlilxochitl_, pp. 280-1.
[IX-49] _Tezozomoc_, in _Kingsborough_, vol. ix., pp. 168, 181-3;
_Clavigero_, tom. i., p. 293; _Torquemada_, tom. i., pp. 214-15;
_Duran_, MS., tom. ii., cap. lxvi.; _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. iii.,
pp. 448-50; _Herrera_, dec. iii., lib. ii., cap. viii.; _Acosta_,
_Hist. de las Ynd._, p. 511; _Vetancvrt_, _Teatro_, pt ii., pp. 42-3.
[IX-50] It is impossible here to distinguish between references to
Tututepec in Oajaca, and Tototepec, or Totoltepec, north-east of
Mexico. The _Codex Tell. Rem._, in _Kingsborough_, vol. v., p. 154,
mentions in 1512 the conquest of Quimichintepec and Nopala, towards
Tototepec, and also that the stones in that year threw out smoke which
reached the skies. The same authority records the conquest of
Tututepec on the Pacific, and an earthquake in 1513; the conquest of
Hayocingo in 1514, and that of Itzlaquetlaloca in 1515. See
_Ixtlilxochitl_, pp. 278-80, 283-4. This writer also mentions the wars
of Mictlanzinco and Xaltaianquizco as among the last waged by the
Aztec monarchs. _Duran_, MS., tom. ii., cap. lvi. _Clavigero_, tom.
i., pp. 293-4; _Veytia_, tom. iii., pp. 359-60; _Torquemada_, tom. i.,
pp. 214-5; _Vetancvrt_, _Teatro_, pt ii., p. 42.
[IX-51] _Torquemada_, tom. i., pp. 218-19; _Veytia_, tom. iii., pp.
361-3.
[IX-52] Vol. ii., pp. 93-5.
[IX-53] Ixtlilxochitl, p. 280, gives the southern boundaries as
Huimolan, Acalan, Vera Paz, and Nicaragua; the northern as the Gulf of
California and Pánuco; makes the empire cover all the ancient Toltec
territory, and incorrectly includes besides the north-western states,
those of Tabasco and Guatemala. Herrera, dec. ii., lib. vii., cap.
xiii; lib. ix., cap. i.; agrees with the limits I have given, and
shows that Goazacoalco and Tabasco never belonged to the empire.
Aztecs never subdued the region about Zacatecas. _Arlegui_, _Chrón.
Zacatecas_, p. 9. Clavigero, tom. iv., pp. 267-9, tells us that the
empire stretched on the Pacific from Soconusco to Colima; that Chiapas
was only held by a few garrisons on the frontier; that the province of
Tollan was the north-western limit; Tusapan the north-eastern, Pánuco
and the Huastecs never having been subdued; Goazacoalco was the
south-eastern bound.
[IX-54] On Nezahualpilli's death see:--_Torquemada_, tom. i., pp.
216-17; _Ixtlilxochitl_, pp. 282, 388, 410; _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom.
iii., pp. 452-5; _Duran_, MS., tom. ii., cap. lxiv.; _Veytia_, tom.
iii., pp. 363-4; _Clavigero_, tom. i., pp. 294-5; _Tezozomoc_, in
_Kingsborough_, vol. ix., pp. 178-9. Several authors make the date
1516; Duran says ten years before the coming of the Spaniards, or in
1509.
[IX-55] See p. 451 of this volume.
[IX-56] Ixtlilxochitl, pp. 282-3, 410, and Torquemada, tom. i., p.
221, are the chief authorities on the succession of Cacama. The former
records a report, which he doubts, that Nezahualpilli before his death
indicated as his successor a younger son, Yoiontzin. He implies that
Cacama was an illegitimate son and had no claim to the throne, but was
forced on the Acolhua nobles against their will by Montezuma.
Torquemada, on the other hand, makes Cacama the oldest son and
legitimate heir, not mentioning the existence of
Tetlahuehuetquizitzin, and does not imply that Montezuma had any undue
influence in the choice of a new king. Duran, MS., tom. ii., cap.
lxiv., and Tezozomoc, in _Kingsborough_, vol. ix., p. 179, give an
entirely different version of the matter. They say that the Acolhua
lords were summoned to Mexico and invited by Montezuma to select their
new king. When they told him there were five competent sons--only two
of whose names, Cohuanacoch and Ixtlilxochitl, are identical with
those named by other authorities--he advised the election of
Quetzalacxoyatl, who was therefore elected and proved a faithful
subject of the Mexican king. He only lived a few days, however, and
was succeeded by his brother Tlahuitoltzin, and he, after a few years,
by Cohuanacoch, during whose reign the Spaniards arrived. See also,
_Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. iv., pp. 14-21; _Veytia_, tom. iii., pp.
367-9; _Clavigero_, tom. i., pp. 297-9; _Vetancvrt_, _Teatro_, pt ii.,
pp. 43-4; _Herrera_, dec. iii., lib. i., cap. i.
[IX-57] On the voyage of Córdova, see: _Torquemada_, tom. i., pp.
349-51; _Cogolludo_, _Hist. Yuc._, pp. 3-8; _Peter Martyr_, dec. iv.,
lib. i-ii.; _Herrera_, dec. ii., lib. ii., cap. xvii.; _Bernal Diaz_,
_Hist. Conq._, fol. 1-5; _Stephens' Yucatan_, vol. i., pp. 49-52;
_Prescott's Mex._, vol. i., pp. 222-4; _Gomara_, _Hist. Ind._, fol.
60-1.
[IX-58] On Ixtlilxochitl's revolt and the treaty with Cacama, see:
_Veytia_, tom. iii., pp. 369-75; _Clavigero_, tom. i., pp. 299-302;
_Torquemada_, tom. i., pp. 223-7; _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. iv., pp.
21-3, 36-7; _Vetancvrt_, _Teatro_, pt ii., p. 44; _Ixtlilxochitl_, pp.
283-4.
[IX-59] _Camargo_, in _Nouvelles Annales_, tom. xcviii., pp. 189-91;
_Tezozomoc_, in _Kingsborough_, vol. ix., pp. 172-5; _Torquemada_,
tom. i., pp. 197, 201, 228; _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. iv., pp. 23-7;
_Clavigero_, tom. i., pp. 280-2; _Veytia_, tom. iii., pp. 325, 328-31,
375-6; _Vetancvrt_, _Teatro_, pt ii., pp. 45-6.
[IX-60] _Codex Chimalp._, in _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. iii., pp.
34-6.
[IX-61] _Torquemada_, tom. i., p. 228; _Veytia_, tom. iii., pp. 376-7;
_Vetancvrt_, _Teatro_, pt ii., p. 46.
[IX-62] On Grijalva's voyage, see:--_Diaz_, _Itinerario_, in
_Icazbalceta_, _Col. de Doc._, tom. i., pp. 281-307; _Bernal Diaz_,
_Hist. Conq._, fol. 6-11; _Peter Martyr_, dec. iv., lib. iii-iv.;
_Navarrete_, _Col. de Viages_, tom. iii., pp. 55-64; _Gomara_, _Conq.
Mex._, fol. 811, 568; _Herrera_, dec. ii., lib. iii., cap. i-ii.;
_Torquemada_, tom. i., pp. 351-8; _Prescott's Mex._, vol. i., pp.
224-8.
[IX-63] _Torquemada_, tom., i., pp. 378-80; _Acosta_, _Hist. de las
Ynd._, pp. 515-16; _Veytia_, tom. iii., pp. 377-8; _Duran_, MS., tom.
ii., cap. lxix-lxx.; _Tezozomoc_, in _Kingsborough_, vol. ix., pp.
189-94; _Herrera_, dec. ii., lib. iii., cap. ix.
CHAPTER X.
HISTORY OF THE EASTERN PLATEAU, MICHOACAN, AND OAJACA.
Early History of the Eastern Plateau -- The Chichimec-Toltecs
-- Arrival of the Teo-Chichimecs in Anáhuac -- They Conquer
and Settle the Eastern Plateau -- Civil Wars -- Miscellaneous
Events -- Wars between Tlascala and the Nations of Anáhuac
-- Early History of Michoacan -- Wars between Wanacaces and
Tarascos -- Founding of Tzintzuntzan -- Metamorphosis of the
Tarasco Princes -- Encroachments of the Wanacaces -- The King
of the Isles -- Murder of Pawacume and Wapeani -- Reigns of
Curatame, Tariacuri, Tangaxoan I., Ziziz Pandacuare, Zwanga,
and Tangaxoan II. -- Origin of the Miztecs and Zapotecs --
Wixipecocha -- Rulers of Oajaca -- The Huaves and Mijes --
Later Kings and History of Oajaca -- Wars with Mexico.
Although all that is known of the history of the eastern plateau prior
to the fall of the Toltec empire has been already told, it will be well
to briefly review the events of that period before referring to the
Chichimec occupation of the region under consideration.
The earliest inhabitants of the plateau of whom we have any definite
knowledge were the Olmecs, one of the oldest of the Nahua nations, who
appear to have settled the country about Puebla and Cholula with the
permission of the Quinames, or giants, the original possessors, and
to have been so badly treated by them that at length, by a stratagem,
they slew their oppressors and became sole masters of the country. Next
we hear of the erection of the great pyramid of Cholula by Xelhua,
an Olmec chief; then of the advent and subsequent disappearance
of Quetzalcoatl, the culture hero and reformer, who is not to be
confounded with Ceacatl Quetzalcoatl, king of Tollan and afterwards
of Cholula, who appeared on the scene at a much later period and was
also a great reformer. After this, history is silent concerning the
Olmecs until the founding of the Toltec empire, when we find them
still flourishing on the eastern plateau with Cholula for their capital
city. Then the king of Culhuacan, Mixcohua, better known as Camaxtli,
under which name he was subsequently apotheosized and worshiped on
the plateau, directs a military expedition towards Chalchiuhapan,
afterwards Tlascala, which seems to have been founded about this
time. But the most notable event of this pre-Chichimec history of the
plateau, and the one which most advanced its importance and prosperity,
was the coming of Ceacatl Quetzalcoatl, son of Camaxtli, to Cholula,
in 895, after he was forced from his throne at Tollan by the ambitious
Tezcatlipoca, or Huemac. As has been already stated, this event was the
beginning of a new and golden era in the eastern region, which lasted,
if we except the conquest and temporary subjection of Cholula by
Huemac, up to the time of the Toltec troubles, in which Cholula and her
sister cities on the plateau doubtless shared, though to what extent is
not certain; at all events they were not deserted as the Toltec cities
in the valley are traditionally reported to have been at the time of
the Chichimec invasion.
[Sidenote: CHICHIMECS AT CHOLULA.]
Brasseur has an account, drawn from one of his manuscripts,[X-1] of
the taking of Cholula shortly after the fall of the Toltec empire
by a tribe which he calls the Chichimec-Toltecs, and the subsequent
settlement of the greater part of the plateau by this and other fierce
bands, the original inhabitants being driven out of the country. This
relation is, however, of doubtful authenticity, and is, moreover,
irreconcilable with other statements made by the same writer;[X-2] it
seems, in short, to stand by itself, as an episode recorded in one
obscure manuscript only, and having no connection whatever with the
events that precede or follow it. The account relates that among
the fierce hordes that contributed to the downfall of Tollan, was
one which, from the fact of its settling in the ruined capital,
and possibly founding a temporary power there, received the name of
Chichimec-Toltec. After the death of Huemac III. this band left Tollan,
under the leadership of Icxicohuatl, Quetzaltehueyac, Totolohuitzil,
and other chiefs,[X-3] and after ravaging the country about lake
Tenochtitlan, entered the mountains to the east of the valley of
Anáhuac, and there wandered about for a number of years without making
any permanent settlement. When next heard of they were encamped near
Cholula, their numbers greatly reduced by famine or pestilence, and
in a very wretched condition. Weary of their wandering life and not
strong enough to take forcible possession of one of the rich provinces
of the plateau, or even to forage for their subsistence, they resolved
to humble themselves before the princes of Cholula, and implore their
protection and assistance. Their small number and apparently broken
spirit, caused their prayer to be granted with more readiness than they
had expected, and the fierce warriors, who in former times had made
the kings of Anáhuac tremble upon their thrones, were now scornfully
admitted into Cholula as men too weak to be feared and upon the footing
of slaves and servants. But a few years of rest and abundance roused
the old spirit in the Chichimec-Toltecs, and made them burn to throw
off their self-imposed yoke, and avenge the insults to which they
were constantly subjected by their masters. To obtain this end, they
resorted to a very ingenious stratagem, suggested it is said, by their
national god, Tezcatlipoca. A deputation waited upon the Tlachiach
and Aquiach, the two chief princes of Cholula, and begged permission
to give a public entertainment, the chief feature of which should be
their national ballad and dance. For the proper performance of this
they must, however, be supplied with their old weapons, which, since
their arrival in Cholula, had been shut up in the city arsenal. Their
petition was readily granted, great preparations were made, and on the
appointed day all the people assembled to witness the novel spectacle.
The Tlachiach and Aquiach were present, surrounded by their suites and
a vast number of the nobility. The entertainment opened with certain
comic representations, which made the spectators roar with laughter,
and excited them to drink freely and be merry. Then the Chichimec
warriors dressed in full war costume and bearing their weapons in
their hands, formed themselves into a great circle, with the teponaztli
player in the centre, and the solemn _mitote_ commenced. At first the
music was low and sad, and the dancers moved with slow and measured
steps, but gradually the pace grew faster, and the deep voices of the
warriors as they chanted their battle song mingled with the sound of
the teponaztli. Higher and still higher the shouts arose, accompanied
now by terrible gestures and brandishing of weapons; more madly yet
the circle whirled, until it was impossible to distinguish one form
from another; then, on a sudden, the note of the teponaztli changed
and became low and sad once more. This was the signal for the massacre;
in a moment the mock fury became a terrible reality, as the Chichimecs
turned and fell upon the unarmed and half-drunk spectators. A dreadful
slaughter ensued, and the streets of the city ran red with human blood.
The Tlachiach and Aquiach managed to escape, and took refuge with a few
of their relatives and friends within the walls of Yancuitlalpan, which
became for the time their residence. By night the Chichimec-Toltecs
were masters of Cholula. The news of this victory soon attracted
other savage tribes; the original inhabitants were driven from place
to place, and at the end of a few years, the entire country "from the
shores of the gulf of Mexico to the mountains which encircled the port
of Acapulco," had changed masters.[X-4]
* * * * *
[Sidenote: TEO-CHICHIMEC ANNALS.]
With the arrival of the Teo-Chichimecs in Anáhuac, the history proper
of the eastern plateau begins. This people, as has been said, was one
of the invading bands that appear about the same time as the Nahuatlaca
tribes, with whom they are classed by some writers. According to
Camargo, the Tlascaltec historian, they were at Chicomoztoc in 5
Tochtli; thence they journeyed by way of Amaquetepec and Tepenec to
Tomallan, which they conquered; then with great difficulty they fought
their way through Culhuacan, passed into Teotla Cochoalco, and so on to
Teohuiznahuac, where their march was opposed by Queen Coatlicue, who,
however, after a severe struggle was forced to come to terms. They next
advanced to Hueypuchtlan, and then to Tepozotlan, where the principal
chiefs received certain military honors and adopted new names. After
passing with many halts through other provinces they finally arrived
in the vicinity of Tezcuco, in the year 2 Tecpatl, where they were
well received by the king, and assigned the plain of Poyauhtlan as
a place of encampment.[X-5] Veytia states that a great number of the
Teo-Chichimecs, who did not like to settle in a locality surrounded
by so many people, passed on into the country east of the Valley of
Mexico, where they spread over Tlascala, Huexotzinco, and Cholula,[X-6]
which were probably occupied at that time by the remnants of the Olmecs
and Xicalancas, who had formerly been subject to the Toltec empire.
[Sidenote: TEO-CHICHIMEC MIGRATION.]
Notwithstanding the settlers at Poyauhtlan met with no opposition
on their arrival, and even appear to have been well received,
their presence soon became a source of great uneasiness to all the
surrounding nations. At first they behaved themselves well enough,
and as they gave no cause for complaint, were left undisturbed in
their new country for a number of years; but as time progressed, and
their numbers increased, they began to encroach upon and ravage the
adjoining territories. This led to reprisals and bloody encounters,
until at length the evil grew to be unbearable, and was finally put an
end to by the famous battle of Poyauhtlan, and the departure of the
Teo-Chichimecs to join their countrymen upon the eastern plateau, in
the year 1272. Their real reason for leaving the country was doubtless
their weakened condition, for though they had nominally won the battle
of Poyauhtlan, yet it had been but a Cadmean victory for them, and
they knew that another such engagement must infallibly result in
their annihilation. But be this as it may, their god Camaxtli spoke
opportunely through the mouth of his priests, saying, "arise, depart
from hence, for the dawn of your greatness shall not break in this
place, neither shall the sun of your splendor rise here." But the
strongest proof that the Teo-Chichimecs emigrated because their enemies
were too strong for them, lies in the fact that they found it necessary
to ask the king of Tezcuco for permission to leave the country, though
Camargo gives as an excuse for their submission that they wished to be
able to call upon him for assistance, should they meet with reverses
in their intended journey beyond the mountains. The king of Tezcuco,
doubtless delighted to get rid of such troublesome neighbors, not only
gave the desired permission, but granted them safe conduct through his
dominions and furnished them with trusty guides who were to conduct
them by the safest passes to the summit of the range, and thence to
point them out their road toward the east. No time was lost in setting
out, and soon the whole Teo-Chichimec nation was marching eastward.
Their guides led them to the peak of Tlalocan, from which elevation
they overlooked an immense extent of country. Behind them the Lake of
Mexico sparkled in the midst of the valley of Anáhuac, before them lay
the fertile provinces of Tlascala, Huexotzinco, and Cholula. Descending
to the plain they gave vent to their joy in feasts and rejoicings, and
offered thanks to their god Camaxtli, who had delivered them from their
enemies and brought them into such a fair land. It is related, however,
that the entire nation did not ascend the peak. A large party under the
leadership of Chimalcuixintecuhtli refused to climb the great eastern
range, and proceeded northwards to Tulancingo, Quauhchinanco, and
other neighboring provinces which they found to be already colonized by
Macuilacatltecuhtli, a kinsman of Chimalcuixintecuhtli, who welcomed
the wanderers with every mark of friendship, and as an especial token
of his favor conferred wives upon their chiefs.[X-7]
Meantime the larger portion of the emigrants pressed forward into
the eastern country. They seem to have kept together until they
reached a place called Tetliyacac,[X-8] situated near Huexotzinco,
where they separated into several divisions, and dispersed in various
directions. Most of the surrounding cities and provinces fell into
their hands one after another, and before long they had gained
possession of the best part of the country. Thus the province of
Quauhquelchula was appropriated by Toquetzal and Yohuallatonac, and
the town of Coatepec was founded by Quetzalxiuhtli;[X-9] another band
went to Ahuayopan, where a bloody fray took place among them, which
caused a chief named Izcohuatl to separate from the rest and settle
in Zacatlan. Tetzitzimitl founded, or took possession of Totollan;
Quauhtzintecuhtli settled in Atlmayoacan; Cozcaquauh Huehue established
himself in the Teopan district; Tlotlitecuhtli went a little lower
down; Tempatlahuac settled in the Contlan district; Cacamatecuhtli in
the Xaltepetlapan district; Calpan surrendered to Toltecatltecuhtli;
Cimatecuhtli obtained Totomihuacan; Totomalotecuhtli gained possession
of Tepeaca.[X-10]
For several years the Teo-Chichimecs continued to extend their
settlements over the entire plateau. Some of the provinces yielded
without a struggle, others offered a desperate resistance, but though
the invaders occasionally met with a temporary repulse, their arms
were always victorious in the end. At Nacapahuazcan they were visited
by certain Chichimec chiefs who are said to have preceded them on
the plateau, and who instructed the new-comers how to cook meat in
earthen pots which they presented to them.[X-11] Here they conferred the
dignity of Tecuhtli upon a number of warriors who had distinguished
themselves. They next proceeded towards the plain of Cholula, but their
passage through the mountains was opposed by the Tlachiach and Aquiach,
who refused to let them enter their country. They met with a very
haughty response, however, in which the Teo-Chichimecs expressed their
determination to continue their march in spite of all opposition. Upon
this the Cholultec princes retreated, and the invaders advanced without
hindrance. At Tepeticpac, a city strongly fortified by art and nature,
their progress was again stayed by the Olmec prince, Colopechtli,
but after a desperate resistance the city was taken and its brave
defender slain. Struck by the advantageous position of this place, the
Teo-Chichimec leader, Quanez,[X-12] resolved to found his capital here.
The city was first known as Texcalticpac, then as Texcalla, and finally
as Tlaxcallan, or Tlascala.[X-13]
[Sidenote: CONQUEST OF CHOLULA.]
So far everything had gone well with the invaders. While they were
united and occupied themselves only in driving the rightful possessors
from the soil they had experienced a succession of brilliant conquests.
But, as is usual in such cases, they had no sooner got possession of
the country than they began to quarrel among themselves. Quanez was the
first to give rise to a jealous feeling. He had fortified his position
at Tlascala more strongly than ever, and seemed disposed to aim at the
sovereignty of the plateau. To this his brother chiefs at Huexotzinco
and other places would not submit. Each wanted to be independent in
the territory he had won, and they clamored for a distinct division
of the soil. Quanez, however, persisted in his ambitious designs
and soon confirmed their suspicions by his acts. Upon this the other
chiefs held a consultation which resulted in their uniting their forces
and marching upon Tlascala. It seems that they were met by Quanez,
who, however, was defeated in the engagement that ensued and forced
to retreat to his stronghold, where he was closely besieged by his
enemies.[X-14] The Tlascaltecs did not remain shut up within their walls,
however, but made frequent and furious sallies against the besiegers.
The horrors of these engagements, in which fathers fought against sons,
and brothers against brothers, are dilated upon by the historians. All
efforts were unavailing, outpost after outpost was lost to the enemy
until the Tlascaltecs were finally driven within the walls of the city
proper, without any hope of escape. In this extremity Quanez managed to
secretly dispatch messengers to the king of Tezcuco and to the princes
of Xochimilco[X-15] and Xalpan, requesting assistance. The Tezcucan
monarch promptly responded to the call with a considerable force, under
the command of a valiant chief named Chinametl, and at the same time
sent the beleaguered Quanez a valuable alabaster vase as an encouraging
token of regard. This re-inforcement, together with certain prophecies
delivered by the oracle of Camaxtli, re-assured the Tlascaltecs, and
they at once set about strengthening their position.
In the meantime Xiuhtlehui, prince of Huexotzinco, who commanded the
allied troops, seeing the aid obtained by the enemy, and fearing that
the victory which had seemed so certain during the earlier part of the
campaign, was slipping out of his hands, sent messengers to Coxcoxtli,
king of Culhuacan,[X-16] imploring his aid, and expatiating on the
strongest terms on the harm wrought by the Tlascaltecs. Coxcoxtli was
much puzzled how to act; he was on friendly terms with both parties,
and perhaps, as Camargo says, he was afraid of the Tlascaltecs. At
length, after carefully considering the matter, he adopted a very
cautious policy. He instructed the Huexotzinca envoys to tell their
master that he would send an army as required, but no sooner had they
departed than he sent a message to the Tlascaltec chief, greeting him
in the most friendly terms, and informing him of the application he
had received and the promise he had given. This promise, he said, he
was bound to keep, but only as a matter of form; his troops should take
no active part against the Tlascaltecs, who, he begged, in their turn,
would take care not to injure his soldiers.
[Sidenote: WAR BETWEEN TLASCALA AND HUEXOTZINCO.]
Flattered by this proof of friendship, Quanez returned his thanks to
Coxcoxtli with assurances that the latter's troops should suffer no
harm at his hands. The Tlascaltecs then prepared to meet the expected
attack, and all the people attended an elaborate ceremony for the
purpose of beseeching the protection and aid of their god Camaxtli.
The answer of the god was favorable; he exhorted them to take courage
and fear nothing, for they should surely be triumphant, and directed
them to seek for a virgin having one breast larger than the other, and
sacrifice her in his honor, which was done.
On the third day, when the last of the propitiatory ceremonies had been
completed, the Tlascaltecs turned their attention towards the enemy;
and, behold, the hills and plains, far and near, were swarming with
hostile troops. Coxcoxtli's auxiliaries had arrived and were posted
as a reserve on a neighboring mountain, where they remained inactive
during the combat that ensued. At this sight the hearts of the valiant
Tlascaltecs sank within them, and they sought and obtained renewed
assurances of divine favor. Scarcely had they done so when the battle
commenced. At the first shock the Tlascaltecs captured a warrior, who
was hurried to Camaxtli's altar, and sacrificed in their horrible
manner. The battle soon raged furiously, the air was black with
stones, arrows, and javelins, the rocks resounded with the war-cries
of the combatants, blood flowed in torrents. Cheered on by their
high-priest, and strong in their faith in the oracles that had promised
them victory, the Tlascaltecs were irresistible, and soon drove the
enemy before them. Before long the rout became general, and a terrible
carnage ensued, the like of which could be found only, say the annals,
upon the bloody plain of Poyauhtlan. In the meantime Coxcoxtli's troops
descended from the hill from which they had witnessed the whole battle,
and quietly retreated to Anáhuac, without in any way succoring the
defeated army.
This great victory made the Tlascaltecs much respected, and all the
neighboring nations hastened to congratulate Quanez upon his success
and proffer him their alliance, while the conquered people humbly
confessed that they had been in the wrong and prevailed upon the elated
victor to pardon their presumptuous conduct. Thus Tlascala became the
most powerful state on the plateau, a position which it enjoyed for
some time in peace.[X-17]
[Sidenote: EASTERN ALLIANCE.]
It was about this time, or shortly afterward, that disturbances
occurred in Cholula, of which there is more than one account. Brasseur
relates that the ancient inhabitants of the city, who had groaned for
a number of years under the Teo-Chichimec yoke, and whose principal
men had long been in exile, resolved at length to make an effort to
recover their freedom. They applied to Coxcoxtli of Culhuacan for aid,
and as a sure inducement appealed to his piety, by reminding him that
Cholula was in a spiritual sense the daughter of Quetzalcoatl, while
in a temporal sense she was the vassal of the kings of Culhuacan, whom
she had never ceased to venerate as sovereigns. Coxcoxtli granted
their petition and at once sent a force to their assistance. The
Teo-Chichimecs who were in power at Cholula, had leagued themselves
with the Huexotzincas, against Tlascala, but since their humiliation,
for some reason or other, they had concentrated at Quauhquelchula,
where they continued to oppress the followers of Ceacatl. The lineal
descendants of the high-priests of Quetzalcoatl were Iztantzin and
Nacazpipilolxochi; they managed to interest in their favor the prince
of Tlascala, by referring to the great things he had done to the
honor of Camaxtli, and reminding him that this god was the father of
Quetzalcoatl; was it not the duty of the Tlascaltecs, they added, to do
all in their power to restore the ancient worship of the prophet and
deliver his ministers from their banishment. This crafty argument had
the desired effect. An alliance was concluded between the Cholultecs
and the neighboring states of Tlascala, Huexotzinco, Totomihuacan,
Tepeaca, Quauhtecan, and Quauhtinchan, and the exiled ministers of
Quetzalcoatl were solemnly conducted back to the sacred city. The
towns of the territory of Cholula were then subjected to the Toltec
authority, as of old, and the Teo-Chichimecs of Quauhquelchula,
Cuetlaxcoapan, and Ayotzinco, hitherto leagued together against
Iztantzin, were forced to recognize him as their suzerain. These
events occurred between the years 1280 and 1299.[X-18] Veytia's story
of this disturbance in Cholula is that Quauhquelchula, Cuetlaxcoapan,
Ayotzinco, and some other places in the province rose in rebellion
against the high-priest Iztamantzin,[X-19] who called upon Xiuhtemoc,
king of Culhuacan, for assistance. The force furnished by this
monarch was divided into two parts, one led by himself, the other by
Nacazpipilolxochi. With this army the insurgents were finally humbled,
though not without considerable bloodshed, and after the campaign
had lasted nearly a year.[X-20] After the return of its priests Cholula
quickly regained its ancient prosperity. The old laws were enforced
and the executive authority was entrusted to a military chief, who
was assisted in his duties by a council of six nobles, and this form
of government was preserved until the time of the Conquest. From this
time the city was rarely troubled with wars, but was respected and held
in veneration as a sacred place of pilgrimage by all the surrounding
peoples.[X-21]
The peace which followed the victory over the Huexotzincas and their
allies gave the Tlascaltecs an opportunity to turn their attention
to more peaceful pursuits. Their position as leading nation on the
plateau was now assured, and for a time they devoted themselves to the
furtherance of culture and commerce, fixing boundaries and granting
lands to those who had deserved them by their conduct in the late wars.
After remaining under one head for several years the government took
the form of a sort of aristocratic republic. It was about this time
that Tlascala was divided into four wards, or districts. Quanez had a
brother named Teyohualminqui, to whom, in his old age, he made over the
district of Ocotelulco,[X-22] giving him at the same time a part of the
relics of Camaxtli, which were so highly venerated as to constitute in
themselves a gift no less princely than the lands.
[Sidenote: REIGN OF QUANEZ.]
This prince so distinguished himself and enlarged his domain by his
bravery and conquests that he eventually came to be regarded as chief
of the whole nation. Another district, called Quiahuiztlan,[X-23] was
granted by Quanez to a chief named Mizquitl, who, according to Camargo,
had been one of the leaders of the Chichimecs who went north after the
battle of Poyauhtlan instead of crossing the eastern range. He had
led his band northwards to Tepetlaoztoc, whence he had subsequently
come to Tlascala, arriving there in time to assist Quanez against
the Huexotzincas. It was for this service that the district was
awarded him. These were three of the four wards, for the part that
Quanez reserved for himself formed one, probably the largest at that
time, and was called Tepeticpac. The history of the events which led
to the foundation of the fourth district is much confused. Camargo
relates that Acatentehua, grandson of Teyohualminqui, and third lord
of Ocotelulco, after reigning mildly for some time, suddenly became
tyrannical. Tlacomihua, one of his nobles, raised a revolt, killed
him, and succeeded to the throne of Ocotelulco. These events led to
the disaffection of one Tzompane, who went with his followers to a
part of Tepeticpac, and there established a separate government. He was
succeeded by his son Xayacamachan, otherwise called Tepolohua, who was
afterwards massacred, together with all his relations. The next rulers
were Aztoguihua Aquiyahuacatl and Zococ Aztahua Tlacaztalli, the latter
of whom went with his followers to the heights of Tianazatlan, where he
founded Tcatlaiz. His grandson, Xicotencatl, was reigning at the time
of Cortes' arrival.[X-24] According to Brasseur, who follows Torquemada
principally, a number of the inhabitants of the two oldest quarters,
Tepeticpac and Ocotelulco, finding themselves too crowded, descended
into the neighboring valley of Teotlalpan, where they constituted a
separate government under a chief named Tepolohua.[X-25] The number of
people that deserted the higher districts for the pleasant valley,
excited the jealousy of the other chiefs. They united their forces,
descended upon the young settlement, and killed Tepolohua. The
followers of the late chief then departed to Tizatlan where they
founded a seigniory which continued to thrive in peace up to the reign
of Xicotencatl, who was ruling when the Spaniards came. At Tepeticpac
the descendants of Quanez continued to reign, and were regarded as
ranking first in the state. It was at this epoch that the united
districts of Tlascala adopted the peculiar form of government described
in a former volume,[X-26] and that Nezahualcoyotl paid his first visit to
the republic, in 1420.
The history of the plateau grows very dim and disconnected from this
time on, and has light thrown upon it only here and there, as it
happens to be connected with the more important affairs of the Aztec
empire, which seems to have engrossed the attention of the historians.
[Sidenote: MISCELLANEOUS EVENTS.]
Almost all that is known of the events that remain to be recorded has
already been told. We have seen that in 1428 Nezahualcoyotl, fleeing
for his life from Maxtla, took refuge for a second time in Huexotzinco
and Cholula, and was aided by the people of these and other places on
the plateau to recover his father's throne at Tezcuco.[X-27] In 1451-6
came the great famine, when the terrible compact was made between
the people of the plateau and those of Anáhuac for the provision of
human sacrifices.[X-28] Then followed the war between the Miztecs and
the allied powers, in which the Tlascaltecs and Huexotzincas espoused
the cause of the former.[X-29] We next find the restless Tlascaltecs
stirring up a war between the Mexicans and the Olmecs of Cuetlachtlan,
allying themselves with the latter and sharing in their defeat.[X-30]
Shortly before the year 1460 several important cities upon the
southern part of the plateau, at the instigation of the Tlascaltecs and
Huexotzincas, killed some Mexican merchants, were instantly attacked
by the powers of the valley, reduced to the rank of Mexican provinces,
and appended to Montezuma's empire.[X-31] About the year 1469 Axayacatl,
the Mexican monarch, having some cause of complaint against the people
of Huexotzinco and Atlixco, invaded their country, and in the battle
that ensued the Mexicans, encouraged by the miraculous appearance
of Tezcatlipoca, routed their enemies.[X-32] During the reign of
Nezahualpilli, Huexotzinco was again troubled, the reason for the war
this time being, as we have seen, the predictions of the astrologers
that Huehuetzin was fated to vanquish the Tezcucan monarch--predictions
which Nezahualpilli falsified, in their literal meaning at least,
by a stratagem.[X-33] Ahuitzotl of Mexico is said by Camargo to have
invaded the plateau and conquered Huexotzinco and Cholula,[X-34] and
it would appear that this fierce king did not leave the country empty
handed, for of the eighty thousand human victims immolated by him at
the dedication of the temple of Huitzilopochtli in 1487, we read that
sixteen thousand were Huexotzincas.[X-35] His own nephew was afterwards
taken captive in one of the numerous battles or skirmishes which seem
to have been constantly occurring on the borders of the plateau,
principally at Atlixco, and offered as a sacrifice on the altar of
Camaxtli.[X-36] In 1498, an altercation arose between the lords of
Cholula and Tepeaca, which led to a series of combats between those
states. The Cholultecs sought and obtained the aid of Ahuitzotl, and
we are left to suppose that they then triumphed over their enemies. But
the Mexican emperor received a severe check soon afterwards at Atlixco.
The close proximity of that town to the valley made it desirable for
annexation to the empire. Ahuitzotl accordingly entered its territory
suddenly with a considerable force. The Atlixcas gathered what troops
they could to oppose the Mexicans, and at once dispatched messengers to
their allies at Huexotzinco for aid. One of the Huexotzinca captains,
named Tultecatl, who was playing at ball when the news arrived, hurried
off with a few followers to the scene of combat without even taking
time to arm himself. Without hesitation he plunged into the thick of
the fight, slew a warrior with his hands, seized his arms, and threw
himself with such fury upon the Mexicans that they were soon routed
and forced to abandon the field. For this valorous conduct Tultecatl
was made ruler of a Huexotzinca town. But in little more than a year
events occurred which obliged him to retire from his post. For some
time past the priests of his town had been indulging all manner of
excesses with impunity; entering and pillaging houses with the greatest
effrontery; taking away the women's clothes while they were bathing;
insulting the men; and, in short, taking advantage of their sacred
character to commit every conceivable species of outrage. Tultecatl
attempted to put a stop to this disorder, and punish its authors. For
this purpose he armed a number of the most respectable citizens. But
the priests also took up arms, and excited the populace in their favor.
It is said that Camaxtli aided his servants by various enchantments,
which so frightened the citizens that they retreated in dismay. A great
number of the nobles with their followers, then betook themselves to
Itzcohuatl, lord of a neighboring province, to whom they related the
cause of their leaving Huexotzinco. But Itzcohuatl was a creature of
Ahuitzotl, at whose hands he had received the lordship he now enjoyed;
he betrayed the refugees to his master, by whom they were all put to
death.[X-37]
[Sidenote: ADVENTURES OF TULTECATL.]
Immediately after the accession of Montezuma II., Atlixco became once
more the seat of war. This unfortunate city seems to have been regarded
by the kings of the valley as the proper place to attack whenever they
required human victims for sacrifice. It was customary for the kings
of Anáhuac before they were formally crowned to make a raid upon some
neighboring nation for the purpose of obtaining captives that their
blood might grace the coronation ceremonies. This was the cause of
Montezuma's expedition against Atlixco on the occasion above referred
to. He accomplished his end and returned with a great number of
prisoners, though the victory seems to have been dearly gained. But the
armies of the haughty Montezuma were not always triumphant when they
encountered the stronger nations of the plateau, and a short time after
the victory at Atlixco they received a serious check at the hands of
the Tlascaltecs.
[Sidenote: WAR BETWEEN TLASCALA AND MEXICO.]
For a long time Tlascala had been regarded with much jealousy by the
Huexotzincas, Cholultecs, and other nations of the plateau, both
because of its great commercial prosperity, and of its successful
resistance to the conquering kings of the valley. The Tlascaltecs seem
at this period to have given up all hopes of gaining the sovereignty
of the entire region--so long the object of their ambition--and to
have confined their resources to strengthening their own position,
and fortifying their frontiers. Almost all the neighboring states
appear at this time to have been either allied to or conquered by the
powers in the valley, and consequently the defensive measures adopted
by the republic for the preservation of its independence fanned their
smouldering envy into flame, so that they took every opportunity to
provoke a quarrel between Tlascala and the kings of Anáhuac. They
represented that the Tlascaltecs designed to possess themselves of the
eastern maritime provinces; that they hindered the merchants of the
other nations from trading in those regions, by making secret treaties
with the inhabitants. Only too glad of an excuse to humble his ancient
enemies, the Mexican monarch was easily prevailed upon to break up
the Tlascaltec trade in the east, and this he did so effectually that
for a number of years the people of the republic were deprived of the
luxuries and even some of the necessaries they had previously enjoyed.
At length, weary of these privations, yet not strong enough to better
their condition by force, they dispatched an embassy to the Mexican
king to inquire the cause of an enmity which they had done nothing to
provoke. For answer, they were told contemptuously that the monarch
of Mexico was lord of the entire world, and they must pay tribute to
him or be prepared to take the consequences. To this they returned a
haughty reply, saying that their nation had never payed tribute to any
earthly king, and that before submitting to do so now they would shed
more blood than their ancestors had shed at Poyauhtlan. They then once
more turned all their attention to strengthening their position, and
it was probably at this period, says Clavigero, that they built the
six-mile wall on the east side of the city. They received considerable
assistance from the numerous Zacatec, Chalca, and Otomí refugees, of
whom the garrisons on the frontier were chiefly composed. But the
privations which they suffered by reason of the stoppage of their
intercourse with the surrounding peoples, constantly increased, and
for over sixty years, says Torquemada, salt and other staples were
unknown to the poorer classes, at least, though the nobles may have
fared somewhat better.[X-38] The date of these events is not certain, but
they probably occurred during the reign of Axayacatl. From the time
of the defiance recorded above until the accession of Montezuma II.,
there appear to have been no important hostilities between the Mexicans
and Tlascaltecs, but no sooner had Montezuma ascended the throne of
Mexico than he determined to make a grand effort to humble the stout
little republic, and forthwith issued a proclamation commanding all
his subjects and allies to assist in a general attack. At this time the
four lords of Tlascala were Maxixcatzin, who ruled in the district of
Ocotelulco; Xicotencatl, in Tizatlan; Teohuayacatzin, in Quiahuiztlan;
and Tlehuexolotl, in Tepeticpac. Fifteen years afterwards these four
princes received Cortés and his companions within their walls. The
Huexotzincas and Cholultecs were the first to begin the war, which
may be said to have lasted until the coming of the Spaniards. Failing
to bribe the Otomí garrison of Hueyotlipan, on the Tezcucan frontier,
to betray their trust, they invaded the Tlascaltec territory under
the command of Tecayahuatzin of Huexotzinco, and advanced as far as
Xiloxuchitla, within a league of the capital. Here they were met by
Tizatlacatzin, a noble chief of Ocotelulco, who with a mere handful
of warriors succeeded in checking their farther advance, though at the
price of his own life.[X-39] The Tlascaltecs hastened to avenge the death
of their brave leader by laying waste the province of Huexotzinco.
Shortly afterwards they again encountered the Huexotzincas on the
heights of Matlalcueje, and pressed them so hard that Tecayahuatzin
sent off in haste to Montezuma for re-inforcements. The Mexican
monarch at once responded with a large force under the command of
Tlacahuepantzin, his eldest son.[X-40] After receiving re-inforcements
at Quauhquelchula Tlacahuepantzin proceeded by way of Atlixco valley
to effect a union with the Huexotzincas, but the Tlascaltecs, seeing
that this must be prevented at all hazards, bore down upon him before
he could join his allies with such fury that his army was scattered
in all directions. In this battle Tlacahuepantzin was slain and a
great spoil fell into the hands of the victors, who probably suffered
severely also, as they now returned to their capital to recuperate. But
it seems[X-41] that they still managed to keep the Huexotzincas penned
up on the heights of Matlalcueje, where they again attacked them with
fresh forces the following year. But the delay had also given the
Huexotzincas time to recuperate, and to strengthen their naturally
advantageous position, so that the worst the Tlascaltecs could do was
to ravage the country, and this they did with such effect that many
of the Huexotzincas were eventually compelled to migrate to Mexico
in quest of food. Tezozomoc makes this a more serious affair. When
the Huexotzincas, he says, were hard pressed by the Tlascaltecs, the
children and aged of the former people were invited to take refuge
in Mexico while the Mexicans with their allies set out to assist the
Huexotzincas. For twenty days Tlahuicol, the Tlascaltec general, fought
bravely, retreating at the same time before the superior number of the
enemy. Finally he was captured in a marsh, his army scattered, and the
land restored to the Huexotzincas.[X-42]
[Sidenote: ADVENTURES OF TLAHUICOL.]
When Montezuma heard of the defeat of his troops by the Tlascaltecs and
the death of his son he was furious, and in a public speech declared
that he had hitherto permitted the republic to exist as a supply of
captives for sacrifice and for the exercise of his armies[X-43] but
that now he was determined to utterly annihilate the presumptuous and
obstinate little state now and forever. The people surrounding Tlascala
were ordered to renew the attack on all sides in conjunction with
the Aztec troops. But the Tlascaltecs were, as usual, well prepared,
and with the aid of the Otomí frontier population, they gained a
glorious victory, and rich spoils. At the festivities which ensued
in Tlascala, the leaders of the Otomí auxiliaries were rewarded with
the title of tecuhtli, while the defeated Mexican captains were, by
Montezuma's orders, deprived of their rank and privileges.[X-44] Thus
the brave Tlascaltecs preserved their independence in spite of the
united efforts of their enemies until the coming of Cortés, when it was
their assistance and implacable animosity to the Mexicans that made it
possible for a handful of adventurers to conquer a world.
[Sidenote: WAR BETWEEN TEZCUCO AND TLASCALA.]
The above-recorded events occurred about 1505. During the same year,
the Huexotzincas and Cholultecs fell out. In an engagement which ensued
the former put their enemies to flight and pursued them into Cholula,
where they killed a few citizens and did some trifling damage to the
temples. Anxious to carry this version of the quarrel to Montezuma
before the Cholultecs could tell him another story, they at once
despatched an embassy to the emperor. But the messengers mistook their
rôle, and in their anxiety to extol the valor of their countrymen
they lead Montezuma to believe that the Cholultecs had been utterly
annihilated and their city destroyed. The emperor was much disturbed at
this news, because he had always been accustomed to regard it as a holy
city, secure from destruction. Upon inquiry, however, he learned the
true facts, and at once sent a powerful army to punish the Huexotzincas
for the deception they had practiced upon him. The Huexotzincas
marched out to meet the imperial troops, but an explanation ensued,
and the lying ambassadors having been properly punished, Montezuma was
pacified.[X-45] In 1507 the Huexotzincas, as we have seen,[X-46] became
embroiled with the Mexicans once more, on account of their burning
the lighthouse at Acachinanco--an offense for which they were severely
chastised by Montezuma's troops.
A war between Tezcuco and Tlascala, which took place a very few years
before the conquest, is the latest recorded event in which the people
of the plateau were concerned, prior to the coming of the Spaniards.
On this occasion Nezahualpilli was urged by Montezuma to join him
in making war upon the Tlascaltecs, for the purpose of obtaining
victims for sacrifice. It seems that the Mexican monarch was jealous
of the greatness of his Tezcucan rival, and planned this war for his
destruction.[X-47] Nezahualpilli, however, suspecting no harm from his
colleague, set out with his army towards Tlascala, and camped in the
ravine of Tlalpepexic. Montezuma had in the meantime sent word to
the Tlascaltecs of the threatened invasion, informing them at the
same time that though he was bound, as a matter of form, to accompany
Nezahualpilli, his troops would not aid him but rather favor the
Tlascaltecs. The latter accordingly formed an ambuscade in the ravine
of Tlalpepexic, and in the morning, just as the Tezcucans, warned
by certain evil omens of the impending danger, were breaking camp in
great haste, they fell upon them furiously, and routed them with great
slaughter.
From the eastern plateau we turn now to the kingdom of Michoacan, which
lay to the west of Anáhuac. The boundaries of this flourishing state,
as they existed at the time of the Conquest, may be easily defined. On
the north and north-east the rivers Tololotlan, Pantla, and Coahuayana
separated Michoacan from Tonala and Colima; on the west the shores
of the Pacific stretched south to Zacatollan; the winding course of
the river Mexcala marked the southern frontier; and on the east lay
the Mexican provinces of Cohuixco and Matlaltzinco. The face of the
country enclosed within these limits presents a series of undulating
plains, intersected by numerous mountain chains of varying height. The
climate is temperate, the land fertile, well wooded and watered, and
was celebrated, even in pre-Spanish times, for its mines of gold and
silver.
[Sidenote: EARLY TARASCO ANNALS.]
It is a singular fact that the Tarascos, the representative people
of Michoacan, though they were certainly equal, if not superior, to
their Aztec neighbors in civilization, wealth, and power, have left
no record of their history anterior to the thirteenth century, while
even the little that is known of their later history is told chiefly
by Aztec chroniclers. The origin of the Tarascos[X-48] is consequently
an unsolved problem. Their civilization seems to have been of the
Nahua type, though their language was totally distinct from the Aztec,
the representative Nahua tongue.[X-49] It is a prevalent opinion that
Michoacan formed part of the Toltec empire, and that though from
its position it was the first to suffer from the invading tribes,
yet it was not affected by the causes which overthrew the empire
to such an extent as the valley of Anáhuac; thus this theory would
make the Tarascos the very best representatives of the oldest Nahua
culture.[X-50] Orozco mentions the Tecos as being among the earliest
inhabitants of Michoacan; the subsequent possessors, he says, took
the country from this people about the time that the Toltecs settled
in Tollan.[X-51] Tello speaks of the Culhuas coming from Aztlan, the
home of the Nahuatlacas, and settling in Sonora, Jalisco, and as
far south as Etzatlan and Tonala. Gil, commenting on this, expresses
a belief that there was a succession of early migrations into this
western and north-western region. Thus the Culhuas came from the west
and extended along the coast to Zacatollan. They were followed by the
Coras, who settled in Acaponeta Valley and as far as Zentipac. Then
came the Thorames, who conquered the previous settlers and drove them
to Nayarit. Afterwards various Aztec tribes arrived from the north. The
first immigrants appear to have been the most civilized, and occupied
Tuitlan Valley, founding the city of that name. The next comers erected
the Teul temple. Last of all came a ruder people, who destroyed the
young culture in places.[X-52] But these accounts of the earliest
occupation of Michoacan are very meagre and unsatisfactory. The
authorities nearly all tell the story of the Aztecs in their migration
from the Seven Caves to the valley of Anáhuac, passing through this
region and encamping on the shores of Lake Patzcuaro, where they
quarrel, in the manner already related,[X-53] and separate, one portion
proceeding to Anáhuac, and the other, bearing the name Tarascos,
remaining and settling the country.[X-54] As I have already remarked,
however, no faith can be placed in this story. The total dissimilarity
in language shows the Tarascos to have been a people entirely distinct
from the Mexicans. It must not, however, be thought from this that
there was any relationship between the Toltec and Tarasco languages. We
have already seen that many nations adopted Nahua institutions, who did
not speak Nahua dialects.
Herrera states that Michoacan was occupied, during its later years,
by four peoples, each having a different origin and language, namely,
Chichimecs, Mexicans, Otomís, and Tarascos.[X-55] Of these, says
Brasseur, the Chichimecs were savage tribes who lived on the north-east
frontier. Though they would not conform to the rules of civilized life,
yet they recognized the sovereignty of the Tarasco princes, and lent
them their aid in time of war. Their language was the Pame, which is
spoken at the present day by the tribes living in the mountains of
Tzichu, north-east of Guanajuato. The Mexican population was composed
of those Nahuas who had separated from their companions on the march,
or who had from various causes been forced to flee from Anáhuac. The
Otomís were the primitive nations who dwelt in the valleys west of
Anáhuac, including the Mazahuas on the north, and the Matlaltzincas on
the south-west.[X-56]
An anonymous manuscript written for Don Antonio de Mendoza, viceroy
of New Spain, formerly belonging to the Peter Force collection, in
Washington, and quoted by Brasseur de Bourbourg, contains nearly all
that is known of the early history of Michoacan.
[Sidenote: CHICHIMEC OCCUPATION.]
At the period when the Chichimecs first made their appearance in
Anáhuac and the surrounding regions, Michoacan was settled and its
people were civilized. At that time the country was divided into a
great number of little states, and the people of the principal of these
called themselves Betamas and Ezcomachas. The most powerful of all
the chiefs was the king of the isles of Patzcuaro, who bore the title
of El Henditare, 'lord above all,' and had subjected a number of the
surrounding peoples, including some Chichimec tribes, to his authority.
A little to the north of the lake was the independent town and
territory of Naranjan, which was governed by a chief named Ziranziran
Camaro. It is in the neighborhood of this town that we first meet with
the wild Chichimec Wanacaces,[X-57] led by their chief Iri Ticatame, who
bore by virtue of his office the image of their god Curicaneri. All we
know of the original home of this people is that, according to their
own account, they came from a distant land called Bayameo. They were
a wandering race of daring hunters, and seem to have had no particular
object in coming to Michoacan other than to find good hunting-grounds.
Upon arriving at the borders of the forest of Wiriu Quarampejo, within
sight of the city of Naranjan, they halted and built a great altar to
their gods as a token that they had found the kind of country they
wanted and intended to settle there. The presence of the strangers
created a great deal of alarm among the original inhabitants, and this
was increased when Iri Ticatame sent word to Ziranziran Camaro that
his people must bring fuel to the altar of Curicaneri. Such an insolent
demand showed unmistakably that their intentions were not peaceful; and
the priests, who in Michoacan had the greatest influence in secular
as well as ecclesiastical affairs, at once began to propitiate the
gods with sacrifice and prayer, without seeming to think for a moment
of the expediency of even parleying with the invaders. But Ziranziran
Camaro was more prudent, and calling his hot-headed ministers before
him he pointed out to them the hopelessness and folly of engaging in
a war with the Wanacaces. The invaders, he argued, would never have
dared to make such a demand unless they had been confident of their
power to enforce it; it was better to conciliate them than to risk
the consequences of an open rupture; finally he proposed that a noble
lady, one of his own relations, should be given as a wife to Iri
Ticatame. His advice was taken; the people of Naranjan hastened to
carry provisions and clothing to the strangers; the lady was conducted
to the wild chief's hut; and the barbarians were appeased.
Of this marriage was born a son named Sicuiracha, who was destined
to play an important part in the history of his country. When he was
old enough to leave his mother he was entrusted to the care of the
priests, to be instructed in all those things which it was necessary
for a youth of his country to know. One of his principal duties was to
kill game in the forests and bring it to the altars for sacrifice. It
happened one day when he was hunting to supply a special feast with
offerings, that the quarry escaped to the fields of Quierecuaro, but
being mortally wounded it died there, and was found by some women who
were gathering maize for the same festival. Now, it seems that to wound
game without killing it instantly was thought to forebode evil to the
hunter, so that when the news of the discovery was carried to the lord
of Naranjan, he at once foresaw the downfall of the Wanacaces, and
lost no time before taking council with his priests and nobles upon
the subject. It was not long before these things reached the ear of
Iri Ticatame, and he appears to have shared in the superstition, for he
resolved to change his place of abode without delay. Having announced
his intention to his tribe, he departed with his family and the image
of Curicaneri to a place named Quereqto, which does not seem to have
been far distant; his wife also took her god, Wasoricuare, wrapped up
in a rich cloth, to her new home.[X-58] Soon afterwards he moved again
to Zichajucuero, three leagues from the city of Tzintzuntzan, where he
erected a temple and altars.
In the meantime Sicuiracha had grown up and had become a brave warrior
and skillful hunter; but his father was now old, while his followers
had lost their ancient fierceness and energy by long repose. The people
of Naranjan had never forgotten the humiliation they had suffered when
the Wanacaces first arrived. Now the time seemed ripe for vengeance.
[Sidenote: IRI TICATAME AND ORESTA.]
At that time a very powerful prince named Oresta was reigning at
Cumachen. An embassy, laden with costly presents, was sent to him from
Naranjan, requesting his assistance to drive the Wanacaces out of the
country. Oresta had as much reason as any to fear the interlopers,
and he readily entered into the scheme. The united forces then marched
rapidly and secretly against the place where Iri Ticatame was dwelling,
intending to surprise him before he could call upon his warriors.
On the borders of the lake they met his wife, who, comprehending the
situation at a glance, attempted to run and warn her husband. But they
caught her and reproached her with wishing to betray her own people,
and prevent them from taking a just vengeance on their enemies. She
was a better wife than patriot, however; and eluding the grasp of those
who detained her, she fled to warn Iri Ticatame. She arrived too late;
the allied troops reached the town before her, and at once began the
assault. The venerable chief of the Wanacaces, attacked and surrounded
in his own house, defended himself valiantly for some time, but at last
overpowered by numbers, he fell dead upon a heap of slain. His wife
came up just at this moment, and in spite of all that could be done to
prevent her, the devoted woman cast herself upon the body of the fierce
old chief and refused to be removed or comforted. The victors then set
fire to the place and retired, carrying with them the idol Curicaneri.
Ignorant of the misfortune which had fallen upon his house, Sicuiracha
was hunting in a forest at some distance from the doomed town when the
news was brought to him. He at once hastened to the spot, but arrived
only to find his mother weeping upon the body of his father, amid the
blazing buildings. Filled with rage at the sight, and thirsting for
vengeance, he wasted no time in useless mourning, but calling together
the few warriors who had escaped the massacre, he started in pursuit of
the enemy. His force was so small that this seemed an act of madness;
but fortune favors the brave. Elated with their victory, or as the
old chronicle has it, prompted by the god they had stolen, the allied
troops had given themselves up to drunkenness, and in this state the
avengers found them. The idol stood neglected at the foot of an oak;
seizing this, the Wanacaces rushed furiously upon their fallen foes.
A great number were massacred, and the rest were carried in triumph
to Wayameo, where Sicuiracha dwelt. For some time they were kept in
the condition of slaves, but eventually they were released upon the
understanding that their chiefs should recognize the supremacy of
Sicuiracha, who now formally took the title of king. The new monarch
rapidly increased his territory by conquering and annexing the numerous
petty states that lay around it; he built several temples, notably
one to Curicaneri, whom he regarded as the author of his greatness;
increased the number of priests, and erected dwellings for them about
the temples; enforced religious observances; and established his
capital at Wayameo, where, after a long and glorious reign, he died,
leaving the kingdom to his two sons, Pawacume and Wapeani.
[Sidenote: THE TARASCOS ON LAKE PATZCUARO.]
Shortly after the accession of these princes, events occurred in the
flourishing region lying north of Wayameo, on the southern shore of
Lake Patzcuaro, which affected the condition of the entire country,
and eventually added greatly to the power of the Wanacace kings.
The capital of this region was Tzintzuntzan. The chronicle I have
hitherto followed gives no account of the origin of this city; but
other authors, who in their turn make no mention of the events above
recorded, furnish a story of its foundation, which I will relate here,
before continuing the more consecutive narrative.
After the separation of the Tarascos from their Aztec brethren, says
Beaumont, the former, resolving to settle, began at once to till the
ground and sow the seeds that they had brought with them. They then
proceeded to elect a king from among their bravest warriors. So highly
was this quality of courage esteemed by them that even the later kings,
who succeeded to the throne by inheritance, were not allowed to wear
certain jewels and ornaments until they had earned the right to do
so by capturing a prisoner in battle with their own hands. Under the
administration of such energetic men the people progressed rapidly,
both in wealth and power; commerce was encouraged and the arts and
sciences flourished. But they especially excelled in feather-work,
for which the splendid plumage of the birds of the country furnished
abundant material.[X-59] This curious art is said to have been suggested
by the phenomenon which led to the founding of their capital. When
the Tarascos first halted on the southern shore of Lake Patzcuaro,
they placed their principal idol in a pleasant spot that the god
might repose, when, behold, a multitude of birds of gorgeous plumage
congregated in the air and formed a brilliant shade or canopy above
the sacred image. This was at once hailed as a divine indication that
they should found their city here, and at the same time it suggested
the feather mosaics for which they afterwards became so famous. In
commemoration of this miraculous manifestation of the divine will the
city was named Tzintzuntzan, 'place of celestial birds.'[X-60]
Little or nothing is known of the history of Tzintzuntzan from this
time until it is again brought into notice by the events to which
I have alluded as occurring shortly after Sicuiracha was succeeded
by his sons on the throne at Wayameo. Granados, it is true, states
that nineteen kings ruled over the Tarascos from the time of their
settlement down to the conquest, but he gives no account of any of
them, while Beaumont complains that he is able to find records of three
only, namely, Characu, 'the boy king,' Zwanga,[X-61] and the son of the
latter, Tangaxoan,[X-62] better known by the name of Caltzontzin, 'he
who is always shod,' to distinguish him from those other rulers who,
being vassals of the Aztec monarch, appeared bare-footed before their
suzerain.[X-63] At what period the boy king lived it is impossible to
tell, but as the other two certainly reigned at a later date than our
story has yet reached, they may all be referred to hereafter.
[Sidenote: THE GODDESS XARATANGA.]
Let us now return to the anonymous narrative. At the time of
Sicuiracha's death at Wayameo, three brothers named Tarigaran,
Pacimwane, and Sucurawe were reigning in the region of which
Tzintzuntzan was the capital. On a hill overlooking the lake stood the
temple of their chief divinity, the goddess Xaratanga, whose son was
named Manowapa. Now, the priests of this goddess obtained the wood
which they burned in the temple from the forest of Atamataho, close
to Wayameo, and they frequently took advantage of their proximity
to the temple of Curicaneri to carry wood there, a courtesy which
the Wanacace priests returned by occasionally bearing fuel to the
sanctuary of Xaratanga. It happened one day, when the feast of the
goddess was approaching, that Tarigaran and his two brothers, with
their attendants, went to the temple to assist the priests to decorate
the idol. But the princes had been drinking deeply, and the goddess,
perceiving this, punished them for their irreverence by making them
very drunk. Then the brothers became alarmed, and sent their women to
the lake to procure fish, by eating which they hoped to dissipate the
fumes of the liquor. But the outraged goddess had hidden the fish,
and the women succeeded only in catching a large serpent, which they
carried to the priests, who cooked it and ate of it together with the
princes, at sunset. But no sooner had the strange food passed their
lips than, to their horror, they all found themselves turned into
serpents. Filled with terror and dismay they plunged into the lake and
swam towards the mountain of Tiriacuri, amid the recesses of which they
disappeared upon landing.
The territory of Tzintzuntzan being now bereft of its chief priests
and princes offered an easy prey to its Wanacace neighbors, and
several chiefs, probably vassals of the kings of Wayameo, soon began
to encroach upon its borders. Tarapecha Chanhori took possession of
Curincuaro Achurin and established himself there, while Ipinchuari did
the same at Pechetaro. The royal brothers of Wayameo also took up arms
and possessed themselves first of Capacureo, and then of Patamagua
Nacaraho. At the latter place they seem to have separated, each to make
conquests on his own behalf.[X-64]
The Tarasco population was now thoroughly alarmed and with one
accord the various states began to prepare for war. The kings of
Wayameo, however, assured Cuyupuri, who had succeeded to the office
of high-priest of Xaratanga at Tzintzuntzan, that he should receive
no injury, and at their invitation he removed to the spot where
his metamorphosed predecessors had disappeared. Later he removed to
Sipico, on the borders of the lake, where he erected a temple and other
buildings; after that he went to several other places, but finally
established himself on Mount Haracotin, where Wapeani had taken up his
abode.
The two brothers now continued their conquests in every direction,
and before long they had gained possession of most of the places on
the south shore of the lake Patzcuaro, including the fertile region
of Tzintzuntzan. Now it came to pass one day, when Wapeani had climbed
Mount Atupen, and was gazing longingly at the beautiful islands which
dotted its surface, that his attention was attracted to a pyramidal
structure which rose in the centre of one of the fairest of them.
Perceiving a fisherman casting his nets at some distance, he called him
to him. In answer to his inquiries, the fisherman informed the prince
that the island upon which the temple stood was called Xaracuero,
and was, together with the island of Pacandan, ruled by a king named
Curicaten, who bore the title of El Henditare. He told Wapeani,
moreover, that there were Chichimecs on these islands, though they did
not speak the same language as the Wanacaces. Wapeani was astonished at
this, as he had believed that his people were the only Chichimecs in
the country. The warriors of his suite then asked the fisherman what
his name was, and if he had any daughters. He answered that his name
was Curipajan, and that he had no children. They insisted, however,
that he had daughters, assuring him at the same time that they intended
no harm, but merely wanted to obtain wives from the islands. At length,
after repeated denials, he confessed that he had one, who was little
and ugly, and quite unworthy of their consideration. It matters not,
they answered, say nothing to anybody, but bring her here to-morrow.
[Sidenote: THE KING OF THE ISLES.]
What induced the fisherman to act against his inclinations after he
had once got free, the chronicle does not relate, but on the next day
he returned at the appointed time with his daughter. Wapeani arrived
at the rendezvous somewhat later, and finding the girl to his taste he
took her away with him, instructing her father to return home, and if
questioned concerning the absence of his daughter, to say that she had
been carried off and enslaved by the Wanacaces. Wapeani afterwards gave
the woman to his brother, Pawacume, who married her, and got by her a
son named Tariacuri, who subsequently became king and was the founder
of the kingdom of Michoacan.
When the king of the isles learned what had been done by Wapeani,
he was greatly enraged, and the neighboring lords having been called
together a council was held to consider what action should be taken in
the matter. But the lords were in favor of peace, and it was finally
arranged that the brother kings should be invited to come and settle
among them, when the office of grand sacrificer should be conferred
upon Pawacume and that of priest of the god Cuangari Changatun upon
Wapeani. Messengers were accordingly sent to make these proposals to
the brothers. Flattered by such brilliant offers and dazzled by the
costly presents which the envoys brought with them, the princes readily
consented to the arrangement, and at once embarked for the islands,
where they were received with great state, and immediately invested
with the promised dignities. But it seems that the brothers' followers
had not been made acquainted with the details of this arrangement, for
after impatiently waiting some time for the return of the princes, they
also set out for the islands to discover the cause of their detention.
Upon learning the true state of the case they were furious, and
demanded with many threats that Pawacume and Wapeani, who, they said,
had been appointed by Curicaneri as their guardians, should instantly
be sent back to their own people. Curicaten thought it prudent to
yield, and the brothers reluctantly returned with their followers to
the mainland.
[Sidenote: CITY OF PATZCUARO.]
But during their brief sojourn in the islands they had seen much that
was new to them, and having observed the benefit to be derived from
civilization, they resolved to improve the condition of their country.
Knowing, however, that their influence alone would not suffice to
make the people suddenly change their nomadic habits, they called to
their aid the voice of the gods. One day they announced that the god
of Hades had appeared to them in a dream, commanding them to erect
temples in honor of all the Chichimec divinities. The people, whose
religious fervor seems to have been unbounded, were at once anxious
to begin the pious work. It only remained to choose a suitable site.
Under the guidance of the brothers, they repaired to a densely wooded
hill near Tarimi Chundido, where there was a beautiful stream of water,
known henceforth by the name of Cuirizcatero. Here they set to work
in earnest; hewing down the trees and clearing the ground for the
foundations of the temples. One after another the stately edifices
rose, and when they were finished the chiefs began to vie with each
other in building fine dwelling-houses, so that in an incredibly
short space of time the sides of the hill were covered with buildings.
Such was the origin of the city of Patzcuaro,[X-65] for a long time the
capital, and afterwards one of the principal cities of Michoacan.
Now, at that time the kingdom of Curincuaro, which comprised part
of the lake islands, was one of the most powerful states in all that
region, and in common with its Tarasco neighbors, it regarded the rapid
progress of the Wanacaces with feelings of jealousy and apprehension,
which soon resulted in actual hostilities. An ambassador was sent to
Patzcuaro to formally demand that its inhabitants should bring fuel
to the altars at Curincuaro. The Wanacaces knew by experience what
this meant, and at once prepared for war. All being ready they marched
to meet the enemy. A terrible engagement took place near the town of
Ataquaro, in which Pawacume and his brother were seriously wounded, and
finally forced to retreat with their troops to Patzcuaro.
Soon after this the great feast of the goddess Curincuaro, the
principal divinity of the kingdom that bore her name, was celebrated.
It appears that it was arranged that all hostilities should cease
during this solemn period, that the Wanacaces might join with
their late enemies in the ceremonies. The lords of Curincuaro were
particularly anxious that the brothers of Patzcuaro should appear at
the feast, and to ensure their presence they employed an old woman,
who had access to them, to expatiate on the grandeur of the coming
festivities, and the number of sacrifices to be offered. She played
her part so well that the princes promised to be present; afterwards,
being assured by certain of their priests that treachery was designed,
they renounced their intention of going; but emissaries from Curincuaro
again found means to persuade them, and when the day of the feast
arrived they set out to participate in it. On the way they fell into an
ambuscade, and Wapeani was killed on the spot. His brother escaped and
fled to Patzcuaro, but he was pursued by his enemies and slain in the
city, which was deserted on account of all the people having gone to
the feast. The bodies of the unfortunate princes were ransomed by their
sorrowing subjects, and after being formally burned were buried with
much ceremony in a grave dug at the foot of the steps leading up to the
temple of Curicaneri.
Curatame, Wapeani's eldest son, now ascended the throne at Patzcuaro.
He had two brothers named Xetaco and Aramen. Pawacume, as we have
already remarked, had also a son named Tariacuri, by the fisherman's
daughter. This prince was sent to the island of Xaracuero, to be
educated by the Tarasco priests in the arts of civilized life. On
his return to Patzcuaro, Tariacuri showed himself to be a youth of an
excellent disposition, very pious and industrious, and withal highly
accomplished in matters both of war and of peace. As soon as he arrived
at a suitable age he was crowned king of the Wanacaces; whether his
cousin Curatame continued to reign as his colleague, or what became of
him, is not stated.
Tariacuri soon began to extend his empire by conquest in every
direction. He carried his arms farther than any of his predecessors had
done, and his hostile expeditions were invariably attended by success.
Again the Tarasco princes were alarmed, and uniting their forces they
marched upon Patzcuaro. But Tariacuri was irresistible; he surprised
and vanquished the allies at Ataro and Tupuxanchuen, conquered the
kingdom of Zirumbo, and finally blockaded the lake islands. Meanwhile,
his cousins, jealous of his glory, conspired with his enemies to
betray him. But he escaped their plots, and having possessed himself
of the islands he became king of the whole of Michoacan. This king
may be identical with Characu, the 'boy king,' to whom I have already
referred. My reason for thinking so is that the events above recorded,
or those immediately succeeding them, are said to have happened in the
time of Montezuma I., while the founding of a city named Charo, in the
reign of Characu, is also said by Beaumont to have taken place during
the life of the same Mexican monarch. The founding of Charo was in this
wise, according to one account.
[Sidenote: CHARACU, THE BOY KING.]
During the reign of 'the boy king' the Aztecs made an inroad, aided by
the Tecos and other unruly tribes. Being hard pressed, the king applied
to the Matlaltzincas of Toluca for aid. Six captains started with their
troops, and the Mexicans were defeated. In reward for this timely aid,
the Matlaltzincas were granted their choice of lands within the kingdom
of Michoacan, and selected the region around Tiripito, where the lower
class founded Undameo, and the nobles, Charo, so named in honor of the
king. This settlement being in the center of Michoacan, says Pimentel,
the people came to be known as the Pirindas, 'those in the middle.'[X-66]
In another place Beaumont gives Padre Larrea's version of the
founding of Charo. In the time of Montezuma I. the Aztecs appeared
in conjunction with the Tecos and Matlaltzincas to attack Michoacan.
The Tarascos who were only one-third as strong as their enemies,
had recourse to strategy. Large supplies of food and drink were
spread in the camp, and when the Aztec forces attacked, the Tarascos
fled, abandoning the camp. The hungry Aztecs at once commenced to
gorge themselves, and when filled with meat and drink the Tarascos
returned upon them making a great slaughter, and capturing a goodly
number of Tecos and Matlaltzincas, who were given lands in Michoacan;
the Tecos as the more turbulent in Patzcuaro and the capital, and
the Matlaltzincas in Charo, which was founded by them.[X-67] The
Matlaltzincas who remained in Toluca were conquered by Axayacatl, as
has been already related.[X-68]
Before his death, Tariacuri divided the kingdom, and generously
provided for the children of the cousins who had attempted his
destruction. To Hicipan he left Coyucan, a very important city; to
Hicucaxe, Patzcuaro and its dependencies, and to his son, Tangaxoan, he
gave the territory of Tzintzuntzan, which comprised the lake islands.
These events, says Brasseur, to which the anonymous historian assigns
no date, occurred, in all probability, during the first part of the
fifteenth century, Tangaxoan having been a contemporary of Montezuma
I., of Mexico.
Michoacan did not remain long divided. Hicucaxe had a great number
of sons, all of whom he put to death because they were disorderly
and oppressed the people. Another son which was born to him later was
killed by lightning, and apotheosized on that account. Thus the king
of Patzcuaro died without leaving heirs, and his division was added
to Tangaxoan's territory. The kingdom of Coyucan, upon the death of
Hicipan, was also annexed to Tzintzuntzan, where Tangaxoan's son Ziziz
Pandacuare, was then reigning. Michoacan became thus re-united under
one head. Ziziz Pandacuare used his great power for the advancement
and benefit of his country. He embellished the city of Tzintzuntzan,
and made it his capital. His reign was a long and glorious one, and
it was chiefly to his able administration that Michoacan owed its
greatness.[X-69]
[Sidenote: REIGN OF ZWANGA.]
Ziziz Pandacuare was succeeded by his son Zwanga.[X-70] It was during the
reign of this prince that the valiant Tlascaltec general, Tlahuicol,
invaded Michoacan at the head of a Mexican army, and took Tangimaroa,
or Tlaximaloyan, and other towns, together with great spoils.[X-71]
Zwanga was still on the throne at Tzintzuntzan when Cortés took Mexico.
He was appealed to for aid by Cuitlahuatl, who was elected monarch
after the death of Montezuma II. After some hesitation he promised his
assistance. Ambassadors were sent to Mexico, who, when they arrived,
found Cuitlahuatl dead, and the small-pox raging in the city. They
hastened back to Tzintzuntzan, but bore with them the germs of the
disease, which rapidly spread through the capital, and carried off the
king and a great number of his subjects.
Zwanga left several sons, and the eldest of these, Tangaxoan II.,
seized the sceptre.[X-72] He appears to have been a weak prince, and
totally unfit to fill the throne at such a critical period. One of
his first acts was to cause his brothers to be put to death, on the
pretense that they had conspired against his life, but really because
he was jealous of their power.[X-73] This cruel murder caused serious
disturbance in the capital, and the fratricide brought great odium
upon himself. It was said that such a terrible deed portended evil
to the country--a prediction which was verified strongly afterwards,
by the appearance of a Spanish soldier who had been sent by Cortés to
reconnoitre the country.
The Tarascos, like most of the other Nahua nations, were warned
by omens of their future subjection to a foreign power. Beaumont,
who makes Tangaxoan II. a contemporary of Montezuma II., relates
that the former was at first persuaded to assist the latter against
the Spaniards, but was cautioned by the spirit of his dead sister,
who, to prove that her utterances were not meaningless, pointed out
certain signs in the heavens; namely, the figure of a young man with a
glittering hand, and a sword, fashioned like those of the Spaniards,
which appeared in the east on the day of the great festival. In the
council convened to consider this warning it was decided not to resist
the strangers.[X-74] It is related, moreover, that in Zwanga's time there
lived a high-priest, named Surites, who foretold the introduction of a
new religion, and in anticipation of it instituted two Christian-like
festivals.[X-75]
* * * * *
[Sidenote: THE MIZTECS AND ZAPOTECS.]
Among the earliest peoples of Mexico were the Miztecs and Zapotecs,
whose country may be roughly described as comprising the modern state
of Oajaca. The Miztecs occupied the western portion of this region, and
their territory was divided into upper and lower Miztecapan,[X-76] the
latter reaching to the coast, and the former embracing the mountainous
region farther north, which is sometimes called Cohuaixtlahuacan.
Zapotecapan, the country of the Zapotecs, lay to the east of
Miztecapan, and extended, at the time when we first hear of this people
in history, to Tehuantepec.[X-77]
The records of these nations are silent as to their history before they
settled here; everything previous to this rests upon traditions of the
vaguest character, one of which represents their ancestors as birds,
beasts, and trees--to indicate their extreme antiquity, courage, and
stubbornness, naively adds Burgoa, the historian of Oajaca.[X-78] But
though their own annals do not reach back to the pre-Toltec period,
they are stated by some authorities to have inhabited at that time
the region of Puebla, together with the Olmecs and Xicalancas.[X-79]
Most of the old writers connect them with the Nahua stock, although
their language was distinct from the Nahua. Thus Torquemada derives
the Miztecs from Mixtecatl, the fifth son of Iztac Mixcohuatl, of the
Seven Caves; while Sahagun states that they were of Toltec descent,
and adds that some go so far as to regard them as descendants of
Quetzalcoatl, because of the richness and beauty of their country, in
which the famous Tlalocan, the 'terrestrial paradise,' was said to be
situated.[X-80] At the time when civilization was introduced into Yucatan
and Chiapas, says Brasseur, the mountains of Miztecapan were inhabited
by savage tribes without any particular name, but who were afterwards
known as Miztecs, or Wild Cats.[X-81] Civilization is said by tradition
to have first appeared in the mountains of Apoala. At the entrance of
a gorge in this region where, says García, the gods lived before man
came on earth, stood two majestic trees, from which sprung two youths,
the founders of the Miztec monarchy.[X-82] The braver of the two went to
Tilantongo, and there had a contest with the Sun for the possession of
the country. After a desperate combat, which lasted a whole day, the
Sun was forced to go down behind the hills, thus leaving the youth the
victor.[X-83]
Other traditions relate that certain of the warlike tribes from the
north, that invaded Anáhuac from the eighth to the eleventh century,
passed from the Aztec plateau into Miztecapan, coming down from the
mountains of Apoala to the beautiful and naturally fortified valley of
Yanguitlan, 'new land,' where they determined to settle. The Miztecs
resisted the invaders for a long time, and their final subjection was
effected more by religious teachings than by force of arms. On this
plateau the immigrants from Anáhuac founded Tilantongo, and built a
temple called Achiuhtla.[X-84] The date of this event seems to coincide,
says Brasseur, with the sending out of missionaries from Cholula,
though whether the followers of Quetzalcoatl or the tribes from Anáhuac
arrived first is not known. But it appears certain that from the union
of the priests of Achiuhtla and the Olmecs who fled from Cholula at
the time of Huemac's invasion, sprung the power which civilized these
regions.[X-85]
It is in Zapotecapan, however, that the disciples of Quetzalcoatl
appear most prominently. There they are said to have founded Mitla,
or Yopaa, and to have diffused their arts and religious teachings
throughout the whole country, as far as Tehuantepec.[X-86]
The mysterious apostle Wixipecocha, of whom a full account has
already been given,[X-87] is said to have appeared in these regions.
The tradition, which is very vague, relates that he came from the
south seas, and landed, bearing a cross, at Tehuantepec. He taught
morality, abstinence from women, confession, and penance. He was
generally respected but was sometimes persecuted, especially in the
Mije country, whither he went after passing through the Zapotec valley.
The people there tried to kill him, and pursued him to the foot of
Mount Cempoaltepec, where he miraculously disappeared, but re-appeared
shortly afterwards on the summit of the mountain. His pursuers
followed him, but he again vanished, and was seen no more in that
country, though he afterward showed himself on the enchanted island of
Monapostiac, near Tehuantepec.
[Sidenote: THE PRIESTS OF ACHIUHTLA.]
As I have already remarked, nothing definite is known of the early
history of the Miztecs and Zapotecs. All that has been preserved is
some account of their spiritual rulers. Thus we are told that the
kingdom of Tilantongo, which comprised upper Mizteca, was spiritually
governed by the high-priest of Achiuhtla, who bore the title of
Taysacaa, and whose power equaled, if it did not surpass, that of the
king; while in Zapotecapan the Wiyatao, or sovereign pontiff, united in
his person the supreme sacerdotal and secular power. The origin of the
city of Yopaa, or Mitla, where the Wiyatao held his court, is doubtful,
though, as we have seen, it has been attributed to the disciples of
Quetzalcoatl, who came from Cholula.
It is a singular fact that we hear nothing of the early Miztec and
Zapotec kings, save that there were such, until we find the latter
subjecting the Huaves to their authority. These Huaves are said to
have come originally from the south, from Nicaragua or Peru say some
authors. The causes that led to their migration are unknown; but the
story goes that after coasting northward, and attempting to disembark
at several places, they finally effected a landing at Tehuantepec.
Here they found the Mijes, the original possessors of the country; but
these they drove out, or, as some say, mingled with them, and soon
made themselves masters of the soil. They founded their first city
at Arrianjianbaj, or Arriangui Umbah, but afterwards extended their
possessions to the city of Jalapa, which they are said to have founded
also.[X-88]
But the easy life they led in this beautiful and fertile region
soon destroyed their ancient energy, and they subsequently fell an
unresisting prey to the Zapotec kings.[X-89] Of the Mijes very little
is known. They are believed to have been the most ancient people of
the Oajaca region, and Burgoa affirms that they possessed of old
the greater part of Tehuantepec, Soconusco, and Zapotecapan. The
Beni-Xonos, who lived between the Mijes and Zapotecs, are said to
have once belonged to the former people, but their character seems
to disprove this. They are described as a tribe of rich, shrewd
traders, very miserly, great liars, "incorrigible and inveterate
evil-doers"--the Jews of Oajaca, Brasseur calls them. They were among
the first to submit to the Zapotec kings, in the hope of being allowed
to retain their wealth.[X-90]
[Sidenote: THE ZAPOTEC KINGS.]
It was to one of these Zapotec princes that the fortified city of
Zaachilla Yoho, or Teotzapotlan, as it was called by the Mexicans, owed
its origin. At the time when history first sheds its light on these
regions, Teotzapotlan was the capital of Zapotecapan,[X-91] and rivaled
in power and extent of territory the Miztec kingdoms of Tututepec and
Tilantongo. It seems that during the war with the Mexicans these three
powers united against the common enemy, though at other times they
appear to have quarreled considerably among themselves, by reason of
the ambitious designs of the Zapotec monarchs, who, it is said, aimed
at universal sovereignty.[X-92]
Of the kingdom of Tututepec, which stretched for sixty leagues along
the shore of the Pacific, nothing is known, except that its princes
were among the richest in all Mexico, that its kings had many powerful
vassals, and that its principal city, which was also called Tututepec,
was very populous.[X-93]
One of the earliest conquests of the Zapotec kings was that of the
Mountain of the Sun, near the town of Macuilxuchil. There dwelt on
this mountain a tribe of very fierce and blood-thirsty barbarians,
who lived by plundering the surrounding nations. At length their
depredations became so frequent, and were attended with such cruelty
that it became evident that the country about the mountain would soon
be abandoned by its inhabitants unless the robbers were annihilated.
Accordingly, a large force of picked troops was sent against them
under the command of two renowned warriors named Baali and Baaloo. The
expedition was successful. After a desperate resistance the robbers
were overpowered and slaughtered to a man. A fortress and temple
were then erected on the summit of the mountain, and the charge of
them given to Baali and Baaloo, as a reward for their valor. After
their death these heroes received divine honors, and were buried at
the foot of the mountain they had conquered. The veneration in which
their memory was held increased with time; their tombs were visited by
multitudes of pilgrims, and a city called Zeetopaa, which eventually
became the principal seat of learning and religion, and the nucleus of
civilization in these parts, soon rose upon the spot.[X-94]
[Sidenote: DEATH OF CONDOY.]
The first Zapotec king of whom we have any definite information is
Ozomatli, who, it is said in the _Codex Chimalpopoca_,[X-95] reigned in
1351. The next king, whose name or deeds are recorded, is Zaachilla,
who, being master of all Zapotecapan, coveted the region lying east of
the river Nexapa, and inhabited by the Chontales, Mijes, and Huaves.
The Chontales were the most powerful of these nations, and against
them Zaachilla proceeded first. He took from them the city of Nexapa,
which he fortified and garrisoned with his own soldiers. To strengthen
his position in the conquered territory he also built the fortresses
of Quiechapa and Quiyecolani.[X-96] He next entered the country of the
Mijes, took the town of Zoquitlan, and drove the inhabitants into
the mountains. The Mijes were now confined between the Maya tribes of
Chiapas and the Zapotecs. But, though in this difficult position, with
a territory so small that it contained only one city of importance,
namely Xaltepec, and numbering, says Herrera, only two thousand men,
women, and children, the brave little nation seems to have gallantly
maintained its independence for a number of years.[X-97] It was destined
to be subjected at last, however, and in the hour of its greatest
glory. Condoy, the last king of the Mijes, who is said to have made
his first appearance from a cavern in the mountains, was a very brave
and energetic prince. He waged war with the surrounding nations, and
succeeded by his valor in increasing the extent of his dominions. The
Zapotec and Miztec kings, jealous of these encroachments, formed an
alliance against the Mije prince, while the tribes of Chiapas, from
the same motives, attacked him at the same time on the other side of
his dominions. In spite of all that the brave Condoy could do, his
capital was taken and burned to the ground, and he and his followers,
hotly pursued by the enemy, were forced to take refuge in the recesses
of the mountains. Shortly after this Condoy disappeared and was seen
no more. The Zapotecs claimed that their king slew him with his own
hand, but the subjects of the Mije prince insisted that, tired of war
and bloodshed, he had entered the cavern from which he had originally
issued, and, attended by some of his warriors, had gone to far distant
provinces.[X-98]
About the year 1456 occurred the war between Dzawindanda, king of
Cohuaixtlahuacan or upper Miztecapan, with his allies the Tlascaltecs
and Huexotzincas, and Montezuma I., with his allies of the valley of
Anáhuac. The details of this war having been already given,[X-99] it
remains only to repeat Burgoa's account of the supernatural powers
of Dzawindanda. This prince, says the fable, when he wished to make
war upon some neighboring nation, caused himself to be miraculously
transported to the summit of a mountain inaccessible to ordinary
mortals. Arrived there he prostrated himself upon a knoll, and besought
the gods to favor his designs. Then he shook a bag which was suspended
from his girdle, and immediately there issued from it a multitude
of warriors, fully armed and equipped, who having formed in military
order descended from the mountain in silence and marched at once to
conquer the coveted territory.[X-100] Dzawindanda's magical powers must
have deserted him on the occasion above referred to, however, for, as
we have seen, his armies were terribly defeated, his kingdom was made
tributary to the domain of the victors, he himself was assassinated,
and his widowed queen was carried captive to Mexico to gratify a
passion which Montezuma had conceived for her.
In 1469 Axayacatl of Mexico swooped suddenly upon the cities of
Tehuantepec and Guatulco, and took them; according to Brasseur he
even carried his victorious arms into Soconusco.[X-101] At this time
Zaachilla III. was king of Zapotecapan. He was a warlike and ambitious
prince, and succeeded in adding Jalapa and the valley of Nexapa to his
kingdom, driving the Huave population into the less desirable region on
the frontiers of Chiapas and Soconusco. During the later years of his
reign Zaachilla, with the assistance of the Miztec king of Tilantongo,
succeeded in regaining possession of Tehuantepec and the other places
in that region which Axayacatl had garrisoned with Mexican troops.
But this brought the Mexican king, Ahuitzotl, down upon him like a
thunderbolt, and being deserted by his Miztec allies, Zaachilla's
armies were quickly routed; he was forced to flee for his life to the
mountains, and Tehuantepec once more became a Mexican possession.[X-102]
Cociyoeza, who succeeded Zaachilla III. on the throne of Zapotecapan,
was no less anxious than his predecessor to rid his kingdom of the
Aztec garrisons, but being a very prudent, though brave, prince, he
acted with greater deliberation and caution. Before proceeding to open
hostilities he contracted a firm alliance with the neighboring nations;
he then chose a favorable opportunity, when the prestige of the Mexican
arms had been damaged by reverses, to declare war, massacre the Mexican
merchants, and retake Tehuantepec and most of the other places occupied
by Ahuitzotl's troops. The reader has been made acquainted with the
details of this war, in the course of which the sacred city of Mitla,
or Yopaa, was taken, and of the final treaty by which it was arranged
that the Mexicans should keep Soconusco, and that Cociyoeza should wed
a Mexican princess and remain in possession of Tehuantepec.[X-103]
[Sidenote: MONTEZUMA INVADES MIZTECAPAN.]
In 1506, Miztecapan was invaded by Montezuma's armies, and the cities
of Tilantongo, Achiuhtla, and Tlachquiauhco were taken. In the same
year the Miztecs made a determined effort to regain their independence,
but, as has been seen, only succeeded in making their burdens heavier
than before.[X-104] From this time until the coming of the Spaniards
Miztecapan may be regarded as virtually subject to the Mexican empire.
By his marriage with the faithful Pelaxilla, Cociyoeza had a son
named Cociyopu. It is related that during the feasts with which the
birth of this prince was celebrated, fiery rays of light were seen to
dart across the sky. Such ominous phenomena did not escape the notice
of the soothsayers, and the downfall of the kingdom was predicted.
When Cociyopu had reached the age of twenty-four years, his father
conferred upon him the crown of Tehuantepec.[X-105] It was at this
time, says Brasseur, that the news of the conquests of the Spaniards
reached Cociyoeza's court at Teotzapotlan.[X-106] Upon this the nobles
of Tehuantepec besought Cociyopu to inquire of the gods what the
meaning of these things was, and if the ancient prophecies concerning
the introduction of a new religion and the conquest of the country by
a race of white men, were about to be fulfilled. Cociyopu did as they
desired, and was told by the oracle that the time had come for the
fulfillment of the prophecies. Then an embassy was sent to Coyuhuacan,
where Cortés then was, with instructions to announce to the Spanish
chief that according to the directions of their oracles the people of
Zapotecapan and Tehuantepec acknowledged his right of sovereignty.[X-107]
* * * * *
[Sidenote: THE PUEBLOS OF NEW MEXICO.]
In the subdivision of my present subject, given in an early chapter
of this volume,[X-108] I named as one of its divisions the Historical
Traditions of the Wild Tribes of the North, to which topic I intended
to devote a short chapter. On further research, however, I find that
there is absolutely no material for such a chapter. Some of the wild
tribes had vague traditions of how the world was created and peopled,
generally by the agency of a bird or beast; others told wonderful
tales of supernatural adventures of their fathers many moons ago; a
few named the direction, north, south, east, or west, whence their
fathers came. Such traditions have been given in those portions of this
work relating to the subjects of Mythology and Origin. There is great
confusion among the different versions of these traditions, and even if
we knew in each case which was the authentic version, they would shed
not a ray of light on general aboriginal history; the very most that
could be hoped from them would be slight information respecting modern
tribal history. All the speculations of modern travelers and writers
on primitive history in the north have been founded, so far as they
have had any foundation at all, on the material relics of antiquity,
fully described in volume IV. of this work; on the traces of the Aztec
tongue in the north, a subject fully disposed of in volume III.; and
on the theory of the Spanish writers respecting a general migration
from the north, duly considered in the present volume. Consequently all
that could be said on the history of the northern tribes here would
be but a repetition of what has already been said; a collection of a
few valueless speculations resting on foundations already proven to be
unsound; and a renewed argument against the theory of a migration from
the north, a theory that has already received more attention than it
deserves. It may be thought that the reported Montezuma-tradition of
the Pueblos in New Mexico deserves some investigation; but besides the
fact that all the force of evidence and probability indicates that the
myth was an invention of white men, it is also true that if the worship
of Montezuma and the hope of his coming from the east, were actually
found among the Pueblos, this would only prove what is not at all
improbable, that the fame of Montezuma I. and of the great Aztec power
had reached this northern region. It has been seen that the Nahuas a
few centuries after the beginning of our era were driven northward and
established themselves in Anáhuac and the region immediately north-west
of that valley, but that their possessions never extended farther
north than Zacatecas. Yet it is altogether probable that they came
more or less into contact with tribes further north, and it is best to
attribute to this contact at this period the Nahua linguistic traces
that have been pointed out in the north. The Pueblos, who in ancient
times occupied the country as far south as northern Chihuahua, were
not Aztecs, as is clearly proven by their language, their monuments,
and their institutions. The very slight Nahua analogies that have
been pointed out in their manners and customs, do not necessarily
imply any connection whatever with the civilized peoples of the
south; yet I regard it as not improbable that the Pueblo tribes were
slightly influenced by Nahua contact at the period referred to; and
not altogether impossible that the Nahua seed sown at this time fell
into good ground in some wild people of the north, and thus originated
Pueblo agriculture and later culture. In favor of any closer connection
between these peoples, there is absolutely no evidence.
[Sidenote: THE MOUND-BUILDERS.]
When we come to the Mound-Builders of the Mississippi Valley, the
matter presents far greater difficulties. We know nothing of their
language or manners and customs, since they have become locally
extinct; but their material monuments, and their religious rites as
indicated by those monuments, bear a very striking resemblance to
those of the civilized nations of the south. I have already expressed
an opinion that the Mound-Builders were in some way connected with
the civilized nations; the nature of the connection is involved in
difficulties, from which there is no escape save by conjecture. We have
seen that the Aztec traces in the New Mexican region, and possibly
the Pueblo culture, may be attributed to the migrating Nahua tribes
after their overthrow in Central America; but there is little or no
reason to attribute the establishment of the Mound-Builders of the
eastern states to the same influence and the same epoch. The few Nahuas
that were scattered in the north are not likely to have exerted so
slight an influence in the Pueblo region, and so powerful a one on
the Mississippi; besides, the Mississippi monuments bear marks of a
much greater antiquity than can be attributed to the Pueblo buildings.
Yet we have seen that it is much more reasonable to believe that the
culture of the Mound-Builders was introduced by a colony or by teachers
from the south, than to regard the Mississippi Valley as the original
birth-place of American civilization. The Natchez of the gulf states
are said to have been superior at the coming of Europeans to other
aboriginal tribes of the eastern states, and presented some slight
analogies in their institutions to what the Mound-Builders may be
supposed to have been. It is also the opinion of several authorities
entitled to considerable credit, that their language shows a very
strong resemblance to those of the Maya family. Without attaching
very great importance to the last argument, I am inclined to believe
that the most plausible conjecture respecting the origin of the
Mound-Builders, is that which makes them a colony of the ancient Mayas,
who settled in the north during the continuance of the great Maya
empire of Xibalba in Central America, several centuries before Christ.
We have seen that the ancient Mayas, under the name of Quinames,
probably occupied eastern Mexico at that epoch, and in later times we
find the Huastecs in southern Tamaulipas speaking a Maya dialect. It
is not at all unlikely that a colony of these people passed northward
along the coast by land or water, and introduced their institutions
in the Mississippi Valley, building up a power which became very
flourishing as the centuries passed, but was at last forced to yield
to the presence of environing barbarism. I offer this not as a theory
which can be fully substantiated by facts, but simply as the most
plausible conjecture on the matter which has occurred to me.
FOOTNOTES:
[X-1] _Historia Tulteca, Peintures et Annales, en langue nahutl, coll.
Aubin._
[X-2] See _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. ii., pp. 361-3.
[X-3] Camargo, in _Nouvelles Annales_, tom. xcviii., p. 150, vaguely
mentions an expedition said to have been made to Cholula under chiefs
bearing similar names to the above, but he gives no details or dates.
[X-4] _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. ii., pp. 363-70.
[X-5] _Camargo_, in _Nouvelles Annales_, tom. xcviii., pp. 138-9,
145-6.
[X-6] _Veytia_, tom. ii., pp. 108-9.
[X-7] _Camargo_, in _Nouvelles Annales_, tom. xcviii., pp. 142-7;
_Torquemada_, tom. i., pp. 260-1; _Clavigero_, tom. i., p. 154;
_Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. ii., pp. 357-60.
[X-8] Spelled Tetliyucatl by Camargo. Torquemada, tom. i., p. 262,
says that a separation took place previously at Tepapayecan. Camargo,
in _Nouvelles Annales_, tom. xcviii., p. 150, may possibly imply the
same, but he is very confused at this point.
[X-9] _Torquemada_, tom. i., p. 262. Camargo says that Coatepec was
founded in the province of Quauhquelchula by the three last named
chiefs; this is, however, probably a mistake of the French translator.
Brasseur says Coatepec 'se soumettait à Quetzalxiuhtli.' _Hist._, tom.
ii., p. 372.
[X-10] Brasseur, _Hist._, tom. ii., p. 373, calls this chief
Quauhtliztac.
[X-11] _Camargo_, in _Nouvelles Annales_, tom. xcviii., pp. 151-2.
These chiefs were named Totolohuizil and Quetzaltehuyacixcotl, and are
the same as those mentioned by Camargo on p. 150, as having arrived at
Cholula in the year 1 Acatl. They are also identical with the
Chichimec-Toltec chiefs who, according to Brasseur's account, already
recorded, conquered Cholula by a stratagem soon after the Toltec fall.
See ante, pp. 485-6. Speaking of their visit to the Teo-Chichimecs at
Necapahuazcan, Brasseur, _Hist._, tom. ii., p. 372, calls them the
"nouveaux seigneurs de Cholula." But it is evident from the context
that Camargo does not regard them as such, notwithstanding what he has
said about their arrival in 1 Acatl.
[X-12] Called 'Colhua-Teuctli-Quanez, le vainqueur de Poyauhtlan,' and
Culhua-Teuctli, by Brasseur; and Culhuatecuhtli and Aculhua Tecuhtli
by Camargo.
[X-13] _Camargo_, in _Nouvelles Annales_, tom. xcviii., pp. 136,
152-4, 164; _Veytia_, tom. ii., p. 175; _Herrera_, dec. ii., lib. vi.,
cap. xii; _Torquemada_, tom. i., p. 263.
[X-14] _Camargo_, in _Nouvelles Annales_, tom. xcviii., p. 154.
[X-15] Brasseur writes Xicochimalco.
[X-16] 'Coxcoxtli, roi de Culhuacan, qui gouvernait alors, avec ses
propres états, les Mexicains établis dans le voisinage de sa capitale,
et les Tépanèques d'Azcapotzalco, est le seul prince à qui se puisse
rapporter l'événement dont il s'agit ici, Tezozomoc n'ayant régné que
beaucoup plus tard.' _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. ii., p. 409; see also
note on p. 410 of same work. Camargo says that Xiuhtlehui sent for aid
to 'Matlatlihuitzin, qui régnait alors à Mexico.' _Nouvelles Annales_,
tom. xcviii., p. 156. Veytia, tom. ii., pp. 197-201, states that he
sent to Acamapichtli II, Matlatlihuitzin being probably a surname
borne by that prince. Torquemada, tom. i., pp. 264-5, and Clavigero,
tom. i., p. 155, agree with Camargo in the name, but speak of the
prince as being Tepanec.
[X-17] _Camargo_, in _Nouvelles Annales_, tom. cxviii., pp. 154-63;
_Torquemada_, tom. i., pp. 264-8; _Clavigero_, tom. i., pp. 154-5;
_Veytia_, tom. ii., pp. 200-12; _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. ii., pp.
405-18.
[X-18] _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. ii., pp. 418-19.
[X-19] Ixtlilxochitl, in _Kingsborough_, vol. ix., p. 349, writes
Iztamatzin, and on p. 216, Yztacima.
[X-20] _Veytia_, tom. ii., pp. 154-5; _Ixtlilxochitl_, in
_Kingsborough_, vol. ix., pp. 216, 349.
[X-21] _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. ii., pp. 419-20.
[X-22] _Camargo_, in _Nouvelles Annales_, tom. xcviii., p. 164.
Veytia, tom. ii., p. 213, considers this account wrong. Culhua
Tecuhtli Quanez, he says, who is Xiuhquetzaltzin, the younger brother
of Quinantzin of Tezcuco, had no brother by that name, or, none who
would have joined him in Tlascala--he disregards the fact, as related
by himself, that Xiuhquetzaltzin must have ruled over a hundred years
already. It is therefore much more probable, as related by other
writers, he continues, that Quanez left his own district of Tepeticpac
or Texcalticpac to his eldest son, as will be seen, and Ocotelulco to
his second son, Cuicuetzcatl, 'swallow;' he ruled jointly with his
brother, and left the succession to his son Papalotl, 'butterfly,' who
was followed by his brother Teyohualminqui, the above-named personage.
He thinks the above two rulers have been omitted because of their
brief rule. Others, he continues, relate that Mitl divided the rule
with his brother. Ixtlilxochitl, p. 344, says that the Tlascaltec
rulers descended from Xiuhguzaltzin. Brasseur, _Hist._, tom. iii., p.
143, though he cites Camargo as his authority, states that Quanez
associated his brother with himself on the throne, and divided the
town and territory of Tlascala with him. Teyohualminqui then chose
Ocotelulco as his place of residence.
[X-23] Called also Tlapitzahuacan.
[X-24] _Camargo_, in _Nouvelles Annales_, tom. xcviii., pp. 165-72.
[X-25] Brasseur, _Hist._, tom. ii., pp. 143-4, makes Tzompane,
Xayacamachan, and Tepolohua, one and the same person. Camargo, as we
have seen, speaks of them as father and son. Torquemada, tom. i., p.
275, combines two of the names, Xayacamachantzompane.
[X-26] See vol. ii. of this work, p. 141.
[X-27] See pp. 387-8, of this volume.
[X-28] Id., p. 414.
[X-29] Id., p. 416.
[X-30] Id., p. 417.
[X-31] _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. iii., p. 269.
[X-32] See this vol., p. 426.
[X-33] Id., pp. 437-8.
[X-34] _Camargo_, in _Nouvelles Annales_, tom. xcviii., p. 178.
[X-35] _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. iii., p. 341.
[X-36] See this vol., p. 443.
[X-37] _Torquemada_, tom. i., p. 191; _Vetancvrt_, _Teatro_, pt ii.,
p. 38; _Clavigero_, tom. i., pp. 259-60; _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom.
iii., pp. 375-7; _Veytia_, tom. iii., pp. 297-9.
[X-38] _Camargo_, in _Nouvelles Annales_, tom. xcviii., pp. 178-80;
_Torquemada_, tom. i., pp. 197-9; _Clavigero_, tom. i., pp. 275-8;
_Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. iii., pp. 402-5.
[X-39] _Torquemada_, tom. i., pp. 200-1; _Vetancvrt_, _Teatro_, pt
ii., p. 40. According to Camargo, in _Nouvelles Annales_, tom.
xcviii., pp. 182-3, and Clavigero, tom. i., p. 278, the Tlascaltecs
were beaten on this occasion.
[X-40] _Camargo_, in _Nouvelles Annales_, tom. xcviii., p. 183;
_Clavigero_, tom. i., p. 279; _Torquemada_, tom. i., p. 200;
_Vetancvrt_, _Teatro_, pt ii., p. 40; _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. iii.,
p. 406. These authorities say that the Mexican general was Montezuma's
eldest son. But Ixtlilxochitl, in _Kingsborough_, vol. ix., p. 271;
and Duran, MS., tom. ii., cap. lvii., Tezozomoc, in _Id._, p. 160;
say that he was Montezuma's brother.
[X-41] _Clavigero_, tom. i., pp. 278-80; _Torquemada_, tom. i., pp.
201-2; _Vetancvrt_, _Teatro_, pt ii., p. 40; _Camargo_, in _Nouvelles
Annales_, tom. xcviii., p. 183; _Veytia_, tom. iii., pp. 324-5.
Tlacahuepantzin is regarded by Clavigero as a man appointed to the
generalship on account of his birth, and not because he possessed any
military ability. Duran, MS., tom. ii., cap. lvii., who makes this a
war between Huexotzinco and Mexico, states that he performed wonders
on the battlefield, killing over fifty men, but was captured and
killed on the field, in accordance with his own request; the body was
preserved as the relic of a hero. Other brothers of Montezuma were
also killed, and many captives carried to Huexotzinco. Tezozomoc, in
_Kingsborough_, vol. ix., pp. 160-1, adds that the Aztecs were only
one to twenty in number, and that 40,000 warriors fell in the fight.
Shortly after, continues Tezozomoc, Ixtlilcuechahuac of Tollan, aided
by Aztec troops under three of Montezuma's cousins attacked the
Huexotzincas again; the three cousins were killed, with most of their
troops, and the lord of Tollan, who was conspicuous in his fine dress,
was also slain; but the Chalcas coming up, the victory turned and the
Huexotzincas were compelled to retreat. _Id._, pp. 165-6; _Duran_,
MS., tom. ii., cap. lviii. After this, the Cholultecs, who had never
yet had a war with the Mexicans, says Duran, challenged that people to
fight a battle, 'to give pleasure to the god of battle and to the
sun.' The Mexicans and their allies who, according to Tezozomoc, were
opposed by six times the number of Cholultecs, aided by Huexotzincas
and Atlixcas, lost 8,200 men; whereupon the fight was discontinued,
and the Aztecs went home to mourn. _Tezozomoc_, pp. 169-70; _Duran_,
MS., tom. ii., cap. lix. Ixtlilxochitl, p. 278, seems to refer to this
battle when he says that Montezuma II. agreed with the Atlixcas to
leave Macuilmalinatzin, the true heir to the Mexican throne, in the
lurch. He accordingly perished with 2,800 of his warriors.
Nezahualpilli composed a scathing poem, denouncing this act as a base
assassination.
[X-42] _Tezozomoc_, in _Kingsborough_, vol. ix., pp. 172-4; _Duran_,
MS., tom. ii., cap. lx.; _Clavigero_, tom. i., p. 280; _Veytia_, tom.
iii., pp. 325-6.
[X-43] The truth of this bombastic assertion the Tlascaltec historian,
Camargo, denies, and doubtless with reason; as it would be absurd to
suppose that the Aztecs would have permitted the existence of such a
formidable enemy at their very doors if they could have helped it.
Besides, we have seen how often they did their best to subdue Tlascala
and failed.
[X-44] _Torquemada_, tom. i., pp. 202-3; _Veytia_, tom. iii., pp.
326-7; _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. iii., pp. 407-9; _Vetancvrt_,
_Teatro_, pt ii., p. 41; _Duran_, MS., tom. ii., cap. lxi;
_Tezozomoc_, in _Kingsborough_, vol. ix., pp. 176-8; _Clavigero_, tom.
i., p. 280; _Oviedo_, _Hist. Gen._, tom. iii., p. 497; _Camargo_, in
_Nouvelles Annales_, tom. xcviii., pp. 184-6.
[X-45] _Torquemada_, tom. i., pp. 209-10; _Clavigero_, tom. i., pp.
284-5; _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. iii., pp. 418-20; _Veytia_, tom.
iii., pp. 338-40.
[X-46] See this vol., p. 464.
[X-47] Ixtlilxochitl, pp. 280-1, the Tezcucan historian, is the only
authority for this account, and it is probable enough that he has
exaggerated Montezuma's treachery.
[X-48] For etymology of this name, see vol. ii., p. 130.
[X-49] Several names of places in the country were, however, of Aztec
origin, and even the name Michoacan, 'place of fish,' is derived from
the Aztec words _michin_ and _can_. Beaumont, _Crón. Mechoacan_, MS.,
p. 47, says that the original name of the country was Tzintzuntzan,
but he translates this, 'town of green birds.' Brasseur, _Hist._, tom.
iii., p. 52, says Michoacan was 'le nom que les Mexicains donnaient à
la région des Tarasques.'
[X-50] Ixtlilxochitl, in _Kingsborough_, vol. ix., p. 214, mentions a
Toltec party that emigrated to the Michoacan region, and dwelt there
for a long time. Sahagun, tom. iii., lib. x., pp. 145-6, refers to a
Toltec migration as an issue from the same region. Veytia, tom. ii.,
pp. 39-40, speaks of Toltecs who founded colonies all along the
Pacific coast, and gradually changed their language and customs.
[X-51] _Orozco y Berra_, _Geografía_, pp. 120, 141.
[X-52] _Gil_, in _Soc. Mex. Geog., Boletin_, tom. viii., pp. 500-1.
[X-53] See this vol. p. 328.
[X-54] See also Tello's version of Aztec settlement given by Gil, in
_Soc. Mex. Geog., Boletin_, tom. viii., p. 501.
[X-55] _Hist. Gen._, dec. iii., lib. iii., cap. ix.
[X-56] _Hist._, tom. iii., pp. 55-6.
[X-57] Called Chichimecas vanáceos by Carbajal Espinosa, _Hist. Mex._,
tom. i., p. 266.
[X-58] 'Chaque tribu, chaque famille, souvent chaque personne avait
son dieu ou ses génies particuliers à peu près comme les teraphim de
Laban qu'enlevait à l'insu sa fille Rachel.' _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom.
iii., p. 61.
[X-59] _Beaumont_, _Crón. Mechoacan_, MS., pp. 48, 63.
[X-60] _Beltrami_, _Mexique_, tom. ii., p. 54. The first name given to
the town was Guayangareo, says Granados y Galvez, _Tardes Amer._, p.
184. Padre Larrea translates Tzintzuntzan, 'town of green birds,' and
the town was so called, he says, from the form of the idol. Beaumont
calls it also Chincila and Huitzitzilaque. _Crón. Mechoacan_, MS., pp.
43, 46-7.
[X-61] Also known as Chiguangua, Chiguacua, and Tzihuanga.
[X-62] Also, Sintzicha Tangajuan, 'he of the fine teeth.'
[X-63] _Beaumont_, _Crón. Mechoacan_, MS., pp. 44-5, 68-9, 75.
Herrera, dec. iii., lib. iii., cap. viii., translates Cazonzin by 'old
sandals,' saying that the name was bestowed upon the king as a
nick-name because of the shabby dress in which he appeared before
Cortés. According to Alegre, _Hist. Comp. de Jesus_, tom. i., p. 91,
Caltzontzin was the name given to Zintzicha by the Spaniards.
Beltrami, _Mexique_, tom. ii., p. 44, writes the name Sinzincha.
Torquemada, tom. i., p. 338, calls him Caczoltzin. Granados y Galvez,
_Tardes Amer._, pp. 184-6, writes Caltzontzin or Cinzica. 'Les
relations et les histoires relatives au Michoacan donnent toutes au
roi des Tarasques le titre ou le nom de Cazontzin. Était-ce un titre?
c'est incertain. Torquemada ne sait ce qu'il doit en penser.'
_Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. iii., p. 78. Cazonzi 'paraît être une
corruption tarasque du mot nahuatl Caltzontzin, Chef ou tête de la
maison.' _Id._, tom. iv., p. 363.
[X-64] Brasseur, _Hist._, tom. iii., pp. 66-7, renders this passage
very ambiguously. 'Ce fut en ce lieu (Patamagua Nacaraho) que les
dieux, frères de Curicaneri, se séparèrent; chacun des chefs
chichimèques, prenant le sien, alla se fixer au lieu que la victoire
lui donna. Pour lui, continuant le cours de ses conquêtes, il chassa
tour à tour le gibier sur les terres voisines, passant d'une montagne
à l'autre, et jetant la terreur dans les populations d'alentour.'
[X-65] '_Patzcuaro_ veut évidemment dire le lieu de temples; _cu_ ou
_cua_, dans la langue tarasque, comme dans la langue yucatèque.'
_Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. iii., p. 72.
[X-66] _Pimentel_, _Cuadro_, tom. i., p. 499; _Beaumont_, _Crón.
Mechoacan_, MS., pp. 61-2, quoting _Basalenque_, _Hist. Mech._, lib.
i., cap. xv.
[X-67] _Beaumont_, _Crón. Mechoacan_, MS., pp. 60-61. Granados, p.
185, refers to a seven years' struggle, which may be the same as the
above. The records indicate two great battles at Tajimaroa and Zichu.
[X-68] _Clavigero_, tom. i., p. 150; _Alcedo_, _Dicc._, tom. iii., p.
461; _Pimentel_, _Cuadro_, tom. i., p. 499. See also this vol., pp.
432-5. _Sahagun_, tom. iii., lib. x., p. 129.
[X-69] _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. iii., pp. 51-78; _Carbajal Espinosa_,
_Hist. Mex._, tom. i., pp. 264-85.
[X-70] Also spelled Tzihuanga, see note 62.
[X-71] See this vol., pp. 477-8. Beaumont says that Tlahuicol gained
nothing during his six months' campaign except some booty, and he
doubts whether that was much, as along the frontier there was little
to be had. _Crón. Mechoacan_, MS., pp. 59-60.
[X-72] He bore the title of Caltzontzin. See note 63. Brasseur says he
was also called Gwangwa Pagua, _Hist._, tom. iii., p. 78.
[X-73] _Beaumont_, _Crón. Mechoacan_, MS., p. 68.
[X-74] _Crón. Mechoacan_, MS., pp. 71-3.
[X-75] See vol. iii. of this work, p. 446.
[X-76] For boundaries of Miztecapan, see ante, vol. i., p. 678.
[X-77] See vol. i., p. 679, for boundaries.
[X-78] _Burgoa_, _Geog. Descrip. Oajaca_, tom. ii., pt i., pp. 195-6;
_Murguia_, _Estadist. Guajaca_, in _Soc. Mex. Geog., Boletin_, tom.
vii., p. 167.
[X-79] _Orozco y Berra_, _Geografía_, p. 133; _Veytia_, tom. i., p.
150.
[X-80] _Torquemada_, tom. i., p. 32; _Gomara_, _Conq. Mex._, fol. 299;
_Motolinia_, in _Icazbalceta_, _Col. de Doc._, tom. i., p. 8;
_Burgoa_, _Geog. Descrip. Oajaca_, tom. ii., pt i., p. 175; _Sahagun_,
tom. iii., lib. x., p. 136; _Orozco y Berra_, _Geografía_, p. 120.
[X-81] _Hist._, tom. iii., p. 5.
[X-82] Brasseur, citing _Burgoa_, _Geog. Descrip. Oajaca_, tom. ii.,
pt i., fol. 128-9, says they were male and female, and from them
descended the race that subsequently governed the country. _Hist._,
tom. iii., p. 6; _García_, _Orígen de los Ind._, pp. 327-8.
[X-83] _Burgoa_, _Geog. Descrip. Oajaca_, tom. ii., pt i., pp. 128,
175-6; _Orozco y Berra_, _Geografía_, p. 80, says this story is merely
invented to show the great age of the Miztecs. See also ante, vol.
iii., p. 73.
[X-84] _Burgoa_, _Geog. Descrip. Oajaca_, tom. ii., pt i., fol. 128-9.
Orozco y Berra, _Geografía_, p. 126, says the Zapotecs took their
region by force of arms from the Huatiquimanes, or Guanitiquimanes.
[X-85] _Hist._, tom. iii., pp. 8-9.
[X-86] _Torquemada_, tom. i., p. 255; _Herrera_, dec. iii., lib. ii.,
cap. xi.; _Veytia_, tom. i., p. 164; _Burgoa_, _Geog. Descrip.
Oajaca_, tom. ii., pt ii., fol. 297-8, 343-5.
[X-87] See vol. ii. of this work, pp. 209-11.
[X-88] 'De allà de la Costa del Sur, mas cerca de la Eclyptica
vezindad del Perù, y segun las circunstancias de su lengua, y trato de
la Provincia ò Reyno de Nicarahua.' _Burgoa_, _Geog. Descrip. Oajaca_,
tom. ii., pt ii., fol. 396; _Murguia_, _Estadist. Guajaca_, in _Soc.
Mex. Geog., Boletin_, tom. vii., p. 183; _Orozco y Berra_,
_Geografía_, pp. 173-4. See also _Mühlenpfordt_, _Mejico_, tom. ii.,
pt i., p. 176. Guillemot relates that some Peruvian families fled
northward along the Cordilleras. On the banks of the Sarrabia they
resorted to the fire test to find out whether the gods wished them to
settle there. A brand was placed in a hole, but as it was extinct in
the morning, they knew they must go further. Four emissaries went in
search of another place. Beneath a coapinol-tree, where now stands
Huixicovi, the brand-proof answered the test, and so they settled
there. The coapinol is still venerated. _Fossey_, _Mexique_, pp. 50-1;
see also p. 467.
[X-89] _Burgoa_, _Geog. Descrip. Oajaca_, tom. ii., pt i., fol. 196.
[X-90] _Burgoa_, _Geog. Descrip. Oajaca_, tom. ii., pt ii., fol. 312,
367-76.
[X-91] _Burgoa_, _Geog. Descrip. Oajaca_, tom. ii., pt i., fol. 197.
[X-92] _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. iii., p. 39.
[X-93] _Id._; _Burgoa_, _Geog. Descrip. Oajaca_, tom. ii., pt i., fol.
181, 188.
[X-94] _Burgoa_, _Geog. Descrip. Oajaca_, tom. ii., pt ii., fol. 230,
245.
[X-95] _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. iii., p. 45.
[X-96] _Burgoa_, _Geog. Descrip. Oajaca_, tom. ii., pt ii., fol. 330;
_Murguia_, _Estadist. Guajaca_, in _Soc. Mex. Geog., Boletin_, tom.
vii., pp. 167, 201.
[X-97] _Herrera_, dec. iv., lib. ix., cap. vii.; _Murguia_, _Estadist.
Guajaca_, in _Soc. Mex. Geog., Boletin_, tom. vii., p. 183; _Burgoa_,
_Geog. Descrip. Oajaca_, tom. ii., pt ii., fol. 280.
[X-98] _Burgoa_, _Geog. Descrip. Oajaca_, tom. ii., pt ii., fol.
302-3; _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. iii., pp. 48-50.
[X-99] See this volume, pp. 415-17.
[X-100] _Burgoa_, _Geog. Descrip. Oajaca_, tom. ii., pt i., fol. 150.
[X-101] See this volume, p. 425.
[X-102] _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. iii., pp. 284-5, 338-40.
[X-103] See this volume pp. 443-7.
[X-104] _Id._, pp. 461-2.
[X-105] _Murguia_, _Estadist. Guajaca_, in _Soc. Mex. Geog., Boletin_,
tom. vii., p. 187.
[X-106] _Hist._, tom. iv., p. 539.
[X-107] _Burgoa_, _Geog. Descrip. Oajaca_, tom. ii., pt ii., fol.
367-76.
[X-108] See p. 158.
CHAPTER XI.
THE QUICHÉ-CAKCHIQUEL EMPIRE IN GUATEMALA.
No Chronology in the South -- Outline View -- Authorities
-- Xbalanque at Utatlan -- The Migration from Tulan --
Balam-Quitzé and his Companions -- Sacrifices to Tohil --
the Quichés on Mt Hacavitz -- The Tamub and Ilocab -- First
Victories -- Qocavib Founds the Monarchy at Izmachi -- the
Toltec Theory -- Imaginary Empire of the East -- Different
Versions of Primitive History -- The Cakchiquel Migration --
Juarros and Fuentes -- Lists of Kings -- Cakchiquels under
Hacavitz -- Reigns of Balam-Conache, Cotuha, and Iztayul,
at Izmachi -- War against the Ilocab -- The Stolen Tribute
-- Gucumatz, Quiché Emperor at Utatlan -- Changes in the
Government -- Reigns of Cotuha II., Tepepul, and Iztayul
II. -- Cakchiquel History -- Conquests of Quicab I. --
Revolt of the Achihab -- Dismemberment of the Empire --
Cakchiquel Conquests -- Reigns of the last Guatemalan Kings
-- Appearance of the Spaniards under Alvarado in 1524.
[Sidenote: PRELIMINARY VIEW.]
In the south we have no connected history except for two centuries
immediately preceding the conquest, and no attempt at precise
chronology even for that short period. The Quiché-Cakchiquel empire in
Guatemala was, at the coming of the Spaniards, the most powerful and
famous in North America, except that of the Aztecs in Anáhuac, with
which it never came into direct conflict, although the fame of each
was well known to the other, and commercial intercourse was carried on
almost constantly. The southern empire, so far as may be learned from
the slight evidence bearing on the subject, was about three centuries
old in the sixteenth century, and the nearest approach to chronology
in its annals is the regular succession of monarchs who occupied the
throne, the achievements of each king given in what may be considered
to be their chronologic order, and an apparent connection in a few
cases with occurrences whose date is known from the Aztec records.
In a preceding volume of this work I have presented all that the
authorities have preserved respecting the manners and customs of the
Guatemalan peoples, and their condition at the coming of the Spaniards,
including their system of government and the order of royal succession.
In a chapter devoted to a general preliminary view of these nations,[XI-1]
I have already presented a brief outline of their history as follows:
Guatemala and northern Honduras were found in possession of the Mames
in the north-west, the Pokomams in the south-east, the Quichés in the
interior, and the Cakchiquels in the south.[XI-2] The two latter were the
most powerful, and ruled the country from their capitals of Utatlan
and Tecpan Guatemala, where they resisted the Spaniards almost to
the point of annihilation, retiring for the most part after defeat to
live by the chase in the distant mountain gorges. Guatemalan history
from the time of the Votanic empire down to an indefinite date not
many centuries before the conquest, is a blank. It re-commences with
the first traditions of the nations just mentioned. These traditions,
as in the case of every American people, begin with the immigration
of foreign tribes into the country, as the first in the series of
events leading to the establishment of the Quiché-Cakchiquel empire.
Assuming the Toltec dispersion from Anáhuac in the eleventh century
as a well-authenticated fact, most writers have identified the
Guatemalan nations, except perhaps the Mames, by some considered the
descendants of the original inhabitants, with the migrating Toltecs
who fled southward to found a new empire. I have already made known
my scepticism respecting national American migrations in general, and
the Toltec migration southward in particular, and there is nothing in
the annals of Guatemala to modify the views previously expressed. The
Quiché traditions are vague and without chronologic order, much less
definite than those relating to the mythical Aztec wanderings. The
sum and substance of the Quiché and Toltec identity is the traditional
statement that the former people entered Guatemala at an unknown period
in the past, while the latter left Anáhuac in the eleventh century.
That the Toltecs should have migrated en masse southward, taken
possession of Guatemala, established a mighty empire, and yet have
abandoned their language for dialects of the original Maya tongue, is
in the highest degree improbable. It is safer to suppose that the mass
of the Quichés, and other nations of Guatemala, Chiapas, and Honduras,
were descended directly from the Maya builders of Palenque, and from
contemporary peoples,--that is, as has been shown in the chapter on
pre-Toltec history in this volume, from the Maya peoples after they
had been conquered by a new power and had become to a certain extent,
so far as their institutions were concerned, Nahua nations.--Yet the
differences between the Quiché-Cakchiquel structures and the older
architectural remains of the Maya empire, indicate a new era of Maya
culture, originated not improbably by the introduction of foreign
elements. Moreover the apparent identity in name and teachings between
the early civilizers of the Quiché tradition and the Nahua followers of
Quetzalcoatl, together with reported resemblances between actual Quiché
and Aztec institutions as observed by Europeans, indicate farther that
the new element was engrafted on Maya civilization by contact with the
Nahuas, a contact of which the presence of the exiled Toltec nobility
may have been a prominent feature. After the overthrow of the original
empire, we may suppose the people to have been subdivided during the
course of centuries by civil wars and sectarian struggles into petty
states, the glory of their former greatness vanished and partially
forgotten, the spirit of progress dormant, to be roused again by the
presence of the Nahua chiefs. These gathered and infused new life
into the scattered remnants; they introduced some new institutions,
and thus aided the ancient peoples to rebuild their empire on the
old foundations, retaining the dialects of the original language. The
preceding paragraphs, however, gave an exaggerated idea of the Toltec
element in forming Quiché institutions, as has been shown by the
investigations of the present volume, since, while the Nahua element in
these institutions was very strong, yet the Nahua influence was exerted
chiefly in pre-Toltec times while the two peoples were yet living
together in Central America, rather than by the exiled Toltec nobles
and priests.
[Sidenote: AUTHORITIES ON GUATEMALAN HISTORY.]
The authorities for Quiché history are not numerous. They include
the work of Juarros, which is chiefly founded on the manuscripts of
Fuentes; the published Spanish and French translations of the Popol
Vuh, or National Book, of which much has already been said; and a
number of documents similar to the latter, written in Spanish letters,
but in the various Quiché-Cakchiquel dialects, by native authors who
wrote after the Conquest, of course, but relied upon the aboriginal
records and traditions, never published and only known to the world
through the writings of Brasseur de Bourbourg, who, in Maya as in many
parts of Nahua history, is the chief and almost the only authority.
In the earliest annals of Central America, while the Xibalban empire
was yet in the height of its power, we find what is, perhaps, the first
mention of the territory known later as Guatemala, in the mention by
the Popol Vuh[XI-3] of Carchah, or Nimxob Carchah, a locality in Vera
Paz, as the place whence Hunhunahpu and Vucub Hunahpu, the first Nahua
chiefs who conspired against the Xibalban monarchs, directed their
first expedition toward the region of Palenque. Las Casas also names
this as one of the entrances to the road which lead to the infernal
regions, the sense probably given to Xibalba in the traditions of the
country.[XI-4] And from Utatlan, in the same region, in later centuries
the Quiché capital, started Xbalanque and Hunahpu, the descendants
of the two chieftains already named, to avenge the defeat of their
ancestors, and to overthrow the proud kings of Xibalba. The young
princes left behind them their mother and grand-mother, planting in
their cabin two canes which were to indicate to those left at home
their own fortune, to flourish with their prosperity, to wither at each
misfortune, and to die should they meet the fate of their predecessors;
hence perhaps the Quiché name of Utatlan, Gumarcaah, 'house of
withered canes.'[XI-5] The mention of Guatemalan localities in this
connection is not sufficient to prove that the opposition to Xibalba
had its beginning or centre in Guatemala, but simply indicates that
the Nahua power in those primitive times extended over that region,
as did also the Maya power, not improbably. In other words, the long
struggle between the two rival powers was no local contest at and about
Palenque, but was felt in a greater or less degree throughout the whole
country, from Anáhuac to Guatemala, and perhaps still farther south.
[Sidenote: EXPEDITION OF XBALANQUE.]
Xbalanque's expedition and some subsequent occurrences are related by
Torquemada, as follows: "After the people of the earth had multiplied
and increased, it was made known that a god had been born in the
province of Otlatla (Utatlan), now known as Vera Paz, thirty leagues
from the capital called Quauhtemallan (Guatemala), which god they named
Exbalanquen. Of him it is related, among other lies and fables, that
he went to wage war against Hell, and fought against all the people
of that region and conquered them, and captured the king of Hell with
many of his army. On his return to the earth after his victory, bearing
with him his spoils, the king of the Shades begged that he might not
be carried away. They were then in three or four grades of light, but
Exbalanquen gave the infernal monarch a kick, saying 'go back, and
thine be in future all that is rotten, and refuse, and stinking, in
these infernal regions.' Exbalanquen then returned to Vera Paz whence
he had set out, but he was not received there with the festivities
and songs of triumph which he thought he had deserved, and therefore
he went away to another kingdom, where he was kindly received. This
conqueror of Hell is said to have introduced the custom of sacrificing
human beings.""[XI-6] Brasseur adds on this subject: "Copan, the name of
which ('on the vase') alludes mysteriously to the religious symbols
of the mixed, or Mestizo, Nahua race, was it then chosen by this
prince, whose mother (Xquiq) personified the fundamental idea of this
sanguinary worship? However this may have been, it seems certain that
the latter city owed its origin to a fierce warrior named Balam,
who had entered the country by the way of Peten Itza about fifteen
centuries before the Spanish conquest. During the last period of native
rule the province of which Copan was the capital was called Payaqui
('in the Yaqui, or Nahuas') or the kingdom of Chiquimula."[XI-7] But all
this may be regarded as purely conjectural.
From the time when Xbalanque and Hunahpu marched to the conquest
of Xibalba, and succeeded in subordinating the ancient Maya to the
Nahua power, for several centuries down to the subsequent scattering
of both Nahua and Maya tribes, which preceded the appearance of the
Toltec branches in Anáhuac, the history of Guatemala is a blank. That
civilized peoples occupied the country at that remote time; that they
had been more or less the subjects of the ancient empire; and that they
had been brought within the new influences of the Nahua institutions,
there can be little doubt; but they have left no record of their
deeds, probably not even of their names. The annals recommence with
the traditional migration from Tulan, by which the Toltecs established
themselves on the central plateaux of Mexico, while the tribes
afterwards known as Quichés wandered southward to the highlands of
Vera Paz; but five or six centuries were yet to pass before we find any
record that may be properly termed history. I return to the traditions
of the Popol Vuh, it being necessary to take up the thread of the story
at a period even preceding the arrival at Tulan, and thus to repeat in
a measure certain portions already referred to in a preceding chapter.
[Sidenote: RECORD OF THE POPOL VUH.]
After the creation of the first men, Balam-Quitzé, Balam-Agab,
Mahucutah, and Iqi-Balam, wives were given them, and these were the
parents of the Quiché nation. Among the nations then in the East,
that received their names from those that were begotten, were those
of Tepeuh, Oloman, Cohah, Quenech, and Ahau; also those of Tamub and
Ilocab who came together from the eastern land.[XI-8] Balam-Quitzé was the
ancestor of the nine grand families of Cawek; Balam-Agab of the nine
of Nihaïb; Mahucutah of the four of Ahau-Quiché. There came also the
thirteen of Tecpan, and those of Rabinal, the Cakchiquels, those of
Tziquinaha, Zacaha, and others. All seem to have spoken one language,
and to have lived in great peace, black men and white together. Here
they awaited the rising of the sun and prayed to the Heart of Heaven.
The tribes were already very numerous, including that of the Yaqui
(Nahuas). At the advice of Balam-Quitzé and his companions, they
departed in search of gods to worship, and came to Tulan-Zuiva, the
Seven Caves, where gods were given them, Tohil, Avilix, Hacavitz, and
Nicahtagah. Tohil was also the god of Tamub and Ilocab, and the three
tribes, or families, kept together, for their god was the same.[XI-9] Here
arrived all the tribes, the Rabinals, the Cakchiquels, the Tziquinaha,
and the Yaqui; and here their language was confounded, they could no
longer understand each other, and they separated, some going to the
east and many coming hither (to Guatemala). They dressed in skins
and were poor, but they were wonderful men, and when they reached
Tulan-Zuiva, long had been their journey, as the ancient histories tell
us.
Now there was no fire; Tohil was the first to create it, but it is
not known exactly how he did it, since it was already burning when
it was discovered by Balam-Quitzé and Balam-Agab. The fire was put
out by a sudden shower and by a storm of hail, but the fire of the
Quichés was rekindled by Tohil. Then the other tribes came shivering
with chattering teeth to ask for fire from Balam-Quitzé, which was at
first denied them; and a messenger from Xibalba appeared, a Zotzil,
or bat, as it is said, and advised the high-priests to refuse the
petition of the tribes until they should have learned from Tohil the
price to be paid for the fire. The condition finally named by the god
was, that they consent to "unite themselves to me under their armpit
and under their girdle, and that they embrace me, Tohil," a condition
not very clearly expressed, but which, as is shown by what follows,
was an agreement to worship the Quiché god, and sacrifice to him their
blood, and, if required, their children. They accepted the condition
and received the fire. But one family stole the fire, the family of
Zotzil, of the Cakchiquels, whose god was Chamalcan, and whose symbol
was the bat; and they did not submit to the conditions of Tohil. Here
they began to fast and to watch for the sun. It was not here that they
received their power and sovereignty, but there where they subdued the
great and the little tribes, when they sacrificed them before the face
of Tohil, offering him the blood, the life, the breast, and the armpit
of all men. Thus at Tulan came to them their majesty, that great wisdom
which was in them in the obscurity and in the night. They came then and
tore themselves away from there and abandoned the regions of the rising
sun. "This is not our home; let us go and see where we shall establish
it," said Tohil. Truly he spoke to Balam-Quitzé--and the others. "Make
first your thanksgiving, prepare the holes in your ears, pierce your
elbows, and offer sacrifice; this will be your act of gratitude before
god." "It is well," they replied, piercing their ears; and these things
are in the song of their coming from Tulan; and their hearts groaned
when they started, after they had torn themselves away from Tulan.
"Alas! we shall no longer behold here the dawn at the moment when the
sun comes up to illumine the face of the earth," said they as they set
out. But some were left on the road; for some remained asleep, each of
the tribes arising so as to see the morning star. It was the sign of
the morning that was in their thoughts when they came from the land of
the rising sun, and their hope was the same in leaving this place which
is at a great distance, as they tell us to-day.
[Sidenote: THE QUICHÉS AT MT HACAVITZ.]
They arrived and assembled on the mountain now called Chipixab, the
Quichés, Tamub, Ilocab, Cakchiquels, Rabinals, and Tziquinaha. They
took counsel one with another, and were very sad, and hungry too. Then,
at their own request, were the gods concealed in different ravines
and forests,[XI-10] except Hacavitz, who was placed on a pyramid on Mt
Hacavitz, and there all the tribes waited in great trouble for the
coming of the dawn. "Now behold lords were made, and our old men and
our fathers had their beginning; behold we will relate the dawn and
the appearance of the sun, moon, and stars." The account of the dawn
and its attendant ceremonies, which follows in the Popol Vuh, would
seem, in connection with the preceding quotations, to refer vaguely to
the election of rulers, the establishment of temporal and spiritual
government, the birth of Quiché institutions. Here they sang the
song of lamentation for their separation from their kindred in Tulan,
already referred to.[XI-11]
Under Balam-Quitzé, Balam-Agab, Mahucutah, and Iqi-Balam, they lived
together on the mountain, and the tribes of Tamub and Ilocab lived
near by in the forests of Dan, under the same god Tohil, the god of
the people of Rabinal being the same under the name of Huntoh, while
the god of the Cakchiquels was different, Tzotziha Chamalcan, as was
also their language. Their hearts were heavy because Tohil, Avilix,
and Hacavitz were still hidden in the grass and moss, although it has
been stated before that the latter was on the pyramid of Hacavitz. They
went to thank Tohil for the sunrise, and to make offerings of resins
and plants; and he spoke and made known a rule of conduct for the
sacrificers; and they called upon him to aid them and said, "here shall
be our mountains and our valleys;" and the gods predicted their future
greatness. They still suffered from hunger, and the places where the
wives abode were not clearly known.
And now many towns had been founded, apparently by other than the
Quiché tribes, but as to Balam-Quitzé and his three companions they
were not clearly seen, but cried like wild beasts in the mountains
and on the roads, coming each day before Tohil, Avilix, and Hacavitz,
offering them the blood of beasts, and blood drawn from their own
bodies. Afterwards began the slaughter of the surrounding people who
were overtaken on the roads, either one by one or in small groups,
and slain, as was supposed, by wild beasts. After many had perished,
suspicions were aroused of the four sacrificers and of their gods, but
it was hard to track the pretended animals on the fog-enveloped summits
of the Guatemalan heights. Now the gods Tohil, Avilix, and Hacavitz
assumed the appearance of three young men, and were wont to bathe in a
certain river, vanishing at will whenever they were seen by the people;
and a council was held to devise means for effecting their death, and
to escape the destruction caused by these Quichés of Cawek. They deemed
themselves a great people and those of Cawek only a handful; yet if
the power of the three gods was really so great that it could not be
overcome, then would they call upon Tohil also to be their god. It was
decided to send to meet the three young men at the bath two of the most
beautiful of their virgins, that the passions of the former might be
excited. These virgins, in obedience to the commands of their elders,
went to the river to wash linen, and both removed all their clothing as
soon as the three bathers appeared, and began to talk with them, saying
that their parents had sent them to speak to the young men and to bring
some token of having had an interview with them. But the young men did
not, as was expected, so far descend from their godlike dignity as to
take liberties with the fair Xtah and Xpuch, but after consultation
with Balam-Quitzé and his brother sacrificers, gave the girls their
painted mantles as tokens to carry to those that had sent them. One of
the mantles was covered with painted wasps and bees which came to life
and stung the lord who put it on, and thus was Tohil victorious over
the princes, by the aid of Balam-Quitzé and his companions. Then an
assault was determined upon by the numerous tribes against the small
forces of the Quiché sacrificers on Mount Hacavitz, but Tohil knew of
all their plans, as did Balam-Quitzé. The invaders were to make the
attack by night, but they fell asleep on the route, and their eyebrows
and beard were shaven and all their ornaments stolen by the valiant
Quichés as they slept. The Quiché leaders fortified their position
with palisades and fallen trees, and stationed on them manikins of
wood armed like soldiers and decorated with the gold and silver stolen
from the sleeping foe. The sacrificers were sore afraid, but Tohil
re-assured them. They filled the shells of gourds with hornets and
wasps and placed them about the defences of their town. Spies came from
the enemy and looked upon the wooden soldiers and rejoiced that they
were few in number, and at the victory their countless armies were soon
to win.
[Sidenote: THE THREE TEMPTERS.]
The hostile forces, armed with bows and arrows, and bearing shields,
ascended the mountain and surrounded the Quiché retreat, shouting and
striving with fearful clamor to strike terror into the hearts of their
foes, who meanwhile looked calmly on. At the fitting moment the winged
allies of the Quichés were released from the gourds and in countless
hordes attacked the invaders right valiantly, fastening themselves
on the eyes and noses of the foe, who threw down their arms in their
agony, threw themselves on the ground, and were slaughtered by the
followers of Tohil, both men and women joining in the bloody work.
Barely half of the invading army escaped to their homes. The tribes
were thus humiliated before the face of the sacrificers, begged for
mercy, and were made subjects; the victors were filled with exultation,
and multiplied, begetting sons and daughters on Mount Hacavitz.
The sons of the sacrificers were as follows; Balam-Quitzé begat Qocaib
and Qocavib, ancestor of the Cawek, or first Quiché royal family.
Balam-Agab begat Qoacul and Qoacutec, from whom sprang the family of
Nihaïb. Mahucutah had but one son Qoahau; and Iqi-Balam had none.[XI-12]
The four sacrificers, the first leaders and fathers of the Quiché
people, were now old and ready to die, and after many words of counsel
to their sons they disappeared suddenly, leaving to their people what
is called the 'enveloped majesty' as a most precious relic, the form of
which was not known for the envelope was not removed; and thenceforth
the Quichés from their home on the mountain ruled all the surrounding
tribes now thoroughly subjected.
[Sidenote: ESTABLISHMENT OF THE MONARCHY.]
The three elder sons, Qocaib, Qoacutec, and Qoahau, were married long
after the death of their fathers, and they determined to go as their
fathers had ordered to the East on the shore of the sea, whence their
fathers had come, 'to receive the royalty,' bidding adieu to their
brothers and friends, and promising to return. "Doubtless they passed
over the sea when they went to the East to receive the royalty. Now
this is the name of the lord, of the monarch of the people of the East
where they went. And when they arrived before the lord Nacxit,[XI-13] the
name of the great lord, of the only judge, whose power was without
limit, behold he granted them the sign of royalty and all that
represents it; hence came the sign of the rank of Ahpop and of that
of Ahpop Camha, and Nacxit finally gave them the insignia of royalty,
... all the things in fact which they brought on their return, and
which they went to receive from the other side of the sea, the art of
painting from Tulan, a system of writing, they said, for the things
recorded in the histories."
The three princes returned to Mount Hacavitz, assembled all the tribes,
including the people of Ilocab and Tamub, the Cakchiquels, Tziquinaha,
and the tribe of Rabinal, assuming the authority over them to the
great joy of all. Then the wives of the original sacrificers died,
and many of the people left Mount Hacavitz and founded innumerable
other towns on the neighboring hills,[XI-14] where their numbers were
greatly multiplied. The three princes who went to the East to receive
the royalty, had grown old and died, but before their death they had
established themselves in their great city of Izmachi.[XI-15]
* * * * *
The narrative of the Popol Vuh condenses in the preceding paragraphs,
the history of the Quichés during the whole time that elapsed between
the scattering of the Nahuas from Tulan before the fifth century, and
the final establishment of the Quiché empire, an event whose exact date
is unknown--for we have nothing but approximate dates in the aboriginal
history of Guatemala--but which, judging by the number of kings that
are represented as having occupied the throne afterwards down to the
coming of the Spaniards, is thought not to have been earlier than the
thirteenth century. The record implies, in fact, that the Quichés lived
long in their new home before they acquired power among the surrounding
tribes. All this time they were directed by their trinity, Tohil,
Avilix, and Hacavitz, acting through their four chief sacrificers, or
high-priests, Balam-Quitzé, Balam-Agab, Mahucutah, and Iqi-Balam, the
same who had led them in their migration from the region of Xibalba,
and even in their migration to that region from the east. Of course
many generations of priests bearing these names or these titles must
have succeeded each other in the direction of Quiché affairs during
this period; but the record admits the succession of sons to the
ecclesiastical and temporal power only after the nation had risen
to power. It has been noted, however, that another document mentions
several generations between Balam-Quitzé and Qocavib. The surrounding
peoples are continually referred to in the Popol Vuh, but for the most
part simply as 'the tribes,' although the tribes of Tamub and Ilocab,
of Rabinals, of the Cakchiquels, and several others are frequently
named, sometimes in a manner that would lead the reader to suppose that
these were 'the tribes' subdued, but oftener as if these were from the
first connected with the Quichés. From the records of other Guatemalan
nations which have never been published, the Abbé Brasseur attempts to
throw some light on the history of the tribes among which the Quichés
lived so long in a subordinate position, and on the period over which
the Popol Vuh passes so rapidly.
[Sidenote: MIGRATION FROM TULAN.]
The many tribes that left the central region of Tulan did not probably
do so simultaneously, but migrated at irregular intervals, so that
the final destruction of Tulan may not have occurred before the sixth
or seventh century. Juarros even gives a list of four kings, Tanub,
Capichoch, Calel-Ahus, and Ahpop, who ruled in that city, although his
account taken from that of Fuentes is not worthy of great confidence.
According to the records followed by Brasseur, the first tribes to
migrate southward towards Guatemala, were those of Tamub and Ilocab
together with the thirteen clans of Tecpan, the ancestors of the
Pokomams. We have seen, however, that Guatemala was already more or
less in possession of the Nahuas before the overthrow of Xibalba,
and the vague references to the tribes of Tamub and Ilocab--the
oldest Nahua tribes in the country according to all authorities--are
insufficient to show clearly whether they were already in Guatemala in
the time of Hunahpu and Xbalanque, or like the Quichés proper migrated
thither after the fall of Xibalba. The chiefs of Tamub held the highest
rank in a kind of confederacy that seems to have been established at
this early time. Their capital was Amag-Dan, a few leagues north of
Utatlan. The family of Ilocab, the second in the confederacy, had its
capital, Uquincat, at a short distance north-west of Utatlan, and was
divided into two branches called Gale-Ziha and Tzununi-ha. The third
chief of the alliance has escaped the abbé's researches. The thirteen
tribes of Tecpan, under the names of Uxab and Pokomam, occupied Vera
Paz and the region south of the Motagua, their capital, Nimpokom, being
near where the modern town of Rabinal now stands. The western country
towards Chiapas was held by the Mames, one of the ancient peoples of
Guatemala who were probably found in the country by the first tribes
from Tulan. This nation was divided into many bands, whose names
and towns are given, the latter including those afterwards known as
Quezaltenango and Huehuetenango. One document mentions a succession of
nine sovereigns in the Tamub dynasty before the Quiché power began.
The Quichés entered the country at about the same time as the tribes
of Ilocab, Tamub, and the Pokomams, but as we have seen in their own
record, they had no influence for many centuries among the nations
that preceded them. During this period, with the Cakchiquels, the band
of Rabinal, and the Ah-Tziquinaha, they constituted a group of small
tribes, dwelling on the barren heights of Vera Paz, or the Lacandon
country. It is not probable that they were yet known as Quichés, or
'men of the woods,' and all that is known of them is the names of their
gods, Tohil, Avilix, and Hacavitz; of their chief priests, whose names,
or titles, were Balam-Quitzé, Balam-Agab, Mahucutah, and Iqi-Balam;
and of leaders mentioned by the _MS. Cakchiquel_, and named Xurcah and
Totomay. According to our only authority on early events, excepting
the Popol Vuh, the time which was occupied by the Quichés under
Balam-Quitzé and his companions in their long struggles as animals
against the other tribes, is not that which elapsed between their
arrival from Tulan at Mt Hacavitz in the sixth or seventh century, and
the establishment of their monarchy in the thirteenth, but rather that
between their first coming prominently into notice in the mountains
of Vera Paz in the twelfth century, and the founding of their empire.
According to this version, the annals of the whole preceding period are
included by the author of the Popol Vuh in those of the migration to Mt
Hacavitz; Balam-Quitzé and the other sacrificers were not their leaders
when they left Tulan, but were given to them much later by their god
Tohil to guide the unfortunate people out of their difficulties; in
fact, these sacrificers, so called, were Toltec chieftains who fled
from Anáhuac at the fall of their empire, joined the partisans who
accompanied their flight to the forces of the Quichés, gathered the
scattered tribes on the heights of Vera Paz, and were enabled after a
century of contest--during which the Quichés were regarded as a nation
of brigands, much like the Aztecs at the same time, or a little later,
about the Mexican lakes--to subdue the surrounding nations, and thus
become masters of Guatemala. There are probably no sufficient reasons
to deny that the empire was founded in the twelfth or thirteenth
century;--although it should be noted that this gives to the following
kings down to the Conquest, as will be seen later, an average reign of
only twelve or fifteen years;--the Quichés are known to have claimed
relationship with the Toltec sovereigns; and it is quite likely the
exiled chiefs and priests of Tollan had an influence on the Quiché
institutions; but that the Quiché empire was thus founded by the Toltec
exiles, there is, as I have repeatedly shown, every reason to deny.
[Sidenote: EMBASSY TO ANÁHUAC.]
The first tribes conquered by the followers of Tohil were five of
the thirteen Pokomam bands, which were forced to pay tribute. Ahcan
was now the high-priest and leader of the bands who were gathered
about Mt Hacavitz, and he was the great-grandson of Balam-Quitzé, and
the father of Qocaib and Qocavib, mentioned by the Popol Vuh as the
founders of the monarchy, and represented by that record as the sons of
Balam-Quitzé. It was at his command, expressed just before his death,
that the three princes undertook a journey to the East, to obtain from
the great monarch of that region, the authority and insignia which
should render legitimate the power they were about to assume. Other
documents differ from the Popol Vuh in stating that while one of the
brothers, Qocaib, thus visited the East, the other brother, Qocavib,
directed his course northward to Anáhuac to seek the royal investiture
at the hands of the Toltec princes who had remained at Culhuacan.
He reached the valley, but such was the state of anarchy he found
prevailing there, that he was forced to return without having attained
his object, and reached his home long before the return of his brother.
He even took advantage of Qocaib's absence to dishonor his wife, who
bore him a son. Qocaib, when he came back from his successful mission
and was congratulated by the assembled chieftains, saw the child in
its mother's arms, and was not a little surprised at its existence,
but he seemed perfectly satisfied with the assurance of his wife that
the child was of his own blood, and taking it in his arms, he named
it Balam Conache, who was the founder of the house of Conache and
of Iztayul, and the first to bear the title of Ahpop Camha, or heir
apparent to the throne. It is not explained why the younger brother,
unsuccessful in his mission, was allowed to become the head of the
government instead of the older and more successful Qocaib. A second
journey to the East by the two princes is also recorded before their
right to the throne was definitely established.
This subject of an eastern monarchy ruled by Nacxit is shrouded in
impenetrable mystery. Brasseur claims confidently that the kingdom
cited was in Honduras with its capital probably at Copan, and ruled by
Acxitl Quetzalcoatl, the last of the Toltec kings, or by his son; the
sea alluded to as having been crossed in the journey, must then have
been the gulf of Amatique or that of Dulce. The only authority that I
know of for this assumption is the vague report by Ixtlilxochitl that
Acxitl went southward and established a great empire in Tlapallan,
where he died in the twelfth century; and the slight resemblance in
the names Acxitl and Nacxit. I need not say that the authority is
altogether insufficient, and that it is much safer to give the tale of
the mission to the East some mythologic meaning, or to admit that its
meaning like that of many of the traditions of this early period in
Guatemalan history is wholly unknown.
[Sidenote: REIGN OF QOCAVIB.]
The monarchy as thus first established seems to have included, besides
the Quichés proper of the house of Cawek, the Cakchiquels, Rabinals,
and Ah-Tziquinaha, as the principal Quiché branches or allies. During
the reign of Qocavib, the territory of the kingdom was considerably
extended by the conquest of large portions of Vera Paz, which were
taken from the Pokomams in the south. At the assault of Qoxbaholam, the
stronghold of a powerful people called the Agaab, the prince of that
nation is reported to have been captured, and to have made his nation
tributary to the Quiché king and worshipers of the Quiché trinity,
Tohil, Avilix, and Hacavitz. This and succeeding events, down to the
foundation of Izmachi, already alluded to in the account from the
Popol Vuh, I quote from the only writer who has had access to the other
Guatemalan records.[XI-16]
"Already masters of Pachalum, and on the point of entering Zquina, the
Quichés found themselves checked by strong forces, when an unexpected
ally was offered them; this was Cotuha, prince of Cakulgi, hereditary
guardian of the sacred stone of Tzutuha in the temple of Cahbaha, whom
they had just made a prisoner. Like a skillful politician, Qocavib
took advantage of this occurrence so providential for him. The annals
reveal that in the midst of their conquests the Quichés were divided by
family rivalries; and it seems probable that Qocavib, whose name takes
the place of that of his older brother, had as enemies all the princes
of the house of Ahcan, sprung from Qocaib. Placing little reliance
on the support of his relatives, he sought to strengthen himself by
making allies among the conquered chiefs; and thus Cotuha having become
his captive, he offered him in the order of the Ahqib and Ahqahb the
fourth rank, vacant at the time by the death of the incumbent who had
no offspring; so that this prince was assured of eventually rising to
the command of the whole nation. Cotuha, proclaimed by the nobility,
soon proved his worthiness of that high honor. After having powerfully
aided the Quichés in the conquest of Zquina, Bayal, Chamilah, Ginom,
Tocoy, and Patzima, returning to the Rio Chixoy with his new allies
and subjects, he guided them by passes known only to himself to the
centre of the great city of Cawinal on the bank of the river, an event
soon followed by the submission of the whole Agaab nation, to which it
belonged. The Quiché kings finding themselves pressed for room on Mount
Hacavitz, left this city for that of Cawinal, where they established
the seat of government. This was not, however, the permanent capital.
At the death of Qocavib, Balam Conache, his successor, crossed the
river southward, probably even before his coronation, and fixed his
residence at Izmachi; and there he had himself proclaimed Ahau Ahpop
and consecrated with all the Toltec ceremonial, conferring the title of
Ahpop Camha on his son Iztayul."
[Sidenote: MIGRATION FROM THE NORTH.]
Here should be given such scattered items of information respecting
this primitive period of Guatemalan history, given by the same author
in an earlier work,[XI-17] as are additional to or differ from those
already presented. The famous mythical queen Atit is said by Fuentes
to have lived four centuries, and from her sprang all the royal and
noble families of Guatemala. The oldest nation, or tribe, in the
country was that of Tamub, whose son Copichoch had come from the east
with Cochochlam, Mahquinalo, and Ahcanail, brought the black stone
afterwards venerated at Utatlan, and reigned for a time at Tulan.
The tribe of Ilocab ruled after that of Tamub, or perhaps at the same
time, over the adjoining provinces. Brasseur seems here to favor the
idea that the tribes of Tamub and Ilocab were the Nahuas who occupied
Guatemala before the overthrow of Xibalba in the time of Xbalanque
and Hunahpu, who refused to receive the former at his return from the
conquest, yet among whom he introduced human sacrifice. A Zutugil
document makes the Seven Caves an earlier station on the Quiché
migration than Tulan, and speaks of wars that drove the people from the
latter place into the mountains of Vera Paz. The worthy abbé finds room
in his capacious imagination for a theory that the Pokomams, Quichés,
Cakchiquels, and other kindred peoples, originated in the regions north
of Mexico, stayed a while with the Toltecs at Tollan, but not long
enough to be influenced to any great extent by them, and then migrated
to the Guatemalan highlands. It does not seem to occur to this author
that there are no arguments in favor of such a theory, that there is
no necessity for such a conjecture, and that it disagrees radically
with nearly all that he ever wrote before or afterwards. The same
writer notes that the Pokomams were bitter foes of Acxitl, the last
Toltec king, while the other Quiché tribes were friendly to him, and
he infers from Nuñez de la Vega and other authorities that the kingdom
of Xibalba was still existing, though with greatly diminished power,
at the time when the Quiché tribes came into notice in Guatemala and
Acxitl established his southern empire. The Cakchiquels on their way
are even said to have been employed to defend the Xibalban frontiers,
and their chieftains, the Tukuches, took their name of Zotziles, or
bats, from that of Tzinacantla, their residence at the time, which has
the meaning of 'city of bats.' In fact the tribes are here represented
as having gathered in the Xibalban region before they mounted to their
later homes in the highlands.[XI-18]
The accounts of this gathering are chiefly from the Cakchiquel record.
The locality is called Deozacuancu, apparently in the tierra caliente
of Tabasco; but war was declared against some neighboring power, and
the tribes went to Oloman--perhaps the Tepeu and Oliman, mentioned
in a preceding chapter.[XI-19] The cities against which this expedition
was directed were Nonualcat and Xulpiti, the former suggesting the
Nonohualcas, whose home was in the Tabascan region. The leaders were
the Cakchiquel, or Zotzil-Tukuche, chiefs Hacavitz (Gagawitz) and
Zactecauh; the enemies were defeated in a battle fought chiefly on
the water; their cities were taken and their people massacred. But
even while engaged in the massacre, their foes rallied, attacked them
in the rear, and in their turn routed the Quiché tribes with great
slaughter, not without the aid of magic arts, as we are informed by
the record. The remnants of the vanquished were re-united on Mt Oloman,
but the influence of Hacavitz and Zactecauh was destroyed, the tribes
could be no longer kept together, and they resolved to separate and
each for itself to seek the regions of the interior. No particulars
are preserved of their wanderings, but Brasseur believes that the
Quichés proper were the first to reach the heights of Vera Paz, after
a generation at least had passed since they left the Xibalban region
of Tabasco, and the sufferings from cold and the giving of fire by
Tohil, are by him applied to the period immediately following their
arrival. Then the other tribes arrived one by one and applied for fire,
as has already been stated, their languages having become different
one from another during that interval. The envoy from Xibalba also
appeared among them, a circumstance that indicates to Brasseur that the
Xibalban empire still existed in the eleventh or twelfth century; but
which may, I think, be taken much more reasonably as a proof that these
events took place at a date as early as the fifth or sixth century. The
Cakchiquels were the last to arrive, and they stole the fire of Tohil
without submitting to the required conditions, coming, as it is said,
like bats, another derivation of their name of Zotziles.
[Sidenote: MAMES AND POKOMAMS.]
The Cakchiquels are said to have applied, on their arrival, the name
Mem, or as the Spaniards afterwards called it, Mames, or 'stutterers,'
to the Maya-speaking aboriginal tribes whom they found in possession
of the country, on account of their peculiar pronunciation, although
the Cakchiquel was also a Maya dialect. The Mames in later times
occupied the north-western part of the country towards the Chiapan
frontiers, where they were never entirely conquered by the Quiché
nations down to the time of the Conquest, their capital being Zakuléu,
near Huehuetenango.[XI-20] Besides the Mames, probably the most ancient of
the Guatemalan nations, the tribes of Tamub and Ilocab also occupied
the country before the later Quiché tribes. According to Fuentes the
capital of the Tamub was Utatlan, or Gumarcaah, and it is stated that
the Ilocab were bitter enemies of the Quichés, and were only conquered
when nearly annihilated. The Pokomams and Pokonchis, kindred tribes or
divisions of the same tribe, are here estimated by Brasseur to have
arrived something more than a half century before the other Quiché
tribes, and are said to have conquered or allied themselves with the
Uxab, elsewhere[XI-21] spoken of as a division of that tribe. Nothing is
known of Pokomam history, but some remains of their language and of
their towns may yet be studied. These people, together with the Tamub
and Ilocab, were perhaps the chief foes of the Quichés in the earlier
days of their power.
In their wars against the Pokomams the Quiché tribes made use of the
ancient chieftains who had been subjected by that people, among whom
are mentioned Zakbim and Huntzuy on the Chiquimula frontier. The first
battle and the first Quiché victory was in the valley of Rabinal and
brought into the possession of the Cakchiquels--for these events are
taken from the Cakchiquel record--the stronghold of Mount Zactzuy,
and also made allies of Loch and Xet, chieftains of the Ahquehayi,
who afterwards became almost identical with the Cakchiquels. The
next point against which Hacavitz proceeded was Mount Cakhay; but the
allied Quiché forces were repulsed with great loss, and so weakened
that it was long before they were able again to attack the warlike
Pokomams. Then they retired from a hopeless contest, and took refuge
in the inaccessible mountain fastnesses about Utatlan, now Santa Cruz
del Quiché in the department of Totonicapan. The mountain where they
established themselves is called in the Cakchiquel record Tohohil,
'clashing of arms,' but in the Popol Vuh is known as we have seen as
Mount Hacavitz. All that is known of their stay at Mount Hacavitz, of
their oppression by the neighboring tribes, their gradually increasing
power, their final victory over those tribes, and the establishment of
the Quiché monarchy with its capital at Izmachi, related by Brasseur in
the work from which the preceding notes have been extracted, is taken
by him from the Popol Vuh, and is substantially the same that I have
already given on the same authority.
[Sidenote: VERSION OF JUARROS.]
To conclude this primitive period of Guatemalan history, it only
remains to present a few notes given on the subject by the Spanish
writers, chiefly by Juarros, who follows the manuscript writings of
Fuentes y Guzman, founded as is claimed on native documents, but full
of inconsistencies, and doubtless also of errors. Juarros, or the
authority followed by him, was fully imbued with the belief that the
Quichés were the Toltecs who left Anáhuac after the fall of their
empire, and his efforts to reconcile the native records to this theory
perhaps account for many of his inconsistencies. I translate from this
author that part of his work which relates to this primitive period.
"The Toltecs referred to were of the house of Israel, and the great
prophet Moses freed them from the captivity in which they were held
by Pharaoh; but, having passed the Red Sea, they gave themselves up
to idolatry, and persisting in it notwithstanding the warnings of
Moses, either to escape the chidings of this law-giver or for fear of
punishment, they left him and their kindred and crossed the sea to a
place called the Seven Caves on the shores of the Mar Bermejo (Gulf of
California) now a part of the Mexican kingdom,[XI-22] where they founded
the celebrated city of Tula. The first chief who ruled and conducted
this great band from one continent to the other, was Tamub, ancestor
of the royal families of Tula and of Quiché, and first king of the
Toltecs. The second was Capichoch; the third Calel Ahus; the fourth
Ahpop; the fifth Nimaquiché,[XI-23] who, being the best beloved and most
distinguished of all, at the order of his oracle, led these people away
from Tulan, where they had greatly increased in numbers, and guided
them from the Mexican kingdom to this of Guatemala. In this migration
they spent many years, suffered unspeakable hardships, and journeyed
in their wanderings for many leagues over an immense tract of country,
until, beholding a lake (that of Atitan), they determined to fix their
habitation at a certain place not far from the lake, which they named
Quiché, in memory of the king Nimaquiché (or, the 'great' Quiché), who
had died during their long wanderings. There came with Nimaquiché three
of his brothers, and by an agreement between the four they divided
the region; one founding the province, or seigniory, of the Quelenes
and Chiapanecs; another the department of Tezulutan (Tezulutlan), or
Vera Paz; the third became the ruler of the Mames and Pokomams; while
Nimaquiché was the father of the Quichés, Cakchiquels, and Zutugils.
The latter having died on the journey, Acxopil, a son of Nimaquiché,
entered Quiché at the head of his nation, and was the first to reign
at Utatlan. This prince, seeing the great increase of his monarchy in
numbers and influence, appointed three captains, or governors, with
whom he shared the burden of the administration of affairs. It is also
added in the manuscripts referred to, that Acxopil, at a very advanced
age, determined to divide his empire into three kingdoms, that of the
Quichés, that of the Cakchiquels, and that of the Zutugils. Retaining
for himself the first, he gave the second to his oldest son, Jiutemal,
and the third to his second son, Acxiquat; and this division was made
on a day when three suns were seen, which has caused some to think that
it took place on the day of the birth of our Redeemer, a day on which
it is commonly believed that such a meteor was observed."[XI-24]
[Sidenote: PRIMITIVE QUICHÉ PERIOD.]
Torquemada[XI-25] briefly mentions a few of the points in early Quiché
history, agreeing with Juarros. Orozco y Berra's reasoning from a
linguistic point of view respecting the primitive inhabitants of this
region, is not very clear, or at least it is difficult to determine
what are his conclusions on the subject. In one place he says that
Utatlan was founded at the time of the Toltec migration southward; and
elsewhere, that the Toltecs could not have been the ancestors of the
Quichés, Cakchiquels, and Zutugils.[XI-26] Gallatin accepts the popular
theory that the Quichés were a Toltec colony, but does not explain the
linguistic difficulties in the way of such a supposition.[XI-27] Waldeck
rejects the Toltec theory on account of differences in language and
physique; but states that the Guatemalan tribes came originally from
Yucatan[XI-28].
* * * * *
I have now given all the information accessible respecting Quiché
history preceding the establishment of the empire, which began in the
twelfth or thirteenth century and endured with some modifications
down to the coming of the Spaniards. It has been presented in the
form of fragments, for the reader will readily perceive that to form
from the authorities a connected narrative would have been an utter
impossibility. I have in a preceding chapter presented the evidence
of the existence during a few centuries before and after the beginning
of the Christian era, of a great aboriginal empire in Central America,
narrating all that may be known of its decline and fall resulting from
the contentions of the great Maya and Nahua powers. In the sixteenth
century the Spaniards found two powerful empires, the Aztec in the
north, the Quiché in the south, both of which doubtless were offshoots
of the great primitive monarchy. The annals of the northern branch
have been traced more or less clearly back to the parent trunk, with
only a blank of one or two centuries at most, during which the Nahua
power was transferred northward; but in the annals of the southern
branch, whose connection with the primitive empire was of precisely
the same nature, the blank is lengthened to some eight centuries at
least. From the Xibalban times and the tribal separation at Tulan down
to the establishment of the Quiché empire we have only the fragments
of the preceding pages. These fragments represent the history of many
peoples for many centuries; they are not necessarily contradictory,
for in the absence of all chronology we have no means of knowing to
what epoch each refers. The apparent contradictions and inconsistencies
result for the most part from the efforts of authors through whose
writings the traditions are handed down to us to reconcile them with
the Toltec theory; to apply to one people the traditions of many,
to a modern people the traditions of a remote antiquity; to compress
the events of eight or nine centuries into one. We shall still find
the Quiché annals fragmentary and far from satisfactory, but from the
foundation of Izmachi I shall attempt to carry along the tale as told
by the different authorities together. By far the most complete of
these are the Quiché records as given in the Popol Vuh and that of the
Cakchiquels contained in Brasseur's works.
[Sidenote: EARLY CAKCHIQUEL HISTORY.]
I begin with the adventures of the Cakchiquels after the defeat of
Hacavitz and Zactecauh by the Pokomams, already mentioned.[XI-29] They
seem not to have continued in the company with the Quichés at Izmachi,
but to have retired to other localities in the country of the Mames
somewhat further west, among the Mames of Cholamag, as the record
states it. They found the people very friendly, but only remained
long enough among them to learn their language, which they found most
difficult. Leaving this place they approached the Valley of Panchoy, in
the region of the volcanos, and twice they penetrated the mountain of
fire, Hunahpu, where a most wonderful and unintelligible interview with
Zakiqoxol, the phantom or guardian of the fiery abysses is related,
all being possibly the account of a volcanic eruption. Having reached
the shores of Lake Atitlan the Cakchiquels wished to settle there
permanently although the chief, Hacavitz, seems to have opposed the
settlement. Tolqom, a powerful chieftain and a most wonderful magician,
lived on Mount Qakbatzulu, which extended like a promontory into the
lake; but the bold Hacavitz took him prisoner and became master of
his domain. The Cakchiquels, or the Cakchiquel nobility, seem to have
been divided in four families, the Zotzil-Tukuches, the Cibakihay,
the Baqahol, and the Gekaquchi. All united in giving to Hacavitz
and Zactecauh, of the house of Zotzil-Tukuche, after the victory
over Tolqom, the supreme power, the former having the first rank.
The conquered chieftain, Tolqom, was sacrificed at the coronation of
Hacavitz, in the midst of great festivities, and a part of his body was
thrown from the summit of Qakbatzulu, his former home, into the waters
of the lake. Many of the Cakchiquels decided to remain here and chose a
site which they named Chitulul; others built houses on a point called
Abah, afterwards the site of the city of Atitlan. But Hacavitz was
not pleased, and a violent wind arose and an extraordinary white cloud
hung over the surface of the lake; the new dwellings were destroyed and
great damage was done. The Cakchiquels accepted this as a warning to
obey the will of the gods, except the Ah-Tziquinihayi who decided to
remain with the Zutugils.
The other tribes retired under their leaders into the mountains, and
became much scattered. In passing a deep ravine Zactecauh missed his
footing and was dashed to death on the rocks below, the record hinting
that his colleague and superior was not wholly free from the suspicion
of having caused his death. This suspicion destroyed much of the
prestige of Hacavitz, but he regained it all and more by extinguishing
the fire of a volcano which by its lava and flames had hemmed in and
threatened with total destruction all his followers. Zakitzunun aided
him and was given the second place in the government. They then seem
to have returned to the lake shores, conquering and making allies of
several aboriginal tribes, including the people of Ikomag, with a lady
of which people Hacavitz seems to have married. In the meantime the
Gekaquchi, the Cibakihay, and the Baqahol, three of the four principal
Cakchiquel families, had settled on the mountains in the region of
Iximché, or Tecpan Guatemala, and the ambitious chief of the latter
family had succeeded in obtaining the allegiance of his companions, who
crowned him as supreme king of the three bands.
Hacavitz was filled with wrath, but being unable to overthrow his
rival, Baqahol, was obliged to be content with establishing himself
and his own band of Zotziles on the shores of the lake, where their
dwellings were erected and the Cakchiquel god, Chimalcan, had his
altars. A little later Hacavitz is reported to have aided Baqahol in
overcoming certain foes that had attacked him, and as having received,
at the end of the campaign, the voluntary allegiance of that chief,
thus regaining the supreme power over the Cakchiquel tribes, whom he
ruled from his residence at a place known as Chigohom, where he seems
to have settled after his new accession to power, somewhat away from
the shores of the lake. Here he died at a ripe old age, not long after
his wife gave birth to Caynoh and Caybatz, his successors in later
years.
* * * * *
[Sidenote: REIGN OF COTUHA AND IZTAYUL.]
Returning to the Quiché record as given in the Popol Vuh,[XI-30] we find
nothing recorded of the reign of Balam Conache,[XI-31] son of Qocavib, in
his new capital of Izmachi. He was succeeded early in the thirteenth
century, as it seems, by Cotuha, with Iztayul as Ahpop Camha, and
under this monarch many improvements were made in the city, including
many houses of stone and mortar and three royal palaces, one for the
house of Cawek, one for the house of Nihaïb, and a third for the house
of Ahau Quiché. "Now all were of one heart in Izmachi; there were no
enmities; there were no difficulties; the monarchy was in a state of
repose, without disputes or troubles; peace and felicity were in all
hearts." But their power was yet confined to narrow limits; they had as
yet achieved no great success. The Rabinals, the Cakchiquels, and the
mingled Zutugils and Ah-Tziquinihayi of Atitlan are spoken of as being
at this time allies and friends of the Quichés; but the descendants
of the ancient Ilocab were yet powerful, and became hostile, although
hitherto represented as joined to the house of Cawek; their capital was
but a short distance from Izmachi. When Ilocab--the tribal name being
used, as is often the case, for that of the ruling monarch--perceived
the prosperity of the Quichés, "war was kindled by Ilocab, who wished
to kill this king Cotuha, his people being unwilling that there should
be any king but their own. And as to the king Iztayul, they desired
to punish him also, to put him to death, in the cause of Ilocab. But
their jealousy was not successful against the king Cotuha, who marched
against them. Such was the origin of the revolt and of the war. At
first they entered the city (Izmachi) by assault, spreading death
in their way, for what they desired was the ruin of the Quiché name,
that they alone might rule. But they came only to die; they were taken
captives, and but few escaped. Then their sacrifices began; the people
of Ilocab were immolated before the god, and that was the penalty of
their crime, which was inflicted by the order of Cotuha. Many also were
reduced to slavery, now that they had brought ruin upon themselves by
kindling the flames of war against the king and against the city. What
they had desired was that the name of the Quichés should be ruined
and disgraced, but nothing could be done. Thus originated the usage of
human sacrifices before the god at the declaration of war; and this was
the origin of the fortifications which they began to erect in Izmachi."
Another document[XI-32] is said to give some additional information
respecting the immediate cause of the war, which is reported to
have been connected in some way with Cotuha's marriage. He married
Hamai-Uleü, 'rose of the earth,' a daughter of one of the friendly
Zutugil princes whose territory was on Lake Atitlan, annexing that
prince's domain to his own, and giving his father-in-law, Malah by
name, high rank at the Quiché court. The favor thus shown to Malah,
with other acts of like nature, seem to have excited the jealousy
of other Zutugil lords, who at last marched against Cotuha and were
utterly defeated. It was while Cotuha had this war on his hands that
the Ilocab engaged in the desperate effort above recorded to check
the Quiché monarchs in their rapid progress to supreme power, and
were enabled, perhaps during the absence of Cotuha, to penetrate his
capital. After their final defeat, Uquincat, the Ilocab capital,
was taken and destroyed, and many other towns fell into Cotuha's
possession.
[Sidenote: TRANSFER OF THE CAPITAL TO UTATLAN.]
The Quiché record narrates no further historical events down to the
time when Izmachi was abandoned. It dwells, however, on the greatness
of the kingdom after the overthrow of the Ilocab, and mentions the
power and number of the surrounding princes yet unsubdued as the
strongest proof of Quiché valor, since the new people even in the
face of such environment had been able to establish and extend their
monarchy. After the immolation which followed the Ilocab's defeat,
the practice of human sacrifice was carried to such an extent that the
surrounding tribes were filled with terror at the number of captives
slain by order of Cotuha and Iztayul. At this period the system of
government was perfected by measures, the exact nature of which is not
clearly given, and magnificent festivities with complicated ceremonial
rites were instituted. "Long they remained in Izmachi, until they had
found and had seen another city, and had abandoned in its turn that
of Izmachi. After that they departed and came to the capital called
Gumarcaah (Utatlan), which was so named by the Quichés, when the
kings Cotuha and Gucumatz came together with all the princes. They
were then in the fifth generation (of kings) from the commencement of
civilization and from the origin of their national existence."
The same document already referred to[XI-33] disagrees with the Quiché
record respecting the peace and harmony that followed Cotuha's victory,
while the people were yet at Izmachi. According to this authority
dissensions arose between the heads of the government. Certain parties
interested in fomenting the dissatisfaction, constantly reminded
ambitious nobles that Cotuha was a foreigner,[XI-34] and Iztayul the
son of a bastard, both occupying the places that belonged to more
legitimate princes. Then going to the Ahpop, Cotuha, they said, "the
Ahpop Camha looks with scorn upon thee; he says thou art a miserable
wretch, feeding only on the foam of the _chiquivin_ and other vile
food unworthy of a great king." Then to the Ahpop Camha, Iztayul, they
said, "the king Cotuha is filled with disdain for thee; to him thou
art but a useless man, who livest upon dung and the eggs of flies and
other insects, while his own table is always loaded with excellent
fresh fish and other viands fit for a great prince." The perfidy of
these counselors was afterwards brought to light and they were driven
in disgrace from the court after an attempt to assassinate Cotuha
by suffocation in a steam bath. Yet the king afterwards, according
to the same authority, fell a victim to another conspiracy. Iztayul
succeeded to the throne, with Gucumatz as Ahpop Camha, and continued
the conquests of his predecessor, but no details of his reign are given
in the Quiché record.
In the Cakchiquel annals,[XI-35] however, Brasseur relates certain
events which would seem to belong to the period of Iztayul's reign,
although he is always called in the record of this nation, Tepeuh,
'the dominator, or conqueror.' We left Caynoh and Caybatz, infant
sons of the deceased Hacavitz, under the guardianship of Baqahol and
Gekaquch, who became practically monarchs of the whole nation, having
their capitals on the mountain plateaux of Pantzic and Paraxone.[XI-36]
The Zotzil-Tukuche branch of the nation were naturally unwilling
that the sons of the great Hacavitz, the former head of their family,
should occupy a secondary rank, and they were not slow to urge Caynoh
and Caybatz as soon as they reached a proper age to declare their
independence and resume their legitimate place at the head of the
nation; but the aged chieftain Baqahol, who, it will be remembered, had
been for a time supreme monarch, even before the death of Hacavitz,
haughtily refused to surrender his scepter; and the young princes
must perforce await a more favorable opportunity to assume their due
position. The Cakchiquels seem at this time to have been tributaries
to the Quiché throne, now occupied by Iztayul, or Tepeuh, of whom
it is said, "he was the first to reign with majesty; he dwelt in the
castle of Chixnal; his mysterious power spread abroad terror; he caused
to tremble the place where he had his dwelling, and all people payed
tribute before the face of Tepeuh."
[Sidenote: THE STOLEN TRIBUTE.]
The two sons of Hacavitz were sent to present the Cakchiquel tribute
and homage at the Quiché court, where Iztayul received them with great
kindness, giving them high rank and titles, and making them the royal
tribute-gatherers of his empire. In this capacity they made a long
tour through the Quiché possessions, even penetrating the mysterious
region of the East, where the ancestors of the king had received
the investiture of their royalty. At last they came to Lake Atitlan,
where the united Zutugils and Ah-Tziquinihayi were still living. These
vassals paid their tributes to the envoys, but contrived a cunning plan
to recover the treasure. Two beautiful princesses, Bubatzo and Icxiuh,
daughters of the ruling lords, were appointed to wait upon the royal
tax-collectors. Caynoh and Caybatz were not proof against their charms,
and the maidens, following the parental commands, allowed themselves to
be easily won; but they managed in the night to escape from the couches
of their royal lovers and to steal back all the gold and silver which
had been paid as tribute. The princes complained bitterly when they
discovered their loss, but as a compensation they received Bubatzo and
Icxiuh for wives, with the promise of an honorable position at Atitlan,
in case of Iztayul's displeasure. On their way back to Izmachi with
their wives, however, the prospective anger of Tepeuh so overcome them
that they hid themselves in a cave for a long time; but at last the
Quiché king not only pardoned them for the affair of the lost tribute
and for their marriage, but enabled them to overcome and put to death
Baqahol and Gekaquch, and reseated them on the Cakchiquel throne as
tributary monarchs on favorable terms to the imperial crown of Izmachi.
Caynoh was made Ahpop Xahil, and Caybatz Ahpop Qamahay, corresponding
exactly with the Quiché royal titles of Ahpop and Ahpop Camha.
Gucumatz mounted the throne at Izmachi on the death of Iztayul, and
Cotuha II. became Ahpop Camha. This king began to reign probably
towards the middle of the thirteenth century.[XI-37] Internal dissensions
between the rival families of the Quiché nobility are vaguely alluded
to in the records, but not with sufficient details to enable us to
determine how they influenced Gucumatz to abandon Izmachi in favor
of a new capital. He selected for this purpose the ancient Utatlan,
situated on a plateau not far distant, which had probably long been in
ruins.[XI-38]
* * * * *
[Sidenote: DIVISION OF THE EMPIRE.]
It is now time to return to Juarros' version of Quiché history during
the reigns of the first kings, although there is little hope of
connecting it at any point with the versions already presented. Nima
Quiché, who directed the people in their migration to these Guatemalan
regions, ceded to his brother the command of the Mames and Pokomams,
and at his death left his son Acxopal, or Acxopil, king of the Quiché
tribes. This monarch, either by the increase of his people or by his
conquests among the aboriginal tribes soon found himself master of the
provinces now called Sololá, Chimaltenango, and Sacatepeques, with
a part of Quezaltenango and Totonicapan. In his old age his empire
seemed to him too vast and the duties of government too burdensome for
his failing strength. He consequently divided his empire into three
domains, keeping for himself that of the Quichés, giving that of the
Cakchiquels to his oldest son Xiuhtemal, or Jiutemal, and that of the
Zutugils to his second son Acxoquauh, or Acxiquat; the brother who
ruled over the Mames and Pokomams is not named here. The bounds given
by Juarros to the three kingdoms of the empire are substantially the
same as those of the peoples speaking the same languages at the time
of the Conquest, and were doubtless ascertained from the condition of
affairs in the sixteenth century rather than from ancient records or
traditions.
After the division it was not long before ambition began to produce
what Juarros terms its usual results. Acxoquauh, king of the Zutugils,
found his domain too small and wished to extend its limits to the
detriment of his brother, Xiuhtemal. With this intent he marched at
the head of a large army to the Cakchiquel frontiers, but was forced
to retire to his fortified stronghold on Lake Atitlan, where the
contest raged for many days until a truce was brought about by the aged
Acxopal. Xiuhtemal took advantage of the peace to fortify his capital
at Tecpan Guatemala, but during the extreme old age of his father
he was called to direct affairs at the Quiché capital, and succeeded
to the imperial throne at his father's death, putting his own eldest
son on the Cakchiquel throne. Still fearful of his brother, his first
care was to fortify the Quiché capital,--which Juarros represents as
having been Utatlan from the first--building, among other extensive
works, the castle of Resguardo.[XI-39] His precautions seem not to have
been unnecessary, for Acxoquauh soon recommenced the war, fighting
particularly for the possession of the whole territory about the
lake, which seems to have been in some way divided between the three
monarchs. The war continued, with but brief intervals, throughout the
reign of Xiuhtemal and during a part of that of Hunahpu, his son, who
succeeded him. Nothing further is recorded of Hunahpu's reign, save
that he distinguished himself by introducing the cultivation of cacao
and cotton.[XI-40]
Except in the general statement that the Quiché, Cakchiquel, and
Zutugil kingdoms formed a kind of alliance at this early period, a
conclusion to which the other records have also led us, the version
given by Juarros, from Fuentes, has apparently nothing in common with
the others; and I shall not attempt to conjecture what may have been
the source whence the names of kings given by these authors were
derived. There is no room for hesitation in deciding which records
are the more reliable. Brasseur in one place, after narrating the
foundation of Izmachi, suddenly declares that with Qocavib and Nima
Quiché the symbolic recitals cease and history begins, and then goes
on for a few pages with an account of Acxopal and his division of
the empire between his two sons, apparently accepting the version of
Juarros, except in the name of the capital at the foundation of the
empire. But shortly after, he abandons this for the other version, as
follows: "The first king of Toltec race who appears after Acxopal is
Xiuhtemal, who in his turn seems to have placed his son on the throne
of Quauhtemalan, (Tecpan Guatemala, the Cakchiquel capital). According
to more authentic documents, it is Balam II. of the house of Cawek,
who succeeds Qocavib. Except the struggles mentioned by Fuentes, we
find nothing about this prince or his predecessor, after the foundation
of Izmachi," etc. Thus he implies that Qocavib was identical with
Acxopal, and Balam Conache with Xiuhtemal. We hear no more of the
names given by Juarros until we have the statement by the same author
respecting Hunahpu that "everything favors the opinion that he is the
same who reigned under the glorious name of Gucumatz," without any
attempt to account for the intermediate kings of the Quichés, Cotuha
and Iztayul. Consequently as I am inclined to suspect, "everything
favors the opinion" that the worthy abbé has introduced the names
Acxopal, Xiuhtemal, and Acxoquauh, from Fuentes solely because they are
apparently Nahua names and therefore may add some force to his Toltec
theory, and has then got rid of them as expeditiously as possible.[XI-41]
[Sidenote: GUCUMATZ AT UTATLAN.]
The first care of Gucumatz was to restore the ancient buildings of
Utatlan and to add to the city's old-time splendor by the erection of
new and magnificent temples in honor of the gods. "There they built
their houses in great numbers, and there also they built the house of
the god in the centre of the city at the most elevated point, where
they placed it when they came to establish themselves in that place.
Then their empire was much enlarged, and when their numbers were
already considerable, their great families took counsel together, and
were subdivided." When the quarrels which had formerly threatened their
empire were at last terminated "they carried into effect what had been
resolved upon, and the royalty was divided among twenty-four grand
houses or families." "There they increased in greatness, having thus
gloriously united their thrones and their principalities; the titles
of all their honors having been distributed among the princes, there
were formed nine families with the nine princes of Cawek, nine with the
princes of Nihaïb, four with the princes of Ahau Quiché, and two with
the lords of Zakik. They became very numerous, and numerous were those
that followed each of the princes; they were the first at the head
of their vassals, and many families belonged to each of the princes.
We shall now tell the titles of these princes and of each of the
great houses." Then follows a list of titles, substantially the same
that I have given in a preceding volume, when treating of the Quiché
governmental system.[XI-42]
"Thus were completed the twenty-four princes and the twenty-four great
houses; then was multiplied the power and majesty in Quiché; then was
strengthened and extended its grandeur, when the city and its ravines
were built up with stone and mortar and covered with cement. Both great
and little nations came under the power of the king, contributing
to the Quiché glory; power and majesty sprang up, and the house of
the god was built as well as the houses of the princes. But it was
not they who built them; they did no work, neither constructing the
temple of their god, nor their own buildings, for all was done by
their vassals, whose numbers were multiplied. It was not by stratagem
nor by force that these vassals were brought in; for truly each one
belonged to some one of the princes, and great was the number of their
brothers and relatives who gathered to hear what the princes commanded.
Truly were they loved and esteemed, and great was the glory of the
princes. Veneration kept pace with their renown, and with the lords
were multiplied the dwellers in the ravines round about the city. Thus
nearly all the nations surrendered themselves, not through war and
force directed against them in their ravines and cities, but by reason
of the marvels wrought by their kings, Gucumatz and Cotuha.
[Sidenote: REIGN OF GUCUMATZ.]
Verily, this Gucumatz became a most marvelous king. In seven days he
mounted to the skies--ascended the mountain heights--and in seven days
he descended to the region of Xibalba.[XI-43] In seven days he took upon
himself the nature and form of a serpent, and again of an eagle, and
of a tiger; and in seven days he changed himself into coagulated blood.
Truly the existence of this wonderful prince filled with terror all the
lords that came before him. The knowledge thereof was spread abroad;
all the nations heard of this prodigious king. And this was the origin
of the Quiché grandeur, when the king Gucumatz wrought these signs of
his power. The remembrance of his grandsons and sons was not lost--or,
as Ximenez renders it, he did not lack descendants, both sons and
grandsons. He had not done these things merely that there might be a
royal worker of miracles, but as a means of ruling all nations, and of
showing himself to be the only chief of the peoples. This prodigious
king Gucumatz was of the fourth[XI-44] generation of kings, Ahpop and
Ahpop Camha. He left descendants who also reigned with majesty and
begat children who did many things. Thus were begotten Tepepul and
Iztayul, whose reign made the fifth generation. They were kings, and
each generation of these princes begat sons."[XI-45]
It is seen by the preceding account of Gucumatz' reign that this
king fully accomplished his object in transferring the capital to
Utatlan. By removing his court to this ancient city he aroused the
pride of all the tribes of Quiché race, and revived their traditional
recollections of a glorious past; by restoring the ancient temples and
by erecting new ones he enlisted the religious enthusiasm of the whole
country in his favor. The universal interest in the new enterprise
caused the former dissensions between rival nobles to be for a time
forgotten. All these circumstances combined to create for Gucumatz
a higher degree of popularity than he had ever before enjoyed; and
when he felt sufficiently strong with the people, he still further
fortified his position by a partial reconstruction of his empire.
By the establishment of twenty-four houses of nobility he not only
made partisans of those who were the recipients of new honors, but
effectually checked the ambition of the leading nobles, whose quarrels
had at one time threatened his sovereignty. Two of the new dignities
were given to the family of Zakik, to which belonged the priest of
the ancient temple of Cahbaha at Utatlan; and he gave the titles
Ahau-Ah-Tohil and Ahau-Ah-Gucumatz, or high-priests of Tohil and
Quetzalcoatl, to members of his own family, thus firmly attaching the
priesthood to his own interests. Each of the newly created princes was
required to have a palace in the capital and to reside there during
a certain part of each year; in fact the policy pursued by Gucumatz
resembles in many points that which we have seen pursued by the
Chichimec emperor Techotl in Anáhuac as noted in a preceding chapter.
There are no data from which to determine the extent of Gucumatz'
domain; the descent to Xibalba may indicate that the Palenque region
was subjected to his power, or simply that he was wont to spend in the
tierra caliente a portion of each year. Brasseur believes that from
this period the Ahpop Camha of the Quichés spent his time chiefly in
the Zutugil capital at Atitlan.[XI-46]
* * * * *
[Sidenote: CAKCHIQUEL HISTORY.]
After the death of Gucumatz, Cotuha II., already holding the second
rank of Ahpop Camha, mounted the throne. He was in his turn succeeded
by Tepepul, and he by Iztayul II. with Quicab, or Kicab, as Ahpop
Camha. Respecting the reigns of these three monarchs, the Popol Vuh
gives no details whatever; and but very little can be learned from
other records. The three reigns may, however, be supposed to have
extended to about the end of the fourteenth century, a century which
is thus almost a blank in the annals of the empire. One document[XI-47]
informs us that the first of the three kings, Cotuha II., was
treacherously put to death by the lords of Qohaïl and Ulahaïl, who
drew him into an ambush, but his sons Quicab and Cavizimah, afterwards
kings, avenged his murder by seizing and putting to death thirteen of
the supposed guilty parties.
The Cakchiquel record[XI-48] mentions the third of the Quiché monarchs,
Iztayul II., under the name of Xitayul-Hax. Caynoh, whom we left on
the Cakchiquel throne,[XI-49] had been succeeded by his son Citan-Qatu, a
valiant and wise ruler who, under the sovereignty of the Quiché emperor
at Utatlan, had considerably extended the power of his people. At his
death he was followed by his son Qotbalcan, 'the coiled serpent,'
and under his rule the subordinate chieftains took advantage of
his good nature or want of ability, to reclaim their independence.
The descendants of the princes Baqahol and Gekaquch, who had caused
Hacavitz so much trouble in former years, were the first to inaugurate
this revolt, which the other tribes were not slow to join, and thus the
nation was again split up practically into scattered tribes, the king
having little, if any, more authority than the other chieftains. The
same condition of affairs continued during the reign of this king's
son and grandson, Alinam and Xttamer-Zaquentol; the tribe under the
royal command, after wandering for a long time, having finally settled
near the kindred tribe of the Akahales, at the towns of Zakiqahol and
Nimcakahpec. The great grandson of Qotbalcan, Chiyoc Queh, succeeded in
again uniting under his rule most of the Cakchiquel tribes, and having
founded the capital of Chiawar, somewhat further west than the old
capital Tecpan Guatemala, and given the second rank of Ahpop Qamahay
to his brother Ttattah-Akbal, he was laboring most strenuously to raise
his nation to her old position at the time when the record mentions the
death of Iztayul II., or Xitayul-Hax, and the accession of Quicab.
[Sidenote: WAR BETWEEN QUICHÉS AND ZUTUGILS.]
I must now return to the version presented by Fuentes and Juarros, for
this version agrees with the others respecting the name of the next
king, Quicab, and hence it may be inferred that the period between the
reigns of Hunahpu and Kicab, is identical with that between Gucumatz
and Quicab. The kings that Juarros puts on the throne during this
period were Balam Kiché, Balam Acam, Maucotah, and Iquibalam, names
which are evidently identical with the four high-priests or sacrificers
of a much earlier period. It seems probable that the authors cited
found these names in the aboriginal records, and could make no better
place for them than in the list of kings. The events referred to in
these reigns are as follows:--Balam Kiché did nothing worthy of record.
Balam Acam, his successor, was a most kind-hearted prince, and had
great confidence in his cousin, the king of the Zutugils at Atitlan.
But the latter abused this confidence by stealing the king's daughter
from the royal palace in Utatlan; and Ilocab, a near relative of the
Zutugil monarch--called Zutugilebpop by Juarros, evidently a title
rather than a name--at about the same time abducted a niece of Balam
Acam. These abductions caused a war which, as we are told, lasted with
little intermission down to the coming of the Spaniards. The Quiché
army under the king and Maucotah his chief general, marched on Atitlan,
taking several strong towns on the way, and "the most terrible battle
these countries had ever known" was fought against the Zutugil and
Ah-Tziquinihayi forces under Ilocab. In this battle Ilocab was slain
and the Quichés victorious. The campaign was continued, the Zutugils
being aided by many allies, including the Pipiles of Salvador, while
the Quichés were reinforced by the Cakchiquels and forces from Vera
Paz. In a later battle the loss on both sides amounted to fourteen
thousand, and among the slain was Balam Acam, who is blamed by Juarros
for plunging the country in war for so slight a cause, since the
purpose of the abduction was honorable marriage. Long wars between the
Cakchiquels and Pipiles,[XI-50] as well as between the Quichés and Mames,
resulted from Balam's attempt at vengeance.
Maucotah was named as the successor of Balam Acam, while yet in the
field. Zutugilebpop, flushed with victory, besieged Xelahuh, one of
the Quiché strongholds, but the fortune of war seems to have changed
with the change of rulers, for the Zutugils were defeated both before
Xelahuh and in their own territory about the lake, and their king
died of grief and disappointment soon after, leaving his throne to
Rumal-Ahaus, a young man of nineteen years. This young king continued
the war, but was unable to retrieve the ill-fortunes of his people. In
a battle fought soon after his accession, he had a personal combat with
Maucotah, in which he was wounded, and forced to retreat, the Quiché
king remaining in possession of the towns that his predecessor had
conquered. Maucotah died soon after his victory, and was succeeded by
Iquibalam, who marched with two hundred thousand men into the Zutugil
states, determined to put an end to the resistance of the valiant
Rumal-Ahaus, who had recovered from the effects of his wound. He
captured many towns, particularly in the territory of the Pipiles and
about Zapotitlan, but he also met with severe losses, and seems not to
have gained any permanent advantage over the Zutugils. He died during
the campaign, and was succeeded by Kicab, or Quicab, and Rumal-Ahaus
was succeeded on the throne of Atitlan at about the same time by
Chichiahtulú.[XI-51]
* * * * *
The reign of Quicab is briefly disposed of by Juarros as follows:
"He ascended the throne at a mature age, and with much experience in
military and political affairs. Chichiahtulú, who, with the rank of
Lieutenant General, had gained great advantages over the Quichés in the
memorable campaign of Pinar (the one last referred to), having grasped
the Zutugil sceptre, besieged the famous stronghold of Totonicapan.
King Kicab not only opposed the movements of Chichiahtulú with a
formidable army, but enlisting sixty thousand soldiers, he attacked
with them many cities and towns of the Pipiles and Zutugils, among them
Patulul; and although the governors of these places made great efforts
to defend them, they were unable to resist the superior numbers of
the Quichés. Chichiahtulú, seeing that his best possessions were being
lost, hastened by forced marches to defend them, abandoning the siege
of Totonicapan; but being taken grievously ill on account of his haste
in that march, he died within a few days, greatly to the sorrow of his
people. Still his army did not suspend their march, being commanded
by the Lieutenant General Manilahuh, until they arrived within sight
of the Quiché camp. The fury with which the attack was made on both
sides is unspeakable; but the column of King Kicab on account of being
close and double, being harder to break than the feeble and extended
lines of Manilahuh, the latter were broken and scattered in less than
an hour, the commander and many Atitlan chiefs being left on the field
of battle, while the Quichés, chanting victory, returned to Utatlan.
We do not know in detail the events under the seven monarchs of Quiché
who succeeded Kicab I.; but it is certain that these two kingdoms were
never for a long time at peace."[XI-52]
[Sidenote: REIGN OF QUICAB I.]
Now comes the version of Quicab's reign given by the Popol Vuh, which
document carries the Quiché history no farther, save a mere list of
monarchs already mentioned. "Behold now the names of the sixth royal
generation,[XI-53] of the two great kings Quicab, the name of the first
king, and Cavizimah, name of the second (Ahpop Camha). And behold
the great deed that Quicab and Cavizimah did, and how Quiché was
made famous by reason of their really marvelous condition. Behold the
conquest and destruction of the ravines and cities of the nations great
and small, all very near, including the city of the Cakchiquels, that
now called Chuvila (Chichicastenango), as also those in the mountains
of the Rabinals, that of Pamaca (Zacualpa), in the mountains of
Caokeb, that of Zacabaha (San Andres), Zakuleu, Chuvi-Mugina, Xelahuh,
Chuva-Tzak (Momostenango), and Tzolohche (Chiquimula). These abhorred
Quicab, but truly he made war upon them and conquered and ruined the
ravines and the cities of the Rabinals, of the Cakchiquels, and of the
people of Zakuleu. He conquered all the tribes and carried his arms
afar. One or two nations not having brought their tribute he entered
their towns that they might bring their tribute before Quicab and
Cavizimah. They were reduced to servitude; they were tortured and their
people tied to trees and pierced with arrows; there was for them no
more glory nor honor. Such was the ruin of these towns, destroyed from
the face of the earth; like the lightning which strikes and breaks the
stone, thus by terror he blotted out the nations."
"Before Colche, as a signal of its conquest, there stands to-day a
monument of rock, as if he had formed it with his axe; this is on the
coast called Petatayub, where it is still visible, so that everybody
looks upon it as a sign of Quicab's valor. He could not be killed or
conquered; verily he was a hero, and all nations brought to him their
tribute. Then, all the princes having taken counsel, they went away
to fortify the ravines and the towns, having taken possession of the
towns of all nations. Then sentinels (spies) were dispatched to observe
the enemy, and new tribes (or colonies) were formed to dwell in the
conquered countries." Then follows with frequent repetitions an account
of these colonies, their departure for their posts, their victories,
and a list of cities occupied by them, including most of the names
already mentioned. "Everywhere they waged war, taking continually new
captives; they became in their turn heroes, they who had been guards
of frontier posts; they became strong in their language as in their
thoughts before the kings when they brought in their prisoners and
captives."
"Then assembled the council at the order of the kings, of the Ahpop
and the Ahpop Camha, of the Galel, and of the Ahtzic Winak; and it was
decided that, whatever might happen, they should remain at the head,
for their dignities were there to represent their family. 'I am the
Ahpop, I am the Ahpop Camha, Ahpop to hold my rank like thine, O Ahau
Galel.' As to the Galels, their nobility shall be, replied all the
lords forming a decision. Likewise did those of Tamub and Ilocab; equal
was the condition of the three races of Quiché, when the chiefs of the
people set themselves up against the kings and assumed nobility. Such
was the result of this assembly, but it was not there in Quiché that
the power was seized. The name of the place exists where the vassal
chiefs took possession of the power, for although they had been sent
each to a different place, all afterwards assembled together.
[Sidenote: REVOLT OF THE PLEBEIANS.]
Xebalax and Xecamac are the names of the place where they took
possession of the power, at the time when they assembled their
rank, and that took place at Chulimal. Behold the nomination, the
installation, and the recognition of the twenty Galels, and the
twenty Ahpops who were installed by the Ahpop and the Ahpop Camha,
by the Galel and the Ahtzic Winak. All the Galel-Ahpops entered into
their rank, eleven Nim-Chocoh, Galel-Ahpop, Galel-Zakik, Galel-Achih,
Rahpop-Ahih, Rahtzalam-Achih, Utzam-Achih, titles of the warriors which
they obtained when they were nominated and titled on their thrones and
on their principalities, they who were the chiefs of the vassals of
the Quiché nation, its sentinels and spies, its chiefs of the lances
and chiefs of the slings, the ramparts, the walls, and the towers
which defended Quiché. Thus also did the people of Tamub and Ilocab,
the chiefs of the people in each locality having seized the power and
caused themselves to be titled. Such was the origin of the Galel-Ahpops
and of the titles that now exist in each of these places; such was
their source, when they sprang up at the hands of the Ahpop and the
Ahpop Camha, as also of the Galel and of the Ahtzic Winak, from whom
they derived their existence."[XI-54]
From the preceding narrative we learn that Quicab by his skill in war
and the valor of his armies extended the imperial Quiché power far
beyond its former limits, subjecting to the monarch of Utatlan nearly
the whole of Guatemala; and also that later in his reign he was forced
by a combination of his vassal chieftains, to whom military power had
been entrusted during his conquests, to reorganize his government, and
to bestow on these chieftains of the people nobility, and practically
the control of the empire. With this political revolution the record
as presented by the Popol Vuh ceases, the remainder of the document
being devoted to a description of Quiché institutions already given
in another volume of this work. Whether a portion of the original work
has been lost, or the Quiché history was deemed by the author to have
ceased with the humiliation of the ancient nobility by their forced
association with plebeian chiefs, it is impossible to determine.
Ximenez in his account of the Quiché kings devotes five lines to
Quicab and Cavizimah, whom, however, he unites in one person.[XI-55]
For additional details of Quicab's reign and the political changes
which marked it, as well as for all subsequent Guatemalan history,
we have only the Cakchiquel record,[XI-56] with slight information from
other documents, as presented in the history of Brasseur de Bourbourg,
together with the work of Juarros, whose version of Quicab's reign has
already been presented.
* * * * *
[Sidenote: TYRANNY OF QUICAB I.]
We left Chiyoc Queh, the Cakchiquel monarch, endeavoring to restore the
former glory of his nation by re-uniting its scattered tribes under one
head. The Zotzil-Tukuches were the only tribe that refused to recognize
his royal authority, and at last the Cakchiquel monarch applied to the
Quiché king for aid. Quicab and Cavizimah had just succeeded to the
throne of Utatlan, probably early in the fifteenth century. They sent
an army and routed the Zotziles, plundering and burning their towns and
putting the inhabitants to death without mercy. They did not stop here,
however, but forced Xiquitzal and Rahamun, who succeeded Chiyoc Queh on
the Cakchiquel throne, to give up their sovereign rights and submit to
become vassal lords, such of the people as resisted being massacred,
sacrificed, or sold as slaves. The Mames met with the same treatment,
their strongest towns including Zakuleu and Xelahuh (Huehuetenango and
Quezaltenango) being forced to yield to the armies of Utatlan. Then the
Rabinals and Pokomams were conquered, and no power was left that could
make any resistance. Quicab claimed to be absolute monarch of the whole
Guatemalan country; he admitted no allied kings paying homage and a
nominal tribute as they had done under the reign of his predecessors,
but reduced all rulers to the condition of royal governors entirely
subject to his command. Few kings would submit to such conditions and
most were consequently removed to make room for governors appointed by
the Quiché emperor. In his efforts to subordinate all rank and power to
his own personal sovereignty, he naturally arrayed the nobility of even
the Quiché royal families against himself, and the means adopted to
humble the ancient aristocracy were the appointment to high positions
in the army of plebeian officers distinguished for their valor, and the
humiliation of the noble officers on every possible occasion. The new
chieftains were called Achihab, and so numerous did they become and so
highly were they favored and stimulated against the nobles, that they
soon possessed, and fully realized their possession of, the controlling
power in the empire. In his efforts to humiliate one class, Quicab had
created another which he could not control by force and which he had
zealously educated to disregard all authority based on noble birth.
The Achihab, no longer content with military rank, aspired to the
higher dignities of the court; the people were naturally enthusiastic
in favor of their chiefs and were by them encouraged to question the
authority of their king over them. Soon a deputation was sent to the
court to demand certain reforms in favor of the people, including
an abolition of personal service and labor on the highways. Quicab
scornfully refused the petition of the popular chiefs, and his court
was soon abandoned by the Achihab as it had long been by most of the
nobles. Two of his sons, Tatayac and Ahytza, joined the Achihab in the
revolt, promising them all the property and titles of the nobility
in case of success, and being promised in turn the inheritance of
the throne with the palaces, slaves, and wealth pertaining thereto.
Quicab, in his extremity, applied for aid to the very nobility he had
so oppressed, and seems to have received their zealous support, for
notwithstanding the treatment they had suffered at the hands of the
monarch, they saw plainly that with the success of the rebels all their
prestige would be entirely destroyed. By the advice of the assembled
nobles the leaders of the Achihab, including those who had composed the
deputation demanding reforms, were seized and put to death. This caused
an immediate rising of the people, who, incited by their chiefs, and by
the descendants of the Tamub and Ilocab, invaded Utatlan, pillaged the
royal palaces, and almost annihilated by massacre the ancient nobility.
The king happened to be in a neighboring town at the time, and his life
was spared at the intercession of his sons; but he was kept a prisoner
while the rebel chieftains assembled in council as already narrated in
the Popol Vuh, to reconstruct the monarchy and to choose from their own
number the many lords that have been mentioned. At the close of their
deliberations the king and the surviving nobles of the royal families
were obliged to ratify the appointments at Chuliman, where the new
lords were installed with great ceremony. The Ahpop and Ahpop Camha,
seem, however, to have been left nominally in possession of their royal
rank, although the power was practically taken from them.
[Sidenote: WAR WITH THE CAKCHIQUELS.]
A quarrel broke out between the Quichés and the Cakchiquels residing
in or near Utatlan, and the chiefs of the latter, Vucubatz and Huntoh,
although particular friends of Quicab, were forced to flee from the
city to avoid death at the hands of the Achihab. During their flight,
however, accompanied by a large band of followers, they committed
great ravages in the Quiché lands until they arrived at the Cakchiquel
capital of Tecpan Quauhtemalan, or Iximché. On their arrival they
assembled the nobles, and every preparation was made to resist the
Quichés, who, it was thought, would not long delay an attack. The
Cakchiquels determined to shake off the Quiché yoke; Vucubatz and
Huntoh were raised to the throne, with the titles of Ahpozotzil and
Ahpoxahil, borne by their successors down to the Conquest. The war
began by the defeat of a Quiché army sent to punish the Cakchiquels for
their warlike demonstrations. Other nations were ready to follow the
example of the Cakchiquels; the Zotziles, Tzendales, Quelenes, Mames,
Rabinals, Zutugils, and Ah-Tziquinihayi declared their independence,
and many of these peoples not only threw off their allegiance to
Quicab, but were further divided into independent bands or cities.
The Cakchiquel monarchy soon extended over nearly all of Guatemala
south of Lake Atitlan and of the Rio Motagua, including many Pokomam
districts, thus not only becoming independent of the crown of Utatlan,
but also acquiring for itself the balance of power in the whole
country, so long held by the Quichés. Quicab, now the mere tool of
the Achihab, made little or no resistance, and was forced to see his
nation reduced to a secondary position, her territory being constantly
diminished by the revolt of new provinces and cities. It is said,
however, by the author of the Cakchiquel document, that the Achihab
had been restrained from attacking their rivals in the south by the
influence of Quicab, who was friendly to the Cakchiquel kings, but
this seems hardly probable. It is much more likely that the Achihab did
not attack Vucubatz and Huntoh because all their power was required to
repress hostile demonstrations nearer home. The idea of popular rights
which had robbed Quicab of his greatness and raised the vassal chiefs
to power was as dangerous and unmanageable for the new as for the old
nobility.
About the middle of the fifteenth century the Quiché and Cakchiquel
rulers died and were succeeded, the former by Tepepul II. and Iztayul
III., the latter by Oxlahuh-Tzy and Lahuh-Ah. The Ahpoxahil, or
second in rank at Iximché, however, lived only a few years, and was
followed by his son Cablahuh-Tihax. Immediately after the change of
rulers war was declared between the two nations, and at a time when
the Cakchiquels were weakened by a famine resulting from a failure
of crops, the Quiché army marched against Iximché. The kings Tepepul
II. and Iztayul III., accompanied the army, escorting the idol of
their god Tohil; but their forces were routed with great loss after
a terrific contest, near the Cakchiquel capital; both kings with the
idol fell into the hands of the enemy, and nothing farther is recorded
of their lives. Ximenez[XI-57] puts the revolt of the Cakchiquels and the
establishment of their monarchy in the reign of these kings instead of
that of Quicab; and he also mentions a successful revolt of the tribes
of Sacatepeques against the Cakchiquels, and the arrival of a band of
Pokomams from Salvador, who were given lands within the limits of the
two kingdoms. The two captive monarchs may have been put to death by
their captors, so that it is not certain that Iztayul III. ever held a
higher rank than that of Ahpop Camha.
[Sidenote: LATER KINGS AT UTATLAN.]
Tecum, Tepepul II., Vahxaki-Caam, and Quicab II. followed on the throne
of Utatlan down to the beginning of the sixteenth century, but nothing
is known of their reigns, and the Quichés seem to have had but little
to do with Guatemalan events beyond the limits of their own territory
during this period. Juarros, however--and it is to be noted that
this author gives no intimation of any serious reverses to the Quiché
monarchy--attributes to Quicab II. a successful campaign against the
Mames, undertaken because his own territory was found to be overcrowded
with the increasing numbers of his subjects, and because the Mames were
a miserable people, who should be content with less territory. At the
report of Quicab's warlike preparations, all the surrounding nations
made ready for defence, not knowing on which of themselves the blow was
to fall. The lord of the Mames, Lahuhquieh by name, marched boldly to
meet the Quiché army under the command of the king. The battle lasted
all day, with no decisive advantage on either side; but during the
night Quicab gained a commanding position on a hill, from the summit
of which, at sunrise, a storm of stones and arrows was showered upon
the foe. Lahuhquieh was soon defeated--the lord of Iximché, as is
said, aiding in his overthrow--and his people were driven from their
possessions to the northern mountains.[XI-58]
About all that is known of the kings that reigned at Utatlan from the
death of Quicab II., probably about the beginning of the sixteenth
century, down to 1524, is their names as given by the Popol Vuh,
Vucub-Noh, Cavatepech, Oxib-Quieh, and Beleheb Tzi, the last two being
respectively Ahpop and Ahpop Camha at the arrival of Pedro de Alvarado.
Juarros names as kings for a corresponding period, Iximché, Kicab III.,
Kicab IV., Kicab Tanub, Tecum Umam, Chignaviucelut, and Sequechul.
This author finds it recorded that during the reign of Kicab Tanub an
envoy arrived from Montezuma II., of Mexico, announcing the presence
of the Spaniards, and his own imprisonment, news which caused the
Quichés to make active preparations for defence. Juarros also relates
that Ahuitzotl, king of Mexico, after many unsuccessful attempts to
conquer Guatemala, sent an embassy to the different kings, ostensibly
to form an alliance with them, but as the southern rulers believed, to
study the country and the best means of attack; the embassadors were
consequently driven out of the country. The arguments of this and other
authors, that Guatemala was never subjected to Mexican rule need not
be repeated, since there is absolutely no evidence in support of such
a subjection.[XI-59]
* * * * *
The Cakchiquel record[XI-60] gives some additional information respecting
the later period of Guatemalan aboriginal history. The Cakchiquel
monarch Oxlahuh-Tzy seems to have been disposed to follow the example
of Quicab at Utatlan, by humbling the pride of his vassal kings, and
taking from them all real power. Among the most powerful of his allies
were the Akahales of Sacatapeques under Ychal-Amollac. This ruler was
summoned before the royal tribunal at Iximché on some pretext and was
put to death as soon as he appeared in the judgment-hall; the domain
of the Akahales was annexed to the possessions of the Cakchiquel
monarch, and placed under the government of officers who were that
king's creatures. The natural consequence of Oxlahuh-Tzy's ambition was
the formation of a league against him by powerful tribes unwilling to
surrender their independence. Among these were the Ah-Tziquinihayi of
Atitlan under Wookaok, and the Caokeb under Beleheb Gih; the latter,
however, were conquered by the victorious king of Iximché. About this
time internal dissensions were added to the external combination
against Oxlahuh-Tzy. The Cakchiquels at Iximché were divided into
two branches, the Zotziles and the Tukuches, and the leader of the
latter, Cay-Hunahpu took advantage of the ill-feeling produced by the
king's oppressive measures against the nobility, to revolt with his
partisans, leaving the capital and fortifying his new position near
by. Here he awaited the movements of the revolting tribes which were
leagued against the Cakchiquels, believing they would take advantage
of his secession to attack Iximché, and hoping by aiding their attack
and granting their independence, to place himself on the throne. The
tribes in question and others did take advantage of Cay-Hunahpu's
secession, not however to attack the capital and thus lend themselves
to that chief's ambitious projects, but to declare their independence,
establish governments of their own, and to make preparations for the
defence of their homes. The revolting provinces included that of
Sacatapeques as already mentioned by Ximenez, and the seigniories
of Tzolola, Mixco, Yampuk, and Papuluka, established at this time,
maintained their independence of Cakchiquel control down to the
conquest, except perhaps Mixco.
[Sidenote: REVOLT OF CAY-HUNAHPU.]
Cay Hunahpu, disappointed in the movements of his allies, attacked
Iximché with the Tukuches under his command, but his partisans
were routed, most of them being killed and the remainder fleeing to
distant provinces; while the leader was also among the slain. Thus
Oxlahuh-Tzy was still victorious, but was in no condition to attempt
the reduction of the rebel provinces; for new internal troubles soon
broke out. Cinahitoh, one of his bravest commanders in the last war,
but apparently of plebeian birth, demanded the rank of Ahtzih Winak
made vacant by the death of Cay-Hunahpu, but his claim was rejected,
the office given to Ahmoxnag, and the brave Cinahitoh was put to death.
The successful candidate was also executed for treason within a year.
Oxlahuh-Tzy continued in his policy of opposition to the nobles, and
even succeeded in regaining a few of the weaker tribes that had thrown
off their allegiance to his throne. In a war with the Akahales it is
recorded that a band of Yaqui, or Mexicans, probably traders, took part
against the Cakchiquels.
[Sidenote: PROPHECY OF DISASTER.]
About 1501 a defeat of the Zutugils and the capture of their stronghold
of Zakcab by the Cakchiquel king is recorded; and about the same
time the Ah-Tziquinihayi under Wookaok were besieged in Atitlan, but
succeeded in defeating the invaders. Respecting the last epoch of
Cakchiquel history, Juarros says: "The Cakchiquel king, Nimahuinac,
also enjoyed for a long time the promised tranquility, having made
peace and a perpetual alliance with the Pipiles; but this king having
made his near relative Acpocaquil treasurer of his tributes, this
traitor seized upon the city of Patinamit, now Tecpan Guatemala
(Iximché) and all the country subject to that Cakchiquel stronghold;
and the Zutugil king having declared himself an ally of the rebel
Acpocaquil, an obstinate war was waged between these two lords, which
lasted down to the arrival of the Spaniards. And it even seems that
this was the reason why Sinacam, who had succeeded to the throne of
the Cakchiquels, summoned and received peacefully the Spaniards, in
order to regain by their aid the great possessions of which Acpocaquil,
aided by the king of Atitlan, had despoiled him."[XI-61] The Guatemalans
were not left altogether without warnings of the Spaniards' coming,
for as early as the reign of Quicab II.--which, however, was after the
Spaniards were actually on the American coasts--Ximenez relates that
the son of the Cakchiquel king, a great sorcerer, was wont to visit the
Quiché cities by night, insulting the king with opprobrious epithets,
and disturbing his rest. Great rewards were offered for his capture,
and at last he was taken and brought bound into Quicab's presence,
where preparations were made for his sacrifice, when, addressing the
assembly the captive spoke as follows: "Wait a little and hear what I
wish to say to you; know that a time is to come in which you will be
in despair by reason of the calamities that are to come upon you; and
this _mama-caixon_, 'miserable old man,' (the king) must die; and know
that certain men, not naked like you, but armed from head to foot, will
come, and these will be terrible and cruel men, sons of Teja; perhaps
this will be to-morrow, or day after to-morrow, and they will destroy
all these edifices, which will become the habitations of owls and
wildcats, and then will come to an end all the grandeur of this court."
Thus having spoken, he was sacrificed to the gods.[XI-62]
At the beginning of the sixteenth century, three rival and hostile
monarchies ruled Guatemala, that of the Quichés at Utatlan, under
Vucub-Noh and Cavatepech, probably the Kicab Tanub of Fuentes; that
of the Cakchiquels at Iximché, under Oxlahuh-Tzy and Cablahuh-Tihax;
and that of the Zutugils at Atitlan, under Wookaok. The condition of
the Cakchiquel and Zutugil powers has already been portrayed so far
as there is any information extant on the subject. The Quiché monarchy
had recovered in a certain sense a large part of its former power. The
Achihab had shrewdly kept the descendants of the ancient kings on the
throne, and thus secured something of the friendship and respect of the
scattered lords. True, these lords maintained their independence of the
king of Utatlan, but so long as their privileges were not interfered
with they were still Quiché allies against the hated Cakchiquels and
all other foreign powers. So with all the independent tribes in the
country, who, although admitting no control on the part of either
monarch, were at heart allies of one of them against the others. Thus
the ancient empire had been practically divided into three, each with
its allied kingdoms or seigniories, of which three that of the Zutugils
and Ah-Tziquinihayi at Atitlan, was much less powerful and extensive
than the others.
There is no doubt that during this final period of Guatemalan history
the Mexican traders, who constantly visited the cities of the coast
in large caravans for commercial purposes, and who became, as we have
seen, practically the masters of Soconusco, exerted an influence also
in the politics of the interior. We have seen the prominent part this
class played in the conquest of provinces north of the isthmus, and
there is much evidence that they were already making their observations
and laying plans, by mixing themselves in the quarrels of the Quichés
and Cakchiquels, which might have brought the whole country under the
Aztec rulers, had it not been for the coming of the Spaniards, which
broke up so many cunningly devised plans in America. I have already
noticed the expulsion of ambassadors seeking ostensibly an alliance
with the southern powers, recorded by Juarros, and also the Mexican aid
said to have been furnished the Akahales against the Cakchiquels.
Oxlahuh-Tzy died about 1510, and his colleague two years later, leaving
the Cakchiquel throne to Hunyg and Lahuh-Noh. Early in the reign of
these kings there came from Mexico the embassy already spoken of in a
preceding chapter[XI-63] as having been sent by Montezuma II. probably to
obtain information respecting the strangers on the eastern coast, and
to consult with the southern monarchs about the best method of treating
the new-comers. It is possible also, that the political designs alluded
to above had something to do with the embassy, and Brasseur believes
that the Mexicans and Cakchiquels formed at this time an alliance
offensive and defensive against all foes. War broke out immediately
afterwards between the Cakchiquels and Quichés, and lasted almost
uninterruptedly for seven years, with no decisive results in favor of
either party, although the Cakchiquels, who acted for the most part on
the offensive, seem to have had the best of the struggle.
[Sidenote: RAVAGES OF THE SMALL-POX.]
In 1514, while the war still continued, immense numbers of locusts
caused a famine in the Cakchiquel dominions, and in the same year the
city of Iximché was almost entirely destroyed by fire. In 1519 the
war was suspended, perhaps on receipt of the news brought by the envoy
already mentioned, that the Spaniards had landed at Vera Cruz. Omens of
sinister import appeared here as at the north, one of the most notable
being the appearance of a ball of fire which appeared every evening for
many days in the east, and followed the course of the sun until it set
in the west. The famous black stone in the temple of Cahbaha was found,
when the priests went to consult it in this emergency, broken in two
pieces. In 1520 there came upon the Cakchiquels an epidemic cholera
morbus, accompanied by a fatal affection of the blood which carried
off large numbers, but which were as nothing in their ravages compared
with the small-pox which raged in 1521, contracted as is supposed, from
the Nahua tribes of the coast region. One half of the whole Cakchiquel
population are estimated to have fallen victims to this pestilence,
including the two monarchs, who were succeeded by Belehe Qat and
Cahi Imox. Whether the pestilence also raged among the Quichés is not
known; but the monarchs of Utatlan renewed their hostilities at this
time, and the Cakchiquels, weakened by disease and famine, harassed by
rebellious vassals, and now attacked again by a powerful foe, adopted
the desperate resort of sending an embassy to Mexico to demand the aid
of the Spaniards, advised to this course doubtless by their Mexican
allies. The reply was the promise that relief would soon be sent. In
the meantime two Cakchiquel campaigns are recorded, one most successful
in aid of the rulers of Atitlan against insurgents, and the other, less
favorable in its results, in aid of the Ah-Tziquinihayi of Pacawal.
The news of the Cakchiquel alliance with the Spaniards caused the most
bitter indignation, not only at Utatlan, where Oxib-Quieh and Beleheb
Tzy had succeeded to the throne, but among all the tribes of the
country, which seem to have formed a combination against the monarchs
of Iximché, and to have already begun hostilities when, in February
1524, the approach of Pedro de Alvarado was announced. The details of
Alvarado's conquest belong to another history; but in general terms,
after having marched--not without opposition--through Soconusco, he
defeated the native forces that attempted to check his progress on the
banks of the Rio Tilapa, the Guatemalan frontier line, and advanced
against the allied forces that had assembled from all directions in the
region of Xelahuh, or Quezaltenango, under the command of Tecum, the
Nim Chocoh Cawek of the Quiché monarchy. The two battles which decided
the fate of the Quichés were fought near Xelahuh and Totonicapan, so
that at Utatlan Alvarado met no open resistance, but was invited to
enter the city, the plan being to burn the city and the Spaniards with
it. The plot was discovered and the Ahpop and Ahpop Camha burned alive
in punishment for their intentions, the city then being burned by the
invaders. After the fall of Utatlan, Alvarado marched to Iximché,
where he was kindly received by the Cakchiquel kings, and where
he established his headquarters for the conquest of other nations,
beginning with the Zutugils.[XI-64]
FOOTNOTES:
[XI-1] See vol. ii., p. 121, et seq.
[XI-2] See map in vol. ii.
[XI-3] _Popol Vuh_, p. 79; this volume, p. 175.
[XI-4] _Las Casas_, _Hist. Apologética_, MS., tom. iii., cap. cxxiv.,
cxxv.
[XI-5] This vol., pp. 178-80; _Popol Vuh_, p. 141.
[XI-6] _Torquemada_, tom. ii., pp. 53-4; _Las Casas_, _Hist.
Apologética_, MS., tom. iii., cap. cxxiv.
[XI-7] _Brasseur_, in _Popol Vuh_, p. cclvi. The only authority
referred to on this matter of Copan is the _Isagoge Historico_, a
manuscript cited in _García Pelaez_, _Mem. para la Historia del
antiguo Reino de Guatemala_, tom. i., p. 45 et seq.
[XI-8] The other names are Lamak, Cumatz, Tuhalha, Uchabaha,
Chumilaha, Quibaha, Batenab, Acul-Vinak, Balamiha, Canchahel, and
Balam-Colob, most of which Brasseur connects more or less
satisfactorily with the scattered ruins in the Guatemala highlands,
where these tribes afterwards settled. It is stated by the tradition
that only the principal names are given.
[XI-9] The fourth god, Nicahtagah, is rarely named in the following
pages; Tohil is often used for the trinity, Tohil, Avilix, and
Hacavitz; and Balam-Quitzé for the band of the first four men or
high-priests.
[XI-10] The names of the localities named as the hiding-places of the
gods are said to be still attached to places in Vera Paz.
[XI-11] See p. 182, of this volume.
[XI-12] Another document consulted by Brasseur, _Popol Vuh_, p. 286,
places four generations between Balam-Quitzé and Qocaib and Qocavib
mentioned above as his sons.
[XI-13] Brasseur insists that this was Acxitl Quetzalcoatl, the last
Toltec king, who had founded a great kingdom in Honduras, with the
capital at Copan. _Popol Vuh_, p. 294.
[XI-14] Brasseur, in _Popol Vuh_, p. 297, gives a list from another
document of many of these new settlements, many of which as he claims
can be identified with modern localities. The chief of the new towns
was Chiquix, 'in the thorns,' possibly the name from which Quiché was
derived. This city occupied four hills, or was divided into four
districts, the Chiquix, Chichac, Humetaha, and Culba-Cavinal.
[XI-15] _Popol Vuh_, pp. 205-99; _Ximenez_, _Hist. Ind. Guat._, pp.
83-118.
[XI-16] _Brasseur_, in _Popol Vuh_, pp. ccliii-cclxxi. The manuscripts
referred to by this writer for this and the preceding information,
are:--_Título Territorial de los Señores de Totonicapan_; _Título
Territorial de los Señores de Sacapulas_; _MS. Cakchiquel_; _Título
Real de la Casa de Itzcuin-Nehaib_; and _Título de los Señores de
Quezaltenango y de Momostenango_.
[XI-17] _Hist. Nat. Civ._, tom. ii., pp. 73-150. The authorities
referred to besides those already named are the following: _Fuentes y
Guzman_, _Recopilacion Florida de la Hist. de Guat._, MS.; _Ximenez_,
_Hist. de los Reyes del Quiché_, MS.; _Chrónica de la Prov. de
Goattemala_, MS. The chief authority, however, is the _MS.
Cakchiquel_, or _Mémorial de Tecpan-Atitlan_.
[XI-18] The tribes named as having gathered here, are the Quichés,
Rabinals, Cakchiquels, Zutugils, Ah-Tziquinaha, Tuhalaha, Uchabaha,
Chumilaha, Tucurú, Zacaha, Quibaha, Batenab, Balaniha, Canchahel,
Balam Colob, Acul, Cumatz, Akahales, and Lamagi.
[XI-19] See p. 182, of this volume.
[XI-20] See vol. iv., pp. 128-30, for notice of ruins.
[XI-21] See p. 555 of this volume.
[XI-22] This is evidently taken by Juarros, from the Spanish version
of the Mexican traditions.
[XI-23] The reader is already aware that no such kings ever reigned
over the Toltecs in Anáhuac. It is evident that the author has
confounded the Tulan of the Guatemalan annals with Tollan, the Toltec
capital in Anáhuac, and the Nahua migration from the Xibalban region
in the fourth or fifth century, with that of the Toltecs in the
eleventh.
[XI-24] _Juarros_, _Hist. Guat._, (Guat., 1857) pp. 7-9. The extract
that I have made extends a little beyond the point at which I have
left the other records. I give here also a list of the Quiché kings,
who were according to Juarros: 1, Acxopil; 2, Jiuhtemal; 3, Hunahpu;
4, Balam Kiché (Balam-Quitzé); 5, Balam Acam (Balam-Agab); 6, Maucotah
(Mahucutah); 7, Iquibalam (Iqi-Balam); 8, Kicab I.; 9, Cacubraxechein;
10, Kicab II.; 11, Iximché; 12, Kicab III.; 13, Kicab IV.; 14, Kicab
Tamub; 15, Tecum Umam; 16, Chignaviucelut; 17, Sequechul or Sequechil.
The list of the Quiché princes of the royal house of Cawek, according
to the order of the generations, is given in the _Popol Vuh_, pp.
339-40, _Ximenez_, pp. 133-4, as follows--the list apparently includes
not only the Ahpop, or king, but the Ahpop Camha, heir apparent to the
throne. And, as is indicated by the course of the history, and as
Brasseur believes, each Ahpop Camha succeeded the Ahpop on the throne,
so that the whole number of the Quiché kings, down to the coming of
the Spaniards, counting from Qocavib, was twenty-two instead of
eleven, as the list might seem to imply and as Ximenez evidently
understands it:--1, Balam-Quitzé; 2, Qocavib, (although we have seen
that, by other documents several generations are placed between the
first and second of this list); 3, Balam Conache (the first to take
the title Ahpop); 4, Cotuha and Iztayub; 5, Gucumatz and Cotuha; 6,
Tepepul and Iztayul; 7, Quicab and Cavizimah; 8, Tepepul and Xtayub;
9, Tecum and Tepepul; 10, Vahxaki-Caam and Quicab; 11, Vukub Noh and
Cavatepech; 12, Oxib-Quieh and Beleheb Tzi (reigning when Alvarado
came, and hung by the Spaniards); 13, Tecum and Tepepul; 14, Don Juan
de Rojas and Don Juan Cortés.
The princes of the house of Nihaïb given by the same authority, p.
343, _Ximenez_, pp. 135, were as follows:--1, Balam-Agab; 2, Qoacul
and Qoacutec; 3, Qochahuh and Qotzibaha; 4, Beleheb-Gih; 5, Cotuha; 6,
Batza; 7, Ztayul; 8, Cotuha; 9, Beleheb-Gih; 10, Quema; 11, Cotuha;
12, Don Christóval; 13, Don Pedro de Robles.
List of the princes of the Royal House of Ahau Quiché, _Popol Vuh_, p.
345, _Ximenez_, pp. 136-7; 1, Mahucutah; 2, Qoahau; 3, Caklacan; 4,
Qocozom; 5, Comahcan; 6, Vukub-Ah; 7, Qocamel; 8, Coyabacoh,
Vinak-Bam. These lists, however, do not seem to correspond altogether
with the Quiché annals as given by the same authority, as the reader
will see in the succeeding pages.
[XI-25] _Monarq. Ind._, tom. i., p. 38, tom. ii., pp. 338-40. See also
_Helps' Span. Conq._, vol. iii., pp. 246-9.
[XI-26] _Geografía_, pp. 97-9, 128, et seq.
[XI-27] _Gallatin_, in _Amer. Ethno. Soc., Transact._, vol. i., p. 8.
[XI-28] _Voy. Pitt._, pp. 41, 646.
[XI-29] _Mem. de Tecpan-Atitlan_, in _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. ii.,
pp. 155-75.
[XI-30] Pp. 299-307; _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. ii., pp. 475-99;
_Ximenez_, _Hist. Ind. Guat._, pp. 119-21.
[XI-31] In his _Hist. Nat. Civ._, tom. ii., p. 478, Brasseur seems to
regard Balam II. and Conache as two kings, one succeeding the other,
but in his notes to _Popol Vuh_, p. cclxxiii., he unites them in one.
[XI-32] _Título de los Señores de Totonicapan._
[XI-33] _Título de los Señores de Totonicapan_, in the introduction to
_Popol Vuh_, pp. cclxxv-vi.
[XI-34] See p. 529, of this volume.
[XI-35] _Mem. de Tecpan-Atitlan_, in _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. ii.,
pp. 483-9.
[XI-36] See p. 570-1, of this volume.
[XI-37] Brasseur places his reign somewhere between 1225 and 1275.
[XI-38] The _Popol Vuh_ represents Utatlan, as we have seen, p. 573,
to have been first occupied by Cotuha and Gucumatz; meaning, as is
shown by the table of kings in the same document--see p. 566, of this
volume--by Gucumatz as king and Cotuha II. as second in rank. Brasseur
states that the name Gumarcaah was then given to the city, but it is
much more likely that this was the ancient name, and Utatlan of later
origin.
[XI-39] For description of the ruins of Utatlan, see vol. iv., pp.
124-8.
[XI-40] _Juarros_, _Hist. Guat._, pp. 9-16.
[XI-41] _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. ii., pp. 150-2, 475-7, 499. The
opinion that Hunahpu and Gucumatz were identical, however, is said to
receive some support from the _Isagoge Historico_, of Pelaez' work,
quoted by _Id._, in _Popol Vuh_, p. 316.
[XI-42] See vol. ii., pp. 637-44.
[XI-43] Or, as Ximenez renders it, to Hell.
[XI-44] He is named as being of the fifth generation in the tables at
the end of the document.
[XI-45] _Popol Vuh_, pp. 307-17; _Ximenez_, _Hist. Ind. Guat._, pp.
121-5; _Id._, _Escolios_, in _Id._, pp. 165-8. This last work is
perhaps the same as that quoted by Brasseur as _Ximenez_, _Hist. de
los Reyes del Quiché_, MS., but it is merely a list of kings with some
of their deeds, adding nothing whatever, in a historical point of
view, to the translation of the Quiché record.
[XI-46] _Hist. Nat. Civ._, tom. ii., pp. 493-9; _Id._, in _Popol Vuh_,
p. cclxxvi.
[XI-47] _Título de los Señores de Totonicapan_, in _Popol Vuh_, pp.
cclxxvi-vii.
[XI-48] _Mem. de Tecpan-Atitlan_, in _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. ii.,
pp. 501-3.
[XI-49] See p. 576, of this vol.
[XI-50] Cakchiquels and Pipiles almost constantly at war; _Squier's
Cent. Amer._, p. 323; _Id._, in _Nouvelles Annales_, tom. cliii., p.
180.
[XI-51] _Juarros_, _Hist. Guat._, pp. 16-23. Fuentes used a history
written by a son and grandson of the last king of Guatemala, _Müller_,
_Amer. Urrel._, p. 454. Waldeck, _Voy. Pitt._, p. 46, declares the
Guatemalan manuscripts not reliable, and states that the Macario
manuscript used by Fuentes was badly translated.
[XI-52] _Juarros_, _Hist. Guat._, pp. 23-4.
[XI-53] The seventh according to the tables.
[XI-54] _Popol Vuh_, pp. 317-27; _Ximenez_, _Hist. Ind. Guat._, pp.
125-9. There are some differences and omissions in the Spanish
translation.
[XI-55] _Escolios_, in _Hist. Ind. Guat._, pp. 168-9.
[XI-56] _Mem. de Tecpan-Atitlan_, in _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. ii.,
pp. 503-45.
[XI-57] _Escolios_, in _Hist. Ind. Guat._, pp. 169-71.
[XI-58] _Juarros_, _Hist. Guat._, pp. 24-6.
[XI-59] _Id._, pp. 9-11, 35-9.
[XI-60] _Mem. de Tecpan-Atitlan_, in _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. ii.,
pp. 529-45.
[XI-61] _Juarros_, _Hist. Guat._, p. 26. It is impossible to connect
this account in any way with the others.
[XI-62] _Ximenez_, _Escolios_, in _Hist. Ind. Guat._, pp. 172-3.
[XI-63] See p. 470 of this volume; _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. ii., p.
624.
[XI-64] _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. iv., pp. 619-51, with reference to
_MS. Cakchiquel_, and other documents.
CHAPTER XII.
MISCELLANEOUS TRIBES OF CENTRAL AMERICA.
Scarcity of Historical Data -- The Tribes of Chiapas -- The
Founders and Heroes of the Chiapanec Nation -- Wars with the Aztecs
-- The People of the Southern Coast -- They are vanquished by the
Olmecs -- Their Exodus and Journey -- They settle and separate --
Juarros' Account of the Origin and later History of the Pipiles --
Pipile Traditions -- The Founding of Mictlan -- Queen Comizahual
-- Acxitl's Empire of the East -- The Cholutecs -- Various Tribes
of Nicaragua -- Settlements on the Isthmus.
It is my purpose to relate in this chapter all that is known
of the scattered tribes of Central America, exclusive of the
Quiché-Cakchiquels. The historical information that has been preserved
respecting these tribes is, however, so meagre and of such a vague and
unsatisfactory character that the reader must expect nothing more than
a very disconnected and incomplete account of them.
Chiapas, which is geographically the most northerly portion of Central
America, though politically it belongs to Mexico, was inhabited in its
northern part by the Tzendales and Zoques, in its central and southern
region by the Chiapanecs, Zotziles, and Quelenes.[XII-1] The Tzendales
lived in the vicinity of Palenque, and are said to have been directly
descended from the builders of that city. Of the Zotziles and Quelenes
nothing is known, save that they, together with the Tzendales and the
Zoques, were at a late date subjugated by the Chiapanecs.[XII-2]
[Sidenote: THE CHIAPANECS.]
The Chiapanecs, according to some authorities, came originally from
Nicaragua. After a long and painful journey they arrived at the river
Chiapa. Finding the region to their taste they resolved to settle, and
founded a strong city upon the neighboring heights.[XII-3] Fuentes asserts
that they were descended from the Toltecs, and that their kingdom was
founded by a brother of Nima Quiché, one of the chiefs who led the
Toltecs to Guatemala.[XII-4] There can be no doubt that the Chiapanecs
were a very ancient people; indeed their traditions refer us back to
the time of Votan.[XII-5] Boturini, on the authority of Bishop Nuñez de
la Vega, speaks of an original record in which Votan is represented as
the third figure in the Chiapanec calendar. The record also enumerates
the places where Votan tarried, and states that ever since his visit
there has been in Teopixca a family bearing his name. Vega believes
that the original population of Chiapas and Soconusco were of the
race of Cham.[XII-6] The twenty heroes whose names are immortalized in the
calendar of the Chiapanecs are commonly said to have been the founders
or first rulers of that nation. We are told that they all distinguished
themselves, and that some died in their beds, some on the battle-field,
others at the hands of their rivals, but beyond this scarcely any
record of their lives or deeds has survived. One of them named Chinax,
a military leader represented with a flag in his hand, was hanged
and burned by an enemy; of another named Been, it is stated that he
traveled through Chiapas, leaving special marks of his visits in the
places through which he passed. It appears by the calendar that Imox,
sometimes called Mox, and occasionally Ninus, was the first settler
in Chiapas. According to the worthy prelate above mentioned, this
Ninus was the son of Belo, who was the son of Nimrod, who was the son
of Chus, who was the grandson of Cham. He was represented by or with
the ceiba tree,[XII-7] from whose roots, it is said, the Chiapanec race
sprang.[XII-8] It is Orozco y Berra's opinion that the Chiapanecs should
be placed before the better known tribes[XII-9] and after the builders of
Palenque and Copan. Their language has not been classified, but is said
to resemble that of the Nicoya region.[XII-10]
The spot on which the pioneer settlers of the Chiapan region
established their first stronghold was so difficult of access as to be
almost unassailable, and was fortified so strongly both by nature and
art, that it was practically impregnable. From here the inhabitants
kept up a constant warfare with the Aztec garrisons at Tzinacatla,
Soconusco and elsewhere.[XII-11] They cordially hated the Mexicans, and
persistently refused to intermarry with them. Their enemies seem
to have been stronger than they, but by their valor they not only
maintained their independence until the time of the Conquest, but, as
we have seen, they subjugated the surrounding nations. They incurred
the bitter enmity of the Chinantecs, because they forced the Zoques to
pay tribute.[XII-12]
[Sidenote: THE PIPILES.]
The southern coast region of Chiapas, between Tehuantepec and
Soconusco, was occupied by a people whose origin is involved in some
mystery. Brasseur relates that they came from Cholula; probably in the
ninth century, at the time when Huemac took that city and persecuted
the followers of Quetzalcoatl. Torquemada identifies them with the
Pipiles of Guatemala and Salvador,[XII-13] of whom I shall speak presently.
These coast people were an industrious, frugal race, and for a long
time they held peaceable possession of their territory, and prospered
exceedingly. But their happy life was destined to be rudely and
suddenly changed to one of bondage and oppression. A horde of fierce
Olmecs invaded and conquered their country, and immediately reduced
the vanquished to a state of miserable slavery. Not only were they
forced to pay excessive and ruinous tribute, but they were compelled
to yield up their children of both sexes to gratify the unnatural lusts
of their masters. They were, besides, made amenable to a most rigorous
system of laws, the least infraction of which was punished with death.
For a time they groaned passively under this cruel yoke, but at length
it grew unbearable. Then in their deep trouble they appealed to their
priests for help and advice. The priests consulted the oracles and
at the end of eight days announced to the people that the only way in
which they could escape from their persecutors was to leave the country
in a body, and go in search of another home. At first the people
seemed disposed to question the prudence and feasibility of this step,
but they were speedily re-assured by the priests, who declared that
the gods would aid and protect them in their flight. A day was then
set for their departure, and they were instructed in the meantime to
provide themselves with everything necessary for a long journey. At the
appointed time they assembled secretly, and set out at once. It would
be difficult to believe that an entire nation of slaves could have
made such an exodus unknown to and against the will of their masters,
even though we read of a parallel case in Holy Writ; but, however this
might be, they seem to have taken the road towards Guatemala without
hindrance, and to have been pursued by no Olmec Pharaoh.[XII-14]
According to the tradition, they continued their march down the coast
for twenty days, until they came to the banks of the river Michatoyatl.
Here their chief priest fell sick, and the country being very pleasant,
they halted for a time. Before long the priest died, and they then
proceeded on their journey, leaving, however, some families behind,
who settled here and founded a city, afterwards known in Guatemalan
history by the name of Itzcuintlan. After this there is some confusion
in the different accounts. Following the plainest version, similar
circumstances caused them to make another halt twenty leagues lower
down, in the neighborhood of the volcano Cuzcatlan.[XII-15] Here they found
a lovely climate, and a productive soil, and that part of them that has
since borne the name of Pipiles resolved to settle. The others went
farther south, towards the Conchagua Gulf;[XII-16] but of these I shall
speak again presently.
The authorities do not all assign this origin to the Pipiles, however.
Juarros says that Ahuitzotl, king of Mexico, sent to Guatemala, in the
garb of traders, a large number of Mexicans of the lowest class, under
the command of four captains and one general. These were instructed to
settle in the country. Ahuitzotl did this in order to have auxiliaries
so situated as to facilitate his intended military operations against
the chiefs of Guatemala. He died, however, before he could carry out
this policy. The new settlers spoke the Mexican language very poorly,
much as children might speak it; for this reason they were called
Pipiles, which in Mexican signifies children.[XII-17] They prospered
and multiplied wonderfully in their new home, and extended their
settlements to Sonsonate and Salvador. But after a time they incurred
the enmity of the Quichés and Cakchiquels, by whom they were so sorely
oppressed that there was danger of their being speedily exterminated.
In this emergency the Pipiles formed a military organization, much
as Ahuitzotl had originally intended. But some time later the chiefs
began to abuse the power with which they had been invested by imposing
heavy taxes and otherwise robbing the people. Moreover, the principal
lord, named Cuaucmichin, introduced human sacrifice, and made victims
of some of the most highly esteemed persons in the community. A riot
broke out, during which Cuaucmichin was put to death by the people of
his palace. The other chiefs were also deprived of their authority,
and left with the inferior rank of Alahuaes, or heads of calpullis. A
nobleman named Tutecotzemit, a man of mild disposition, kind heart, and
good ability to govern was then invested with the supreme authority. It
appears that he was not free from ambition, however. His first step was
to form a council, or senate, of eight nobles, connected with himself
by blood or marriage, to whom he granted a certain amount of authority.
He then appointed a number of subordinate officers, chosen from among
the nobility, who were subject to the orders of the senate. He next
proceeded to reduce the imposts and to remedy the evils that had arisen
from previous misgovernment. Having thus gained the confidence and
affection of the people, he caused himself to be formally proclaimed
king of the Pipiles with the right of transmitting the crown to his
children and their descendants. It is recorded that the Pipiles played
a very prominent part in the numerous wars that took place between the
several kingdoms of Guatemala. In later years they were engaged in
a very long and bitter conflict with the Cakchiquels, in which they
were finally worsted by Nimahuinac, king of that people, who forced
Tonaltut, lord of the Pipiles, to sue for peace, and only granted it
on the condition that the Pipiles should bind themselves to a perpetual
alliance with the Cakchiquel kings.[XII-18]
All that has been preserved of their earlier history is contained in
two traditions, which are half if not wholly mythical. The first of
these refers to the period immediately following the settlement of
the Pipiles at their last halting-place in Salvador, and especially to
the founding of Mictlan, a city which subsequently corresponded in its
sacred character to Cholula on the eastern plateau of Mexico, and Mitla
in Oajaca. The story goes that there issued one day from Lake Huixa a
mysterious old man of venerable aspect, clad in long blue robes, and
wearing upon his head a pontificial mitre. He was followed by a young
girl of peerless beauty, dressed in a similar manner, excepting the
mitre. Soon after his appearance the old man betook himself to the
summit of a neighboring hill. There under his directions the people
at once set about building a splendid temple, which received the name
of Mictlan. Round about the sacred edifice the palaces of the chiefs
rose in rapid succession, and in an incredibly short space of time
a thriving and populous city had grown out of the desert. The same
mysterious personage gave them laws and a system of government, under
which they continued to prosper until the end.[XII-19]
The other tradition to which I have alluded was preserved at the
time of the Conquest by the inhabitants of Cerquin, a province in the
mountainous region of northern Honduras. There is reason to believe
that the people to whom it relates were Pipiles, as they extended
their possessions in this direction, but their name is not given in
connection with the story, which attributes to a woman the honor of
having first introduced culture into this part of the country, two
hundred years before the advent of the Spaniards. She is described
as having been very beautiful, of a fair complexion, and well versed
in the art of magic. She appeared suddenly, as if dropped from the
sky, for which reason, and because of the great respect which she
inspired, she was named Comizahual, or 'flying tigress,' the tiger
being an animal held sacred by the natives. She took up her abode at
Cealcoquin, and erected there many temples which she ornamented with
monstrous figures of men and animals. In the principal temple she
placed a stone having three sides, on each of which were three faces
of hideous aspect. By means of the magic virtues which lay within this
stone she overthrew her enemies and added to her dominions. She reigned
gloriously for a number of years, and had three sons, though she was
unmarried and had never known a man. When she felt her end drawing
near, she summoned these princes to her presence, and after giving them
the best of advice regarding the way in which they should govern, she
divided her kingdom equally between them. She then caused herself to be
carried on her bed to the highest terrace of the palace, and suddenly
vanished, amid thunder and lightning. It is recorded that her three
sons governed well and wisely, but no particulars of their reigns are
given.[XII-20]
[Sidenote: EMPIRE OF THE EAST.]
Brasseur implies that the Pipiles were in some way connected with or
subject to the empire which he believes Topiltzin Acxitl, the last
Toltec king of Anáhuac, to have founded in Central America, since
he speaks of Mictlan being the seat of the spiritual power of that
realm. I have already expressed my opinion that this empire of the
East is the offspring of the Abbé's inventive imagination; but at the
same time, notwithstanding the two or three allusions upon which he
must found his theory are so vague as to be practically meaningless,
he manages to give a tolerably definite description of the condition
in which the Cakchiquels found it when they came after a long and
arduous pilgrimage from Anáhuac to do homage to Acxitl. He confesses
his ignorance of the particulars of the Toltec monarch's journey, and
of the means by which he attained universal dominion in the east, but
adds that it is certain that with the aid of the Toltec emigrants,
like himself, and the Chichimecs of all languages, who followed in his
footsteps, he had succeeded in establishing a kingdom larger, perhaps,
than that which he had lost, and in conferring upon his subjects the
benefits of civilization as well as the cult of Quetzalcoatl, of whom
he was the supreme representative. Taught by experience the benefits
of such a policy, he united under his authority the bands of emigrants
that were constantly arriving, and with their assistance conquered by
force of arms such of the surrounding provinces as would not peaceably
acknowledge his supremacy. It was his custom to leave those princes
who offered no resistance to his encroachments in possession of their
titles and dignities, merely making them nominal vassals of the empire.
By pursuing this policy Acxitl became so powerful that none of the
numerous Quiché and Cakchiquel chiefs who afterwards founded states in
these regions dared to assume the royal authority until they had been
formally instated in their possessions by him. Thus it was that at the
time when the Cakchiquels descended from the mountains to the plateau
of Vera Paz, they found Acxitl occupied in conferring the sovereignty
of that region upon one of the most renowned of the warriors who had
followed him from Tollan, named Cempoal Taxuch before his coronation,
and Orbaltzam afterwards.[XII-21]
[Sidenote: NICARAGUAN TRIBES.]
Let us now follow the fortunes of the Xuchiltepecs, or that part of
the tribes of the coast of Chiapas which separated from the Pipiles at
Cuzcatlan. Following the coast southward they arrived at the Gulf of
Conchagua. Here they were forced to halt, by the illness and subsequent
death of the priest who had hitherto been their guide. Before expiring,
the old man, who seems in some way to have gained a knowledge of that
region, gave them full information as to what they might expect of
the surrounding nations, exhorted them to settle and live in peace,
and predicted that their ancient enemies, the Olmecs, would eventually
become their slaves. The Xuchiltepecs accordingly stayed permanently
where they were, on the borders of Honduras, Salvador, and Nicaragua,
and bore henceforward the name of Cholutecs, from the country from
which they originally came.[XII-22]
Of the other tribes of Nicaragua nothing is known, except the names
and localities of those that inhabited the strip of country between
the Pacific coast and the lakes. Of these, the Orotiñans occupied the
country about the Gulf of Nicoya and south of the Lake of Nicaragua.
Their principal towns were Orotiña, Cantren, and Choroté.[XII-23] North of
these were the Dirians, whose chief cities were settled at the foot of
the volcano of Mombacho, and at Managua on the lake of that name.[XII-24]
North of the Dirians were the Nagrandans, or Mangnés, whose territory
lay between Lake Managua and the ocean.[XII-25] The Chontales inhabited the
mountainous region north-east of Lake Nicaragua.[XII-26] Immediately south
of the Cholutecs were the Chorotegans. These two nations are often
regarded as identical. According to Squier the Chorotegans included the
Orotiñans, Dirians, and Nagrandans.[XII-27] The Niquirans, or Nicaraguans,
were one of the most prominent tribes in Nicaragua.[XII-28] There is some
confusion about their origin. Torquemada implies that they were part
of the tribes that were driven from their home on the coast of Chiapas
by the Olmecs, who, after the death of their priest at the Gulf of
Conchagua, continued their journey to the Atlantic coast, along which
they traveled as far as Nombre de Dios, founding several towns on the
way. Thence they returned, in search of a fresh-water sea, to Nicoya,
where they were informed that a few leagues farther on was a fine lake.
They accordingly proceeded to the spot upon which Leon now stands,
and there formed settlements. But growing dissatisfied with this site,
they afterwards went to Nicaragua, where, by a treacherous ruse, they
killed the inhabitants and took possession of the land.[XII-29] Brasseur
tells much the same story of their travels and ultimate settlement in
Nicaragua, but asserts that they were Toltecs.[XII-30]
FOOTNOTES:
[XII-1] See for location of these tribes, vol. i., pp. 681-2.
[XII-2] _Herrera_, dec. iv., lib. x., cap. xi.; _Remesal_, _Hist.
Chyapa_, p. 264; _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. iii., p. 16.
[XII-3] _Remesal_, ib.; _Herrera_, ib.; _Murguia_, _Estadist.
Guajaca_, in _Soc. Mex. Geog., Boletin_, tom. vii., p. 187.
[XII-4] _Juarros_, _Hist. Guat._, p. 8.
[XII-5] _Clavigero_, tom. iv., p. 52, tom. i., pp. 150-1;
_Larrainzar_, in _Soc. Mex. Geog., Boletin_, tom. iii., p. 92;
_Bradford's Amer. Antiq._, p. 202.
[XII-6] _Boturini_, _Idea_, pp. 115, 118-19.
[XII-7] Five-leaved silk-cotton tree, _Bombax Ceiba_.
[XII-8] _Piñeda_, in _Soc. Mex. Geog., Boletin_, tom. iii., pp. 344-5.
The names of these heroes were: Imox, Igh, Votan, Chanan, Abah, Tox,
Moxic, Lambat, Molo or Mulu, Elab, Batz, Evob, Been, Hix, Tziquin,
Chabin, Chic, Chinax, Cahogh, Aghual.
[XII-9] Who these 'better known tribes' are is not stated.
[XII-10] _Piñeda_, in _Soc. Mex. Geog., Boletin_, tom. iii., p. 346.
The history, position and civilization of the Chiapanecs shows that
they preceded, or were at least contemporaries of the first tribes or
factions of the Aztec family. They were certainly a very ancient
people, and of Toltec origin, while their civilization undoubtedly
came from the north and not from the south. _Orozco y Berra_,
_Geografía_, pp. 44, 60, 120.
[XII-11] _Clavigero_, tom. iv., pp. 267-8; _Bernal Diaz_, _Hist.
Conq._, fol. 73, 178; _Herrera_, dec. iv., lib. x., cap. xi.;
_Larrainzar_, in _Soc. Mex. Geog., Boletin_, tom. iii., p. 92;
_Brasseur_, _Esquisses_, p. 17.
[XII-12] _Herrera_, dec. iv., lib. x., cap. xi.; _Remesal_, _Hist.
Chyapa_, p. 264.
[XII-13] _Monarq. Ind._, tom. i., p. 333. Brasseur, _Hist._, tom. ii.,
p. 76, identifies them with the Pipiles and Xuchiltepecs.
[XII-14] _Torquemada_, tom. i., p. 332.
[XII-15] Cuzcatlan was the ancient name of Salvador.
[XII-16] _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. ii., pp. 78-9. Torquemada, tom. i.,
p. 332, relates that twenty days after starting, one of their
high-priests died. They then traversed Guatemala, and journeying a
hundred leagues farther on, came to a country to which the Spaniards
have given the name of Choluteca, or Choroteca. Here another priest
died. After this the author goes on to tell the story which, according
to the version followed above, applies to the Xuchiltepecs who
proceeded to the Gulf of Conchagua, and which will be referred to
elsewhere.
[XII-17] _Juarros_, _Hist. Guat._, p. 224. A reduplication of _pilli_,
which has two meanings, 'noble,' and 'child,' the latter being
generally regarded as its meaning in the tribal name. _Buschmann_,
_Ortsnamen_, p. 137. See also _Molina_, _Vocabulario_.
[XII-18] _Juarros_, _Hist. Guat._, pp. 81-4, 17-18, 20, 23, 26.
[XII-19] 'L'époque que les événements paraissent assigner à cette
légende coïncide avec la période de la grande émigration toltèque et
la fondation des divers royaumes guatémaliens qui en furent la
conséquence.' _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. ii., p. 81.
[XII-20] _Torquemada_, tom. i., p. 336; _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. ii.,
pp. 106-7; _Herrera_, dec. iv., lib. viii., cap. iv.
[XII-21] _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. ii., pp. 101-5.
[XII-22] _Torquemada_, tom. i., p. 332; _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. ii.,
pp. 79, 107-8. See vol. i., of this work, p. 791, for territory of
Cholutecs.
[XII-23] _Torquemada_, tom. i., p. 332; _Levy_, _Nicaragua_, p. 6; see
vol. i., of this work, p. 792.
[XII-24] _Id._
[XII-25] _Id._
[XII-26] _Id._, p. 790.
[XII-27] _Nicaragua_, (Ed. 1856), vol. ii., pp. 309-12; _Oviedo_,
_Hist. Gen._, tom. iv., p. 35.
[XII-28] For locality, see vol. i., p. 792.
[XII-29] _Torquemada_, tom. i., pp. 332-3.
[XII-30] _Hist._, tom. ii., pp. 108-9.
CHAPTER XIII.
HISTORY OF THE MAYAS IN YUCATAN.
Aboriginal Names of Yucatan -- The Primitive Inhabitants
from the East and West -- Zamná, the Pontiff-King -- The
Itzas at Chichen -- Rule of Cukulcan at Chichen and Mayapan
-- His Disappearance on the Gulf Coast -- The Cocome Rule
at Mayapan -- Appearance of the Tutul Xius -- Translation
of the Maya Record by Perez and Brasseur -- Migration from
Tulan -- Conquest of Bacalar and Chichen -- Itza Annals --
Tutul Xius at Uxmal -- Overthrow of the Cocome Dynasty -- The
Confederacy, or Empire, of Tutul Xius, Itzas, and Cheles --
Fable of the Dwarf -- Overthrow of the Tutul Xius -- Final
Period of Civil Wars.
Respecting the original name of Yucatan, Bishop Landa tells us that
it was called Ulumil Cuz and Etel Ceh, 'land of turkeys and deer.'
Padre Lizana writes the name U Luumil Cutz and U Luumil Ceb. Malte-Brun
claims to have found a tradition to the effect that in the early time
the interior plains of the peninsula were submerged, forming lakes,
and the people lived in isolated groups by fishing and hunting. Landa
also applies the name Peten, 'isle,' thinking that the natives believed
their country to be surrounded with water. The Perez manuscript terms
the peninsula Chacnouitan, which Gallatin believes to have been its
true name; while Brasseur regards this as the ancient name of only the
southern portion of the country. There is no doubt that the native name
of Yucatan at the coming of Europeans and afterwards was Maya. Several
authors define this as 'land without water,' a most appropriate name
for this region. Brasseur in one place derives the name from Mai, that
of an ancient priest; Cogolludo says the country was named from its
capital or chief city thus differing at each successive epoch, being
in ancient times Mayapan, but in the time of the writer, Campeche.
Ternaux-Compans declares that from the fall of Mayapan to the coming
of the Spaniards the country had no general name. All agree that the
name Yucatan originated from a misunderstanding by the Spaniards of the
words first pronounced by the natives when questioned about the name of
their country.[XIII-1]
[Sidenote: MIGRATION FROM THE EAST.]
The earliest inhabitants are supposed to have come from the east. As
they fled before their enemies their god had opened a path for them
through the sea.[XIII-2] Lizana believes these first inhabitants came
from Cuba, which may have been connected with the peninsula in those
primitive times; while Orozco y Berra seems to favor the idea that
they came to Cuba from Florida.[XIII-3] From this original population,
few in numbers, is supposed to have come the ancient name _cenial_, or
'little descent,' applied by the inhabitants to the east; while the
name _nohenial_, 'great descent' by which the west was called,
originated from a larger migration from that direction. Cogolludo, it
is true, claims that the eastern colony was the more numerous of the
two, yet, this is not tradition, but his theory, based on the
prevalence of the Maya language in connection with the unfounded
assumption that those who came from the west must have spoken
Aztec.[XIII-4] All that can be learned from these traditions is the
existence among the Mayas of a vague idea that their ancestors came
originally from opposite directions. Their idea of the most primitive
period of their history, like the idea entertained by other nations
whose annals have been presented, was connected with the arrival of a
small band from across the ocean. This was the 'little descent'; by
this first band and their descendants the country was peopled and the
Maya institutions established. The 'great descent' referred to the
coming of strangers from the south-west, probably at different times,
and at a much later period.
To account for the fact that but one language is spoken in Yucatan,
and that closely related to those of Tabasco and Guatemala, Orozco y
Berra supposes that the Mayas destroyed or banished the former
inhabitants. They were evidently barbarians, as shown by their
abandonment of the ruins; perhaps they were the same tribes that
destroyed Palenque.[XIII-5] But the reader already knows that the
builders of the cities were found in possession of the country, and
the unity of language is exactly what might be expected, if the
traditional colony from the east peopled not only Yucatan, but the
adjoining countries, and the subsequent returning colonies from the
west came from the countries thus peopled. We learn from Boturini that
the Olmecs, Xicalancas, and Zapotecs, of the eastern region of Mexico,
fled at the approach of the Toltecs and settled in Yucatan. Veytia
shows that if any of these peoples settled in Yucatan, it was from
choice, not necessity; Torquemada and others add the Chichimecs and
Acolhuas to the peoples that settled Yucatan. Cogolludo and Fancourt
include the Teo-Chichimecs,[XIII-6] while most modern writers favor
the theory that the Toltecs occupied Yucatan after their expulsion
from Anáhuac in the eleventh century, erecting the cities that have
since been found there in so great numbers.[XIII-7]
[Sidenote: TOLTEC THEORY.]
The conjectures of the preceding paragraph and many others of a similar
nature, are a part of the theory, so often noted in this work, of a
general migration of American nations from north to south, a theory
which has amounted almost to a mania for dispatching every ancient
northern tribe southward, and for searching in the north for the origin
of every ancient southern people. It was not enough that the people
of Yucatan and Guatemala migrated from the far north-west; but it was
necessary to find in each of these states traces of every nation whose
presence in Mexico during the past ages has been recorded by tradition.
After what has been said on this subject in this and preceding volumes,
it is needless to repeat here the arguments against a Mexican origin
for the people and monuments of Yucatan. No people in America show less
indications of a past intermixture with foreign tribes; the similarity
between the monuments and those farther north is sufficiently accounted
for by the historical events to be recorded in this chapter; and the
conjectures in question are not only unfounded, but wholly uncalled
for, serving only to complicate a record which without them is
comparatively clear if not very complete.
* * * * *
The Yucatec culture-hero was Zamná, or Ytzamná, who according to the
traditions was the first temporal and religious leader, the civilizer,
high-priest, and law-giver, who introduced the Maya institutions,
divided the country into provinces, and named all the localities in
Yucatan. He was accompanied, like other culture-heroes, by a band of
priests, artizans, and even warriors. Ruling the country from his
capital of Mayapan, he gave the government of the provinces to his
companions, reserving the best positions naturally for chieftains of
his own blood. Zamná was the reported inventor of the Maya hieroglyphic
art, and it is conjectured that the Cocomes, the oldest royal family
in Yucatan, were the descendants of this first ruler. He died at an
advanced age and was interred at Izamal, supposed to have been at that
time near the sea shore, a city which was named for him, and probably
founded by him, where his successors erected a sacred temple in honor
of his memory, which was for many centuries a favorite shrine for
Yucatec pilgrims. Another personage, Kinich Kakmo, is prominent in the
Maya mythology, and may probably have been identical with Zamná, or one
of his companions.[XIII-8]
Zamná may best be connected with the first colony, the 'little
descent,' the first introduction of Maya institutions into the
country, although it is not expressly stated that he was at the head
of that colony; and both the colony and its leader may be identified
most naturally with the introduction of the Votanic civilization and
the establishment of the Xibalban empire already narrated from the
traditions of the nations. Whether Zamná was a companion or disciple
of Votan, or even identical with that personage, it is, of course,
impossible to determine; and it is not by any means necessary to accept
literally the arrival of either colony or leader. But the rôle played
by Zamná was the same as that of Votan, and the same events at the same
epoch may be reasonably supposed to have originated the Yucatec as
well as the Tzendal, Quiché, and Toltec traditions of this primitive
historic period. The statement of Ordoñez, already referred to, that
Mayapan was one of the allied capitals which with Palenque, Tulan, and
Copan, constituted the Xibalban, or Votanic, empire, is not improbable,
although its truth cannot be fully substantiated.
[Sidenote: THE ITZAOB AT CHICHEN.]
The next event in the annals of the peninsula is the rule of the
Itzaob, three most holy men, at Chichen Itza, over the people also
called Itzas. Closely connected with these rulers, and perhaps one
of the three, was Cukulcan, or Quetzalcoatl, the 'plumed serpent.'
Torquemada tells us that in very remote times, at the time of
Quetzalcoatl's disappearance from Mexico, Cukulcan appeared from the
west with nineteen followers, all with long beards, and dressed in
long robes and sandals, but bare-headed. This author identifies him
with Quetzalcoatl. Cogolludo in one place briefly refers to Cukulcan
as a great captain and a god; and elsewhere speaks of the coming of
Cozas with nineteen followers, introducing the rites of confession and
otherwise modifying the religious institutions of the country. Landa
speaks of Cukulcan as having afterwards been regarded as a god in
Mexico, whence he had come to Yucatan, under the name of Cezalcouati
(Quetzalcoatl). Herrera gives him two brothers, and states that the
three collected a large population and reigned together in peace
for many years over the Itzas at Chichen, where they erected many
magnificent temples in honor of their gods. The three brothers lived
a most holy and continent life, neither marrying nor associating
carnally with women; but at last one of them, Cukulcan, for most of
the authorities agree that he was one of them, left his companions and
adopted Mayapan as his capital. Landa says on this subject: "It is the
opinion of the natives that with the Itzas who settled Chichen Itza
there reigned a great lord named Cukulcan, which is shown to be true
by the principal edifice called Cukulcan. They say that he entered the
country from the west, but they differ as to whether he came before,
with, or after the Itzas; and they say he was very moral, having
neither wife nor children." In another place the same author speaks
of the three brothers also as having come from the west, reigning at
Chichen, agreeing in life and character with Cukulcan, until one of the
number died, or at least abandoned his companions and left the country.
After the departure or death of Cukulcan, the two remaining lords
gradually gave themselves up to an irregular and dissolute life, and
their conduct finally moved their subjects to revolt, to kill the two
princes, and to abandon the city. Cukulcan in the meantime devoted his
attention to building up, beautifying, and fortifying his new capital,
erecting grand temples for the gods and palaces for his subordinate
lords, among whom he divided the surrounding country and towns. He
ruled here most wisely and prosperously for several years, but at last
after fully establishing the government, and instructing his followers
respecting their duties and the proper means of ruling the country
peacefully, he determined, for some motive not revealed, to abandon the
city and the peninsula. He tarried awhile, however, at Champoton on the
western coast, where a temple was erected in commemoration of his stay.
According to Herrera it was erected by himself.[XIII-9]
[Sidenote: CUKULCAN AND THE COCOMES.]
It is evident enough that Cukulcan was the same as Quetzalcoatl, but
to determine with _which_ Quetzalcoatl--the Nahua culture-hero or the
Toltec king--is a difficult matter. We have seen what complications in
Mexican history arise from the fact that the Spanish writers failed to
make any distinction between the two, most of them entirely ignoring
the latter. Cogolludo dates the departure of Cukulcan in the middle of
the twelfth century; Herrera makes it precede by about five hundred and
sixty years the coming of the Spaniards; and Brasseur de Bourbourg,
in his history, implies that Cukulcan was Acxitl Quetzalcoatl, thus
placing his stay in Yucatan in or after the eleventh century. Yet
most of the traditions seem to point to the Itzaob and to Cukulcan as
preceding the Tutul Xius. The Itzas seem to have been among the most
ancient nations in the country, and their name is best derived from
that of Ytzamná. Even Brasseur de Bourbourg, in a later work,[XIII-10]
offers the conjectures that the Itzas were Xibalbans who fled from
Chiapas after the overthrow of their empire by the Nahuas, and that
Cukulcan "was the same as the more or less mythologic personage of whom
Sahagun speaks, the leader of the Nahua race to Tamoanchan, who seems
identical with the Quetzalcoatl of the _Codex Chimalpopoca_, and the
Gucumatz of the _Popol Vuh_."
There is no reason for bringing the Itza people from Chiapas, since
they appear to have been like the Cocomes, descendants, or followers,
of Zamná, whose history from the death of their great ruler down to
Cukulcan's coming, is unknown. But it is certainly most consistent
to identify Cukulcan with the first Quetzalcoatl and with Gucumatz,
to regard his appearance and the rule of the three 'holy princes' at
Chichen and Mayapan as the first introduction of the Nahua influence in
Yucatan, and to date it within the first two centuries of the Christian
era, while the Nahua power was beginning to rival that of the ancient
Xibalba in Chiapas, and while the Olmecs and Xicalancas were becoming
established in Vera Cruz and Puebla. Malte-Brun and some others deem
Cukulcan and Zamná the same without any apparent reason, although the
lives and deeds of both these pontiff-rulers are recorded only in the
vaguest manner.[XIII-11]
It is probable that Cukulcan abandoned Chichen and its people,
among whom he at first attempted to establish his peculiar reforms,
because his teachings were not so favorably received or so permanent
in their effects as he desired, and because he had reason to expect
more favorable results among the Cocomes, whom he now adopted as
his chosen people. Both 'listeners' and 'serpents' are given as the
signification of the name Cocomes; the first may be referred to the
fact that they were the first to 'listen' to Cukulcan's teachings;
the second may arise from their relationship to the Votanic race
of Chanes, or 'serpents.' Torquemada speaks of the Cocomes as the
descendants of Cukulcan, but to regard them rather as disciples would
be more consistent with the celibate life and chastity attributed to
the great teacher. After the Plumed Serpent's departure the lords of
Mayapan, raised to the highest power in the state the chief of the
Cocome family, as Landa says, "either because this family was the most
ancient or the richest, or because he who was at its head was a very
valiant chief." Many of the aboriginal institutions of this country,
as described in a preceding volume, are derived from traditions of this
period of Cocome rule, one of the most prosperous in Maya history. The
family names of rulers are often used as personal names in the annals
of these nations, and thus we find the ruler at Mayapan spoken of as
Cocom.[XIII-12]
* * * * *
[Sidenote: MIGRATION OF TUTUL XIUS.]
Respecting the ensuing period of Cocome rule, we have no record until
at a subsequent but undetermined date a new people, the Tutul Xius,
appeared from the southern region where they had wandered long and
suffered great privations, and settled in the vicinity of Mayapan,
being kindly received by the Cocomes. All agree that they came from
the south; Herrera brings them from the Lacandon mountains, and speaks
of them as having entered Mayapan, where they lived in great peace
together with the former inhabitants. Landa judges from linguistic and
monumental resemblances that they came from Chiapas. Morelet suggests
that they were a band from Palenque.[XIII-13] I have already shown that
the Tutul Xius were probably, like the Quichés and Toltecs, among the
tribes that migrated from Tulan in Chiapas at some time between the
third and fifth centuries.[XIII-14] They were not like the Toltecs a purely
Nahua nation, that is, they did not speak the Nahua language; but they
were, like the Quichés, a branch of the ancient Maya, or Xibalban,
people, which had in Chiapas been subjected to Nahua influences and had
adopted to some extent the Nahua institutions. In language they were
kindred to the Cocomes, Itzas, and all the aboriginal inhabitants of
Yucatan; but like the Cocomes they were also followers of Cukulcan and
Quetzalcoatl. Their kind reception is not therefore to be wondered at,
and their subsequent prominence in the history of the country accounts
for the Nahua analogies observed in Yucatan institutions and monuments.
[Sidenote: THE PEREZ RECORD.]
[Sidenote: CHRONOLOGY OF THE RECORD.]
I now present in full the Perez document which contains nearly all
that is known of the Tutul Xiu annals. I quote the version given
in Mr. Stephens' work, adding in parentheses the variations and a
few explanatory notes from Brasseur's translation.[XIII-15] "This is the
series of Katunes, or epochs, that elapsed from the time of their
departure from the land and house of Nonoual, in which were the four
Tutul Xiu, lying to the west of Zuina (probably the Tulan Zuiva of
the Popol Vuh) going out of the land of Tulapan (capital of Tulan).
Four epochs were spent in traveling before they arrived here with
Tolonchantepeuj (Holon-Chan-Tepeuh, in both the Maya text and in
Brasseur's translation) and his followers. When they began their
journey towards this island (_peten_, meaning literally 'island,' is
the word used, but Brasseur tells us that it was applied as well to
regions almost surrounded by water, and the Mayas knew very well that
their country was a peninsula), it was the 8 Ahau, and the 6 Ahau,
the 4 Ahau, and the 2 Ahau[XIII-16] were spent in traveling; because in the
first year of 13 Ahau they arrived at this island (peninsula), making
together eighty-one years they were traveling between their departure
from their country and their arrival at this island peninsula of
Chacnouitan. In the 8 Ahau arrived Ahmekat Tutul Xiu (an error perhaps,
for 13 Ahau as above, or this may refer to a later arrival of another
party), and ninety-nine years they remained in Chacnouitan. Then
took place the discovery (conquest) of the province of Ziyan-caan,
or Bacalar (Bakhalal, Chectemal at the time of the conquest, probably
near the site of Bacalar). The 4 Ahau, the 2 Ahau, and the 13 Ahau, or
sixty years, they ruled in Ziyan-caan, when (since) they came here.
During these years of their government of the province of Bacalar,
occurred the discovery (conquest) of Chichen Itza. The 11 Ahau, 9
Ahau, 7 Ahau, 5 Ahau, 3 Ahau, 1 Ahau, or one hundred and twenty years
they ruled in Chichen Itza, when it was abandoned and they emigrated
to Champoton (Chanputun) where the Itzas, holy men, had houses (had
_had_ dwellings). The 6 Ahau they took possession of the territory
of Champoton. The 4 Ahau [and so on for twelve epochs to the 8 Ahau]
Champoton was destroyed or abandoned (Brasseur has it, "4 Ahau, etc.,
etc., and in the 8 Ahau Champoton was destroyed"). Two hundred and
sixty years reigned (or had reigned at the time when Champoton was
destroyed) the Itzas in Champoton, when they returned in search of
their homes ("after which they started out anew in search of homes,"
according to Brasseur), and then they lived for several epochs under
the uninhabited mountains ("for several epochs the Itzas wandered,
sleeping in the forests, among rocks and wild plants, suffering great
privations," as Brasseur has it, noting an omission of a part of the
text in Perez' translation). The 6 Ahau, 4 Ahau, after forty years they
returned to their homes once more, and Champoton was lost to them. (The
French version is entirely different; "6 Ahau, 4 Ahau"--they wandered
as above--"after which they--the Itzas--had again fixed homes, after
they had lost Champoton"). In this Katun of 2 Ahau, Acuitok Tutul Xiu
established himself in Uxmal; the 2 Ahau [and so on in regular order
for ten epochs to 10 Ahau] equal to two hundred years, they governed
and reigned in Uxmal with the governors (powerful lords) of Chichen
Itza, and Mayapan. After the lapse of the Ahau Katunes of 11, 9, 6
Ahau, (Brasseur says 7 instead of 6 Ahau, as indeed it must be in
order to preserve the order) in the 8 Ahau the governor (the powerful
lords) of Chichen Itza was (were) deposed (ruined) because he murmured
disrespectfully against Tunac-eel (Hunac Eel); this happened to
Chacxibchac of Chichen Itza, who had spoken against Tunac-eel, governor
of the fortress of Mayalpan (Mayapan). Ninety years had elapsed, but
the tenth of the 8 Ahau was the year in which he was overthrown by
Ajzinte-yutchan (Ah-Tzinteyut-Chan) with Tzuntecum, Taxcal, Pantemit,
Xuch-ucuet (Xuchu-Cuet), Ytzcuat, and Kakaltecat; these are the names
of the seven Mayalpans (lords of Mayapan). In this same period, or
Katun, of the 8 Ahau, they attacked king Ulmil (king of the Ulmil) in
consequence of his quarrel (festivities) with Ulil, king of Izamal
(Ytzmal); thirteen divisions of troops had he when he was routed by
Tunac-eel (Hunac Eel, 'he who gives intelligence'); in the 6 Ahau the
war was over, after thirty-four years. In the 6 Ahau, 4 Ahau, 2 Ahau,
13 Ahau, 11 Ahau (Brasseur says in the 8 Ahau), the fortified territory
of Mayalpan was invaded by the men of Itza, under their king Ulmil,
because they had walls and governed in common the people of Mayalpan.
Eighty-three years elapsed after this event and at the beginning of
11 Ahau, Mayalpan was destroyed by strangers of the Uitzes, (perhaps
Quichés) or Highlanders, as was also Tancaj (Tancah) of Mayalpan. In
the 6 Ahau (8 Ahau according to original text and Brasseur), Mayalpan
was destroyed (finally abandoned). The epochs of 6 Ahau, 4 Ahau, and
2 Ahau, elapsed, and at this period the Spaniards, for the first time
arrived, and gave the name of Yucatan to this province, sixty years
after the destruction of the fortress. The 13 Ahau, 11 Ahau, pestilence
and small-pox were in the castles. In the 13 Ahau, Ajpula (Ahpulá)
died; six years were wanting to the completion of the 13 Ahau; this
year was counted toward the east of the wheel, and began on the 4
Kan (the 4 Kan began the month Pop). Ajpula died on the eighteenth
day of the month Zip, in the 9 Ymix (in the third month Zip, and on
the ninth day Ymix); and that it may be known in numbers, it was the
year 1536, sixty years after the demolition of the fortress. Before
the termination of the 11 Ahau, the Spaniards arrived; holy men from
the east came with them when they reached this land. The 9 Ahau was
the commencement of Christianity; and in this year was the arrival of
Toral, the first (new) bishop."
Such is our chief authority on the aboriginal history of Yucatan. It
is, as Perez remarks, "rather a list than a circumstantial detail
of the events," was doubtless written from memory of the original
records after the Spaniards came, and may be inaccurate at some
points. Perez claims to interpret its chronology according to his
theory that the Ahau Katun was a period of twenty-four years;[XIII-17]
while Brasseur, following most of the Spanish writers, reckons an
Ahau Katun as only twenty years. I do not propose to enter into any
further discussion on this point, but it should be noted that while
Perez adduces strong arguments in favor of his general theory of the
length of these periods, neither his translation of the document in
question nor his comments thereon are at all consistent with his own
theory. The document states clearly that Ahpula died in 1536, six years
before the end of 13 Ahau, which must have closed in 1541. An accurate
calculation, reckoning twenty-four years to an epoch, would make the 8
Ahau in which the Tutul Xius left their ancient home, begin with the
year 173, A.D.,[XIII-18] instead of 144 as Perez gives it. If we compute
the epochs at twenty years each, we have 401 as the date when the
migration began. I have not attempted to fix the date of the migration
from Chiapas, of which this forms a part, further than to place it
before the fifth and probably after the second century; but the date
401 agrees better than that of 173 with the general tenor of the
authorities, I therefore follow this system in forming the following
résumé, although I give in notes the dates of the other system,
together with some of Perez' dates.
The Tutul Xius left their ancient home in Chiapas in 401, wandering
for eighty-one years before their arrival in 482 at Chacnouitan, or
the southern part of the peninsula, under the command of, or together
with, Holon Chan Tepeuh.[XIII-19] Ahmecat Tutul Xiu arrived with them
or at a later period,[XIII-20] and they remained ninety-nine years in
Chacnouitan, down to 581.[XIII-21] Then took place the conquest of
Bacalar, where they ruled for sixty years, or from 581 to 641; but at
the same time the 4 Ahau, 2 Ahau, 13 Ahau, of this period, correspond
to the years 701 to 761, leaving the years 641 to 701 unaccounted
for.[XIII-22] During this rule at Bacalar, or at its end, they took
possession of Chichen Itza, where they remained for six epochs, or one
hundred and twenty years, from 761 to 881.[XIII-23] Then they went to
Champoton where the Itzas had been, taking that country in
941,[XIII-24] nothing being said of them during the three epochs from
881 to 941. The Itzas had ruled in Champoton for two hundred and sixty
years, from 4 (or better 6) Ahau to 8 Ahau, or from 681, when they
were probably driven from Chichen,[XIII-25] to 941 when they were
driven out by the Tutul Xius.[XIII-26] The Itzas wandered for two
epochs, from 941 to 981, suffering great hardships, and then again
obtained fixed homes. Where they settled the record fails to
state.[XIII-27]
[Sidenote: TUTUL XIU ANNALS.]
Returning to the annals of the Tutul Xius, in 2 Ahau, 981, Ahcuitok
Tutul Xiu settled at Uxmal, where his people ruled conjointly with
the kings of Chichen and Mayapan for two hundred years, from 981 to
1181.[XIII-28] In the tenth year of 8 Ahau, or 1191, Chac Xib Chac, and
other lords of Chichen, were deposed for some offence against Hunac
Eel, the ruler of Mayapan. In the same epoch the Cocome king attacked
and defeated the Itza king Ulmil. This war lasted thirty-four years,
and was ended before 1221, by the Itzas invading Mayapan.[XIII-29]
Eighty-three years passed, and then in 11 Ahau, between 1281 and 1301,
Mayapan was conquered by the Uitzes, or mountaineers; and Mayapan was
finally abandoned in 8 Ahau, between 1441 and 1461.[XIII-30] After three
epochs more, the Spaniards came for the first time, between 1501 and
1521, sixty years after the destruction of Mayapan.[XIII-31] Between 1521
and 1561, the small-pox ravaged the country, and among its victims was
Ahpulá, who died in 1536.[XIII-32] Before 1561 came the Spaniards; and in
the next epoch Christianity was introduced, and Bishop Toral arrived.
The first event narrated by the preceding document which seems to have
any connection with those taken from other authorities is the
establishment of the Tutul Xius at Uxmal, where they ruled during the
tenth, eleventh, and twelfth centuries with the monarchs of Mayapan
and Chichen Itza. All authorities agree on the prosperity attending
the reign of the Cocome monarchs in conjunction with the Tutul Xius at
Uxmal. It was perhaps in this period that were built a large
proportion of the magnificent structures which as ruins have excited
the wonder of the world, and have been fully described in a preceding
volume;[XIII-33] although there is no reason to doubt that some of the
cities date back to the Xibalban period, to the time of Zamná and his
earliest successors. Uxmal and the many cities in its vicinity may be
attributed to the Tutul Xius.
The first king of Mayapan after the departure of Cukulcan is generally
called Cocom, or Ahcocom, but we know nothing of his successors
for some centuries, save Brasseur's conjecture that the four Bacab
mentioned by Cogolludo as gods should be reckoned among the number.[XIII-34]
At last, probably during the twelfth century, Landa and the other
Spanish writers agree that the monarchs at Mayapan began to neglect
the interests of their subjects, and to become exceedingly avaricious,
oppressing the people by excessive taxation. The first to follow this
course of conduct is called by Brasseur Ahtubtun, a name selected from
Cogolludo's list of gods for no other apparent reason than that his
name signified 'spitter of precious stones,' certainly an indication
of extravagance. To his successor this author applies the name Aban
and the title Kinehahau. This monarch was even more oppressive than his
predecessor, and loud murmurs of discontent began to be heard, but none
were strong enough to make any opposition save the Tutul Xius. Either
this king or a successor introduced into the country a force of foreign
soldiers from Tabasco and southern Vera Cruz, and also established
slavery, hitherto unknown in Yucatan.
[Sidenote: OVERTHROW OF THE COCOMES.]
The Tutul Xius began their opposition to the Cocomes by sheltering
their oppressed subjects. The third of the tyrants, probably identical
with the Hunac Eel of the Perez record, was even more oppressive than
those that preceded him, and brought in more foreign soldiers. In 1191
the monarch of Chichen Itza, Chac Xib Chac, was deposed by the tyrant
and the deposition enforced by the aid of his foreign auxiliaries. Less
than ten years later Hunac Eel with his allies marched again against
Chichen, now ruled by a new monarch, Ulmil, and defeated him after a
long campaign. The end of the trouble is briefly if not very clearly
expressed by the author of the Maya record in the statement that Ulmil
before 1221 invaded Mayapan.[XIII-35]
Landa and Herrera relate that the tyranny of the Cocome monarch at last
became insupportable, and his subjects with the aid of the Tutul Xius
revolted, captured and sacked Mayapan, and put to death the king with
all his family, except one son, who chanced to be absent. The king of
Uxmal naturally acquired by this overthrow of the Cocome dynasty the
supreme power. Ulmil, the Itza king who led the attack against the
Cocomes, seems to have received the second place, while the head of the
family of Cheles, before high-priest at Mayapan, was given the third
rank as king of Izamal. Nearly all the authorities state that Mayapan
was destroyed and abandoned at this time; but the dates they give
with the fact that this city is mentioned by the Maya record at a much
later period, show that it was still inhabited, though deprived of its
ancient power.[XIII-36]
The Tutul Xius on their accession to the supreme power, strengthened
their popularity by a liberal policy toward all classes, and by
restoring those who had been enslaved or exiled by the Cocomes to their
former positions. They also permitted the Xicalanca troops introduced
by Hunac Eel and his predecessors to remain in the country, and gave
them the province of Canul, or Ahcanul, between Uxmal and Campeche,
where they soon became a powerful nation.[XIII-37] The son of the Cocome
tyrant, who by his absence from Mayapan at the time of the revolt
escaped the fate of his family, on his return was permitted to settle
with his friends in the province of Zotuta, where he is said to have
built Tibulon, and several other towns. Thus was perpetuated with the
ancient Cocome family the mortal hatred which that family continued to
feel towards their successful rivals.[XIII-38]
[Sidenote: FABLE OF THE DWARF.]
The reign of the Tutul Xius at Uxmal was doubtless the most glorious
period of Maya history, but in addition to what has been said we have
respecting it only a single tradition which seems to refer to the last
king and the overthrow of the dynasty.[XIII-39] An old sorceress lived at
Kabah, rarely leaving her chimney corner. Her grandson, a dwarf, by
making a hole in her water-jar, kept her a long time at the well one
day, and by removing the hearth-stone found the treasure she had so
carefully guarded, a silver _tunkul_ and _zoot_, native instruments.
The music produced by the dwarf was heard in all the cities, and the
king at Uxmal trembled, for an old prophecy declared that when such
music should be heard the monarch must give up his throne to the
musician. A peculiar duel was agreed upon between the two, each to
have four baskets of _cocoyoles_, or palm-nuts, broken on his head.
The Dwarf was victorious and took the dead king's place, having the
Casa del Adivino built for his palace, and the Casa de la Vieja for
his grandmother.[XIII-40] The old sorceress soon died, and the new king,
freed from all restraint, plunged into all manner of wickedness, until
his gods, or idols, abandoned him in anger. But after several attempts
the Dwarf made a new god of clay which came to life and was worshiped
by the people, who by this worship of an evil spirit soon brought upon
themselves destruction at the hands of the outraged deities, and Uxmal
was abandoned.
For this tradition we have only Brasseur's conjectural, but not
improbable, interpretation to the effect that the Tutul Xiu throne
at Uxmal, in the earlier part of the thirteenth century perhaps,
was usurped by a chief of another family, known in tradition as the
Dwarf, or the Sorcerer. It is not unlikely that the usurping king
was of the Cocome family and that he succeeded in his attempt by the
aid of the priesthood. Whoever may have been at its head, the new
dynasty was in its turn overthrown apparently by religious strife, and
Uxmal ceased to be a capital or centre of temporal power in Yucatan,
although its temples may still have been occupied by the priesthood.
From the fact that the Maya record, or Perez document, speaks only
of Mayapan after this period, it is not unlikely that the Tutul Xiu
power was transferred to that ancient capital, after the downfall of
its representative at Uxmal. Near the end of the thirteenth century
Mayapan was conquered by a foreign army of Uitzes, or mountaineers, the
reference being perhaps to a raid of one of the earlier Quiché emperors
from Utatlan. For a century and a half, a period of contention between
rival dynasties and tribes, we have, besides a few reported predictions
of coming disaster, only one definite event, the flight of a band of
Itzas under Canek, and their settlement on the islands in Lake Peten,
where they were found, a most flourishing community, by the Spaniards.
No definite date is given to their migration--or elopement, for a lady
was at the bottom of the affair, as some say--except by Villagutierre,
who places it in 8 Ahau, or between 1441 and 1461.[XIII-41]
Also between 1441 and 1461, Mayapan was finally ruined in the
contentions of the factions, and abandoned at the death of a monarch
called by some authors Mochan Xiu; the Tutul Xius then seem to have
retired to Mani, which was their capital down to the Conquest.[XIII-42]
For twenty years after the final destruction of Mayapan the tribes
are said to have remained at peace and independent of each other;
but the remaining century, down to 1561, was one of almost continual
inter-tribal strife, of which there is no detailed record, but which,
with hurricanes, famine, deadly pestilence, and constantly recurring
omens and predictions of final disaster, so desolated and depopulated
the country, that the Spaniards found the Mayas but a mere wreck of
what they once had been, fighting bravely, but not unitedly, against
the invaders.[XIII-43]
FOOTNOTES:
[XIII-1] On the name of this country see:--_Landa_, _Relacion_, and
_Brasseur_, in _Id._, pp. 6, 8, 42-3; _Lizana_, in _Id._, p. 348;
_Perez MS._, in _Id._, pp. 421, 429; _Id._, in _Stephens' Yucatan_,
vol. ii., pp. 465, 467; see also vol. i., pp. 139-40; _Cogolludo_,
_Hist. Yuc._, pp. 60-1, 178-9; _Villagutierre_, _Hist. Conq. Itza_, p.
28; _Ternaux-Compans_, in _Nouvelles Annales_, tom. xcvii., pp. 30-1;
_Malte-Brun_, _Yucatan_, pp. 14-15; _Gomara_, _Hist. Ind._, fol. 60.
[XIII-2] _Landa_, _Relacion_, p. 28; _Herrera_, dec. iv., lib. x.,
cap. ii.
[XIII-3] _Lizana_, in _Landa_, _Relacion_, p. 354; _Orozco y Berra_,
_Geografía_, p. 128. Cogolludo, _Hist. Yuc._, p. 178, quotes this from
Lizana.
[XIII-4] _Lizana_ and _Cogolludo_, as above. Ternaux-Compans, in
_Nouvelles Annales_, tom. xcvii., p. 32, also reverses the statement
of the tradition respecting the relative numbers of the respective
colonies.
[XIII-5] _Orozco y Berra_, _Geografía_, p. 129.
[XIII-6] _Veytia_, tom. i., p. 237; _Torquemada_, tom. i., p. 269;
_Lizana_, in _Landa_, _Relacion_, p. 354; _Cogolludo_, _Hist. Yuc._,
p. 178; _Fancourt's Hist. Yuc._, p. 115.
[XIII-7] _Stephens' Yucatan_, vol. ii., pp. 304-8, 342-3, 453-4;
_Bradford's Amer. Antiq._, pp. 201-2; _Morelet_, _Voyage_, tom. i.,
pp. 270-1; _Waldeck_, _Voy. Pitt._, pp. 44-5; _Mayer's Mex. Aztec,
etc._, vol. i., pp. 99-100; _Wappäus_, _Geog. u. Stat._, pp. 33, 142;
_Prichard's Researches_, vol. v., p. 346; _Ternaux-Compans_, in
_Nouvelles Annales_, tom. xcvii., pp. 31-2.
[XIII-8] On Zamná, see:--vol. iii., pp. 462-5 of this work;
_Cogolludo_, _Hist. Yuc._, pp. 178, 192, 196-7; _Landa_, _Relacion_,
pp. 328-30; _Lizana_, in _Id._, p. 356; _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. i.,
pp. 78-80; _Waldeck_, _Voy. Pitt._, p. 23; _Malte-Brun_, _Yucatan_,
pp. 15-17.
[XIII-9] On Cukulcan and the Itzas, see:--_Herrera_, dec. iv., lib.
x., cap. ii.; _Torquemada_, tom. ii., p. 52, tom. iii., p. 133;
_Cogolludo_, _Hist. Yuc._, pp. 190, 196-7; _Landa_, _Relacion_, pp.
34-9, 340-2; _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. ii., pp. 10-13; _Malte-Brun_,
_Yucatan_, pp. 15-16; _Stephens' Yucatan_, vol. i., pp. 140-1.
[XIII-10] In a note to _Landa_, _Relacion_, pp. 35, 39; _Orozco y
Berra_, _Geografía_, pp. 155-6.
[XIII-11] Vol. iii., p. 465; _Malte-Brun_, _Yucatan_, pp. 15-16.
[XIII-12] _Torquemada_, tom. ii., p. 52; _Landa_, _Relacion_, pp.
38-45, 54-6; _Cogolludo_, _Hist. Yuc._, pp. 179-80; _Herrera_, dec.
iv., lib. x., cap. ii.; _Ternaux-Compans_, in _Nouvelles Annales_,
tom. xcvii., p. 34; _Malte-Brun_, _Yucatan_, pp. 15-6.
[XIII-13] _Landa_, _Relacion_, pp. 44-8. 'Le nom des _Tutul-Xiu_
paraît d'origine nahuatl; il serait dérivé de _totol_, _tototl_,
oiseau, et de _xíuitl_, ou _xíhuitl_, herbe, etc. En ceci il n'y
aurait rien d'extraordinaire, puisqu'ils sortaient de _Tula_ ou
_Tulapan_, cité qui aurait été la capitale des Nahuas ou Toltèques
après leur victoire sur Xibalba.' _Brasseur_, in _Id._, p. 47. See
also _Herrera_, dec. iv., lib. x., cap. ii., iii.; _Torquemada_, tom.
iii., p. 132; _Cogolludo_, _Hist. Yuc._, pp. 178, 182; _Morelet_,
_Voyage_, tom. i., p. 271; _Gallatin_, in _Amer. Ethno. Soc.,
Transact._, vol. i., p. 171; _Ternaux-Compans_, in _Nouvelles
Annales_, tom. xcvii., pp. 34-5.
[XIII-14] This volume, pp. 227-8. Additional study of the subject has
caused me to modify considerably in this chapter some of the
statements on Maya history contained in vol. ii., pp. 118-20.
[XIII-15] _Stephens' Yucatan_, vol. ii., pp. 465-9; _Brasseur_, in
_Landa_, _Relacion_, pp. 420-9.
[XIII-16] For an account of this system of Ahau Katunes and the order
of their succession, see vol. ii., pp. 762-5.
[XIII-17] See vol. ii., pp. 762-5.
[XIII-18] In his _Hist. Nat. Civ._, Brasseur follows this system and
repeatedly gives 174 (171 on p. 228 of this volume is a misprint) as
the date of this migration, using it indeed to fix the date of the
migration of the Toltecs and Quichés from Tulan; but he adopts the
other theory in his notes to Landa's work.
[XIII-19] Reckoning an epoch as 24 years, the migration lasted from
173 to 270, or 97 years instead of 81, as in the text. Perez has it
from 144 to 217, or 73 years, which agrees neither with the text nor
with his own theory.
[XIII-20] As late as 661 or 485, if Perez' statement of 8 Ahau be
accepted, which is inconsistent with the whole record.
[XIII-21] From 218 to 360, according to Perez; or according to his
statement that four epochs elapsed, from 270 to 366.
[XIII-22] 360 to 432, _Perez_; 533 to 605, on the basis of 24 years to
an epoch.
[XIII-23] 432 to 576, _Perez_; 605 to 725 on the basis of 24 years to
an epoch.
[XIII-24] Or 821 according to the other system.
[XIII-25] We have seen above that there is some confusion about the
date of the Tutul Xius taking Chichen.
[XIII-26] In his commentary, Perez applies this stay of 13 epochs to
the Tutul Xius, although the text seems to state the contrary, making
them live in Champoton from 576 to 888; or if he had added simply the
260 years of the text, 576 to 836; or if he had correctly adapted his
chronology to his own theory, from 821 to 1133. On a basis of 24 years
to a Katun the stay of the Itzas at Champoton, as given in the text,
was from 533 to 821.
[XIII-27] 888-936, _Perez_; 821-869, on the basis of 24 years. Perez,
applying this wandering to the Tutul Xius, makes them settle again at
Chichen.
[XIII-28] 936-1176, _Perez_; 869-1109, on basis of 24 years, but this
of course would not agree with the two hundred years of the text.
[XIII-29] Perez makes these events, which he seems to regard as two or
three distinct wars, fill the time from 1176 to 1258. From 1119 to
1157, on a basis of 24 years.
[XIII-30] 1258 to 1368, _Perez_; 1229 to 1445, on the basis of 24
years. Perez admits in his commentary only one destruction of Mayapan
in 1308.
[XIII-31] Or, on a basis of 24 years to a Katun, between 1493 and
1517. Either of these dates agrees very well with the facts, since
Córdova reached the coast of Yucatan in 1517, and Gerónimo de Aguilar
was wrecked there, probably some years earlier. But Perez dates their
arrival between 1392 and 1488, before America was discovered!
[XIII-32] Perez directly contradicts the text in placing this death in
1493.
[XIII-33] Vol. iv., pp. 140-285.
[XIII-34] _Cogolludo_, _Hist. Yuc._, p. 197.
[XIII-35] It seems to me very probable that there is an error or
omission by the copyist or translator in this part of the document.
[XIII-36] On this revolution see:--_Landa_, _Relacion_, pp. 48-52, 56.
This author calls the Chel prince Achchel, and calls him the
son-in-law of a venerable priest in Mayapan. _Herrera_, dec. iv., lib.
x., cap. ii., iii.; _Cogolludo_, _Hist. Yuc._, pp. 60, 178-9;
_Lizana_, in _Landa_, _Relacion_, p. 350; _Villagutierre_, _Hist.
Conq. Itza_, p. 28; _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. ii., pp. 32-40, 48-9.
This author calls him Ahalin Chel, and their province Cicontun.
_Ternaux-Compans_, in _Nouvelles Annales_, tom. xcvii., pp. 31, 35;
_Gallatin_, in _Amer. Ethno. Soc., Transact._, vol. i., pp. 172-3;
_Prichard's Researches_, vol. v., p. 347; _Malte-Brun_, _Yucatan_, pp.
20-1; _Stephens' Yuc._, vol. i., pp. 140-1.
[XIII-37] Brasseur, _Hist._, tom. ii., pp. 41-2, tells us that their
province was called Calkini, and the people, from their ruler, took
the name of Ahcanuls; and also that they built or enlarged the cities
of Sabacché, Labná, and Pokboc. (See vol. iv., pp. 211-8) The only
authority for the latter statement is probably the location of these
ruins in a general southern direction from Uxmal. Cogolludo says the
natives of Conil and Choàca, called Kupules, were the most warlike in
Yucatan. _Hist. Yuc._, p. 143; see also _Landa_, _Relacion_, p. 54;
_Herrera_, dec. iv., lib. x., cap. iii.
[XIII-38] _Landa_, _Relacion_, pp. 54-5; _Herrera_, dec. iv., lib. x.,
cap. iii.; _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. ii., p. 42; _Cogolludo_, _Hist.
Yuc._, p. 143; _Malte-Brun_, _Yucatan_, p. 20.
[XIII-39] _Registro Yuc._, tom. ii., pp. 261-72. The tradition is
given in the form of a dialogue between a visitor to the ruins and a
native of extraordinary intelligence, who claimed to be well
acquainted with the historical traditions of his race. Brasseur,
_Hist._, tom. ii., pp. 578-88, gives what is probably an extended
translation of the article referred to. Stephens, _Cent. Amer._, vol.
ii., pp. 423-5, obtained from a native a tradition similar in some
respects, so far as it goes, which is translated by Charnay, _Ruines
Amér._, pp. 369-71.
[XIII-40] See vol. iv., pp. 172, 192-7.
[XIII-41] _Cogolludo_, _Hist. Yuc._, pp. 507-8; _Villagutierre_,
_Hist. Conq. Itza_, pp. 29-31, 401-2, 488-91; _Waldeck_, _Voy. Pitt._,
pp. 24, 36, 41; _Stephens' Yucatan_, vol. ii., p. 200; _Gondra_, in
_Prescott_, _Hist. Conq. Mex._, tom. iii., p. 98; _Ternaux-Compans_,
in _Nouvelles Annales_, tom. xcvii., pp. 51-2; _Squier's Cent. Amer._,
pp. 547, 550-1.
[XIII-42] _Herrera_, dec. iv., lib. x., cap. ii., iii.; _Torquemada_,
tom. iii., p. 132; _Cogolludo_, _Hist. Yuc._, pp. 100, 179; _Landa_,
_Relacion_, pp. 50-2, 62; _Villagutierre_, _Hist. Conq. Itza_, p. 28;
_Stephens' Yucatan_, vol. i., pp. 140-1; _Gallatin_, in _Amer. Ethno.
Soc., Transact._, vol. i., pp. 172-3. Landa makes the date 100 years
before the Conquest, that is 1446. Villagutierre and Cogolludo say
1420. Herrera says 70 years before the arrival of the Spaniards, and
500 years after its foundation. Gallatin makes it 1517 or 1536.
[XIII-43] _Landa_, _Relacion_, pp. 58-64; _Herrera_, dec. ii., lib.
iii., cap. i., dec. iv., lib. x., cap. iii.; _Cogolludo_, _Hist.
Yuc._, pp. 97-100, 185; _Gomara_, _Hist. Ind._, fol. 63;
_Villagutierre_, _Hist. Conq. Itza_, pp. 35-7; _Torquemada_, tom.
iii., pp. 132-3; _Alcedo_, _Dicc._, tom. iii., p. 473; _Remesal_,
_Hist. Chyapa_, pp. 245-6.
INDEX.
The Index refers alphabetically to each of the ten or twelve thousand
subjects mentioned in the five volumes of the work, with numerous
cross-references to and from such headings as are at all confused by
reason of variations in orthography or from other causes. In describing
aboriginal manners and customs, the tribes are grouped in families,
and each family, instead of each tribe, has been described separately;
consequently, after each tribal name in the Index is a reference to
the pages containing a description of the family to which the tribe
belongs; there is also an additional reference to such pages as
contain any 'special mention' of the tribe. For example, information is
sought about the Ahts. In the Index is found 'Ahts, tribe of Nootkas,
i., 175-208; special mention, i., 177, 180-1,' etc. All the matter
relating to the Nootka family on pp. 175-208, is supposed to apply to
the Ahts as well as to the other tribes of the family, except such
differences as may be noted on pp. 177, 180-1, etc. If information
is sought respecting the burial rites or any particular custom of the
Ahts, a more direct reference to the exact pages will be found under
'Nootkas,' where the matter relating to that family is subdivided.
The matter in the last three chapters of vol. v. is referred to in the
earlier letters of the Index by chapters instead of pages. No table of
abbreviations used is believed to be needed.
A
Aba, iii., 354, see Aoa.
Abah (Abagh), Tzendal day, ii., 767; name for Atitlan, v., chap.
xi.
Abajo Val., Hond., antiq., iv., 70.
Aban, Mayapan ruler, v., chap. xiii.
Abbato-tinneh, Kutchin dialect, iii., 587.
Abchuy Kak, Maya god, iii., 467.
Abiquiu, locality of Utahs, i., 465.
Abmoctacs, Cent. Cal. tribe, i., 363-401; location, i., 452.
Abó, New Mex., antiq., iv., 663.
Abortion, i., 169, 197, 242, 279, 390, 634, 773; ii., 183, 269,
469-70.
Abrevadero, Jalisco, antiq., iv., 577.
Ac, herb, Yucatan, ii., 698.
Acacebastla, locality, Cent. Amer., iii., 760.
Acachinanco, locality, Mexico, iii., 298; v., 507.
Acagchemems, South Cal. tribe, i., 402-22; location, iii., 162;
myth., iii., 162-9, 525.
Acagnikakh, Aleut 1st man, iii., 104.
Acahualcingo (Acahualtzinco, Tlalixco), Aztec station, v., 323.
Acala, city, Chiapas, i., 681.
Acalan, city, Guatemala, ii., 650; v., 347.
Acalli, canoes, ii., 398.
Acamapichtli I. king of Culhuacan, v., 341-54.
Acamapichtli II., king of Mexico, v., 354-62, 492.
Acanum, Maya god, ii., 698.
Acapichtzin, Toltec hero, v., 213, 246.
Acapipioltzin, a Chichimec prince, v., 428, 450-1.
Acaponeta, province in Jalisco, i., 609, 671; v., 509.
Acapulco, city in Guerrero, i., 678, ii., 109.
Acat, Maya god, iii., 467.
Acatentehua, a Tlascaltec chief, v., 497.
Acatic, town, Jalisco, i., 672.
Acatl, Nahua calendar-sign, ii., 505; iii., 57, Toltec chief, v.,
243.
Acatlan, suburb of Mex., ii., 560; v., chap. x.
Acatomatl, a Chichimec chief, v., 293.
Acatonal, a Xochimilca chief, v., 309.
Acatzingo, city, Puebla, v., 420.
Acatzintitlan, locality, Mex., v., 345.
Acaucalli, Aztec chapel, iii., 346.
Acauhtzin (Achcauhtzin, Axcauhtzin), Chichimec king, v., 285,
290-1.
Acaxées (Acaxas), North Mex. tribe, i., 572-91; location, i.,
572; special mention, i., 585, 589-90; location, i., 614;
language, iii., 718-19.
Acayetl, Nahua pipe, ii., 231, 287.
Acayucan, town, Oajaca, i., 646.
Acchioc, Mosquito drink, i., 739.
Accouchement, see Women.
Acequias, see Canals and Irrigation.
Acexcoch, name of Tezcatlipoca, iii., 246.
Achastliens (Achastliés, Achastliers), Cent. Cal. tribe, i.,
363-401; location, i., 363; lang., iii., 653-4.
Achcacauhti, Aztec old men, ii., 137.
Achcacauhtzin, Tezcucan ambassadors, ii., 422.
Achcauhtin, Nahua military order, ii., 403.
Achcauhtli, Nahua priestly order, ii., 313.
Achcauhtzin, v., 245, 290, see Achcuhtzin and Icauhtzin.
Acheto-tena, i., 149, see Daho-tena.
Achi, Guatemala tribe, i., 687-711; location, i., 787; lang.,
iii., 760.
Achihab, Quiché nobles, ii., 639; v., chap. xi.
Achilla, Cent. Cal. tribe, i., 363-401; location, i., 454.
Achillimo, South Cal. tribe, i., 402-422; location, i., 459.
Achiotl (Achiolt), dye-plant, i., 724; ii., 486.
Achitometl I., Culhua king, v., 256, 303, 316-20, 330-1.
Achitometl II., Culhua king, v., 354.
Achiuhtla, city in Oajaca, conquest of, v., 461; chap. x.
Achnutschik, Koniaga male concubine, i., 82.
Achote, food, South Mex., i., 652, 654.
Acla, Isthmian tribe, i., 747-85; location, i., 795; language,
iii., 794.
Acnagis, Cent. Cal. tribe, i., 363-401; location, i., 452.
Acoahunotl, ii., 436, see Quauhnochtli.
Acoculco, locality, Mexico, v., 339.
Acolhuacan (Aculhuacan), Nahua kingdom, i., 676; hist., v., 323,
333-482.
Acolhuas (Aculhuas), Nahua nation, i., 617-44; ii., 133-629;
loc., i., 676; spec. mention, ii., 92, 104, 125, 491-2, 134-6,
162-3, 231, 246-7, 367, 569, 589; myth., iii., 63, 195; lang.,
iii., 724-5; hist., v., 303-20, 359-494; see also Culhuas, with
whom they are often confounded.
Acolhuatl, name of Chichimecatl, iii., 250.
Acolhua-tlalli, war lands of Acolhuacan, ii., 225.
Acolman (Aculma), city of Mexico, ii., 441; iii., 63; v., 20,
380, 388, 395, 476.
Acolmiztli, name for Nezahualcoyotl, v., 372; lord of Cuitlahuac,
v., 409.
Acolnahuac, station, Aztec migration, v., 323, 324.
Acolnahuacatl, Tepanec king, v., 330-41, 365-6.
Acoloa, Nahua god, iii., 418.
Acoltas, tribe of Haidahs, i., 156-174; special mention, i., 174.
Acoma, town and tribe of Pueblos, i., 526-556; location, i., 600;
special mention, i., 527; language, iii., 681-2; antiq., iv.,
665-6.
Aconchi, town, Sonora, i., 606.
Aconite, Koniaga poison, i., 79.
Acopilco, locality, Mexico, v., 339.
Acorns, food in California, i., 339, 373-5, 406.
Acotelulco, ward of Tlascala city, v., 503.
Acoti, town of Pueblos, i., 527.
Acotoch, v., 317, see Ocotox.
Actopan, Mex., antiq., iv., 545.
Acuco, New Mex., antiq., iv., 674.
Acuecuejotl, name of Chalchihuitlicue, iii., 367.
Acul, Guatemala tribe, i., 687-711; hist., v., chap. xi.
Aculhua, Tepanec king, v., 320.
Aculhuacan, i., 676, see Acolhuacan.
Aculhuas, ii., 125, see Acolhuas.
Aculhua Tecuhtli, name for Quanez, v., 491.
Aculma, iii., 63; v., 20, see Acolman.
Aculmaitl, Tezcucan 1st man, iii., 63.
Aculnaoacatl, name of Mictlantecutli, iii., 396.
Acul Vinak, Maya nation, i., 687-711; ii., 630-803; special
mention, v., chap. xi.
Acuragua, South Cal. tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 460.
Acus, town of Pueblos, i., 527.
Acutee, Guatemala tribe, i., 687-711; location, i., 789.
Acweek, Nootka title, i., 194.
Acxiquat, Zutugil king, v., chap. xi.
Acxitl (Meconetzin), Toltec king, v., 270-86, chap. xi.
Acxopal (Acxopil), Quiché king, v., chap. xi.
Acxopal, a Toltec noble, v., 297.
Acxoquauh (Acxocuauh, Acxoquauhtli, Acxiquat), a Toltec prince
and Culhua king, v., 299-300, 358; a Zutugil ruler, v., chapter
xi.
Acxotecas, tribe of Teotenancas, v., 280.
Acyums, Cent. Cal. tribe, i., 463-401; location, i., 452.
Adacs, Lower Cal. tribe, i., 556-71; location, i., 603.
Addresses, see Speeches.
Adams County, Mississippi Valley, antiq., iv., 771.
Adkayom, sacrificer, Guat., iii., 488.
Admiralty Inlet, i., 208, 298, 302.
Admiralty Island, i., 143.
Adobe, building material, i., 535-6, 575, 624, 651, 692; ii.,
557-73; iv., 473, 607, 626-83, 718-42, see also Earth.
Adultery, i., 350-1, 390, 412, 509-10, 660, 728-9, 770; ii.,
464-6, 658, 673-5, see also Fornication.
Adze, Koniaga and Nootka implement, i., 80, 189.
Aé, Acagchemem 1st woman, iii., 164.
Aestaca, Cent. Cal. tribe, i., 363-401; location, i., 454.
Affats-tena, tribe of Nehannes, i., 149.
Agaab, Guatemala tribe, i., 687-711; location, i., 789; special
mention, v., chap. xi.
Agalta Valley, Hond., antiq., iv., 70.
Agaraits, North Cal. tribe, i., 327-61; location, i., 445.
Agate, i., 343, 495; ii., 164, 751; iv., 469, 479, 554, 678, 715.
Agave, see Maguey.
Ages of the World, Nahua myth., ii., 504-5; iii., 64-5.
Aggitikkahs, tribe of Shoshones, i., 422-42; location, i., 463.
Aghual, Chiapan day, ii., 767.
Aglegmutes (Aglegmjuten, Agolegmüten, Oglemutes), tribe of
Koniagas, i., 70-87; loc., i., 70, 139-40.
Agrazenuqua, tribe of Isthmians, i., 747-85; location, i., 795.
Agriculture, Hyperboreans, i., 107; Columbians, i., 162, 234,
267; Californians, i., 323-5, 430; iv., 696; New Mexicans,
i., 487-9, 501, 538-9, 543; iv., 619, 623, 632, 636, 676-7;
Mexicans, i., 24, 576, 578, 625, 630, 652-3; ii., 343-50, 480;
iii., 274; iv., 429-431, 442; Cent. Americans, i., 694, 719,
758-9; ii., 653, 701, 717-20; iv., 21.
Agtism, Cent. Cal. tribe, i., 363-401; location, i., 454.
Aguacateca, lang., Guat., iii., 760.
Aguaceros, North Mex. tribe, i., 572-91; location, i., 612.
Aguachapa, town of Pipiles, ii., 752.
Aguadas, see Reservoirs.
Aguama, South Cal. tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 459.
Aguardiente, South Mexican drink, i., 664.
Aguasajuchium, Cent. Cal. tribe, i., 463-401; location, i., 453.
Aguascalientes, antiq., iv., 593.
Aguasto, Cent. Cal. tribe, i., 363-401; location, i., 453.
Aguatubi, Moqui village and tribe, i., 526-56; special mention,
i., 601.
Aguin, South Cal. tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 458.
Agulmutes (Agulmüten, Aguljmjuten), tribe of Koniagas, i., 70-87;
loc., i., 70, 140; spec. mention, i., 80.
Ah, Quiché-Cakchiquel day, ii., 767.
Ah-Actulul, Guatemala tribe, i., 687-711; location, i., 789.
Ahacus, Pueblo village, i., 527.
Ahahuete, iii., 66, see Ahuehuete.
Ahapchingas, South Cal. tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 460.
Ahau, Maya title and day, ii., 636, 756, 760; v., 21.
Ahau Ah Gucumatz, Quiché title, ii., 644; iii., 489.
Ahau Ahpop, Quiché title, ii., 639, 643; v., chap. xi.
Ahau Ahpop Camha, Quiché title, ii., 639, 643; v., chap. xi.
Ahau Ah Tohil, Quiché title, ii., 639, 644; iii., 489.
Ahau Ahtzic Winak, Quiché title, ii., 644.
Ahau Avilix (Awilix), Quiché title, ii., 644; iii., 489.
Ahau Can Mai, iii., 472, see Ahkin Mai.
Ahau Chamahez, Maya god, ii., 697.
Ahau Gagavitz, Quiché title, ii., 644; iii., 489.
Ahau Galel, Quiché title, ii., 644.
Ahau Galel Camha, Quiché title, ii., 644.
Ahau Katunes, Maya cycle, ii., 762-5.
Ahau Quiché, Quiché royal family, ii., 643-4; v., chap. xi.
Ahazats, tribe of Nootkas, i., 175-208; location, i., 296-7.
Ahbuluc Balam, Maya god, ii., 701.
Ahcan, Quiché noble and priest, v., chap. xi.
Ahcan Uolcab, Maya god, ii., 701.
Ahcanail, Quiché personage, v., chap. xi.
Ahcanuls, Yuc. province and people, v., chap. xiii.
Ahchaoh, Quiché judges, ii., 642.
Ahcitz, Maya god, ii., 698.
Ahcocom, ruler at Mayapan, Yuc., v., chap. xiii.
Ahcuitok Tutul Xiu, ruler at Uxmal, Yuc., v., chap. xiii.
Ahcunal, ruler at Uxmal, Yucatan, v., chap. xiii.
Ah Hulneb, Maya chief and god, see Ahulneb.
Aheltahs, North Cal. tribe, i., 327-61; location, i., 445.
Ahgih, Maya astrologer, ii., 679.
Ahgishanakhou, mythic personage, iii., 103, 146.
Ahikia, Chinook game, i., 244.
Ahkak Nexoi, Maya god, ii., 698.
Ahkin, Maya priests, iii., 472.
Ahkin Mai (Ahau Can Mai), Maya high-priest, iii., 472.
Ahkin Xooc, Yuc. prince, Chichen Itza, v., chap. xiii.
Ahknil Chel, Yuc. high-priest, Chichen Itza, v., chap. xiii.
Ahlela, village of Moquis, i., 528, 600.
Ahmak, Quiché-Cakchiquel day, ii., 767.
Ahmecat Tutul Xiu, Yuc. prince, v., chap. xiii.
Ahmoxnag, Cakchiquel prince, v., chap. xi.
Ah-Oanem, Guatemala tribe, i., 687-711; location, i., 789.
Ahomamas, North Mex. tribe, i., 572-91; special mention, i., 576,
585, 590.
Ahomes (Ahomoas), North Mex. tribe, i., 572-91; loc., i., 572,
607-8; spec. men., i., 584-5; lang., iii., 707.
Ahousets (Ahousahts, Ahowzarts), tribe of Nootkas, i., 175-208;
location, i., 295.
Ahpop, Quiché title, ii., 639, 643; v., chap. xi.
Ahpop Camha, Quiché title, ii., 639, 643; v., chap. xi.
Ahpop Qamahay, Cakchiquel title, ii., 640; v., chap. xi.
Ahpoxahil, (Ahpop Xahil), Cakchiquel title, ii., 640; v., chap.
xi.
Ahpozotzil, Cakchiquel title, ii., 640; v., chap. xi.
Ahpua, Maya god, ii., 698.
Ahqahb, Quiché title, v., chap. xi.
Ahqib (Ahqixb), Quiché title, v., chap. xi.
Ahquehayi, Quiché nobles, v., chap. xi.
Ah-tenas, i., 149, see Atnas.
Ahtepal, Maya title, ii., 634; v., chap. xiii.
Ahts, tribe of Nootkas, i., 175-208; loc., i., 175, 297; spec.
mention, i., 177, 180-1, 186, 188-9, 191-2, 194, 197, 205;
myth., iii., 96, 520-1; lang., iii., 608; origin, v., 19.
Ahtubtun, Yuc. ruler, Mayapan, v., chap. xiii.
Ahtzic Winak, Quiché title, v., chap. xi.
Ah-Tziquinaha (Ah Tziquinihayi), Guatemala tribe, i., 687-711;
location, i., 789; hist., v., chap. xi.
Ah-Tzakol-Quet (Queh), Guatemala tribe, i., 687-711; location,
i., 789.
Ah-Tzuque, Guatemala tribe, i., 687-711; location, i., 789.
Ahuacachapullin, a locust, iii., 380.
Ahuales, officials, Guat., i., 702.
Ahualulcos, South Mex. tribe, i., 645-70; location, i., 645, 682;
special mention, i., 652, 658.
Ahuamhoue, South Cal. tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 459.
Ahuanga, village, South Cal., i., 460.
Ahuauhtli, eggs of the Axayacatl, ii., 356.
Ahuayopan, locality, Puebla, v., 490.
Ahuchan Xahil, Cakchiquel title, ii., 640; v., chap. xi.
Ahuehuete (Ahahuete), cypress-tree, iii., 66; iv., 502.
Ahuehuepa, Mex., antiq., iv., 496.
Ahuic, name of Chalchihuitlicue, iii., 367.
Ahuilizapan, ancient name of Orizava, v., 418.
Ahuitzotl, king of Mexico, v., 417, 424, 439-55, 499-501.
Ahulneb (Ah Hulneb), Maya god, iii., 466; v., chap. xiii.
Ahwahnachees, Cent. Cal. tribe, i., 363-401; location, i., 452.
Ahwashtes (Ahwastees), Cent. Cal. tribe, i., 363-401; loc., i.,
363, 453.
Ah Witzil, Yuc. name for Quichés, v., chap. xiii.
Ah Xiu, ruler at Mayapan, Yuc., v., chap. xiii.
Ahytza, Quiché prince, v., chap. xi.
Aiacachtli, Totonac rattle, i., 635.
Aiauh, name of Chalchihuitlicue, iii., 367.
Aiauhcalco, Nahua shrine, iii., 347.
Aiauhquemitl, priest's mantle, iii., 339.
Aibino, North Mex. lang., iii., 707.
Aijados, tribe of Apaches, i., 473-526; location, i., 599.
Air, a Nahua symbol, iii., 129.
Aisish, root used for food, i., 265.
Aitizzarts, tribe of Nootkas, i., 175-208; location, i., 295-6.
Aixas, tribe of Apaches, i., 473-526; location, i., 599.
Aixtilcuechahuac, v., 250, see Ixtlilcuechahuac.
Ají, name of chile, i., 759.
Ajmak, Guatemalan god, iii., 482.
Ajuchitlan, town in Guerrero, i., 678.
Akab, Maya night, ii., 755.
Akab-Tzib, hieroglyph at Chichen, Yucatan, antiq., iv., 225; name
of a person, v., chap. xiii.
Akahales (Akales), Guatemala tribe, i., 687-711; ii., 630-803;
hist., v., chap. xi.
Akbal, Maya day, ii., 756, 760, 767.
Aké, Yucatan, antiq., iv., 245.
Aketsum (Kachuma), village, South California, i., 459.
Akil, Yucatan, antiq., iv., 220.
Akun Island, i., 141.
Akutan Island, i., 141.
Akutans, tribe of Aleuts, i., 87-94; location, i., 141.
Alabaster, ii., 557, 751, 787.
Alachschak, i., 37, see Alaska.
Alacupusyuen, South Cal. tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 458.
Alaguilac, Guatemala lang., iii., 760.
Alahuiztlan, city of Guerrero, v., 442.
Aläksu, i., 37, see Alaska.
Alameda County, Cal., antiq., iv., 710.
Alames, South Mex. tribe, i., 645-70; location, i., 645.
Alamitos, village, South Cal., i., 460.
Alamos, village, Sonora, i., 606-7.
Alasapas (Alazapas), North Mexican tribe, i., 572-91; location,
i., 611.
Alaska (Aliaska, Aläksu, Alachschak, Aläsku, Alaxa, Alasca,
Alyaska, Alayeksa, Aläschka, Aljaska), name, i., 37-8; nations
and tribes described, i., 37-137; loc. of tribes, i., 35-40,
137-149; myth., iii., 98-106, 122, 128-131, 141-9, 507, 516-18;
lang., iii., 557-8, 575-603, 662-3; antiq., iv., 742.
Alaya, a village of Sabaibos, i., 614.
Alayeksa, i., 37, see Alaska.
Albatross, Ceri dress, i., 574.
Albatuinas (Albatuins), tribe of Mosquitos, i., 712-47; loc., i.,
713; spec. mention, i., 746; lang., iii., 783.
Alberni, village, Vancouver Island, i., 297.
Albinos, i., 423, 530, 750; ii., 166.
Alcax, South Cal. tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 459.
Alceas, i., 250, see Alseas.
Alchedumas (Alchedomas), tribe of Apaches, i., 473-526; location,
i., 598; language, iii., 685.
Alchones (Olchones), Cent. Cal. tribe, i., 363-401; location, i.,
453-4; spec. mention, i., 365; myth., iii., 161.
Aleis, tribe of Chinooks, i., 222-50; location, i., 306.
Aletas, Cent. Cal. tribe, i., 363-401; location, i., 452.
Aleupkignas, South Cal. tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 460.
Aleutian Archipelago, i., 38, 87, 141; iii., 577-8; iv., 742; v.,
28-9.
Aleuts (Aleyuts), one of the five families into which the
Hyperboreans are divided, manners and customs of all its
nations and tribes described together, i., 87-94; physique, i.,
88; dress, i., 88-9; dwellings, i., 89; food, i., 90; weapons
and war, i., 90-1; implts. and manuf., i., 91; marriage, women,
government, i., 92; amusements, i., 92-3; burial, i., 93;
character, i., 93-4; loc. of tribes, i., 38, 87, 141-2; myth.,
iii., 104-5, 144-5, 507, 518; lang., iii., 577-80; origin, v.,
19.
Alexander Archipelago, i., 293.
Aleyas, i., 307, see Alseas.
Aleytacs, Cent. Cal. tribe, i., 363-401; location, i., 452.
Algonkins (Algonquins), location, i., 25; origin, v., 22.
Aliaska, i., 37, see Alaska.
Aliquachiek, i., 347, see Allicochick.
Alizway, South Cal. tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 459.
Aljaska, i., 37, see Alaska.
Aljiman, South Cal. tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 459.
Alkollock, game played by Colvilles, i., 280-1.
All, Towka young man, i., 732.
Allequas, North Cal. tribe, i., 327-61; spec. mention, i.,
329-31, 333, 341, 348, 350; myth., iii., 525.
Alliances, see Treaties.
Allicochick (Aliquachiek), shell money, North Cal., i., 347.
Alligators, i., 579, 696, 759; ii., 721; iv., 101.
Alloy, ii., 474, 749.
Allvatalama, South Cal. tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 459.
Alparagats, Mosquito sandals, i., 716.
Alseas (Alceas, Alseyas, Aleyas, Ulseahs), tribe of Chinooks, i.,
222-50; location, i., 307-8; special mention, i., 250.
Alsea Bay, i., 308.
Altahmos (Altajumos), Cent. Cal. tribe, i., 363-401; loc., i.,
363, 452-3.
Altamia, Oajaca, antiq., iv., 373.
Altamira, village, Tamaulipas, i., 613.
Altanuis, Cent. Cal. tribe, i., 363-401; location, i., 452.
Altar, village in Sonora, i., 602.
Altars, ii., 307, 571, 582, 689, 799; iii., 239, 332; iv., 32,
61-2, 94-9, 111-14, 257-9, 277, 334, 345-6, 371, 382, 436, 443,
456, 541, 545, 587, 646, 703, 774.
Altaville, California, antiq., iv., 703.
Altepatlalli, Nahua lands, ii., 226.
Aluenchis, Cent. Cal. tribe, i., 363-401; location, i., 452.
Alum, ii., 474, 487.
Alyaska, i., 37, see Alaska.
Alzatlan, town, North Mex., i., 622.
Am, Maya conjuring stones, ii., 697.
Amacavas, tribe of Apaches, i., 473-526; location, i., 599.
Amacui, a Chichimec chief, v., 295-6, see Xolotl II.
Amadaappigalla, season of the year, Lower Cal., i., 564.
Amaddappi, season of the year, Lower Cal., i., 564.
Amador Co., Cal., i., 450; iv., 707.
Amag-Dan, town, Guatemala, i., 789; v., chap. xi.
Amalcum, Maya god, ii., 698.
Amalinalpan, station, Aztec migration, v., 324.
Amamaxtla, medical root, ii., 599.
Amanteca, Nahua feather-worker, ii., 489-91.
Amantla, a ward in city of Mex., ii., 490.
Amaquemecan, ancient home of Chichimecs, iv., 580; v., 219, 289,
301, 314.
Amaquetepec, Chichimec station, v., 242, 487.
Amaranth, ii., 329, 333, 356, 616; iii., 241, 297, 344, 371, 395.
Amasmaxtli, paper dress, ii., 323.
Amatetevitl (Amateteuitl), paper ornaments, iii., 333, 362.
Amatique Gulf, iii., 726; v., chap. xi.
Amatitlan (Amatitan), town, Guat., i., 787-8; ii., 651.
Amatitlan Lake, antiq., iv., 121.
Amatl, Nahua paper, ii., 485, 524.
Amatlan de los Reyes, Vera Cruz, antiq., iv., 434-5.
Amatzin, king of Tlatelulco, v., 364.
Amaxtlan, province, Oajaca, v., 447, chap. x.
Amaytun lamayte (Lamaytun), Maya division of Cycle, ii., 762.
Ambassadors, i., 388, 628, 723, 729-30, 770; ii., 254, 412-13,
419-23, 462, 607, 646, 666-8.
Ambawtawhoot-Tinneh (Sheep Indians), tribe of Tinneh, i.,
114-137; location, i., 145; special mention, i., 121; language,
iii., 585.
Amber, i., 72, 649-51; ii., 732.
Ambush, i., 264, 496-7, 628, 697; ii., 426-7.
Amechichi, Tezcucan title, ii., 189; v., 350.
American River, i., 450.
Ameyal, a Toltec prince, v., 313, 316.
Amimitl, Nahua god, iii., 410.
Amitaguas, North Mex. tribe, i., 572-91; location, i., 611.
Amolli, soap-plant, ii., 491.
Amonces, Cent. Cal. tribe, i., 363-401; location, i., 363, 456.
Amotenenqua, name of Napatecutli, iii., 417.
Amoxoaque, Nahua prophets, v., 189.
Amoxtli, water-plant, ii., 365.
Ampayouts, i., 441, see Yam Pah Utes.
Amusements, Hyperboreans, i., 66-7, 84-5, 92-3, 119, 131;
Columbians, i., 169-71, 180-1, 198-201, 219, 243-5, 280-2;
Californians, i., 351-4, 392-4, 415-17, 437-8; New Mexicans,
i., 515-17, 549-53, 566-7, 586-7; Mexicans, i., 635-6, 664-5;
ii., 283-301, 399; Central Americans, i., 704-7, 735-9, 774-6;
ii., 711-14.
Amusgo, South Mex., lang., ii., 752.
Amutajas, Cent. Cal. tribe, i., 363-401; location, i., 452.
Anacanas, North Mex. tribe, i., 572-91; location, i., 613.
Anacarck, i., 458, see Anacbuc.
Anacbuc (Anacarck), South Cal. tribe, i., 402-22; location, i.,
458.
Anáhuac, name, i., 18; ii., 87-8; for nations and tribes, myth.,
lang., antiq., and hist., see Mexico.
Anáhuac Ayotlan, Oajacan coast region, ii., 111; v., chap. x.
Anáhuac Mountains, name for Utah Mountains, i., 465.
Anáhuac Xicalanco, Tabascan coast region, ii., 111; v., 196.
Anajue (Anijue), South Cal. tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 459.
Analco, village, Jalisco, i., 672.
Analtés (Analtehes, Analtees), Maya books, ii., 768-9.
Anamás (Anamons), Cent. Cal. tribe, i., 363-401; location, i.,
452.
Anayicoyondi, Pericúi goddess, iii., 169.
Ancasiguais, North Mex. tribe, i., 572-91; location, i., 613.
Ancasmarca Mountain, v., 15.
Anchins, Cent. Cal. tribe, i., 363-401; location, i., 452.
Ancoose Lake, i., 443.
Anderson Lake, i., 311.
Anderson Valley, i., 362, 449.
Andreanovski (Andrejanowschen) Island, i., 87, 142.
Anegas, i., 293, see Hanegas.
Angels, iii., 492-3, 540.
Anian Strait, v., 79.
Aniche Island, Michoacan, antiq., iv., 571.
Anijue, i., 459, see Anajue.
Animals, myth., iii., 37, 127-139; diffusion of, v., 29-30.
Animal-sculpture or images, ii., 750-1; iv., 24, 39-51, 100-1,
112-14, 122, 137, 163-8, 173, 175, 183-9, 216, 226-31, 235,
317-20, 386-8, 436, 467-9, 481-2, 488, 493, 497-8, 500-1,
519-20, 538, 548, 575, 590-5.
Animpayamos, Cent. Cal. tribe, i., 363-401; location, i., 455.
Ankle-ornaments, i., 574; ii., 290, 372; iii., 385.
An-Kutchin, i., 147, see Han Kutchin.
Anlygmutes (Anlygmjuten, Anlygmüten), tribe of Koniagas, i.,
70-87; location, i., 70, 141.
Anointing, ii., 144-7, 422, 641; iii., 435.
Ansaymas, Cent. Cal. tribe, i., 363-401; location, i., 454.
Antelope, see Deer.
Antelope Peak, i., 595.
Antiquities, Cent. America, ii., 116-18; iv., 15-139; v., 58-61;
Mexican Republic, ii., 749-51; iii., 398; iv., 143-614; v.,
55-8; New Mexico, i., 537-8; iv., 616-686; California and North
West, iv., 688-743; Mississippi Valley, iv., 744-90; v., 93-5,
114; Peru, iv., 791-806; Brazil, v., 123; Bibliography of,
iv., 2-4, 150-1, 289-94, 377-8, 390-1, 483, 621-5; See names of
states and localities.
Ants, i., 419, 428, 568, 762; ii., 176, 356.
Aoa (Aba), Nahua festival character, iii., 354.
Apaches (Apatschees), one of the four families into which the
New Mexicans are divided. Manners and customs of all its
nations and tribes described together, i., 473-526; physique,
i., 477-9; dress, i., 480-4; dwellings, i., 485-7; food, i.,
487-92; weapons, i., 493-6; war, i., 496-500; impl'ts and
manufactures, i., 500-5; boats and property, i., 505-6; art,
i., 506-7; government, i., 507-10; slavery, i., 510-11; women
and marriage, i., 511-15; amusements, i., 515-17; miscellaneous
customs, i., 517-21; medicine and burial, i., 521-4; character,
i., 524-6; location of tribes, i., 473-5, 591-9; iii., 593-5;
myth., iii., 132, 135, 170; lang., iii., 584, 593-603.
Apalaches, lang., iii., 727.
Apalamu, Cent. Cal. tribe, i., 363-401; location, i., 453.
Apan, station, Aztec migration, v., 324.
Apanco, station, Aztec migration, v., 323.
Apanecatl, a Toltec noble, v., 254.
Apantecutli, Nahua god, v., 193.
Apasco (Apazco), station, Aztec migration, v., 323-4.
Apatamnès, Cent. Cal. tribe, i., 363-401; location, i., 453.
Apaugasi, Cent. Cal. lang., iii., 650.
Apaxtle, a Nahua vessel, ii., 272.
Apay, Cent. Amer. lang., iii., 760.
Apes, North Mex. tribe, i., 572-91; location, i., 611; see also
Monkeys.
Apetlac, Nahua place in temple, iii., 387.
Apil, Cent. Cal. tribe, i., 363-401; location, i., 454.
Apoala, town, Oajaca, iii., 71; v., chap. x.
Apoplexy, i., 247.
Apotheosis, ii., 618, 693, 699, 801; iii., 25-6, 32, 271, 308,
399, 457, 473; v., 205, 226, 249-50, 255, 264, chap. xi., xii.,
xiii.
Apozolco, a mission in Cent. Mex., i., 672.
Apozonallotl, name of Chalchihuitlicue, iii., 367.
Apparitions, Mex. hist., v., 467-9.
Appeal, right of, ii., 434-7, 445, 656.
Apple-tree Cove, i., 301.
Apuasto, Cent. Cal. tribe, i., 363-401; location, i., 453.
Aquamish, tribe of Nootkas, i., 175-208; location, i., 295.
Aquarius Mountains, i., 597.
Aquas Calientes, South Cal., i., 460.
Aqueducts, ii., 169, 563, 565-6; iv., 121, 341-2, 447, 522-4,
611, 798, 801; v., 422, 452-3.
Aquiach, Nahua title, v., 264, 486.
Aquilasco, ancient Nahua home, v., 221, 309.
Ara, deified bird, ii., 212; v., 16.
Arabic, lang., traces, iii., 705.
Aramacina, Honduras, antiq., iv., 77.
Aramays, Cent. Cal. tribe, i., 363-401; location, i., 452.
Aransas Bay, i., 594.
Arcata, town, North Cal., i., 446.
Arch, ii., 555, 701-2, 791; iv., 127, 137, 157-8, 171, 177-9,
190-1, 208, 214, 228, 235, 243-4, 272-3, 309-11, 341-3, 356,
373, 380-1, 383, 451, 460-1, 528, 658, 713.
Archæology, introductory, iv., 1-14; see also Antiquities.
Architecture, ii., 553-89, 783-94; iv., 267 et seq.; v., 55-60;
see also Dwellings.
Arch Spring, New Mex., antiq., iv., 645.
Areitos, Isthmian dances, i., 774.
Aretines, North Mex. tribe, i., 572-91; location, i., 613.
Aribetzi, village, Sonora, i., 606.
Arigames, North Mex. tribe, i., 572-91; location, i., 610.
Aripas (Aripe), Lower Cal. tribe, i., 556-71; loc., i., 604;
lang., iii., 687.
Arispe (Arizpe), village, Sonora, i., 605-6.
Arithmetic, i., 68, 192, 274-5, 507, 564, 726, 769; ii., 497-500,
753-4.
Arizona, nations and tribes, i., 422, 465-6, 473-555, 591-603;
myth., iii., 75-83, 132-6, 170, 526-8; lang., iii., 593-603,
671-4, 680-6; antiq., iv., 616-44.
Ark, myth., iii., 66, 76, 79, 103; v., 14, 86-7, 327-9.
Arkansas River, i., 464, 591-2.
Arks, i., 143, see Auks.
Armadillos, ii., 720.
Armería, Colima, antiq., iv., 572.
Armor, i., 50, 90, 105, 160, 182, 230, 235, 432, 541, 578, 655,
723, 763; ii., 403-8, 488, 490, 742, 750.
Armories, ii., 415, 578.
Arms, see Weapons.
Arnotto, oil, i., 753.
Arrianjianbaj, Oajaca, antiq., iv., 374.
Arrows, see Bows and Arrows.
Arrow Lakes, i., 252, 264, 271-2, 314.
Arroyo Blanco, i., 457.
Arsenals, see Armories.
Art, Hyperboreans, i., 68; Columbians, i., 160-1, 165-6, 172,
192-3, 238-9, 274-5; New Mexicans, i., 506-7, 545-6, 564,
583-4; Mexicans, i., 24, 631; ii., 442, 473-552; iv., 366-597;
v., 258; Cent. Americans, i., 700-1, 726-8, 769; ii., 748-82;
iv., 15-365; Peruvians, iv., 791-806.
Arteljnowskojes, tribe of Aleuts, i., 87-94; location, i., 141.
Artemisia, Cent. Cal. food, i., 374.
Artez-Kutshi, tribe of Tinneh, i., 114-37; location, i., 147.
Artsmilsh, i., 305, see Karweewee.
Ascension River, i., 602, 605.
Ascetics, Nahuas, iii., 436-7, 441-2.
Aseguang (Asequang), tribe of Haidahs, i., 156-74; location, i.,
292.
Ashes, i., 126, 204, 395-7, 419, 535, 566; ii., 277, 307, 348,
608-10, 615, 617, 621, 717, 722.
Ashochemie, Cent. Cal. lang., iii., 648.
Asia, origin from, v., 30-55.
Asientic-häbî Mountains, i., 597.
Asiuhuil, South Cal. tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 459.
Aspianaque, Cent. Cal. lang., iii., 653.
Ass, Lower Cal., food, i., 561.
Association, element of progress, ii., 55-9.
Assuntas, Cent. Cal. tribe, i., 363-401; location, i., 452.
Asthma, i., 287, 667.
Astronomy, i., 584; ii., 500-22; iii., 371; iv., 496-7, 506-8;
v., 450.
Asucsagna, South Cal. tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 460.
Asuncion Sianori, village, Sinaloa, i., 614.
Atalaya Castle, Guatemala, ii., 788.
Atalcaoplo, iii., 420, see Atlcahualco.
Atamalqualiztli, Nahua religious feast, ii., 341; iii., 429.
Atamataho, forest, Michoacan, v., 517.
Atarpes, Cent. Cal. tribe, i., 363-401; location, i., 452.
Atchaer, i., 142, see Atkhas.
Ateakari (Ateacari), name of Coras, i., 672; iii., 719.
Atecpanecatl, name of Huemac ii., v., 267.
Atemoztli (Atemuztli), Nahua month, ii., 337, 339, 511; iii.,
346.
Atempanecatl, Nahua title, ii., 138.
Atenamitic, Totonac station, v., 203.
Atenco (Atengo), village, Mexico, ii., 560; station, Aztec
migration, v., 323.
Atepetlac, station, Aztec migration, v., 323.
Atepocaxixilihua, Nahua dance, ii., 324.
Athabasca Lake, i., 144.
Athabascas, name for Chepewyans, i., 114.
Athletic Sports, i., 552, 567, 586-7; ii., 286, 295-9, 713-14.
See also Amusements.
Atilan, department of Oajaca, i., 680.
Atit, Guatemalan queen, iii., 75; v., chap. xi.
Atitlan (Atitan, Atital-huyu), town, Guatemala, i., 789; iii.,
75; v., chap. xi.
Atitlan Lake, i., 789; iv., 121; v., chap. xi.
Atkha Island, lang., iii., 579.
Atkhas (Atchaer), tribe of Aleuts, i., 87-94; location, i., 87,
141-2; lang., iii., 578-9.
Atl, Nahua day, ii., 511-12, 516-17.
Atlacamani, name of Chalchihuitlicue, iii., 367.
Atlacohuayan, city, Mexico, v., 402.
Atlacuezona, water lily, iii., 369.
Atlacuihuayan, station, Aztec migration, v., 324.
Atlacuizoayan Mountain, name of Tacubaya, iii., 405.
Atlantis, origin theory, v., 123-9.
Atlapolco, a city of Matlaltzinco, v., 433.
Atlcahualco (Atlchualco, Atalcaoplo, Atlaooalo, Atlcaoalo), Nahua
month and festival, ii., 305, 509; iii., 332, 419-20.
Atliaca, Vera Cruz, antiq., iv., 447.
Atlicalaguian (Atlicalaquian, Atlitlalacayan, Atlitlanquian,
Atlitlalacpan, Atitalaquia), station, Aztec migration, v.,
323-4.
Atlihuetzian, a province of Mexico, i., 675.
Atlixco, town, Puebla, i., 671; antiq., iv., 468-9; hist., v.,
202, 426, 443, 463, 499-504.
Atlmayoacan, locality, Puebla, v., 490.
Atnahs (Atnaks), Inland tribe, i., 254-91; location, i., 251,
310; spec. mention, i., 260; lang., iii., 589-91.
Atnas (Ah-tenas, Atnaer), tribe of Tinneh, i., 114-137; location,
i., 116, 135, 149; spec. men., i., 135.
Atna River, name of Copper River, i., 38, 149.
Atochpan (Atocpan), province, Vera Cruz, i., 673-4; v., 420.
Atole (Atolli), Nahua drink, i., 695, 706; ii., 355.
Atonaltzin, name for Dzawindanda, v., 415.
Atonan, station, Chichimec migration, v., 294.
Atonatiuh, Nahua age of water, ii., 504; iii., 66.
Atotonilco, station, Aztec migration, v., 298, 323-4.
Atotoztli (Atototzin), a Mexican princess, v., 316, 358, 372.
Atoyac, a district of Guerrero, i., 678.
Atrato River, i., 796-7.
Attajen, California mythic personage, iii., 165.
Atupen, mountain, Michoacan, v., 519.
Atzacualco, part of Mexico city, ii., 563.
Atzcapotzalco, station, Aztec migration, v., 324. See also
Azcapuzalco.
Ahtzih Winak Cawek, Cakchiquel title, v., chap. xi.
Auguries, ii., 255, 389-95, 427; iii., 438.
Aujay, i., 459, see Ojai.
Auks (Arks), tribe of Thlinkeets, i., 96-114; location, i., 96,
143; lang., iii., 579.
Aulintacs, Cent. Cal. tribe, i., 363-401; location, i., 454.
Aulone, shell used as money, i., 385.
Ausion, South Cal. tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 458.
Authorities, list of, i., xvii-xlix.
Autlan, Jalisco, antiq., iv., 572.
Autochthon, origin theory, v., 129-32.
Auyapemes, North Mex. tribe, i., 572-91; location, i., 613.
Auzar, Californian mythic personage, iii., 165.
Avatanak Island, i., 141.
Avatanaks, tribe of Aleuts, i., 87-94; location, i., 141.
Avecatl, a Toltec chief, v., 243.
Avenues, see Streets.
Aviaries, Nahuas, ii., 163-6.
Avilix (Awilix), Quiché god, ii., 648; iii., 50, 477; v., 181,
chap. xi.
Awánees, Cent. Cal. tribe, i., 363-401; location, i., 456.
Awignas, South Cal. tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 460.
Awls, i., 407-8; ii., 710; iv., 710-12, 740.
Axalo, village, Guerrero, i., 677.
Axaucalli, bath houses, iii., 337.
Axayacatl, flies, i., 625; ii., 356; king of Mexico, v., 417,
424-35, 499, 503, chap. x.
Axcahua, Nahua title, ii., 187.
Axcauhtzin, v., 290, see Acauhtzin.
Axes, i., 719; ii., 480, 557, 743; iii., 71.; iv., 23, 59-60,
557, 611, 677, 793.
Axixpatli, Nahua medicine, ii., 599.
Axoquentzin, Acolhua prince, v., 410.
Axpitil, i., 458, see Paxpili.
Axuas, tribe of Apaches, i., 473-526; spec. mention, i., 482,
500, 511.
Ayacachtli, rattles, ii., 289, 293.
Ayaguas, North Mex. tribe, i., 572-91; location, i., 612.
A yail haab, Maya intercalary years, ii., 762.
Ayatl, Nahua mantle, ii., 366.
Ayauhcihuatl (Ayauchigual), a Mexican queen, v., 363.
Ayhuttisaht, i., 295, see Ehateset.
Ayotzinco, town, Mexico, ii., 568; v., 495.
Aytcharts, tribe of Nootkas, i., 175-208; location, i., 295.
Azacot, a Quiché chief, v., chap. xi.
Azcapuzalco, city, Mexico, i., 675; ii., 104-5, 219-20, 475; v.,
311, 320, 334, 345-58, 376-94.
Azcatlxochitl, a Toltec princess, v., 313.
Azcaxochitl (Azcaxochic), station, Aztec migration, v., 324;
princess of Malinalco, v., 340; princess of Mexico, v., 358; a
Tepanec princess and queen of Tezcuco, v., 421.
Aztacalco, town, Mexico, ii., 560.
Aztapilpetlatl, mats, iii., 335.
Aztatlitexcan, a Tailotlac chief, v., 338.
Aztaxelli, tassels, ii., 320.
Aztecs, Nahua nation, ii., 90-629; loc. ii., 93-5; iii., 557-8;
myth., ii., 200-7, 245-6, 302-41, 388-97, 604-5, 616-19; iii.,
55-70, 109-13, 119-23, 128-9, 181-231, 237-444, 469-70, 511-15,
532-9; lang., iii., 557-8, 630-1, 660-72, 680-2, 713-14,
716, 719-20, 723-37; antiq., iv., 504-23, 553-64; hist., v.,
307-510.
Aztetl, Nahua medicine stone, ii., 600.
Aztlan, ancient home of Aztecs, i., 676; ii., 125; v., 221,
305-6, 322-5.
Aztoguihua Aquiyahuacatl, a Tlascaltec chief, v., 498.
Azuza, village, South Cal., i., 460.
B
Baali, a Zapotec captain, v., chap. x.
Baaloo, a Zapotec captain, v., chap. x.
Baal-Peor, Phallic-worship, iii., 501.
Babel, myth., iii., 67-8, 77; v., 17-18, 21, 200, 209.
Babeles, North Mex. tribe, i., 572-91; location, i., 611.
Babiacora, village, Sonora, i., 606.
Babiamares, North Mex. tribe, i., 572-91; location, i., 611.
Babines, tribe of Tinneh, i., 114-37; location, i., 145.
Babispe, village, Sonora, i., 606.
Babos, North Mex. tribe, i., 572-91; location, i., 610.
Babosarigames, North Mex. tribe, i., 572-91; location, i., 611.
Baca, village, Sonora, i., 608.
Bacabs, Maya gods, ii., 690, 699; iii., 462, 466; rulers of
Mayapan, v., chap. xiii.
Bacadeguachi, village, Sonora, i., 606.
Bacalar, locality in Yucatan, v., chap. xiii.
Bacaniyahua (Baipoa), village, Sonora, i., 606.
Bacanora, village, Sonora, i., 606-7.
Bachimba, Chihuahua, antiq., iv., 604.
Bacerac, village, Sonora, i., 606.
Bacoatzi (Bacuachi), village, Sonora, i., 606.
Bacowas, Cent. Cal. tribe, i., 363-401; location, i., 449.
Bacum (Bacún), village, Sonora, i., 608.
Badges, of rank, see Insignia.
Badgers, Maya food, ii., 720-1.
Bags, i., 62, 190; ii., 324, 710; iii., 337, 339-41.
Bagiopas, tribe of Apaches, i., 473-526; loc., i., 598; lang.,
iii., 685.
Bagnames, North Mex. tribe, i., 572-91; location, i., 611.
Bahacechas, tribe of Apaches, i., 473-526; location, i., 599.
Baidar (Baydare), Eskimo skin boat, i., 60.
Baidarka, Eskimo small boat, i., 60.
Baines Sound, Brit. Col., antiq., iv., 741.
Baipoa, i., 606, see Bacaniyahua.
Bajada Point, i., 217.
Bajio, Guanajuato, antiq., iv., 577.
Baker's Bay, i., 304.
Bakhalal, locality, Yucatan, v., chap. xiii.
Baklum Chaam, Maya god, iii., 467.
Balam, Maya sorcerer, ii., 659; founder of Copan, v., chap. xi.
See Ci.
Balam II., a Cakchiquel ruler, v., chap. xi.
Balam-Agab (Balam-Acab, Balam Acam), Quiché 2d created man, iii.,
47; v., 181; Quiché king, chap. xi.
Balam Colob, Maya nation, i., 687-711; ii., 630-803; hist., v.,
chap. xi.
Balam Conache, a Quiché prince, v., chap. xi.
Balam-Quitzé, (Balam Kiché) Quiché 1st created man, iii., 47; v.,
181; Quiché king, chap. xi.
Balanicha, Maya nation, i., 687-711; ii., 630-803; hist., v.,
chap. xi.
Balbitz, Guatemala, antiq., iv., 131.
Balché, South Mex. drink, i., 665.
Balconies, ii., 161, 555, 572. See also Terraces.
Bald Hill Indians, i., 446, see Tchololahs.
Bald Hills, i., 446.
Bale Ranch, Cent. Cal., i., 451-2.
Balize, iv., 139, see Belize.
Balls, games with, i., 353, 393, 586-7; ii., 297-9; iv., 230; v.,
174-9, 184, 329, 432, chap. xi.
Ballabollas, i., 295, see Bellacoolas.
Ballista, Nahuas, ii., 410.
Ballo Ki Pomos (Oat Valley People), Cent. Cal. tribe, i.,
363-401; location, i., 448.
Balustrades, Yucatan, antiq., iv., 226-7, 229, 235.
Bal Masque, Nahua feast, iii., 429.
Balsams, i., 589, 699-700; ii., 599.
Bamaqs, Guatemala tribe, i., 686-711; location, i., 787.
Bamboo, i., 583, 692-3, 737, 755; ii., 386, 389, 398, 406, 410.
Bamusehua, Sinaloa god., iii., 180.
Banamichi, village, Sonora, i., 606.
Banana, i., 624, 694, 697, 719, 739, 758-9, 775.
Banattees, tribe of Shoshones, i., 422-42; location, i., 461.
Bandages, dress, i., 717, 752.
Bands, Towkas marriage, i., 732.
Banks Island, i., 294.
Bannacks (Bannocks, Bonacks) tribe of Shoshones, i., 422-442;
location, i., 463; special mention, i., 440-1; lang., iii.,
661.
Banners, see Flags.
Bapancorapinamacas, North Mex. tribe, i., 572-91; location, i.,
611.
Baptism, Mexicans, i., 661-2, 664; ii., 260, 270-8; iii., 369-76,
439; Mayas, ii., 669, 682-4.
Baqahol, Cakchiquel band, prince, and family, v., chap. xi.
Barabara, Koniaga dwelling, i., 74.
Baranoff Island, i., 96, 143.
Barbarism, see Savagism.
Barbasco, used as poison, i., 760.
Barber-shops, Nahuas, ii., 370.
Barbote, chin-ornament, ii., 376.
Barclay Sound, i., 295, 297.
Bark, Hyperboreans, i., 75, 101-3, 118, 123, 130-1; Columbians,
i., 160-4, 170, 172-3, 179-80, 182-6, 188, 191, 204, 211,
214-15, 218, 227, 230-3, 235, 257, 260, 270, 272, 286; iii.,
150; Californians, i., 368, 372, 382, 406; New Mexicans, i.,
481, 500, 502, 517, 532, 535, 563; Mexicans, i., 650; ii., 174,
599; Cent. Americans, i., 691, 697, 699, 715-16, 718, 722, 724,
726, 751, 754, 760, 766-7; ii., 727, 734, 752, 768.
Barnacles, food, i., 214.
Barricades, see Fortifications.
Bashones, i., 450, see Bushumnes.
Basiroas, North Mex. tribe, i., 572-91; location, i., 607.
Baskets, Hyperboreans, i., 91, 103, 107, 129; Columbians,
i., 162-3, 166, 172, 185, 190, 213, 215, 220, 234, 236-7,
261-2, 270; Californians, i., 339, 345, 374-5, 381-2, 406,
429-30, 434; New Mexicans, i., 500, 504, 539, 543, 563-4,
577; Mexicans, i., 624, 631, 633; ii., 483, 616, 619; Cent.
Americans, i., 724, 766.
Basopa, North Mex. lang., iii., 707.
Bats, i., 393, 561, 762; ii., 743; iii., 484.
Batab, Maya title, ii., 636.
Batemdakaiees, Cent. Cal. tribe, i., 363-401; location, i., 448;
lang., iii., 647.
Batenab, ancient Guat. tribe, v., chap. xi.
Baths, Hyperboreans, i., 83, 111; Columbians, i., 201, 205, 219,
235, 284-6; Californians, i., 341, 356, 395, 419; New Mexicans,
i., 487, 521-2, 554, 569; Mexicans, i., 626-7, 639-40, 654,
667; ii., 171-2, 268, 280, 316, 370, 389, 392, 574, 587,
595-6, 621; iii., 337-8, 346, 435; iv., 447, 525-6, 545; Cent.
Americans, i., 696, 709, 722, 743, 760; ii., 641, 669, 681,
735, 789.
Battles, see War.
Battlelemuleemauch (Meatwho), tribe of Shushwaps, i., 251-91;
location, i., 312.
Battlements, Nahua architecture, ii., 556, 578, 580.
Batucari, North Mex. lang., iii., 707.
Batucas, North Mex. tribe, i., 572-91; location, i., 606; special
mention, i., 575-8; lang., iii., 699.
Batuco, village, Sonora, i., 606-7.
Batz, Tzendal day, ii., 767.
Batza, Quiché prince, v., chap. xi.
Batzul, Chiapan month, ii., 766.
Bauzarigames (Bazaurigames), North Mex. tribe, i., 572-91;
location, i., 612; spec. mention, i., 576, 585.
Bayal, locality in Guat., v., chap. xi.
Bayameo, ancient home of the Wanacaces, v., 511.
Bayamo River, i., 796.
Bayamos (Bayanos), tribe of Isthmians, i., 747-85; location, i.,
796-7; lang., iii., 794.
Baydare, i., 60, see Baidar.
Bayette River, i., 463.
Baygua, poisonous plant, ii., 721.
Bayma Pomos, Cent. Cal. tribe, i., 363-401; location, i., 448.
Beacon Hill, British Columbia, antiq., iv., 740.
Beads, Hyperboreans, i., 72-3, 128, 131, 133; Columbians, i.,
179, 182; Californians, i., 333, 347, 368, 381-2, 396, 424-6;
New Mexicans, i., 482-3, 545; Mexicans, i., 623, 649; Cent.
Americans, i., 691, 717, 752; ii., 684, 732, 750.
Beans, i., 234, 489, 538, 574, 577, 624, 694, 719, 758; ii., 290,
300, 343, 347, 355, 718-19.
Bears, i., 50, 57, 78, 91, 170, 187-8, 230, 258, 264, 337, 359,
405-6, 426, 438, 491, 496, 520; ii., 310; iii., 80, 91-3, 150,
546.
Bear Creek, i., 447, 450-1, 462; iii., 648-9; iv., 707.
Beards, i., 46-7, 117, 157, 179, 225-6, 255-6, 332, 365-7, 402-3,
423, 573, 619, 622, 646-8, 689, 714; ii., 370, 624, 730-1, 802.
Bear Lake River, i., 144.
Beaufort Bay, i., 52.
Beaver, i., 86, 117, 123, 133, 239, 244, 264, 424, 430; iii.,
94-5, 130.
Beaver Ind., (Thick wood Ind.) tribe of Tinneh, i., 114-37;
location, i., 114, 144; lang., iii., 585.
Beaver Mountains, i., 467, 468.
Becal, Yucatan, antiq., iv., 262.
Becanchen, Yucatan, antiq., iv., 253.
Beds, i., 51, 259, 544, 630, 656-7, 697-8, 724; ii., 259, 572,
786-7.
Bedahmareks, Cent. Cal. tribe, i., 363-401; location, i., 451.
Bees, i., 577, 659; ii., 699, 701, 722.
Beeatee, Chepewyan food, i., 118.
Been, Tzendal day, ii., 767.
Beheading, Nahua mode of sacrifice, ii., 324, 327, 332, 337.
Belbellahs, i., 294, see Bellacoolas.
Beleh, Guatemala, antiq., iv., 131.
Belehe Qat, Quiché prince, v., chap. xi.
Beleheb Gih, Quiché prince, v., chap. xi.
Beleheb Queh, Quiché prince, v., chap. xi.
Beleheb Tzi, Quiché prince, v., chap. xi.
Belem, Pueblo village, i., 599.
Belen, village, Sonora, i., 605, 608.
Belize (Balize), i., 793; iii., 761; iv., 138-9.
Belize River, antiq., iv., 139.
Bellacoolas (Bellahoolas, Bellaghchoolas, Belbellahs,
Bellabellahs, Bellabollas, Bellabollahs, Ballabollas), tribe of
Haidahs, i., 156-174; location, i., 155, 294-5; spec. mention,
i., 158, 166, 169; lang., iii., 607.
Bells, i., 705, 765; ii., 290, 319, 324-5, 706-7, 737, 749-50,
787; iii., 238, 324, 385; iv., 556.
Bellingham Bay, i., 208, 221, 299.
Belts, i., 330, 483, 559; ii., 396.
Ben, Maya day, ii., 755-6, 760.
Benemé, South Cal., lang., iii., 686.
Beni-Xonos (Cajones, Cajonos, Nexichas, Nexitzas), South Mex.
tribe, i., 645-70; location, i., 680; special mention, i., 668;
lang., iii., 754; hist., v., chap. x.
Bentinck Arms (Bentick), i., 155, 294-5.
Bering Bay, i., 96, 142.
Bering Isle, i., 48.
Bering Straits, i., 28, 37, 41, 63-4, 139; v., 28.
Berries, i., 55, 76, 78, 90, 103, 123, 162-3, 181, 187-8, 199,
204, 214, 229, 234, 243, 264-7, 323, 339-40, 345, 373-4, 406,
427, 430, 558.
Betamas, Michoacan people, v., 511.
Betrothal, see Marriage and Courtship.
Betting, see Gambling.
Betumkes, Cent. Cal. tribe, i., 363-401; location, i., 447.
Betumki Valley, i., 447.
Bguanas, North Mex. tribe, i., 572-91; location, i., 611.
Bibliography, Almaraz, Mem. de Metlaltoyuca, iv., 458-9. Almaraz,
Teotihuacan, in Id., Mem. Pachuca, iv., 530. Baldwin's Ancient
Amer., iv., 2. Boscana, in Robinson's Life in Cal., iii.,
161-2. Boturini, Idea, ii., 532. Brasseur de Bourbourg, Hist.
Nat. Civ., ii., 116, 321, 436, 556, 634-5; v., 153-4. Brasseur
de Bourbourg, MS. Troano, ii., 780. Brasseur de Bourbourg,
Popol Vuh, iii., 42-4. Brasseur de Bourbourg, Recherches sur
les Ruines de Palenqué, iv., 293-4. Careri, Giro del Mondo,
ii., 531, 544-5. Catherwood's Views of Ancient Monuments in
Central America, iv., 81, 146, 292-3. Charnay, Ruines Amer.,
iv., 147, 293, 391. Codex Chimalpopoca, v., 192-3. Dean's
MS., Ancient Remains in Vancouver Island and B. Col., iv.,
737. Domenech's Deserts, iii., 180-1. Dupaix, Relation,
iv., 290-1. Friederichsthal, Les Monuments de l'Yucatan, in
Nouvelles Annales des Voy., 1841, tom. xcii., iv., 146-7.
Fuentes y Guzman, Recopilacion Florida, Hist. Guat., iv., 80.
Galindo, Ruins of Copan, in Amer. Antiq., Soc., Transact.,
vol. ii., iv., 80. Gondra, Ant. Mex., in Soc. Mex. Geog.,
tom. ii., iv., 449. Herrera, Hist. Gen., iv., 80. Iberri,
Ruinas de Monte Real, in Museo Mex., tom. iii., iv., 449.
Ixtlilxochitl, Hist. Chich., iii., 64. Jones' Ancient Amer.,
iv., 82; v., 73. Juarros, Hist. Guat., iv., 80. Kingsborough,
Ant. Mex., iii., 191; iv., 291; v., 84. Las Casas, MS., Hist.
Apologética, ii., 583, 677. Müller, Amerikanische Urreligionen,
iii., 273-300. Müller, Chips from a German Workshop, iii.,
43-4. Norman's Rambles, iv., 145-6. Palacio, Carta, iv., 79.
Palacios, Descrip. Guat., in Ternaux-Compans, Recueil de Doc.,
v., 79. Perez, Cronologia Ant. de Yucatan, ii., 755. Pontelli,
Explorations, iv., 132. Prescott's Hist. Conq. Mex., ii., 162,
171, 440-1. Ramirez, Atlas, Mej., iii., 68-9. Rio, Description
of the Ruins of an Ancient City, iv., 289-91. Sahagun, Hist.
Gen., iii., 231-6. Sawkins, in Mayer's Obs. on Mex. Hist.
and Archæology, iv., 404-6. Scherzer, Wanderungen, iv., 81.
Sproat's Scenes, i., 151. Stephens' Cent. Amer., iv., 80-2.
Stephens' Yucatan, iv., 146-8, 221, 292-3. Ternaux-Compans,
Voy., série ii., tom. i., ii., 439. Mühlenpfordt, Mejico, iv.,
391. Veytia, Hist. Ant. Mej., ii., 440. Waldeck, Voy. Pitt.,
iv., 145. Waldeck, Palenque, iv., 145. West Indische Spieghel,
ii., 141. Ximenes, Hist. Ind. Guat., iii., 42-3. Zavala, in
Antiq. Mex., iv., 144-5. Zurita, Rapport, in Ternaux-Compans,
Voy., série ii., tom. i., ii., 438-9.
Bibliography, General, List of works quoted, i., xvii-xlix.
Native Records, ii., 523-33; v., 140-2, 192-3. Spanish
historians, ii., 158-60; v., 142-9. Works on Antiquities, iv.,
2-4; on Uxmal antiq., iv., 150-1; on Chiapas and Palenque
antiq., iv., 289-94; on Oajaca antiq., iv., 377-8; on Mitla
antiq., iv., 390-1; on Xochicalco antiq., iv., 483; on Arizona
antiq., iv., 621-5.
Bicam (Bican), village, Sonora, i., 608.
Bidwell's Bar, Cal., antiq., iv., 707.
Big Bar, locality, North Cal., i., 445.
Big Chamise, locality, North Cal., i., 448.
Bill Williams Fork, i., 475, 597; iv., 640-1.
Bill Williams Mts., i., 598.
Birch Indians, i., 147, see Gens de Bouleau.
Birds, i., 39, 50, 73, 79, 89-91, 162, 170-1, 189, 200, 211, 213,
215, 229, 373, 375-6, 522, 561, 574-5, 625; ii., 163-6, 315,
352, 372, 750; iii., 132-4, 268, 280, 301-2, 400.
Biruqueta, Isthmian lang., iii., 794.
Bisbire, decomposed plantains, i., 721, 726.
Bitter-root, Inland tribes' food, i., 265.
Bitter Root Mts., i., 252, 317.
Bitter Root Valley, i., 313, 317.
Bitumen, i., 408; ii., 751, 769.
Bixa, vegetable dye, i., 753; ii., 371, 724, 734.
Bjeljkowskojes, tribe of Aleuts, i., 87-94; location, i., 141.
Black Cañon, i., 597.
Black Mesa, i., 595, see Mogollon Mts.
Black Mts., i., 597.
Black River, i., 793-4; iii., 782.
Bladders, i., 84-5, 104, 186, 214-15.
Blancos, North Mex. tribe, i., 572-91; location, i., 611; tribe
of Isthmians, i., 747-85; location, i., 794-5; lang., iii., 793.
Blankets, i., 100, 159, 165-6, 182-3, 192, 194, 211, 215-16, 229,
239, 247, 408, 434, 502-3, 505, 544-5, 582, 621, 630.
Blanket Creek, Cal., antiq., iv., 700.
Blewfields Lagoon, i., 793-4.
Blewfields River, i., 793.
Bliss Collection, Mex. Rep., antiq., iv., 564.
Blood, as food, i., 55, 492; ii., 344; sacrifices, i., 665, 723,
740; ii., 310, 707-8, 719.
Blood-letting, see Phlebotomy.
Blow-pipe, i., 627, 760-2; ii., 411, 474, 491, 720.
Blubber, i., 54-5, 57, 90.
Blue Mts., i., 254, 319, 461.
Blue Rock, i., 448.
Boats, Hyperboreans, i., 59-61, 79, 89, 106-7, 130; Columbians,
i., 166-8, 172, 188-92, 205-6, 216-17, 220, 237, 247-9, 271-2,
288; Californians, i., 338, 345-7, 382-5, 408-9, 435; New
Mexicans, i., 505, 544, 563-4, 583; Mexicans, i., 631, 658;
ii., 386, 397-9, 414, 561; iii., 342; Cent. Americans, i., 699,
724-6, 744, 767-8, 783; ii., 739; iv., 231.
Boboles, North Mex. tribe, i., 572-91; location, i., 612.
Bocalinas Island, i., 604.
Bocalos, North Mex. tribe, i., 572-91; location, i., 611.
Boca de Quadra, i., 173.
Boca del Toro, i., 784, 794-6.
Bocay River, antiq., iv., 27-8.
Bochheafs, Cent. Cal. tribe, i., 363-401; location, i., 451.
Bochica, Muysca culture-hero, iii., 269; v., 24.
Bocoatzi Grande Mts., i., 605.
Bocoras, North Mex. tribe, i., 572-91; location, i., 611.
Bodega Bay, i., 365, 368, 370, 398, 449, 452.
Body-burning, see Cremation.
Body-painting, see Painting.
Bóhem Cülleh, Neeshenam evil spirit, iii., 545.
Boisais River, see Boise River.
Bois d'arc, Apache bows of, i., 494.
Boise City, i., 463.
Boise River (Boisais), i., 463.
Bokal, Yucatan, antiq., iv., 211; hist., v., chap. xiii.
Bolanos, Cent. Cal. tribe, i., 363-401; location, i., 363.
Bolaños, Jalisco, antiq., iv., 577.
Bolbon, i., 453, see Volvon.
Bolon Zacab, Maya god, ii., 702.
Bololchun, sepulchre, Chiapas, antiq., iv., 353.
Bolonchen, Yucatan, antiq., iv., 248-9.
Bolson de Mapimi, i., 592, 594, 610; iii., 714; iv., 597-9.
Bonacks, i., 463, see Bannacks.
Bonaparte River, iii., 613.
Bones, Hyperboreans, i., 48, 58, 72-3, 79, 88, 90-1, 97, 104,
119; Columbians, i., 164, 182, 185-6, 188-9, 191, 201, 211,
214-15, 235-6, 270; Californians, i., 341, 368-9, 377-8, 387,
403, 407-8, 424-6, 434; New Mexicans, i., 482, 532, 559, 563,
579; Mexicans, i., 629, 631, 655, 667; ii., 372, 408, 599-600;
iii., 59; Cent. Americans, i., 717, 752, 761, 765; ii., 623,
684, 713, 732, 742; Mississippi Valley, antiq., iv., 782.
Books, Nahuas, ii., 500, 524, 598; Mayas, ii., 696-7, 768-70,
773, 800.
Boomerang, New Mexicans, i., 541, 561-2.
Boots, see Shoes.
Booty, war, i., 581-2, 764; ii., 746.
Borrados, North Mex. tribe., i., 572-91; location, i., 613.
Bosque de Contador, cypress grove, Mexico, antiq., iv., 527.
Botany, i., 38-9, 323-4, 616-17, 685-6; ii., 88-90.
Bottles, i., 163, 215, 630.
Bourneville, Mississippi Valley, antiq., iv., 756-9.
Bows and Arrows, Hyperboreans, i., 59, 79, 90, 104-5, 119;
Columbians, i., 164, 188, 214-15, 235, 268; Californians,
i., 341-3, 377-8, 407, 431-3; New Mexicans, i., 493-5, 541,
562, 578-9; Mexicans, i., 627, 655; ii., 335, 351, 408-9,
618, 620-1; iii., 289, 294, 302, 371-2, 404; v., 325; Cent.
Americans, i., 696, 722-3, 760-1, 779; ii., 679, 720, 742-3.
Bowls, i., 271, 630, 765; ii., 707.
Boxes, i., 113, 164-5, 171-2, 190, 200-1, 205, 340, 382, 420,
537, 765; ii., 482, 621; iii., 303; iv., 495.
Bracelets, i., 482, 559, 574, 691; ii., 290, 372, 376-7, 635,
732, 750; iii., 238, 324.
Brains, used for tanning, i., 271, 345.
Branding, i., 764-5, 771.
Brass, ornaments of, i., 122, 211, 258.
Braziers, i., 697; ii., 567, 584, 690, 696, 698, 787; iii., 336.
Brazos River, i., 592.
Bread, i., 339, 373-4; ii., 175, 354-5, see also Tortillas.
Breast-plates, i., 105, 766; ii., 406, 742.
Breast-works, see Fortifications.
Breech-cloth, i., 258-9, 330, 369, 480, 484, 531-2, 648, 689-90,
751; ii., 364.
Bribery, of Nahua judges, ii., 445-6.
Bricks, i., 535-6; ii., 557-8; iv., 473, 479, 500, 503, 521; see
also Adobes.
Brides, see Marriage.
Bridges, i., 534, 693, 718; ii., 387, 414, 562-3, 576; iv., 343,
373, 479, 528-6, 690.
Bridles, i., 270, 438, 501, 726.
Bristol Bay, i., 70, 79, 139.
Brita, Nicaragua, antiq., iv., 60.
British Columbia, physical geography of, i., 152-3, 156;
inhabited by Columbians, i., 151-321; myth., i., 170-1, 202-3,
283-4; iii., 95-8, 149-57, 519-22; lang., iii., 604-34; antiq.,
iv., 736-41.
British Museum Collection, Mex. Republic, antiq., iv., 562.
Bronze, Mex. Republic, antiq., iv., 520, 557.
Broom, Centeotl symbol, iii., 354.
Bruceport, town, Washington, i., 305.
Bruno, village, South Cal., i., 460.
Brush Creek, Cal., antiq., iv., 706.
Brushwood, dwellings of, i., 118, 371-2, 485, 535.
Bubatzo, a Zutugil princess, v., chap. xi.
Bubus, Cent. Cal. tribe, i., 363-401; location, i., 450.
Buccan, Mosquito meat rack, i., 721.
Buckeye Hill, California, antiq., iv., 703, 706.
Buckeye Ravine, California, antiq., iv., 707.
Budd's Inlet, i., 301.
Buchanan Hollow, California, antiq., iv., 707.
Buddhism, traces in Amer., v., 40-2.
Buena Vista, village, Cent. California, i., 455.
Buffalo, i., 258, 260, 263, 265, 424-5, 430, 432, 484, 491-2.
Buffalos, tribe of Sahaptins, i., 253-91; location, i., 317.
Bugabita, Isthmus, antiq., iv., 18.
Buildings, see Dwellings and Temples.
Bulbon, i., 453, see Volvon.
Bull Creek, i., 447.
Bullion, Maya gold, ii., 750.
Bundles, mystic, v., 325-6, chap. xi.
Buoys, Eskimo whale fishing, i., 56.
Burial, Hyperboreans, i., 69, 86, 93, 113, 119, 125-7, 132-5;
iii., 148-9; Columbians, i., 172-3, 205-6, 220, 247-9, 288-9;
iv., 737-9; Californians, i., 356-60, 396-7, 420-1, 439-40;
New Mexicans, i., 522-4, 554-5, 569-70, 589-90; Mexicans, i.,
640-1, 667-8; ii., 269, 392, 603-23; iii., 364-7, 401, 512-13;
v., 57, 347; Cent. Americans, i., 709, 744-5, 780-4; ii., 653,
798-402; iii., 490.
Buricas, tribe of Isthmians, i., 747-85; location, i., 748;
special mention, i., 784; lang., iii., 793.
Burke Canal, i., 156.
Burning, captives, i., 498; ii., 329-39; iii., 386-8; see also
Cremation.
Burrita, Tamaulipas, antiq., iv., 597.
Burros Mt, i., 595.
Bushumnes (Pushunes, Pujuni, Bashones, Bushones), Cent. Cal.
tribe, i., 363-401; loc., i., 450; lang., iii., 649.
Bute Canal, i., 184.
Bute Prairie, Washington, antiq., iv., 735.
Butler Hill, Mississippi Valley, antiq., iv., 754.
Butte County, Cal., antiq., iv., 707.
Buzzard, California, myth., iii., 168.
C
Caacac (Cacat, Cancac), i., 458, name of Point Concepcion.
Caäguas, i., 319, see Cayuse.
Caban, Maya day, ii., 756, 760.
Cabecares, tribe of Isthmians, i., 747-85; location, i., 794.
Cabellera Valley, i., 595.
Cabesas (Cabezas), North Mex. tribe, i., 572-91; location, i.,
612; special mention, i., 576, 585.
Cabeson Valley, i., 457.
Cabinal, Guatemala tribe, i., 687-711; location, i., 789.
Cablahuh-Tihax, a Cakchiquel ruler, v., chap. xi.
Cabo Blanco, Costa Rica, antiq., iv., 21.
Cabogh, ii., 767, see Cahogh.
Caborca, village, Sonora, i., 606.
Cabra, Isthmian title, i., 770.
Cabrakan, Quiché culture-hero, v., 172-4, 184; ancient city,
Guatemala, chap. xi.
Cabuegnas, South Cal. tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 460.
Cacaguat, cacao, and name of Nicaragua god, ii., 713, 718, 724;
iii., 492.
Cacalomilli, Nahua war-lands, ii., 227.
Cacalotl, gifts of maize, ii., 332.
Cacama, a Chichimec prince and king of Tezcuco, v., 474-7.
Cacamaca, lord of Chalco, v., 349.
Cacamatecuhtli, a Teo-Chichimec chief, v., 490.
Cacao (Coco, Cocoa), Mexicans, i., 625; ii., 347, 381-2, 600;
Cent. Americans, i., 694-5, 700, 721, 726, 739, 759, 768; ii.,
692-3, 707, 718-19, 723-4, 736-7, 749, 795.
Cacaria, village, Durango, i., 614.
Cácaris, North Mex. tribe, i., 572-91; location, i., 614.
Cacastes, North Mex. tribe, i., 572-91; location, i., 611.
Cacat, i., 458, see Caacac.
Cacaxtlan, Tlascala, antiq., iv., 477.
Cacaxtli, Nahua baskets, ii., 386, 392, 616.
Cachenahs (Cachanegtacs, Chanigtacs), Cent. Cal. tribe, i.,
363-401; location, i., 449, 452-3.
Cache Creek, i., 362.
Cachi, town, Yucatan, ii., 657.
Cachiripa, Durango god, iii., 179.
Cachopostales, North Mex. tribe, i., 572-91; location, i., 611.
Cacique, name for chief, i., 584-5.
Cactlan Valley, i., 672.
Cactli (Cacles), Mexican sandals, i., 620; ii., 369.
Cacubraxechein, Quiché king, v., chap. xi.
Caczoltzin, v., 516, see Caltzontzin.
Cadet River, i., 307.
Cadimas, North Mex. tribe, i., 572-91; location, i., 613.
Caechi, Guatemala tribe, i., 687-711; location, i., 788.
Caechicolchi, Guat. lang., iii., 760.
Cages, ii., 163, 386, 657.
Cagnaguets, Lower California tribe, i., 556-70; location, i.,
603.
Caha-Paluma, Quiché 1st woman, iii., 48.
Cahbaha, a Guatemala temple, v., chap. xi.
Cahi Imox, a Quiché ruler, v., chap. xi.
Cahitas, North Mex. tribe, i., 572-91; location, i., 572; special
mention, i., 573-4; lang., iii., 667, 672, 678, 706-10.
Cahogh (Cabogh), Tzendal day, ii., 767.
Cahokia, Mississippi Valley, antiq., iv., 766-7.
Cahrocs (Kahruks), North Cal. tribe, i., 327-61; loc., i., 327,
445; special mention, i., 325, 332, 336, 344, 348, 350-1,
352-3; myth., iii., 90, 115-17, 137-9, 161, 524; lang., iii.,
641, 652; origin, v., 19.
Cahto Pomos, Cent. Cal. tribe, i., 362-401; location, i., 362,
448.
Cahuillos (Cahuillas, Carvillas, Cawios, Coahuillas, Cohuillas,
Cowillers, Kahweyahs), South Cal. tribe, i., 402-22; location,
i., 402, 457; lang., iii., 651, 660, 677-79, 714, 717, 727.
Cahuimetos, North Mex. tribe, i., 572-91; loc., i., 609; lang.,
iii., 707.
Caibil Balam, a Mame prince, v., chap. xi.
Caichi, Guatemala lang., iii., 760.
Caiguas, tribe of Apaches, i., 473-526; location, i., 592.
Caiguarás, tribe of Apaches, i., 473-526; location, i., 592.
Cailloux, i., 319, see Cayuse.
Caimanes, tribe of Isthmians, i., 747-85; location, i., 797.
Cajon, village, South Cal., i., 458.
Cajones (Cajonos), i., 668, 680, see Beni-Xonos.
Cajpilili, South Cal. tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 459.
Cajuenches, tribe of Apaches, i., 473-526; special mention, i.,
488; lang., iii., 685-6.
Cakam, Quiché-Cakchiquel month, ii., 766.
Cakchi, Guatemala tribe, i., 687-711; location, i., 788.
Cakchiquels (Kachiquels), Guatemala tribe, i., 687-711; ii.,
630-803; location, i., 788-9; ii., 121; special mention, ii.,
121, 632, 637-8, 640-1, 727, 732, 743, 746, 752, 762, 766-7,
790; myth., iii., 483-4; lang., iii., 760-2, 768, 772-3;
antiq., iv., 123, 131; hist., v., chap. xi., xii.
Cakhay, mountain and fort, Guatemala, v., chap. xi.
Cakixaha, Quiché 4th woman, iii., 48.
Caklacan, Ahau-Quiché prince, v., chap. xi.
Cakulgi, locality, Guatemala, v., chap. xi.
Cakyug, Guatemala, antiq., iv., 131, ancient city, v., chap. xi.
Calabash, i., 489, 505, 516, 577-8, 626, 652, 697, 701, 705, 719,
726, 728, 738, 760; ii., 713; iii., 241.
Calahuassa (Calla Wassa, Kulahuasa), South Cal. tribe, i.,
402-22; location, i., 459.
Calajomanas, Cent. Cal. tribe, i., 363-401; location, i., 363,
451.
Calamulla, Honduras, antiq., iv., 71-2.
Calapooyas (Calapooias, Calapooahs, Calahpoewahs,
Callappohyeaass, Callawpohyeaas, Callipooyas, Cathlapouyeas,
Kalapuyas, Kalapooyahs, Kalapooiahs, Kelussuyas, Vule Puyas),
tribe of Chinooks, i., 222-50; location, i., 223, 304, 309-10;
special mention, i., 224, 226, 248-9; lang., iii., 629-30.
Calapooya Mts., i., 308; iii., 637.
Calasthocles (Calasthortes), tribe of Sound Indians, i., 210-22;
location, i., 303.
Calaveras County, California, antiq., iv., 703-4.
Calaveras Creek, California, antiq., iv., 703.
Calaveritas, Cal., antiq., iv., 704.
Calayomane, Cent. California lang., iii., 650.
Calcahualco, Vera Cruz, antiq., iv., 448.
Calche, Guatemala, antiq., iv., 121.
Calchithuehue, Nicaragua god, iii., 491.
Caldera, Isthmus, antiq., iv., 16.
Caledonia Bay, i., 797.
Calel Ahus, a Tulan king, v., chap. xi.
Calendar, Hyperboreans, i., 68, 135; Columbians, i., 192-3,
274-5; Californians, i., 418; New Mexicans, i., 507, 564, 584;
Mexicans, ii., 502-22; iii., 251-2, 267, 274; v., 62-3, 190,
192, 210; Cent. Americans, i., 727, 769; ii., 755-67.
Calendar-stone, Mex., ii., 518-21; iv., 505-9, 521.
California, early occupation of, i., 29; nations and tribes,
i., 322-470; myth., iii., 158-169, 522-6; lang., iii., 565-7,
635-79; antiq., iv., 688-713; Nahua migration, v., 221-2.
California Gulf, i., 601-2; lang., iii., 667, 704-5; boundary,
Mex. empire, v., 473, station, Quiché migration, chap. xi.
Californians, one of the seven groups into which the natives of
the Pacific States are divided, located in California, Oregon,
Idaho, Nevada, and Utah, between latitudes 43° and 32° 30´,
subdivided into four families, the Northern Californians,
Central Californians, Southern Californians and Shoshones.
Manners and customs of each described separately, i., 322-470;
location, divisions, and tribal boundaries, i., 322-6, 442-70;
myth., iii., 158-69, 522-6; v., 14, 19; lang., iii., 565-7,
635-79.
Californians, Central, one of the four families into which
the Californians are divided. Manners and customs of all
its nations and tribes described together, i., 361-401;
physique, i., 364-7; dress, i., 367-71; dwellings, i., 371-3;
food, i., 373-7; weapons and war, i., 377-81; implements
and manufactures, i., 381-2; boats and property, i., 382-5;
government and slavery, i., 385-8; women and marriage, i.,
388-92; amusements, i., 392-4; medicine, i., 394-5; burial,
i., 396-7; character, i., 397-401; location, i., 361-3, 447-57;
myth., i., 397, 400; iii., 85-90, 522-6; lang., iii., 644-55.
Californians, Northern, one of the four families into which
the Californians are divided. Manners and customs of all its
nations and tribes described together, i., 326-61; physique,
i., 327-9; dress, i., 329-34; dwellings, i., 334-6; food,
i., 336-40; personal habits, i., 340-1; weapons and war, i.,
341-4; implements and manufactures, i., 345; boats, i., 345-6;
property, i., 347; government and slaves, i., 347-9; marriage
and women, i., 349-51; amusements, i., 351-4; medicine, i.,
354-6; iii., 160; burial, i., 356-60; character, i., 360-1;
location, i., 326-7, 442-7; myth., iii., 160-1, 175-7, 523-4,
638; lang., iii., 637-43.
Californians, Southern, one of the four families into which
the Californians are divided. Manners and customs of all its
nations and tribes described together, i., 402-22; physique,
i., 402-3; dress, i., 403-4; dwellings, i., 404-5; food, i.,
405-7; personal habits, i., 407; weapons and war, i., 407;
implements and manufactures, i., 407-8; boats, i., 408-9;
property and government, i., 409-10; marriage, i., 410-12;
women and children, i., 412-15; amusements, i., 415-17;
medicine, i., 418-19; burial, i., 419-21; character, i., 422;
location, i., 402, 457-60; myth., iii., 83-6, 122, 131, 525;
lang., iii., 656-9, 674-9.
Calimaya, a city of Matlaltzinco, v., 433.
Calispellums (Calispels), i., 313, see Pend d'Oreilles.
Caliuenga, village, South Cal., i., 460.
Calkimi, a province of Yucatan, v., chap. xiii.
Calkobins, tribe of Tinneh, i., 114-37; location, i., 146.
Calla Wassa, i., 459, see Calahuassa.
Callemax (Callemeux, Callimix), i., 307, see Killamooks.
Calli, Nahua calendar sign, ii., 505, 511-12, 516-17; iii., 69.
Calmecac, Nahua seminary, ii., 201, 244.
Calondras Rancho, Vera Cruz, antiq., iv., 463.
Calpan, locality, Puebla, v., 490.
Calpixcontli, Nahua title, v., 350.
Calpixques, Nahua revenue officers, ii., 236, 424.
Calpullec, head of city council, Nahuas, ii., 227.
Calpulli, ward of a city, Nahuas, ii., 224.
Calquiyauhtzin, Culhua king, v., 331, 343.
Caltzontzin, Tarasco king's title, v., 516.
Caluac, mayordomo, Mayas, ii., 637.
Calvert Island, i., 294.
Calz, Columbia plant, i., 265.
Camachal, Quiché chief, v., chap. xi.
Camac-Hya, a Hindu goddess, v., 47.
Camajal, village, South Cal., i., 458.
Camalél Pomos (Usals), Cent. Cal. tribe, i., 361-401; loc., i.,
362, 448.
Camalotz, Quiché mythic animal, iii., 47.
Camass (Camas, Camash, Cammass, Kamas, Kamass, Kamash, Quamash),
an edible root, i., 214, 265, 340.
Camass Prairie, i., 265, 313.
Camaxtli, Nahua god, ii., 303, 312-15; iii., 195, 250, 295, 403;
v., 249, 253, 262, 484, 488, 493-501.
Camayoas, Isthmian sodomites, i., 774.
Camazotz, Quiché god, v., 179.
Camden Bay, i., 46, 49-50.
Camey, Quiché-Cakchiquel day, ii., 767.
Camleyka, Koniaga dress, i., 74.
Camóa, town, Sinaloa, i., 608.
Campeche, ii., 657; antiq., iv., 263-5.
Campims, lang., iii., 761.
Campo Santo, Uxmal, antiq., iv., 172.
Can, Quiché-Cakchiquel day, ii., 767.
Canadian River, i., 591.
Canainas (Canaynes), North Mex. tribe, i., 571-91; location, i.,
613.
Canal Bacab, Maya god, iii., 466.
Canal de la Reina (Reida, Reido), i., 294.
Canal de Principe, i., 294.
Canals, i., 539; ii., 349, 563, 567-8, 743-4; iv., 632, 635, 676,
696; v., 420-1; see also Aqueducts, Excavations, Irrigation.
Canamlum, Chiapanec god, iii., 458.
Canaumanos, Cent. Cal. tribe, i., 361-401; location, i., 452.
Cancac, i., 458, see Caacac.
Canchahel (Canchaheleb), a Guatemala tribe, v., chap. xi.
Canchebiz (Canchevez), i., 787, see Ganchebi.
Candle-fish, i., 162, 164, 190, 212, 214-16.
Candles, i., 162, 164, 190, 697-8, 765.
Candlesticks, iii., 292, 294; iv., 376, 414, 423.
Cane, i., 516, 627, 656, 692-3, 717-18, 722; ii., 335, 372, 573,
713, 785; iii., 129; see also Reeds.
Canek, Itza king's title, ii., 635; v., chap. xiii.
Canimairo, name of Russian River, i., 449.
Cannibalism, Hyperboreans, i., 106, 120-1; Columbians, i., 170-1,
189, 202-3, 219; iii., 150, 152; Californians, i., 375, 380-1,
428, 433-4; iii., 546-7; New Mexicans, i., 521, 560, 576,
581; Mexicans, i., 625, 653; ii., 176, 305, 308-9, 311, 357-8,
394-7, 431, 626; iii., 413, 443-4, 447; Cent. Americans, i.,
696, 721, 759; ii., 689, 709-10, 725; iii., 472, 488.
Canoe River, i., 319.
Canoes, see Boats.
Cañon Pintado, Utah, antiq., iv., 734.
Canopy, ii., 572, 635, 641, 789.
Canos, North Mex. tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 611.
Cantils, Lower Cal. tribe, i., 556-71; lang., iii., 687.
Cantren, village, Nicaragua, i., 792.
Canuas, North Mex. tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 611.
Caok, Quiché-Cakchiquel day, ii., 767.
Caoutchouc, see India-rubber.
Capacureo, locality, Michoacan, v., 518.
Capanay, village, Cent. Cal., i., 455.
Caparrosa, Mex., antiq., iv., 545.
Cape Avinoff, i., 140.
Cape Bathurst, i., 45.
Cape Blanco, v., 66.
Cape Cantin, v., 66.
Cape Catoche, Yucatan, antiq., iv., 261.
Cape Disappointment, i., 304.
Cape Flattery, i., 208, 210-11, 221, 227, 302; iii., 615.
Cape Gracias à Dios, i., 714, 793-4.
Cape Honduras, lang., iii., 782.
Cape Krusenstern, i., 52.
Cape Lisburn, i., 138.
Cape Lookout, i., 227, 307.
Cape Mendocino, i., 448.
Cape Mudge, i., 297-8.
Cape Newenham, i., 70, 140.
Cape Northumberland, i., 173.
Cape Orford, i., 216, 225, 238, 249.
Cape Prince of Wales, i., 63.
Cape Rodney, i., 141.
Cape Romanzoff, i., 70, 140.
Cape St James, i., 296.
Cape San Lucas, i., 557, 604.
Cape Scott, i., 176, 296.
Cape Spencer, i., 142.
Cape Town, i., 793.
Capilla de la Piedra, near Leon, Nicaragua, antiq., iv., 32, 61.
Capote Utes, tribe of Shoshones, i., 422-42; location, i., 470.
Caprups, Cent. Cal. tribe, i., 361-401; location, i., 452.
Caps, see Hats.
Captives, treatment of; Hyperboreans, i., 80, 108-9; Columbians,
i., 164, 189, 195, 269; Californians, i., 344, 381, 407, 433;
New Mexicans, i., 498, 500, 543, 581; Mexicans, i., 629, 656;
ii., 217-18, 306-8, 329-30, 402, 419, 426, 428-32, 453-4, 626;
iii., 386-8, 394; v., 342-3, 414; Cent. Americans, i., 723,
764-5; ii., 650, 704, 707, 746-7.
Capuchin, Nahua dress, ii., 369.
Capulapa, Vera Cruz, antiq., iv., 445.
Caraca, Mosquito drink, i., 739.
Caracol, at Chichen, Yucatan, antiq., iv., 234-5.
Cara Gigantesca, at Izamal, Yucatan, antiq., iv., 246-8.
Caramariguanes, North Mex. tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 613.
Caramiguais, North Mex. tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 613.
Carascans, Cent. Cal. tribe, i., 361-401; location, i., 452.
Carataska Lagoon, i., 793.
Carates, Isthmian lepers, i., 778.
Caravans, ii., 380, 387-8, 391, 737-8.
Carchah, locality, Guatemala, v., chap. xi.
Careta, Isthmian province, i., 795.
Caribays, North Mex. tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 613.
Cariboo, i., 122-3.
Caribs, tribe of Mosquitos, i., 711-47; loc., i., 713, 793;
special mention, i., 714, 718, 722, 728, 731, 735-6, 741,
745-6; lang., iii., 782; tribe of Isthmians, i., 747-85;
special mention, i., 759, 764, 771.
Carlotsapos, Cent. Cal. tribe, i., 361-401; location, i., 449.
Carmelote Creek, Tamaulipas, antiq., iv., 594.
Carmelo Valley, i., 454.
Carpenter's Farm, South Cal., i., 460.
Carquin, i., 453, see Karquines.
Carriers, i., 587, 666, 708; ii., 386, 736; see also Tacullies.
Carrizal, Guatemala, antiq., iv., 118.
Carrizas (Garzas), North Mex. tribe, i., 571-91; location, i.,
572, 613; special mention, i., 573, 575, 588.
Carrots, Haidahs cultivate, i., 162.
Carr's Inlet, i., 301.
Carson City, i., 469.
Carson Lake, i., 467.
Carson River, i., 466.
Carson Valley, i., 464.
Cartakas, i., 458, see Surillos.
Carthaginians, American origin traces, i., 18; v., 77.
Caruanas, i., 458, see Sierras.
Carvillas, i., 457, see Cahuillos.
Carving, see Sculpture.
Casa Cerrada, at Zayi, Yucatan, antiq., iv., 213.
Casa del Adivino, at Uxmal, Yucatan, antiq., iv., 192-7.
Casa del Enano, name of Casa del Adivino, iv., 192.
Casa del Gobernador, at Uxmal, Yucatan, antiq., iv., 154-65.
Casa de Justicia, at Kabah, Yucatan, antiq., iv., 207-8.
Casa de Monjas, at Uxmal, Yucatan, antiq., iv., 173-89.
Casa de Montezuma, iv., 621, name of Casa Grande, Arizona.
Casa de Palomas, at Uxmal, Yucatan, antiq., iv., 171-2.
Casa de Tortugas, at Uxmal, Yucatan, antiq., iv., 165-6.
Casa de la Vieja, at Uxmal, Yucatan, antiq., iv., 172.
Casa Grande, at Zayi, Yucatan, antiq., iv., 212-13; Arizona,
antiq., iv., 621-32.
Casas Grandes, Guatemala, antiq., iv., 134; Chihuahua, antiq.,
iv., 604-14.
Casas de Piedra, name applied to Palenque, iv., 296.
Casalic, South Cal. tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 458.
Casasano, Mexican, antiq., iv., 495.
Cascade Canal, i., 173-4, 294.
Cascade Indians, i., 320, see Dog-Rivers.
Cascade Mts., i., 151-2, 208, 222, 227, 250, 308, 319, 321-3,
444.
Cascade Range, see Cascade Mts.
Cascade River, i., 320.
Cascades, locality, Oregon, i., 223, 239, 248, 304.
Cascili, South Cal. tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 459.
Case's Inlet, i., 301.
Casine (Kashim), Eskimo town house, i., 66, 75, 82-3.
Cassava, Mosquito food, i., 719, 721, 739.
Castañeda Collection, Mex. Rep., antiq., iv., 560.
Castel Pomos, Cent. Cal. tribe, i., 361-401; location, i., 362,
448.
Castes, Hyperborean divisions, i., 109, 132.
Castillo de Montezuma, near Tuxtepec, Oajaca, antiq., iv., 421.
Castles, Yucatan, antiq., iv., 226-30, 255-7.
Cataclysm, see Deluge.
Cataicanas, North Mex. tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 613.
Catanamepaques, North Mex. tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 613.
Cataract River, i., 319.
Cataracts, Nahua cure for, ii., 599.
Catarrh, see Colds.
Catauhtlix, v., 299, see Cocauhtli.
Caterpillars, i., 561, 762.
Cathlacklas, i., 309, see Cathlathlas.
Cathlacumups (Cathlakamaps, Cathlacomatups), tribe of Chinooks,
i., 222-50; location, i., 306, 308-9.
Cathlahaws, tribe of Chinooks, i., 222-50; location, i., 308.
Cathlâkaheckits (Cathlakahikits), tribe of Chinooks, i., 222-50;
location, i., 306, 317.
Cathlamets (Cathlamahs, Cathlamus, Cathlamux, Katlámat), tribe
of Chinooks, i., 222-50; location, i., 223, 304, 307; special
mention, i., 239; lang., iii., 626.
Cathlanamenamens (Cathlanaminimins, Katlaminimims), tribe of
Chinooks, i., 222-50; location, i., 306, 308-9.
Cathlanaquiahs, tribe of Chinooks, i., 222-50; location, i., 306,
308.
Cathlapootles (Cathlapoutles, Cattleputles, Katlaportles,
Kathlaportles, Quathlapotles), tribe of Chinooks, i., 222-50;
location, i., 304, 306, 308-9; lang., iii., 626.
Cathlapouyeas, i., 309, see Calapooyas.
Cathlascos (Cathlascons), tribe of Chinooks, i., 222-50; loc.,
i., 305.
Cathlassis, tribe of Sahaptins, i., 253-91; location, i., 320.
Cathlathlas (Cathlathlalas, Cathlacklas), tribe of Chinooks, i.,
222-50; location, i., 306, 309.
Cathleyacheyachs, tribe of Chinooks, i., 222-50; special mention,
i., 223.
Cats, i., 258, 561.
Catsanims (Cutsahnims), tribe of Shushwaps, i., 251-91; loc., i.,
312.
Cattle, i., 267, 273, 505, 544, 576, 583, 659, 725.
Cattleputles, i., 304, see Cathlapootles.
Catujanes (Catuxanes), North Mex. tribe, i., 571-91; location,
i., 611-12.
Cauac, Maya calendar sign, ii., 703, 756, 760-1; iii., 122.
Causeways, ii., 414, 561-2, 565, 790; iii., 292-3; iv., 352, 500,
527, 573, 580-90; v., 422.
Cautery, i., 419, 709, 716-17.
Cavatepech (Cawatepech), Quiché ruler, v., chap. xi.
Caves, i., 486, 523, 556, 560, 575, 590, 624, 640, 651-2; ii.,
211, 622; iii., 81-2; iv., 117, 120, 138, 368, 372-3, 435, 575,
577, 587-9, 597-604, 694-6.
Caviare, Haidah food, i., 163.
Cavil, name of Chin, ii., 677.
Caviseras, North Mex. tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 611.
Cavizimah (Cawizimah), Quiché prince, v., chap. xi.
Cawek (Cavek), Quiché royal title, ii., 643-4; v., chap. xi.
Cawinal (Cavinal), Guatemala, antiq., iv., 131; hist., v., chap.
xi.
Cawios, i., 457, see Cahuillos.
Cawitchans, i., 296, see Cowitchins.
Cawnees, Cent. Cal. tribe, i., 361-401; location, i., 456.
Caxapa, Vera Cruz, antiq., iv., 426.
Cayala, ii., 716-17, see Paxil.
Caybatz, a Cakchiquel ruler, v., chap. xi.
Cayeguas, South Cal. tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 459.
Cayeyus, Lower Cal. tribe, i., 556-71; lang., iii., 687.
Cay-Hunahpu, a Cakchiquel prince, v., chap. xi.
Caymus, Cent. Cal. tribe, i., 361-401; location, i., 363, 451;
lang., iii., 650.
Caynoh, a Cakchiquel ruler, v., chap. xi.
Cayo Ratones, Yuc., antiq., iv., 261.
Cayotes, South Cal. tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 458.
Cayuquets, i., 207, 295, see Kyuquots.
Cayuse (Caäguas, Cailloux, Cayoose, Kyoose, Kayouse, Kayuse,
Kyoots, Skyuse, Wyeilats), Inland tribe, i., 250-91; location
and name, i., 254, 273, 316, 319; special mention, i., 254-6,
258, 260, 265, 267-8, 271-4, 276, 290; myth., iii., 95, 156;
lang., iii., 625-6.
Cazcanes, North Mex. tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 672; lang.,
iii., 719.
Cazonzin (Cazontzin), i., 516, see Caltzontzin.
Cazopos, Cent. Cal. tribe, i., 361-401; location, i., 452.
Ceacatl Quetzalcoatl (Quetzalcoatl Chalchiuitl, Topiltzin), a
Toltec prince, v., 254-63, 484.
Cealcoquin, city, Honduras, iii., 485; v., chap. xi.
Cecatzin, a Toltec prince, v., 211, 213.
Cecoatlutlimelaoatl, Nahua divining sign, ii., 389.
Cedar, Columbians, i., 156, 160-1, 164-6 181, 183-5, 191, 199,
212, 214, 216, 231, 235, 237, 260; Californians, i., 341, 431;
Mexicans, ii., 145, 557; Central Americans, i., 699, 725.
Cedar Bank, Mississippi Valley, antiq., iv., 762.
Cedar City, Utah, antiq., iv., 715.
Ceh, (Qeh, Queh, Quej), Maya month, ii., 757-8.
Cehatches, South Mex. tribe, i., 644-70; lang., iii., 761.
Celibacy, Nahuas, ii., 251; iii., 433; Mayas, ii., 672.
Cellars, i., 334-5, 775-6.
Celtales, iii., 761, see Tzendales.
Celts, American origin theory, v., 116-22.
Cement, ii., 570-2, 581; iv., passim.
Ce Miquiztli, Nahua god, ii., 340; iii., 402.
Cempoala (Zempoala), city, Vera Cruz, i., 675; ii., 113, 570;
iv., 436-7; v., 203; station, Chichimec migration, v., 294.
Cempoal Taxuch, Guatemala prince, v., chap. xi.
Cempoaltepec, mountain, Oajaca, v., 529.
Cenial, name for east Yucatan, v., chap. xiii.
Cenicilla, a medicinal herb, i., 588.
Cenizos, North Mex. tribe, i., 571-91.
Censers, Nahuas, ii., 161; iii., 335-6, 347.
Census of Chichimecs, v., 292.
Centectlapixque, Nahua official, ii., 437.
Centeotl (Centeutl, Cinteotl, Tzinteotl, Tzinteutl), Nahua
goddess, ii., 214, 326-7, 331-2; iii., 349-67.
Centizonac, locality, Cent. America, v., 349.
Centla, V. Cruz, antiq., iv., 439-43.
Centli, dried corn, ii., 347.
Central Americans, one of the seven groups into which the natives
of the Pacific States are divided, located in Guatemala,
Salvador, Nicaragua, the Mosquito Coast, Honduras, Costa
Rica, and the Isthmus of Darien, or Panama; subdivided into
three families, the Guatemalans, Mosquitos, and Isthmians.
Manners and customs of each described separately, i.,
684-797; civilized nations, ii., 630-803; location and tribal
boundaries, i., 684-8, 786-97; myth., i., 707-8, 740; ii., 663;
iii., 42-55, 74-5, 461-507, 542-4; lang., iii., 571-3, 759-95;
antiq., ii., 116-18; iv., 15-139; hist., v., 157-88, 223-34,
chap. xi., xii., xiii.
Central Californians, see Californians, Central.
Central Mexicans, see Mexicans, Central.
Cerbat Mts., i., 597.
Ceremonies, Hyperboreans, i., 83-4, 110-11, 113; Columbians, i.,
169-70, 187, 189, 219, 232, 245, 268, 284; Californians, i.,
411-15; New Mexicans, i., 522-4, 542-3, 553-4; Mexicans, i.,
636-7, 661-3; ii., 144-57, 194-8, 255-61, 270-8, 350, 389-97;
iii., 297-300, 315, 370-6; Central Americans, i., 697, 729-33,
740-1, 744-5, 782-3; ii., 668-70, 682-4.
Cereus giganteus, botanical name of the Pitahaya, i., 539.
Ceris (Ceres, Seris), North Mex. tribe, i., 571-91; location, i.,
572, 604-5; special mention, i., 573-4, 576-9, 581, 583-5, 587,
589-90; lang., iii., 704-5.
Cerquin, city, Honduras, iii., 485.
Cerralvo Island, i., 604.
Cerrito de Montezuma, near Tepatitlan, Jalisco, antiq., iv., 574.
Cerro de la Ciudad, fortification, Querétaro, antiq., iv., 550.
Cerro de Coscomate, near Zanatepec, Oajaca, antiq., iv., 374.
Cerro de los Edificios, iv., 580, see Quemada.
Cerro Gordo, i., 614.
Cerro de las Juntas (Quiotepec), Oajaca, antiq., iv., 418-20.
Cerro del Maiz, i., 613.
Cerro de la Malinche, Mexico, antiq., iv., 548.
Cerro de las Navajas, Mexico, antiq., iv., 544-5.
Cerro Prieto, i., 604, 673; iv., 549.
Cerro de San Gregorio, Guanajuato, antiq., iv., 577.
Cerro del Tesoro, Mexico, antiq., iv., 548.
Cerro de las Trincheras, Sonora, antiq., iv., 603.
Cerro del Venado, Oajaca, antiq., iv., 373-4.
Cesina, dried meat, i., 695.
Cetecpatl, king of Cohuaixtlahuacan, v., 461-2.
Cexeninuth, i., 295, see Exenimuth.
Chab, Quiché month, ii., 766.
Chabin (Chahin), Tzendal day, ii., 767.
Chac (Chaac), Maya god, ii., 682, 690-3; iii., 467, 473.
Chacala, Jalisco, antiq., iv., 572.
Chacal Bacab, Maya god, iii., 466.
Chacchob, Yucatan, antiq., iv., 219, 268.
Chacha, iii., 153, see Kishtsamah.
Chachaguares, North Mex. tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 611.
Chack, Yucatan, antiq., iv., 211-12, 270.
Chaclan, Cent. Cal. tribe, i., 361-401; location, i., 453.
Chacnouitan, name for Yucatan, v., 228, chap. xiii.
Chaco River, New Mexico, antiq., iv., 652-61.
Chacuaco, Vera Cruz, antiq., iv., 463.
Chac Xib Chac, ruler of Chichen Itza, v., chap. xiii.
Chadukutl, tribe of Nootkas, i., 174-208; location, i., 295.
Chaguntes, Cent. Cal. tribe, i., 361-401; location, i., 452.
Chahalha, Quiché household gods, iii., 481.
Chahalté, Maya incense, ii., 702.
Chaheowahs, tribe of Chinooks, i., 222-50; location, i., 309.
Chahuames (Chahuanes), North Mex. tribe, i., 571-91; location,
i., 612.
Chalcas, Nahua nation, i., 617-44; ii., 133-629; location and
name, i., 675; ii., 125-6; hist., v., 307-10, 380-422, 503-5.
Chalcatzin, a Toltec prince, v., 211, 213, 220, 243.
Chalchiuhapan, ancient name for Tlascala, v., 241, 253, 484.
Chalchiuhcua, a Mexican noble, v., 320.
Chalchiuhcuecan, Vera Cruz, antiq., iv., 434.
Chalchiuite (Chalchihuitztli), a precious stone, ii., 259, 350,
372, 606, 707; iii., 250, 271, 368, 385, 390; v., 254, 257.
Chalchihuitlicue (Chalchihuitlicueyòhua, Chalchiuhcyeje), Nahua
goddess, ii., 260, 516; iii., 367-76.
Chalchiuhmatz, a Toltec chief, v., 243.
Chalchiuhnenetzin, a Mexican princess, v., 449.
Chalchiuhtepehua, Nahua sacrificer, ii., 430.
Chalchiuhtlanetzin, lord of Coyuhuacan, v., 349.
Chalchiuh Tlatonac (Chalchiuhtlatonac, Chalchiuhtlanetzin,
Chalchiuhtlahuextzin, Tlalchiuhtlanelzin), Toltec king, v.,
245-7, 266, 311, 326.
Chalchiuh Tlatonac II. (Chalchiuhtona), Culhua king, v., 257,
330-1.
Chalchuapa, town, Salvador, i., 787.
Chalchuni, i., 293, see Chatcheenie.
Chalcitan, district of Guatemala, i., 789.
Chalco, province and town, Mexico, v., 310, 324, 380, 401.
Chalco Lake, Mexico, antiq., iv., 497-8; hist., v., 309.
Chalmecaciuatl (Chalmecacioatl), Nahua goddess, iii., 396, 416.
Chalones, Cent. Cal. tribe, i., 361-401; lang., iii., 653.
Chalosas, South Cal. tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 459.
Chalqueños, Cent. Mex. tribe, i., 617-44; lang., iii., 725.
Chalulas, tribe of Chinooks, i., 222-50; location, i., 308.
Chalumü, Cent. Cal. tribe, i., 361-401; location, i., 454.
Chamalcan (Chimalacan), Cakchiquel god, iii., 483-4; v., chap.
xi.
Chamé, tribe of Isthmians, i., 747-85; location, i., 795; lang.,
iii., 794.
Chamilah, locality, Guatemala, v., chap. xi.
Chammá Mts., i., 786.
Chamolla, city, Chiapas, i., 681.
Champoton (Potonchan), city, Yucatan, v., 226, chap. xiii.
Chan, Votan's ancestor, iii., 451; v., 69.
Chañabal, Guatemala lang., iii., 760, 762.
Chanan (Ghanan), Tzendal day, ii., 767.
Chanate Mts., i., 594.
Chancafes, North Mex. tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 611.
Chancel agua, medicinal herb, i., 419.
Chanech, Cent. Cal. tribe, i., 361-401; location, i., 454.
Changuenes, tribe of Isthmians, i., 747-85; location, i., 748.
Chanigtacs, i., 453, see Cachenahs.
Chants, see Songs.
Chantunyab, Maya dance, ii., 697.
Chanwappans, tribe of Sahaptins, i., 253-91; location, i., 320-1.
Chapels, ii., 555, 588, 738; iii., 239.
Chapingo, Mex., antiq., iv., 527.
Chaplets, i., 170; iii., 150.
Chapopote Mt, i., 613.
Chapopotli, a kind of pitch, ii., 322-3; iii., 361.
Chapugtacs, Cent. Cal. tribe, i., 361-401; location, i., 452.
Chapulco, Guatemala, antiq., iv., 115.
Chapulistagua, Honduras, antiq., iv., 71.
Chapultepec (Chapoltepec), town in Mexico, ii., 166-7; iii., 298;
antiq., iv., 502; hist., v., 295-7, 321-4, 330-1, 340.
Chapultepecuitlapilco (Vetzinco), city, Mexico, iii., 248.
Chapuluca, Honduras, antiq., iv., 71.
Charác, village, Sonora, i., 608.
Character, Hyperboreans, i., 68, 86-7, 93-4, 113-14, 120, 122,
133, 135-7; Columbians, i., 173-4, 206-8, 220-2, 249-50,
289-91; Californians, i., 360-1, 397-401, 422, 440-2; New
Mexicans, i., 524-6, 555-6, 570-1, 590-1; Mexicans, i., 24,
641-4, 668-70; ii., 470, 626-9; Central Americans, i., 709-11,
745-7, 784-5; ii., 803; iv., 126-7, 131, 142.
Characu, Tarasco king, v., 516.
Charcoal, i., 210, 404, 535, 631, 722, 752; ii., 174, 483, 651,
710.
Chareckquin, North California spirit land, iii., 177.
Chareya, North California god, i., 352-3; iii., 90, 161; v., 19.
Charities, ii., 623, 637; iii., 431.
Charms, Hyperboreans, iii., 141, 144-5; Columbians, i., 171, 284;
iii., 130; Californians, i., 418; New Mexicans, i., 522, 588;
Mexicans, i., 634; ii., 145, 269, 300, 317, 319, 328, 334, 350,
477, 602; iii., 364; Cent. Americans, i., 734; ii., 697.
Charnel-house, Nahuas, ii., 430-1, 585-6.
Charon, Nahua myth., ii., 605.
Chart, see Maps.
Chase, see Hunting.
Chastà, tribe of Chinooks, i., 222-50; location, i., 308.
Chastay, i., 333, see Shastas.
Chastity, Hyperboreans, i., 65, 81, 123, 132; Columbians, i.,
168-9, 196-8, 218, 242, 278; Californians, i., 351, 437; New
Mexicans, i., 514-15, 549, 565, 585; Mexicans, i., 661-2; ii.,
143, 251, 469-70; iii., 435-6; Central Americans, i., 703; ii.,
651, 659, 675.
Chatalhuic, Nahua medicine, ii., 599.
Chatcheenie (Chatcheenee, Chalchuni), tribe of Haidahs, i.,
155-74; location, i., 293.
Chatham Sound, i., 96, 142, 155, 171.
Chatinos, South Mex. tribe, i., 644-70; location, i., 681;
special mention, i., 646; lang., iii., 752.
Chaudières (Chualpays, Kettle Falls, Quiarlpi, Schrooyelpi,
Schwoyelpi, Shuyelpi, Wheelpo), Inland Columbian tribes, i.,
250-91; location, i., 314-15; special mention, i., 262, 280.
Chavin de Huanta, Peru, antiq., iv., 801.
Chawteuh Bakowas, Cent. California tribe, i., 361-401; location,
i., 447.
Chayen, Cent. Cal. tribe, i., 361-401; location, i., 453.
Chayher, Aht god, iii., 521.
Chaykisaht, tribe of Nootkas, i., 174-208; location, i., 295.
Chayopines, North Mex. tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 611.
Che, Quiché month, ii., 766.
Cheate River, i., 304.
Cheattees (Cheahtocs, Chetkos, Chitcos), North California tribe,
i., 326-61; location, i., 443.
Checatl, Toltec chief, v., 243.
Checaylis, i., 301, see Chehalis.
Chedochogs, Cent. Cal. tribe, i., 361-401; location, i., 449.
Cheek-bones, Hyperboreans, i., 46, 116; Columbians, i., 157-8,
177-8, 210, 225-6; Californians, i., 328, 364; New Mexicans,
i., 530, 573; Mexicans, i., 619; Central Americans, i., 688,
714.
Cheek-ornaments, i., 717, 753.
Cheen, ii., 758; see Chen.
Cheenales, tribe of Sound Indians, i., 208-22; location, i., 299.
Cheese, South Mexico commerce, i., 659.
Chegoe, a sand insect, i., 742, 778.
Chehalis (Cheehaylas, Checaylis, Chihailis, Chickeeles, Chekilis,
Tsihailish, Tchéilichs), tribe of Sound Indians, i., 208-22;
location, i., 209, 301, 303; special mention, i., 214; lang.,
iii., 618-19, 626.
Chehalis River, i., 209, 303.
Chek oc Katun (Lath oc Katun), Maya division of cycle, ii., 762.
Chekasschees, tribe of Salish, i., 252-91; location, i., 315.
Chekilis, i., 303, see Chehalis.
Chelan Lake, i., 316.
Cheles, branch of the Mayas, ii., 119, 126, 633; v., chap. xiii.
Chelly Cañon, i., 596; New Mexico, antiq., iv., 651-2.
Chemakane Mission, i., 315.
Chemeguaba, South California lang., iii., 677.
Chemegue, South California lang., iii., 677.
Chemegue Cajuala, South California lang., iii., 677.
Chemegue Sebita, South California lang., iii., 677.
Chemehuevis (Chemihuevis, Chemehnevis, Chemehuewas,
Chimehwhuebes, Chimehuevais, Chimchinves), tribe of Shoshones,
i., 422-42; location, i., 466; lang., iii., 660, 677-9.
Chen (Cheen), Maya month, ii., 690, 757-8.
Chepewyans (Athabascas), tribe of Tinneh, i., 114-137; location
and name, i., 114-16, 144; special mention, i., 116-21, 135-6;
myth., iii., 518-19; v., 14; origin, v., 22.
Chepo, Isthmian province, i., 796.
Chepobar, Isthmian province, i., 796.
Chepo River, i., 796-7.
Cherokee, lang., iii., 738.
Cherokee Flat, Cal., antiq., iv., 707.
Cherries, drinks made from, i., 707; ii., 724.
Chethl, Thlinkeet god, iii., 103, 146.
Chetkos, i., 443, see Cheattees.
Chetlessentuns, North California tribe, i., 326-61; location, i.,
442.
Chettro Kettle, New Mexico, antiq., i., 537.
Chetulul, Yucatan, antiq., iv., 211; hist., v., chap. xiii.
Cheveriches (Cibariches), tribe of Shoshones, i., 422-42;
location, i., 464.
Chian, seed, ii., 347, 487, 600.
Chiantla, town, Guatemala, i., 787.
Chiapanecs, Maya nation, i., 645-70; ii., 630-803; location, i.,
681; ii., 120-1, 126; special mention, i., 648-9, 654, 658,
660; ii., 644-5, 726, 739, 762, 766-7; myth., iii., 458; lang.,
iii., 759-63; hist., v., 158-69, 221, 227-36, 440, 473, chap.
x., xi., xii.
Chiapas, Nations and tribes, i., 645-70, 673, 681-3; ii., 120-1,
126, 630-803; myth., iii., 458; lang., iii., 759-63; antiq.,
ii., 116; iv., 288-365; hist., v., 158-69, 221, 227-36, 440,
473, chap. x., xi., xii.
Chiauhtla, Nahua title, ii., 441.
Chiawar, ancient city, Guatemala, v., chap. xi.
Chiawat, Pima devil, iii., 527.
Chibirias, Maya Holy Virgin, iii., 462.
Chic (Chiue), Tzendal day, ii., 767.
Chicacotra, Isthmian lang., iii., 794.
Chicchan, Maya day, ii., 755-6, 760.
Chicha, drink, i., 636, 706, 775; ii., 724.
Chichac, suburb of Chiquix, v., chap. xi.
Chichac Chob, Maya god, ii., 701.
Chichanchob, Yucatan, antiq., iv., 233-4.
Chichen Itza, Yucatan, antiq., ii., 791-2; iv., 220-37, 274-5,
285; hist., v., 225-6, chap. xiii.
Chichigalpa, town, Nicaragua, i., 792.
Chichihuatzin, lord of Tulancingo, v., 349.
Chichilop, South California tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 459.
Chichilticale, name of Casa Grande, Arizona, antiq., iv., 621-2.
Chichimecas Vanáceos, v., 511; see Wanacaces.
Chichimecatlalli, a district of Mexico, v., 298.
Chichimecatl, Chichimec king, iii., 249-50; v., 219-20.
Chichimecatlalpayatzin, high-priest of Cholula, v., 349.
Chichimecatl Tecuhtli, Chichimec imperial title, v., 319.
Chichimecs, Nahua nation, i., 617-44; ii., 133-629; location and
name, i., 617-18, 670, 673; ii., 101-5, 126; special mention,
i., 622, 624, 628-9, 632-3, 643; ii., 167-73, 225, 261-2, 344,
364-5, 411, 606, 609, 612-13; myth., iii., 109, 403; lang.,
iii., 724-5; hist., v., 218-20, 237-50, 289-499, 507, 510, 519,
chap. x.
Chichimec Culhuas, Nahua nation, i., 617-44; ii., 133-629; hist.,
v., 242, 248.
Chichimec-Toltecs, Nahua nation, hist., v., 484-7.
Chichimec Wanacaces, see Wanacaces.
Chichitzin, lord of Tepeaca, v., 349.
Chichtli, musical instrument, ii., 396.
Chic Kaban, Maya feast, ii., 700.
Chickeeles, i., 303; see Chehalis.
Chicklezats (Chicklezahts), tribe of Nootkas, i., 174-208;
location, i., 296-7.
Chicoapalnacazminqui, Nahua military cloak, ii., 402.
Chicohnahuimictlan (Chicuhnauhmictlan), a division of Mictlan,
iii., 401, 534.
Chicomecoatl (Chicomecouatl), Nahua goddess, iii., 352, 421.
Chicomoztoc, ancient home of Aztecs, iii., 58, 67; antiq., iv.,
580; hist., v., 188, 191, 197, 203, 219-23, 228, 307, 322-6,
422-4, 487.
Chiconahuapan (Chicunahuapan), Nahua river of death, ii., 605;
iii., 538.
Chiconquauhtli, Otomí lord, v., 317.
Chiconquiavitl, Nahua god, iii., 416.
Chicon Tonatiuh, Toltec king, v., 242, 249.
Chicoratas (Chicoratos), North Mex. tribe, i., 571-91; location,
i., 609; special mention, i., 573, 579; lang., iii., 707.
Chicoziagat, Nicaragua god, iii., 491.
Chicune, Isthmian god, iii., 499.
Chicuras, North Mex. tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 609.
Chicutae, Cent. California tribe, i., 361-401; location, i., 454.
Chiefs, see Government.
Chigmit (Tschigmit) Mts., i., 149.
Chignaviucelut, Quiché king, v., chap. xi.
Chigohom, Cakchiquel city, v., chap. xi.
Chiguacua (Chiguangua, Tzihuanga), name for Zwanga, v., 516.
Chiguau, Central California tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
453.
Chihailis, i., 303; see Chehalis.
Chihuahua, Nations and tribes, i., 473-525, 571-93, 604; myth.,
iii., 178; lang., iii., 593-4, 583, 667, 710, 716-17; antiq.,
iv., 603-14.
Chihucchihui, South Cal. tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 459.
Chihuitlan, Oajaca, antiq., iv., 373.
Chila, Puebla, antiq., iv., 465-6.
Chilam Calam (Chilam Balam), high-priest, Mani, v., chap. xiii.
Chilanes, Maya diviners, iii., 473.
Chilapan, province in Guerrero, i., 677; v., 412.
Chilcat, i., 142, see Chilkat.
Chilcuautla, Mex., antiq., iv., 549.
Childbirth, see Women.
Children, Hyperboreans, i., 66, 81-2, 92, 111-12, 117, 121,
131-3; Columbians, i., 169, 178, 180, 197, 201, 218, 242,
279-80; Californians, i., 350-1, 379, 390-1, 412-14, 437; New
Mexicans, i., 513-14, 548-9, 566, 585; Mexicans, i., 633-5,
661-2, 664; ii., 183, 240-51, 263-5, 271-81, 305, 626; iii.,
331-4, 370-6, 392, 394-5, 421, 428, 436-7; Cent. Americans, i.,
703-4, 734, 773; ii., 661-4, 672-3, 678-84, 729.
Chile (Ají), red pepper, i., 624, 626, 652, 694-5, 721, 759; ii.,
175, 343, 347, 600; see also Pepper.
Chilians, origin, v., 22.
Chilicothe, town, British Columbia, iii., 613.
Chili Gulch, Cal., antiq., iv., 704.
Chilili, village, New Mex., i., 527.
Chililitli, Nahua musical instrument, ii., 589.
Chilkat (Chilcat) River, i., 142, 148.
Chilkats (Chilkahts), tribe of Thlinkeets, i., 96-114; location,
i., 96, 142; lang., iii., 579.
Chilkoten Plain, i., 156, 292.
Chilkotins (Tsilkotin), tribe of Tinneh, i., 114-37; location,
i., 115.
Chillates, tribe of Sound Indians, i., 208-22; location, i., 303.
Chilluckittequaws, Inland tribe, i., 254-91; location, i., 320;
special mention, i., 258, 260, 267, 270, 273, 287, 320.
Chillulahs (Chillulas), North Cal. tribe, i., 326-61; location,
i., 446; special mention, i., 357, 361; lang., iii., 643.
Chillwayhook Lake, i., 298.
Chillwayhook River, i., 298.
Chillwayhooks, tribe of Nootkas, i., 174-208; location, i., 298.
Chillychandize, tribe of Chinooks, i., 222-50; location, i., 309.
Chilnequatolli, a gruel, ii., 355.
Chilts (Chiltz), tribe of Chinooks, i., 222-50; location, i.,
303-6.
Chimakums (Chinakums), tribe of Sound Indians, i., 208-22;
location, i., 302.
Chimalcan (Chimalacan), see Chamalcan.
Chimalco, station, Aztec migration, v., 323.
Chimalcuixintecuhtli, Teo-Chichimec leader, v., 489.
Chimalhuacan Atenco, station, Toltec migration, v., 212.
Chimalhuacan Tlachialco, Mexico, antiq., iv., 496.
Chimalli, Mexican shield, ii., 406.
Chimalma (Chimalman), Nahua goddess, iii., 250; v., 27, 88, 253.
Chimalmat, Quiché goddess, v., 172.
Chimalpan, station, Aztec migration, v., 323.
Chimalpanecan, ward of Tezcuco city, v., 404.
Chimalpanecs, Nahua nation, v., 338.
Chimalpopoca, king of Mexico, v., 361-6, 380-6; king of Tlacopan,
v., 426, 440.
Chimalpopoca Codex, see Codex Chimalpopoca.
Chimalquays, North Cal. tribe, i., 326-61; loc., i., 446; lang.,
iii., 643.
Chimaltecuhtli, king of Matlaltzinco, v., 432.
Chimaltenango, town, Guatemala, i., 788; v., chap. xi.
Chimaltizatl, paint-stone, ii., 487.
Chimamatl, Nahua mythic personage, iii., 249.
Chiman River, i., 796.
Chimapalnecatl, Nahua god, iii., 418.
Chimchinves, i., 466, see Chemehuevis.
Chimedocs, i., 456, see Choomedocs.
Chimehuevais, i., 466, see Chemehuevis.
Chimehwhuebes, iii., 677, see Chemehuevis.
Chimnapums (Chimnahpums, Chunnapuns), Inland tribe, i., 250-91;
location, i., 320.
Chimpsain Peninsula, i., 293.
Chimsyans (Chimmesyans, Chimpsains, Chimseeans, Chimsians,
Chyniseyans, Tsimsheeans), tribe of Haidahs, i., 155-74;
location, i., 155, 293; special mention, i., 125, 157-8, 165,
171, 174, 294; lang., iii., 607.
Chin (Cavil, Maran), Maya god, ii., 677.
Chinabahul, town, Guatemala, i., 787.
Chinametl, Acolhua general, v., 492.
Chinamita, Guatemala, lang., iii., 761; antiq., iv., 115.
Chinamital, Quiché fiefs, ii., 643-4.
Chinamitl Lake, station, Aztec migration, v., 323.
Chinampas, floating gardens, ii., 345-6, 575; v., 345.
Chinandéga, town, Nicaragua, i., 792.
Chinantecs (Tenez), South Mex. tribe, i., 644-70; location, i.,
681; special mention, i., 651-2; lang., iii., 752, 760.
Chinantla, town, Oajaca, i., 680; v., 416.
Chinapa, village, Sonora, i., 606.
Chinarra, North Mex. lang., iii., 714.
Chinax, Tzendal day, ii., 767; name of chief, v., 164, 187.
Chincila, name for Tzintzuntzan, v., 516.
Chinday, Navajo evil spirit, iii., 171.
Chinese, similarities to Americans, i., 170; iii., 647, 737-8;
v., 33-40, 44-51.
Chinigchinich, Acagchemem god, iii., 163-6.
Chinipas, North Mex. tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 609;
special mention, i., 575, 585; lang., iii., 711.
Chinooks, (Chenooks, Cheenooks, Chinnooks, Tchinouk, Tchi-nuk,
Tshinuk), one of the nine families into which the Columbians
are divided; manners and customs of all its nations and tribes
described together, i., 222-50; physique, i., 224-5; dress,
i., 226-30; dwellings, i., 231-2; food, i., 232-5; weapons
and war, i., 235-6; implements and manufactures, i., 236-7;
boats, i., 237; property and commerce, i., 238-9; art, i., 239;
government, i., 240; slavery, i., 240-1; marriage and women,
i., 241-3; amusements, i., 243-5; miscellaneous customs, i.,
245; medicine, i., 245-6; burial, i., 247-9; character, i.,
249-50; location of tribes, i., 151, 222, 304-10; myth., iii.,
95-6, 137, 155-6, 519; v., 19; lang., iii., 626-34.
Chin-ornaments, i., 753; ii., 376.
Chinquimes, i., 677, see Tlapanecs.
Chins, name for Atnahs, i., 251.
Chintule, aromatic plant, i., 654.
Chiowotmahke, Pima god, iii., 78.
Chipiripe, Isthmian god, iii., 499.
Chipisclins, Cent. California tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
452.
Chipixab, (Chi-Pixab), mountain, Guatemala, v., chap. xi.
Chipletacs, Cent. California tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
453.
Chipogana, Isthmian town, i., 796.
Chippanchickchicks, inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91; location,
i., 317.
Chiputcas, Cent. California tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
453.
Chiquauhtli, lord of Mizquic, v., 349.
Chiquimula, province, Guatemala, v., chap. xi., xii.
Chiquimulas, tribe of Guatemala, i., 686-711; loc., i., 789;
lang., iii., 760.
Chiquinaut, Nicaragua god, iii., 491.
Chiquiuhio, station, Aztec migration, v., 323.
Chiquivin, a plant, v., chap. xi.
Chiquix, ancient name for Quichés, and town in Guatemala, v.,
chap. xi.
Chira Island, Costa Rica, antiq., iv., 22.
Chiricagui Mts., (Chiricahua), i., 475, 598.
Chiricagüis (Chirocahues), tribe of Apaches, i., 473-526; loc.,
iii., 594.
Chirichota, Guatemala tribe, i., 686-711; loc., i., 787; lang.,
iii., 760.
Chirimaya (Chirimiya), musical instrument, i., 705, 738.
Chiripos, tribe of Isthmians, i., 747-85; lang., iii., 793.
Chiriquí, province, Isthmus Panama, antiq., iv., 15-21; hist.,
v., chap. xii.
Chiriquí Indians, tribe of Isthmians, i., 747-85; special
mention, i., 752-4, 767, 769, 784.
Chiriquí Lagoon, i., 795.
Chiru, tribe of Isthmians, i., 747-85; location, i., 795; lang.,
iii., 794.
Chirumas, iii., 685, see Yumas.
Chisels, i., 184, 189, 237, 343; ii., 750.
Chistla, Vera Cruz, antiq., iv., 445.
Chitamihuany, abode of Aztec Venus, iii., 377.
Chitcheah, Kutchin clan, i., 132.
Chitcos, i., 443, see Cheattees.
Chitulul, Cakchiquel city, v., chap. xi.
Chitwout, iii., 613, see Similkameen.
Chiuchin, South Cal. tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 459.
Chiue, ii., 767, see Chic.
Chiuhnauhtla (Chiuhnauhtlan), city, Mexico, ii., 441; v., 476.
Chivim, Votan's ancestor, iii., 451, v., 69-71.
Chixnal, locality, Guatemala, v., chap. xi.
Chixoy River, i., 789; v., chap. xi.
Chiyoc Queh Ehgug, a Cakchiquel chief, v., chap. xi.
Chizos, North Mex. tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 610.
Chnagmutes, (Tschnagmjuten, Tschnagmüten), tribe of Koniagas, i.,
70-87; location, i., 70, 141; lang., iii., 576.
Choam Chadéla Pomos, Cent. California tribe, i., 361-401;
location, i., 362, 448.
Chochonis, tribe of Chinooks, i., 222-50; location, i., 309.
Chochona, (Chochontes, Chochos, Chuchon), i., 677; iii., 752; see
Tlapanecs.
Chockrelatans, North Cal. tribe, i., 326-61; location, i., 443.
Choco Bay, i., 797.
Choco Mountains, i., 749.
Chocolatl, chocolate, ii., 359-60.
Chocos (Chocoes), tribe of Isthmians, i., 747-85; location, i.,
749, 796-7; special mention, i., 750, 785.
Chocotoy, Guatemala, antiq., iv., 131.
Chocoyan, station, Chichimec migration, v., 293.
Chocreleatans, tribe of Chinooks, i., 222-50; location, i., 308.
Chocuyem, Central California lang., iii., 647.
Choemimnees, Cent. Cal. tribe, i., 361-401; location, i., 456.
Chohom, Maya dance, ii., 698.
Chohoptins, Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91; location, i.,
317.
Chóis, town, Sonora, i., 608.
Choiteeu, Cent. Cal. tribe, i., 361-401; location, i., 449.
Chokemnies (Chokiamauves), Cent. Cal. tribe, i., 361-401; loc.,
i., 455-6.
Chokishgna, South Cal. tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 460.
Cholamag, locality, Guatemala, v., chap. xi.
Choles, South Mex. tribe, i., 644-70; location, i., 645, 682,
786; special mention, i., 668-9; myth., iii., 122, 482; lang.,
iii., 760, 763.
Cholicus, South Cal. tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 459.
Chollolan, city, Puebla, see Cholula.
Choloma River, i., 793.
Cholos, tribe of Isthmians, i., 747-85; location, i., 796-7;
lang., iii., 794-5.
Cholosoc, South Cal. tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 459.
Cholula (Chollolan), city, Puebla, i., 622-3, 671; ii., 112-13,
142, 588-9; iii., 240, 248-9, 724; antiq., iv., 469-76; v., 57;
hist., v., 200-2, 238, 258-67, 297, 459-63, 483-502, 528, chap.
x.
Cholultecs, Nahua nation, i., 617-44; ii., 133-629; special
mention, i., 622-3; ii., 126-7, 142, 588-9, 629; myth., iii.,
195, 240, 248-9; lang., iii., 724; hist., v., 200, 238, 258-67,
297, 307-10, 459-63, 485-507, chap. xii.
Cholutecs, Guatemala tribe, i., 686-711; location, i., 688, 791;
ii., 123; special mention, i., 711; lang., iii., 791; hist.,
v., chap. xii.
Chomiha, Quiché 2d created woman, iii., 48.
Chontales (Chondals, Chontals, Ciondale), Maya nation, i.,
687-711; ii., 630-803; location, i., 645, 688, 790; ii., 111;
special mention, i., 646-7, 651-3, 668, 707, 711; lang., iii.,
783, 791-2; antiq., iv., 32-9, 56-8, 60; hist., v., chap. ii.
Chontalcuatlan, Guerrero, antiq., iv., 424.
Choomedocs (Chimedocs), Cent. Cal. tribe, i., 361-401; location,
i., 456.
Choomtéyas, Cent. Cal. tribe, i., 361-401; location, i., 456.
Choomuch, Cent. Cal. tribe, i., 361-401; location, i., 456.
Choomwits, Cent. Cal. tribe, i., 363-401; location, i., 456.
Chopunnish (Copunnish), Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91;
location, i., 317; special mention, i., 273-4, 279, 287, 289.
Chori, North Cal. tribe, i., 326-61; location, i., 446.
Choromi, Cent. Cal. tribe, i., 361-401; location, i., 454.
Chorote, South Mex. drink, i., 665.
Chorotegans (Ciocotoga), Maya nation, i., 686-711; ii., 630-803;
location, i., 688, 791; special mention, i., 709, 752; lang.,
iii., 791-3; hist., v., chap. xii.
Chortis, Guatemala tribe, i., 686-711; location, i., 789; lang.,
iii., 760.
Chota, Sonora, lang., iii., 720.
Chotocoy, Guatemala, antiq., iv., 131.
Chowchilla River, i., 452, 455.
Chowchillas, Cent. Cal. tribe, i., 363-401; location, i., 455.
Chowclas, Cent. Cal. tribe, i., 361-401; location, i., 456.
Chowechaks (Choweshak), Cent. Cal. tribe, i., 361-401; location,
i., 449; lang., iii., 647.
Chowig-na, South Cal. tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 460.
Christóval, Don, Nihaib prince, v., chap. xi.
Christy Collection, Mexican Republic, antiq., iv., 555-9.
Chtagaluk Island, i., 139.
Chualpays, i., 315, see Chaudières.
Chuapan, locality, Oajaca, i., 681.
Chuchictacs, Cent. Cal. tribe, i., 361-401; location, i., 453.
Chuchones, i., 677, see Tlapanecs.
Chucunaquese, i., 797, see Cunacunas.
Chucunas, i., 785; see Cunacunas.
Chuchura, Isthmian lang., iii., 794.
Chuen, Maya day, ii., 755-6, 760.
Chueti River, i., 796.
Chugachuik Bay (Chugach, Chugachik, Tschugatsk), i., 139, 149.
Chugatschen Islands, i., 139.
Chugatsches (Chugatshes, Tschugatschen, Tschugazzi, Tchugatchih,
Tschugatsches, Tschugatsi, Tschgatzi, Tschugatschi,
Tschugatskaja, Tschuktchi, Tschuktschi, Tchutski, Tuski), tribe
of Koniagas, i., 69-87; location, i., 70, 139; special mention,
i., 72-3.
Chulimal, ancient city, Guatemala, v., chap. xi.
Chulpuns, Cent. California tribe, i., 361-401; location, i., 453.
Chultunes, cisterns, Yucatan, antiq., iv., 252.
Chuluc, a Cakchiquel prince, v., chap. xi.
Chumas (Kachumas), South Cal. tribe, i., 402-22; location, i.,
458.
Chumbias, Cent. Mex. tribe, i., 617-44; location, i., 677.
Chumilaha, a Guatemala tribe, v., chap. xi.
Chumpache, South Cal. tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 459.
Chumuchn (Chumuchu), South Cal. tribe, i., 402-22; location, i.,
459.
Chuncana, at Rio Jaïna, Yucatan, antiq., iv., 262.
Chunemnes (Chunemmes), Cent. Cal. tribe, i., 361-401; location,
i., 363, 456.
Chunhuhu, Yucatan, antiq., iv., 220.
Chunkin, Maya mid-day, ii., 755.
Chunnapuns, i., 320, see Chimnapums.
Chun-Zak-Yoc, Guatemala tribe, i., 686-711; location, i., 787.
Chupadores, Isthmian sorcerers, i., 780.
Chupan, Peru, antiq., iv., 804.
Chupcan, Cent. Cal. tribe, i., 361-401; location, i., 453.
Chupumnes, Cent. Cal. tribe, i., 361-401; location, i., 450;
lang., iii., 649.
Chuquanaqua River, i., 796-7.
Churchill River, i., 144.
Churmutcé, Cent. Cal. tribe, i., 361-401; location, i., 453.
Chusattes River, i., 321.
Chuscan, Cent. Cal. tribe, i., 361-401; location, i., 453.
Chutchins, Cent. Cal. tribe, i., 361-401; location, i., 452.
Chutimal, ancient city, Guatemala, v., chap. xi.
Chutsain, Tinneh evil spirit, iii., 142.
Chuva-Tzak, ancient city, Guatemala, v., chap. xi.
Chuvi-Mugina, ancient city, Guatemala, v., chap. xi.
Chwachamaju (Chwachamaja), Cent. Cal. tribe, i., 361-401;
location, i., 449; lang., iii., 648.
Chynaus, Cent. Cal. tribe, i., 361-401; location, i., 452.
Chyniseyans, i., 293, see Chimsyans.
Ciateupan, iii., 362, see Cioateucalli.
Ci (Balam), Quiché-Cakchiquel day, ii., 767.
Cib, Maya day, ii., 755-6, 760.
Cibakihay, a Cakchiquel princely family, v., chap. xi.
Cibariches, i., 464, see Cheveriches.
Cibixic, Cakchiquel month, ii., 766.
Cíbola, town, New Mexico, i., 527, 537, 544; antiq., iv., 673-4.
Cíbolo, Mexican bull, i., 527.
Cicuhnauhuepaniuhcan, abode of Aztec Venus, iii., 377.
Cicuyé, Pueblo province, i., 527.
Cihoapatli, a medicinal herb, ii., 268.
Cihom, name of a tree, ii., 683.
Cihuacoatl (Cihuacohuatl, Cihuatcoatl), ii., 138; iii., 350, 363;
see Cioacoatl.
Cihuailhuitl, Nahua month, iii., 419.
Cihuapohualoyan, city, North-east Mex., v., 472.
Cihuaquaquilli, Nahua priestesses, ii., 205.
Cihuatetzin, a Toltec princess, v., 311.
Cihuatlamacasque, Nahua priestesses, ii., 205.
Cihuatlanque, Nahua title, ii., 254.
Cijp, ii., 757, see Zip.
Cimarron River, iii., 595.
Cimatecuhtli, a Teo-Chichimec chief, v., 490.
Cimi, Maya day, ii., 755-6, 760.
Cinaca-Mecallo, Guatemala, antiq., iv., 116-17.
Cinahitoh, a Cakchiquel chief, v., chap. xi.
Cinaloas, i., 607, see Sinaloas.
Cinchau Yzamna, Maya god, ii., 696.
Cinihuaj, South Cal. tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 459.
Cinnabar, i., 370; iii., 435.
Cinteucyòhua, Nahua calendar-sign and god, ii., 516.
Cinzica, v., 516, see Zintzicha.
Cioacoatl (Ciuacoatl, Cihuacoatl, Civacoatl, Cihuacohuatl,
Cihuatcoatl), Nahua goddess, and title of supreme judge, ii.,
138, 269, 434, 608; iii., 350, 363-6.
Cioapipilti, a deified woman, iii., 362.
Cioateucalli (Ciateupan), Nahua place of prayer, iii., 362.
Cioatlamacazque, festival damsels, iii., 358, 404.
Ciocotoga, i., 791, see Chorotegans.
Ciondale, i., 791, see Chontales.
Ciotliahuatl, Nahua god, ii., 491.
Cipactli, Nahua day, ii., 511-12, 516-17; iii., 252.
Cipactonal, Nahua prophet and god, iii., 252; v., 190.
Cipattonal (Zipattoval), Nicaragua goddess, iii., 75, 490-1.
Circees, i., 145, see Sarsis.
Circleville, Mississippi Valley, antiq., iv., 759.
Circumcision, i., 121, 666; ii., 278-9, 679; iii., 439-40, 507;
v., 88, 96-7.
Ciriés, i., 145, see Sarsis.
Cisterns, see Reservoirs.
Citan Qatu, a Cakchiquel ruler, v., chap. xi.
Citbolontum, Maya god, ii., 697.
Cit Chac Coh, Maya temple, ii., 693.
Citin, Acolhua ancestral family, v., 310.
Citinatonali, name of Tonacatecotle, iii., 272.
Citlalatonac (Citlallatonac), Nahua god, iii., 58, 70.
Citlalicue (Citlallinicue), Nahua goddess, iii., 58, 70.
Citli, Nahua god, iii., 61.
Ciuacoatl (Civacoatl), i., 363, see Cioacoatl.
Ciuanemactli, a concubine, ii., 265.
Ciuatlantli, a wife, ii., 264-5.
Ciudad, see Cerro de la Ciudad.
Ciudad Real, city, Chiapas, i., 786.
Ciutla, town, Guerrero, i., 677.
Civilization, i., 3-4, 33-4, 154, 176, 615-16; phases of, ii.,
1-80; general view of civilized nations, ii., 81-125, 804-5.
Clackamas (Clackamis, Clackamos, Clackamus, Clakemas, Clarkamees,
Klackamas), tribe of Chinooks, i., 222-50; location, i., 223,
308-10; special mention, i., 229, 309.
Clackamas (Clackamos) River, i., 308-10.
Clackstars, i., 308; see Clockstars.
Clahclellahs, tribe of Chinooks, i., 222-50; location, i., 306.
Clahnaquah, tribe of Chinooks, i., 222-50; location, i., 308.
Clahoose (Klahous), tribe of Nootkas, i., 174-208; location, i.,
176, 296, 298.
Clallams (Clalams, Clallums, Sklallam, S'klalum, Sklallum,
Tsclallum), tribe of Sound Indians, i., 208-22; location, i.,
208, 295, 302; special mention, i., 211-13, 216-17, 220, 222;
myth., iii., 155, 522; lang., iii., 608, 615.
Clallueis, (Clalluiis), tribe of Nootkas, i., 174-208; location,
i., 295.
Clallums, i., 295; see Clallams.
Clamet, i., 443; see Klamath.
Clamoctomichs, tribe of Sound Indians, i., 208-22; location, i.,
303.
Clamoitomish, tribe of Chinooks, i., 222-50; location, i., 305.
Clams, i., 163, 186-8, 213.
Clanimatas, tribe of Chinooks, i., 222-50; location, i., 306.
Clannahminamuns, tribe of Chinooks, i., 222-50; location, i.,
308.
Clannarminnamuns, tribe of Chinooks, i., 222-50; location, i.,
306.
Clans, see Castes.
Clarence Straits, i., 143.
Clarkamees, i., 310; see Clackamas.
Clarke River, i., 252, 311.
Class Distinctions, ii., 192-4, 638, 649, 663, 668.
Classets (Clatsets, Macaws, Makahs), tribe of Sound Indians, i.,
280-22; location, i., 208, 302-3; special mention, i., 210-11,
213-15, 218, 222; lang., iii., 608, 615.
Clatscanias, tribe of Chinooks, i., 222-50; location, i., 304;
lang., ii., 626.
Clatsop Point, i., 306.
Clatsops (Clotsops, Tlatsaps), tribe of Chinooks, i., 222-50;
location, i., 223, 304, 306; special mention, i., 226, 235,
249; lang., iii., 626.
Clawetsus, i., 295; see Clowetsus.
Claws, as ornaments, i., 117, 426, 438, 496, 580, 752-3; ii.,
372; iii., 398.
Clay, see Earth.
Clayoquots (Klahohquahts, Klaooquates, Kla-os-quates, Klayquoits,
Tlaoquatch, Tloquatch), tribe of Nootkas, i., 174-208;
location, i., 175, 296-7; spec. mention, i., 177, 190, 194,
207.
Clayoquot Sound, i., 175-6, 295, 297.
Cleanliness, Hyperboreans, i., 81, 83; Columbians, i., 187-8;
Californians, i., 430-1; New Mexicans, i., 492-3; Mexicans, i.,
654; ii., 245; Central Americans, i., 696, 722, 760.
Clear Lake Indians, Central California tribe, i., 361-401;
location, i., 362, 448, 451; special mention, i., 364, 367-8,
381-2, 385-6, 388-9, 396, 398; myth., iii., 86-7.
Clearwater River, i., 253, 317.
Clehuse (Clehure), tribe of Nootkas, i., 174-208; location, i.,
295.
Clelikitte, tribe of Nootkas, i., 174-208; location, i., 295.
Clickahuts, i., 320, see Kliketats.
Clickitats, i., 256, see Kliketats.
Clictass (Clictars), tribe of Haidahs, i., 155-74; location, i.,
292.
Cliff-Carvings, see Hieroglyphics.
Climate, i., 14; ii., 44-55, 87-90; Hyperboreans, i., 38, 43-5;
Columbians, i., 153, 156; Californians, i., 324; New Mexicans,
i., 472, 557, 572; Mexicans, i., 616-17, 644; iii., 312; iv.,
141-2, 287-8; Central Americans, i., 685-7, 747; iv., 135.
Clockstars (Clackstars), tribe of Chinooks, i., 222-50; location,
i., 306, 308.
Cloos, i., 292, see Klues.
Cloth, manufacture and commerce, i., 582, 726, 766-7; ii., 259,
484-5, 752.
Clothing, see Dress.
Clotsops, i., 304, see Clatsops.
Cloughewallhahs, tribe of Chinooks, i., 222-50; location, i.,
309.
Clover, Central Californian food, i., 373-7.
Cloverdale, town, Central California, i., 449.
Clowetsus (Clawetsus), tribe of Nootkas, i., 174-208; location,
i., 295.
Clubs, Columbians, i., 164, 235; Californians, i., 343, 377-8,
407, 431, 433; New Mexicans, i., 493-4, 541, 562, 578-9;
Mexicans, i., 627; ii., 408-9; iii., 289, 291; Central
Americans, i., 722, 760, 763.
Clunsus, Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91; location, i., 311.
Coacuech, Chichimec chief, v., 317.
Coacuiles, Nahua priests, ii., 608.
Coahuayana, river, Michoacan, v., 508.
Coahuila, description and location of tribes, i., 473-526, 593;
lang., iii., 563, 594; antiq., iv., 598-600.
Coahuillas, i., 457, see Cahuillos.
Coanenepilli, snake-bite antidote, ii., 600.
Coapatli, snake-bite antidote, ii., 600.
Coaquites, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 611.
Coat of arms, Nahua, ii., 160, 169-71, 405; iii., 73; iv., 467,
469, 481, 498.
Coatepantli (Coatlapechtli), species of snakes, ii., 578; iii.,
254, 292.
Coatepec (Cohuactepec, Cuauhtepec), station, Aztec migration, v.,
323-4, 329; locality, Puebla, v., 490.
Coatetl, princess of Chalco, v., 311.
Coati Island, Peru, antiq., iv., 805-6.
Coatl, Nahua day, ii., 511-12, 516-17.
Coatlan, Nahua temple, iii., 406; v., 426, 478; locality, Oajaca,
v., chap. x.
Coatlantona (Coatlantonan), ii., 315; iii., 407, see Coatlicue.
Coatlan el Viejo, Guerrero, antiq., iv., 424.
Coatlapechtli, iii., 254, see Coatepantli.
Coatlayauhcan, station, Aztec migration, v., 323.
Coatlicamac, v., 323, see Cohuatlicamac.
Coatlichan (Coatlychan), city, Mexico, ii., 104, 441; v., 303,
310-11, 319-20, 333-4, 380, 388, 395.
Coatlicue (Cohuatlicue, Coatlycue, Coatlyace, Coatlyate,
Coatlantona, Coatlantonan), Nahua goddess, ii., 315; iii., 288,
296, 407, 420-1; v., 242, 423-4, 487.
Coatlyace (Coatlyate), iii., 407, 420; see Coatlicue.
Coatzacoalco, iii., 275, see Goazacoalco.
Coatzon, v., 243, see Cohuatzon.
Coaxacayo, Nahua court mantle, ii., 375.
Coaxalpan, a chamber of the temple, iii., 358.
Coaxolotl, temple, Tlatelulco, v., 426.
Coba, Yucatan, antiq., iv., 236-7, 266.
Coban, city, Vera Paz, v., chap. xii.
Cocas, Central Mexican tribe, i., 617-44; location, i., 672;
lang., iii., 720.
Cocauhtli (Catauhtlix, Cocoahtli), Toltec prince, v., 299.
Cocaztzin, lord of Quauhquelchula, v., 349.
Cochees, tribe of Apaches, i., 473-526; location, i., 475, 598.
Cochimetl, Nahua god, iii., 416.
Cochimís (Cochimas, Cochimíes, Colímiës, Cotschimì), Lower
Californian tribe, i., 556-71; location, i., 557-8, 603;
special mention, i., 558-9, 565-7, 570; myth., iii., 83, 170,
529; v., 20; lang., iii., 687-92.
Cochineal, i., 659, 694, 698; ii., 486.
Cochitas, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 572,
607.
Cochiti, Pueblo village, i., 599-600; lang., iii., 681-2.
Cochochlam, Quiché personage, v., chap. xi.
Cochtoca, locality, Mexico, iii., 253.
Cocibolca, locality, Nicaragua, i., 792.
Cocinas, tribe of Isthmians, i., 747-85; location, i., 796.
Cociyo, Zapotec god, iii., 457.
Cociyoeza (Cocyoëza), Zapotec king, v., 443-7, 534-5.
Cociyopu, king of Tehuantepec, v., 535.
Cock-fighting, Pueblos, i., 553.
Cockles, Haidah food, i., 163.
Coclamas, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 610.
Cocoahtli, v., 299, see Cocauhtli.
Cocoa-nut, i., 697, 719, 759, 768.
Cocobiptas, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 611.
Cocohuame, Sinaloa god, iii., 180.
Cocolcan, iii., 282, see Cukulcan.
Cocom, king of Mayapan, Yuc., v., chap. xiii.
Cocomaricopas, i., 555, 595; iii., 685; see Maricopas.
Cocomates, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 611.
Cocomes, Maya nation, ii., 630-803; special mention, ii., 119,
127, 633, 801; iii., 260, 282; name, v., 225; hist., v., chap.
xiii.
Coconoons, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
456; lang., iii., 651.
Cocopas (Cocopahs), tribe of Apaches, i., 473-526; location, i.,
598.
Cocori (Cocorún), village, Sonora, i., 608.
Cocospera, village, Arizona, i., 601.
Cocotl, Nahua place of sacrifice, iii., 333.
Cocotlanes, Central Mexican tribe, i., 617-44; location, i., 672.
Cocoyomes, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 610.
Cocula, Guerrero, antiq., iv., 423-4.
Coculatepil, Guerrero, antiq., iv., 424.
Cocyoëza, v., 443-7, see Cociyoeza.
Cod, Koniaga food, i., 76.
Codames, North Mex. tribe, i., 571-91; special mention, i., 611.
Codex Bologna, ii., 530.
Codex Borgian, ii., 530.
Codex Mendoza, ii., 529, 538-40.
Codex Chimalpopoca, v., 192-4.
Codex Telleriano-Remensis, ii., 530.
Codex Vaticanus, ii., 529-30.
Codex Vienna, ii., 530.
Cœurs d'Alêne (Cœurs d'Aleines), Inland Columbian tribe, i.,
250-91; location and name, i., 252, 313-14; special mention,
i., 278, 289.
Cœur d'Alêne Lake, i., 252, 314.
Cœur d'Alêne River, i., 314.
Coffins, Hyperboreans, i., 69, 93, 113; Columbians, i., 172-3,
205-6, 247-9, 288; Californians, i., 420; Mexicans, ii., 605-6,
611-12, 616, 619, 621; Central Americans, i., 744, 82-3; iv.,
17-18; Mississippi Valley, iv., 776.
Coguinachis, North Mex. tribe, i., 571-91; loc., i., 606; lang.,
iii., 699.
Cogwell, i., 298, see Quackolls.
Cohah, Guatemalan tribe, i., 686-711; location, i., 789; origin,
v., 21; hist., v., chap. xi.
Cohcaapa (Coaapan, Cozcaapan), locality, Mex., iii., 253, 258.
Cohuacayan, station, Chichimec migration, v., 294.
Cohuactepec, v., 323, see Coatepec.
Cohuailhuitl, Nahua month, ii., 312, 509.
Cohuaixtlahuacan, locality, Oajaca, ii., 109; v., 415-16.
Cohualzon, v., 243, see Cohuatzon.
Cohuanacoch, Chichimec prince, v., 474-7.
Cohuanas, tribe of Apaches, i., 473-526; location, i., 599.
Cohuanacotzin (Cohuanacox), a Toltec noble, v., 272-3, 277.
Cohuatitlan, station, Aztec migration, v., 323.
Cohuatl, Nahua title, ii., 189; calendar-sign, ii., 389;
priestess, v., 254; Toltec chief, v., 297, 350.
Cohuatlicamac (Coatlicamac, Cohuatlycamac), station, Aztec
migration, v., 323.
Cohuatlicue, v., 242, see Coatlicue.
Cohuatzin, v., 243, see Cohuatzon.
Cohuatzin, lord of Xiuhtepec, v., 406.
Cohuatzon (Cohuatzin, Cohuazon, Coatzon, Cohualzon), Toltec hero,
v., 212-13, 243.
Cohuatzontli, Culhua princess, v., 358.
Cohuaxochitl, Toltec lady, v., 297.
Cohuazon, v., 243, see Cohuatzon.
Cohuitl, v., 328, see Copil.
Cohuixcas, Nahua nation, i., 617-44; ii., 133-629; location and
name, i., 678; ii., 109, 127; hist., v., 307-10, 411-12, 508.
Coiba, Isthmian tribe, i., 747-85; location, i., 795; special
mention, i., 761; lang., iii., 793.
Coiners' Prairie, i., 463.
Coins, antiq., iv., 15-16, 383.
Coitch, Cent. Cal. tribe, i., 361-401; location, i., 456.
Cojats, South Cal. tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 459.
Cojo (Cojotoc), i., 458, see Xocotoc.
Cojuklesatuch, tribe of Nootkas, i., 174-208; location, i., 295.
Colanii Cobee Pécala, Zapotec priests, ii., 211.
Colcampata, royal lands, Peru, v., 47.
Colchacovatl, see Quetzalcoatl, v., 242.
Colche, ancient city in Guatemala, v., chap. xi.
Colchi, Guatemala tribe, i., 686-711; location, i., 788.
Colds, Hyperboreans, i., 86; Mexicans, i., 667; ii., 592, 599;
Cent. Americans, i., 742; ii., 794-5.
Colechá, locality, Lower California, i., 569.
Colhuas, see Culhuas.
Colhua-Teuctli-Quanez, see Quanez.
Colic, Nootkas, i., 204.
Colima, antiq., iv., 572; hist., v., 473, 508.
Colímiës, i., 558; iii., 687, see Cochimís.
Collars, Hyperboreans, i., 97; Columbians, i., 170; Californians,
i., 425; Mexicans, i., 651; ii., 222; iii., 289, 295, 324, 369;
iv., 236; Cent. Americans, i., 701, 736, ii., 635, 657.
Colleges, see Schools and Education.
Colmena, Chiapas, antiq., iv., 353.
Coloc, South Cal. tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 458-9.
Columbia (New Granada), antiq., iv., 15-21.
Colomche, Maya dance, ii., 712.
Colopechtli, Olmec prince; v., 491.
Color, see Complexion.
Colorado, antiq., iv., 717-31.
Colorado Chiquito, i., 595, 600; antiq., iv., 641-50.
Colorado Desert, i., 324; iii., 593; Cal., antiq., iv., 690-1.
Colorado River, i., 457, 465-8, 475, 592-3, 595-7, 601-2; lang.,
iii., 683-6; antiq., iv., 619, 640; v., 323.
Colorados, North Mex. tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 610.
Colotlan, locality, Zacatecas, i., 671; iii., 719.
Coltonco, town, Mexico, ii., 560.
Coltzin, Matlaltzinca god, iii., 446.
Columbia Lakes, i., 314.
Columbia River, i., 95, 151-2, 203, 223-4, 226, 229, 231-2, 238,
251-3, 289, 304-6, 311, 314, 316, 318, 320; iii., 579, 616,
626; iv., 734.
Columbians, one of the seven groups into which the natives of
the Pacific States are divided, located in British Columbia,
Washington, Oregon, Idaho and Montana, between latitudes 43°
and 55°, subdivided into nine families, the Haidahs, Nootkas,
Sound Indians, Chinooks, Shushwaps, Kootenais, Okanagans,
Salish and Sahaptins. Manners and customs of each of the
first four families described separately and of the last
five together as the inland nations, i., 150-321; location,
divisions, and tribal boundaries, i., 150-6, 292-321; myth.,
iii., 519-22; lang., iii., 564-5, 604-34; origin, v., 19.
Columns, ii., 555, 572; iii., 504-5; antiq., iv., 17, 20, 112-14,
120, 166-7, 175, 180-1, 200, 212-20, 229, 236, 242, 244-5, 257,
274-5, 399, 408, 416, 419, 443, 448, 478-9, 529, 547-9, 585,
591, 600, 713; v., 59-60.
Colusa County, i., 450.
Colusas, Cent. Cal. tribe, i., 361-401; location, i., 362, 450.
Colvilles, Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91; location, i., 252,
314; special mention, i., 265, 280-1.
Colville Valley, i., 314.
Comachos, Cent. Cal. tribe, i., 361-401; location, i., 362, 449;
special mention, i., 386.
Comagre, Isthmian Province, i., 758, 769-70, 782.
Comahcan, Quiché prince, v., chap. xi.
Comalá, village, Colima, i., 638.
Comalli, earthen baking-pans, i., 630; ii., 355.
Comanches (Eubaous, Hietans, Jetans, Nauni, Yetas, Yetans), tribe
of Apaches, i., 473-526; location, i., 473, 591-2; special
mention, i., 477-8, 483-4, 486, 491-6, 499-500, 506-13, 516-23,
525-6; myth., iii., 170, 528-9; lang., iii., 660-3, 670, 672.
Comatlan, locality, Jalisco, i., 672.
Comayagua, town, Honduras, i., 790; antiq., iv., 70-1.
Combat, i., 105-6, 728; ii., 310, 286, 305, 396, 419, 429-30;
iii., 413-15, 420.
Combs, i., 216, 649, 754; ii., 751.
Comecamotes, North Mex. tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 613.
Comecrudos, North Mex. tribe, i., 571-93; location, i., 613.
Comepescados, North Mex. tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 612.
Comesacapemes, North Mex. tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 613.
Comeyas, i., 457-8; see Diegueños.
Comijahual, Honduras ruler and goddess, v., chap. xii.
Comitan, town, Chiapas, i., 682; lang., iii., 762; antiq., iv.,
352.
Comizahual, Honduras goddess, iii., 485.
Commemoration, Nahua festival, ii., 328, 331.
Commerce, Hyperboreans, i., 29-31, 64-5, 107-8, 128-9;
Columbians, i., 167, 192, 217, 238-9, 273-4; Californians, i.,
435; New Mexicans, i., 506, 545, 564, 583; Mexicans, i., 631;
ii., 339, 378-97, 464, 473, 558; iii., 403, 416-17; v., 415,
421, 456-9, 502-3; Cent. Americans, i., 700, 725-6; ii., 653,
735-8.
Communion, Nahua sacrament, iii., 323, 408, 440, 444;
Nicaraguans, ii., 710; iii., 494.
Comogre, tribe of Isthmians, i., 744-85; location, i., 795;
lang., iii., 794.
Comoporis, North Mex. tribe, i., 571-91; loc., i., 608-9; lang.,
iii., 707.
Comox, British Columbia, antiq., iv., 739-40.
Complexion, Hyperboreans, i., 12-14, 45, 71-2, 97, 116, 127;
Columbians, i., 157, 177-8, 210, 225, 255-6; Californians, i.,
328, 364-6, 402, 423; New Mexicans, i., 477-9, 529-30, 558,
573; Mexicans, i., 619, 646-8; ii., 624-5; Cent. Americans, i.,
688, 714-15, 750-1; ii., 802.
Comux, (Comoux, Komux), tribe of Nootkas, i., 174-208; location,
i., 175, 295-7; special mention, i., 208; iii., 608.
Conache, Quiché ruler, v., chap. xi.
Concabe y Muca, name for Oraibe, i., 528.
Concepcion, village, Sinaloa, i., 609.
Concepcion Bay, i., 605.
Concepcion Cuirimpo, village, Sonora, i., 607.
Concepcion de Macoyahui, village, Sonora, i., 607.
Conchagua Gulf, i., 791; v., chap. xii.
Conchos, North Mex. tribe, i., 571-91; loc., i., 572, 610; spec.
mention, i., 575; lang., iii., 688, 714.
Conconulps, Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91; location, i., 312.
Concubines, see Marriage.
Condoy, Mije hero, v., 522-3.
Conecáre, town, Sonora, i., 608.
Confederation, Nahuas, ii., 92, 105-6, 133-4, 418; Mayas, ii.,
633, 645; v., chap. xi., xiii.
Confession, Hyperboreans, i., 124; iii., 143; Mexicans, i.,
662; ii., 601, 608; iii., 220-5, 271, 380-4, v., 88; Cent.
Americans, ii., 669, 678, 683, 795; iii., 472, 494-5.
Confiscation, Maya punishment, ii., 657, 672.
Congo River, i., 796.
Conicaris, North Mex. tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 611.
Conil, province in Yuc., v., chap. xiii.
Conjurers, see Sorcerers.
Conops, Cent. Cal. tribe, i., 361-401; location, i., 452.
Conquest, see War.
Consecration, Nahuas, ii., 324; iii., 297-8, 314, 362; Mayas,
ii., 751, 785.
Consoquitla, Vera Cruz, antiq., iv., 447.
Constables, Isthmian Government, i., 770; Nahua Government, ii.,
437-8.
Consumption, Hyperboreans, i., 86; Columbians, i., 219, 245, 287;
Californians, i., 354, 439; New Mexicans, i., 568; Mexicans,
ii., 593; Central Americans, i., 742.
Contagious disease, Mexicans, i., 588.
Contemoque, Nahua god, iii., 396.
Continence, i., 762; ii., 143, 719.
Contlan, locality in Puebla, v., 490.
Contores (Contotores), North Mex. tribe, i., 571-91; location,
i., 612.
Contra Costa County, California, antiq., iv., 710.
Convents, Mayas, ii., 663; Nahuas, v., 258.
Cookchaneys (Choocchancies, Chookchaneys), Cent. Cal. tribe, i.,
361-401; location, i., 363, 456.
Cooking, Hyperboreans, i., 55, 58, 103, 123; Columbians, i.,
162-3, 187, 213, 234, 265-6; Californians, i., 339-40, 373-6,
406, 428-30; New Mexicans, i., 489-92, 540, 561, 577-8;
Mexicans, i., 626, 653-4, 656; ii., 175, 354-7; v., 490; Cent.
Americans, i., 694-5, 720-1, 758-9; ii., 722-5.
Cookoose (Cookkoooose), tribe of Chinooks, i., 222-50; location,
i., 307.
Cookras, tribe of Mosquitos, i., 711-47; loc., i., 712, 793;
spec. mention, i., 718, 722; lang., iii., 783.
Cook's Inlet, i., 107, 139, 149; iii., 588.
Cooniacs, (Kahnyak, Kukhnyak), tribe of Chinooks, i., 222-50;
location, i., 306.
Coon's Cañon, Utah, antiq., iv., 715.
Coöperation, ii., 57-9; ii., 718.
Coopspellars, Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91; location, i.,
314.
Coose Bay, i., 248, 250.
Cooses, i., 442, see Kowooses.
Coot, Cent. Cal. tribe, i., 361-401; location, i., 454.
Cootonais, i., 255, see Kootenais.
Copahs (Cops), North Cal. tribe, i., 326-61; location, i., 442,
445.
Copal, i., 709, 732; ii., 284, 314, 390-1, 393, 694, 700, 703,
708, 719, 734; iii., 340, 381-2, 392, 410, 426.
Copalis, tribe of Sound Indians, i., 208-22; location, i., 303.
Copalis River, i., 303.
Copalux (Palux) River, i., 305.
Copalxocotl, soap-tree, ii., 491.
Copan, Honduras, antiq., ii., 118, 781-2; iv., 77-105; hist., v.,
56-60, 187, chap. xi., xii.
Copanabastla, Chiapas, antiq., iv., 353.
Copanahuaxtla, Chiapas, antiq., iv., 354.
Copapitas, Zapotec monks, ii., 212.
Copichoch, chief, Chiapas and Guatemala, v., chap. xi.
Copil (Cohuitl), prince of Malinalco. v., 328, 339.
Copilli, Nahua crown, ii., 147, 375-6.
Copo, species of tree, ii., 683.
Copper, Hyperboreans, i., 59, 79, 97, 107, 122, 135; Columbians,
i., 190, 235; iii., 151; Californians, i., 341; New Mexicans,
i., 574; Mexicans, ii., 372, 382, 406, 409-10, 473-8, 557, 599;
iv., 278, 346, 373, 376, 383, 414; Cent. Americans, ii., 742-3,
749, 751; iv., 67; Mississippi Valley, antiq., iv., 778-9, 783;
Peru antiq., iv., 792-4.
Copper Indians (Tantsawhot-Dinneh), tribe of Tinneh, i., 114-137;
location, i., 114, 144; special mention, i., 119, 136; lang.,
iii., 585.
Copper Mine Apaches, tribe of Apaches, i., 473-526; loc., i.,
594.
Coppermine River, i., 42, 45-6, 49-50, 59, 64, 114, 138, 144.
Copper River, i., 96, 116, 142, 149; iii., 588-9.
Copunnish, i., 317, see Chopunnish.
Coquille River, i., 308, 442-3.
Coquilths, i., 296, see Quackolls.
Coquins, i., 443, see Tutunahs.
Coquiza-Chibataya Cozaanatao, Zapotec god, iii., 449.
Coquontans, name of Thlinkeet clan, i., 109, 143.
Cora, Pima basket boat, i., 544.
Coral, i., 583, 623, 752.
Coras, Lower Cal. tribe, i., 556-71; location, i., 603; lang.,
iii., 687-93; special mention, i., 571; North Mex. tribe,
i., 571-91; location, i., 607; lang., iii., 665-8, 678, 706,
719-22; Cent. Mexican tribe, i., 617-44; location, i., 671-2;
special mention, i., 635, 637, 640-1, 643; v., 509.
Corarus, Cent. Mex. tribe, i., 617-44; location, i., 672.
Córdova, i., 293; Vera Cruz, antiq., iv., 434-5.
Córdova, Hernandez de, arrival on coast of Mex., v., 476.
Cords, Hyperboreans, i., 91; Columbians, i., 165-6, 185-6;
New Mexicans, i., 582-3; Mexicans, ii., 484, 551-2; Cent.
Americans, i., 766.
Coribici (Coribizi), Guatemala tribe, i., 686-711; location, i.,
791; lang., iii., 791.
Corn, Columbians, i., 234; New Mexicans, i., 516, 533, 538,
550-1, 577, 581; Mexicans, i., 624-6, 652-4; ii., 317, 348-349.
Corn Creek Valley, i., 468.
Corn Island, i., 715, 717.
Coronados, Cent. Mex. tribe, i., 617-44; location, i., 672.
Coronation, Aztecs, ii., 147-57; v., 389, 408, 425, 428, 437,
455, 501; Quichés, ii., 641.
Corozo-nuts, i., 768.
Corpulency, Columbians, i., 156, 176, 224-5, 254; New Mexicans,
i., 477-8, 558, 573.
Corpus Christi Bay, i., 594.
Corralitos, Chihuahua, antiq., iv., 604.
Cortés, Hernan, arrival at Vera Cruz, v., 479-82.
Cortés, Juan, Quiché king, v., chap. xi.
Cosispas, Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91; location, i., 317.
Cosninos, tribe of Apaches, i., 473-526; location, i., 475, 598;
special mention, i., 478.
Cosos, Cent. Cal. tribe, i., 361-401; location, i., 456.
Costahuntox, Chiapanec god, iii., 458.
Costanos, i., 453, see Ohlones.
Costa Rica, antiq., iv., 21-5.
Costa Ricans, tribe of Isthmians, i., 747-85; special mention,
i., 754-5, 761, 775, 780, 784; lang., iii., 572, 760, 793;
hist., v., chap. xii.
Costrowers, Cent. Cal. tribe, i., 361-401; location, i., 363,
456.
Cosulhentens, North Cal. tribe, i., 326-61; location, i., 443.
Cosumnes River, i., 455-6; lang., iii., 648-9.
Cosumnies (Cosumnes), Cent. Cal. tribe, i., 361-401; location,
i., 450; lang., iii., 649.
Coswas, Cent. Cal. tribe, i., 361-401; location, i., 455.
Cotastla, Vera Cruz, antiq., iv., 445.
Cotejen, Cent. Cal. tribe, i., 361-401; location, i., 453.
Cotschimì, iii., 687, see Cochimís.
Cotter's Creek, i., 317.
Cotton, New Mexicans, i., 502, 504, 531-2, 538, 544, 574, 582;
Mexicans, i., 620-1, 630, 648-50, 655, 657-8, 667; ii., 363-9,
484, 572-3; iii., 241; Cent. Americans, i., 689-92, 694, 715,
723-4, 751-2, 763, 766; ii., 718-19, 726-9, 742, 752.
Cottonois, i., 311; see Kootenais.
Cottonwood, North Cal. boats, i., 346.
Cottonwood Valley, i., 597; iv., 707.
Cotuha, Quiché king, v., chap. xi.
Cotuha II., Quiché king, v., chap. xi.
Cotzales, North Mex. tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 612.
Cotzbalam, Quiché mythic animal, iii., 47.
Cotzumalguapan, village, Guatemala, i., 788.
Councils, Mexicans, ii., 139, 188-9, 418, 420, 438-9, 442, 492-3;
v., 314; Cent. Americans, i., 702; ii., 641-2, 646, 655.
Counting, see Arithmetic.
Coupés, tribe of Chinooks, i., 222-50; location, i., 309.
Couriers, Nahuas, ii., 175, 413-14, 462.
Court-etiquette, Nahuas, ii., 185.
Court-martial, Nahuas, ii., 418, 442.
Courtship, Hyperboreans, i., 134; Columbians, i., 192, 196, 241,
277-8; Californians, i., 349-50; New Mexicans, i., 511-12,
547-9, 565; Mexicans, i., 632-3; ii., 254-5; Central Americans,
i., 729-32; ii., 666-7.
Couse (Cowish), food, Inland Columbian tribes, i., 265.
Coutanies, i., 311, see Kootenais.
Couvade, i., 391-2, 585.
Covaji, South Cal., lang., iii., 686.
Coviscas, i., 677, see Tlapanecs.
Cowghalingen, name for Unalaskas, i., 87.
Cowiahs (Cowhuillas), Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401;
location, i., 363, 456.
Cowichins (Cawitchans, Cowaitzchim, Cowegans, Cowewachin,
Cowitchins, Cowitchens, Cowitchici, Cowitciher, Kawitchen,
Kawitchin, Kawitshin, Kowitchan), tribe of Nootkas, i.,
174-208; loc., i., 175-6, 295-7, 300; lang., iii., 608.
Cowichin (Cowitchen, Kawitchin) Valley, i., 175, 297.
Cowillers, i., 457, see Cahuillas.
Cowlitz (Cowlitsick, Kaoulis), tribe of Sound Indians, i.,
208-22; loc., i., 209, 299, 303-4, 310; spec. mention, i., 210,
220.
Cowlitz River, i., 209, 223, 303, 305.
Cows, Navajo property, i., 489.
Coxanatzin Atencatl, Chichimec prince, v., 314.
Coxcatlan, locality, Guerrero, i., 677.
Coxcotzin, Toltec king, v., 257.
Coxcox, Nahua Noah-myth, iii., 66, 68.
Coxcoxtli (Coxcotzin, Coxcox), Culhua king, v., 13, 330-1,
339-44, 492-5.
Coxoh, Guatemala lang., iii., 760.
Coyabacoh, Quiché prince, v., chap. xi.
Coya Mama Oella, wife of Manco Capac, v., 46.
Coygaraca, Medicinal herb, ii., 795.
Coyohuacan, see Coyuhuacan.
Coyotl, v., 299, see Nauhyotl.
Coyolxauhqui, daughter of Coatlicue, iii., 296.
Coyote River, i., 452.
Coyoteros, tribe of Apaches, i., 473-526; location and name, i.,
474, 596; iii., 594; special mention, i., 495.
Coyotes, North Mex. tribe, i., 571-91; special mention, i., 611.
Coyotes, South Cal. food, i., 405; myths, iii., 75-6, 85-8, 90,
115-17, 137-9, 161, 545-8; v., 13-14.
Coyotl, v., 299, see Nauhyotl.
Coyuhuacan (Coyohuacan), town, Mexico, ii., 562; v., 295, 317,
402.
Co-yukuk River, i., 148.
Coyuquilla, town, Guerrero, i., 677.
Coyyo, Cent. Cal. tribe, i., 361-401; location, i., 454.
Cozaana, Zapotec god, iii., 457.
Cozaby Pah Utes, tribe of Shoshones, i., 422-42; location, i.,
466.
Cozamaloapan, province, Oajaca, v., 412, 417.
Cozcaapan, iii., 258, see Cohcaapa.
Cozcapetlatl, Nahua collar, ii., 404.
Cozcaquauh, Chichimec chief, v., 293.
Cozcaquauh, Teo-Chichimec chief, v., 490.
Cozcaquauhco (Cozcacuauhco), station, Aztec migration, v., 324.
Cozcaquauhtenanco, province in South Mexico, v., 441.
Cozcaquauhtli, Nahua day, ii., 512, 516-17; Acolhua chief, v.,
303; lord of Huauhtlan, v., 462.
Cozcotlan, locality, San Salvador, i., 790.
Cozehuatl, Nahua greaves, ii., 404.
Cozolmecatl, medicinal plant, i., 640.
Cozumel Island, ii., 792-3; iii., 761; iv., 259-60, 266.
Crab-apple, Nootka bows of, i., 188.
Crabs, Nahua food, ii., 356.
Cradles, Columbians, i., 218, 227-8; Californians, i., 391; New
Mexicans, i., 501, 563, 566; Mexicans, i., 633; ii., 275-6,
281; iii., 352.
Crean, Mosquito boat, i., 725.
Creation-myths, Hyperboreans, iii., 98-106; Columbians,
iii., 94-8; Californians, iii., 83-94, 162-5, 531-2, 549;
New Mexicans, iii., 75-83; Mexicans, iii., 55-74; Central
Americans, iii., 44-54, 74-5; v., 171-2, 193-4.
Cremation, Hyperboreans, i., 113, 125-6, 132, 134-5; Columbians,
i., 172-3, 205-6; Californians, i., 356-8, 396-7, 420-1, 439;
iii., 87; New Mexicans, i., 522-3, 555, 569, 589; Mexicans,
ii., 607-11, 615-21; iii., 240; Central Americans, i., 780,
783-4; ii., 798, 800-1.
Crescent City, North California, i., 445.
Crickets, Lower Californian food, i., 561.
Criers, Californians, i., 410; New Mexicans, i., 509, 520, 546;
Mexicans, i., 659-60; ii., 436-7; Central Americans, ii., 646;
iii., 241, 245, 255.
Crimes, see Government and names of crimes.
Crocodiles, Nahuas, hunting, ii., 351.
Cross, ii., 619, 793; iii., 135, 268, 274, 284, 332, 348, 356,
369, 385, 455, 468-70, 506, 509; iv., 57-8, 243, 260, 311-12,
333-8, 374, 407-8, 412, 437-8, 461, 481, 498, 503, 544-5, 572,
574, 674; v., 25, 48, 260.
Cross Sound, i., 96, 142.
Crosswers, tribe of Haidahs, i., 155-74; location, i., 292.
Crown, Mexicans, ii., 147-8, 307, 322, 337, 375-6, 404-5, 441;
iii., 341, 344, 352, 356, 359, 369, 385, 390-2, 396, 407-8,
411-12; Cent. Americans, i., 702; ii., 635.
Crown-lands, Nahuas, ii., 224-5.
Crows, i., 405; ii., 716; iii., 97.
Cruzados, tribe of Apaches, i., 473-526; location and name, i.,
475, 599; special mention, i., 478.
Cu (Qu), Nahua temple, iii., 192, 240, 292.
Cuaahtemalteca, Guatemala tribe, i., 686-711; location, i., 787.
Cuachichiles, i., 614, see Guachichiles.
Cuachilgo, station, Aztec migration, v., 323.
Cuaque River, i., 607.
Cuauhtepec, v., 324, see Cohuactepec.
Cuautla, town, Mexico, i., 672.
Cucapás, iii., 685, see Cuhuanas.
Cuchans, i., 597, see Yumas.
Cuchanticas, tribe of Apaches, i., 473-526; location, i., 592.
Cuchians, Central California tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
453.
Cuchinochis, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 612.
Cuchumaquiq, Quiché god, v., 175.
Cuchumatanes, ancient name of mountains in Guatemala, v., chap.
xii.
Cucomogna (Cucamonga), village, South California, i., 460.
Cuculcan, ii., 119; iii., 281; see Cukulcan.
Cuculetes, tribe of Apaches, i., 473-526; location, i., 598.
Cucullo, a Mexican beetle, i., 649.
Cucumatz, see Gucumatz.
Cucunumic, Pericue god, iii., 84.
Cucurpe, village, Sonora, i., 606-7.
Cueba, see Cueva.
Cuecaltzin, iii., 385, see Xiuhtecutli.
Cuechintli, Nahua military mantle, ii., 402.
Cuecopan, ii., 563, see Tlaquechiuhcan.
Cueitl, Nahua petticoat, ii., 368-9.
Cuelap, Peru, antiq., iv., 797-8.
Cuelcajen-ne, Apache tribal name, i., 474; iii., 594.
Cuencamé, locality, Zacatecas, i., 614.
Cuernavaca (Quernauaca, Quahunahuàc, Quauhnahuac), locality,
Mexico, i., 637, 676; ii., 109; antiq., iv., 481-2; v., 265,
310, 361-2, 406.
Cuernos quemados, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i.,
613.
Cues (Macoyahuis), North Mex. tribe, i., 571-91; location, i.,
607; lang., iii., 707.
Cuesninas, iii., 685, see Yamajabs.
Cuetlachtlan, ancient province in Puebla and Vera Cruz, v.,
417-19, 469-70, 499.
Cuetlaxcoapan (Cuetlaxcohuapan), town, Vera Cruz, i., 670-1; v.,
495.
Cuetlaxochitl, Chichimec princess, v., 311.
Cuetzal (Quetzal), Culhua king, v., 330-1.
Cuetzpalin, Nahua day, ii., 511-12, 516-17.
Cueva (Cueba), Isthmian province and tribe, i., 747-85; location,
i., 749, 795; special mention, i., 753-4, 760-1, 764, 769-70,
779-80, 784; lang., iii., 794.
Cuexcomaixtlahuacan, locality, Mexico, v., 472.
Cuexpatchicuepul, Nahua scalp-lock, ii., 401.
Cuextecas, i., 674; v., 208; see Huastecs.
Cuextecatl, Nahua chief, v., 208.
Cuextecatlichocayan, station, Aztec migration, v., 324.
Cuextlan, province, Vera Cruz, v., 420.
Cuha, Quiché royal palace, ii., 643.
Cuhtzutecas, tribe of Apaches, i., 473-526; location, i., 592.
Cuhuac, Toltec city, v., 295.
Cuhuanas (Cuhanas, Cucapás), tribe of Pueblos, i., 526-56; lang.,
iii., 685.
Cuicacalco, Nahua school-house, ii., 243.
Cuicatecs, South Mexican tribe, i., 644-70; location, i., 681;
special mention, i., 652; lang., iii., 752-3.
Cuicillos (Cuiztillos), burial mounds, iv., 551, 593.
Cuicoyan, Nahua dance-house, ii., 290.
Cuicuetzcatl, Tlascaltec ruler, v., 497.
Cuilapa, locality, Oajaca; lang., iii., 749; antiq., iv., 388.
Cuilco, village, Guatemala, i., 787.
Cuilton, Toltec noble, v., 254.
Cuismer, iii., 685, see Yamajabs.
Cuitlahuac, city in Mexico, hist., v., 253, 307-10, 346, 369,
405, 454.
Cuitlahuatzin, a Mexican prince, v., 462, 464.
Cuitlatecs (Cuitlateques, Cuitlatechi, Cuitlahuacs,
Quitlahuacas), Nahua nation, i., 617-44; ii., 133-629; location
and name, i., 678; ii., 109, 127.
Cuixlahuac, Miztec dialect, iii., 749.
Cukulcan (Cocolcan, Cuculcan, Kukulcan), Maya god, ii., 633, 647,
699-700, 705; iii., 135, 260, 281-2, 463, 465; v., 23, 226,
chap. xiii.
Culhuacan (Colhuacan, Culiacan), city, Mexico, ii., 99, 125;
antiq., iv., 295-6, 501-2; hist., v., 163, 188, 221, 242, 255,
261-87, 295-320, 323, 330-1, 334, 361, 404, 492-4.
Culhua Tecuhtli, Mexican imperial title, v., 396.
Culhuas (Colhuas), Nahua nation, i., 617-44; ii., 133-629;
location and name, i., 675; ii., 101, 127; special mention,
iii., 307-8; lang., iii., 724-5; hist., see Culhuacan.
Culiacan, v., 221, see Culhuacan.
Culisnisnas, iii., 685, see Yamajabs.
Culisnurs, iii., 685, see Yamajabs.
Culul, Cent. Cal. tribe, i., 361-401; location, i., 455.
Cumachen, locality in Michoacan, v., 513.
Cumatz, Guatemala tribe, hist., v., chap. xi.
Cumbatwas, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
457; lang., iii., 638.
Cumhu (Cumkú), Maya month, ii., 757-8.
Cumorah, locality, New York, v., 101-2.
Cumpas, village, Sonora, i., 606.
Cumquekis, tribe of Nootkas, i., 174-208; location, i., 295.
Cumshewas (Cumshawas, Cumshewars, Koumchaouas), tribe of Haidahs,
i., 155-74; location, i., 292.
Cum Umbahs (Cumumpahs), tribe of Shoshones, i., 422-42; location,
i., 469.
Cumuripa, village, Sonora, i., 601.
Cunacunas (Chucunaquese, Chucunas), tribe of Isthmians, i.,
747-85; location, i., 797; special mention, i., 785.
Cunai, Pima dialect, iii., 685.
Cunas, tribe of Isthmians, i., 747-85; location, i., 796-7;
special mention, i., 785; lang., iii., 794.
Cups, Columbians, i., 165, 190; Mexicans, ii., 174-5, 480, 483-4;
Cent. Americans, i., 697, 701.
Cuquiaratzi (Cuquiarachi), village, Sonora, i., 606.
Curari (Urari), Isthmian poison, i., 763.
Curds, food, Apaches, i., 489.
Cures, see Medicine.
Curicaneri (Curinacanery), Tarasco god, and high priest, ii.,
215; iii., 445; v., 511, 514.
Curicaten, king of Michoacan, v., 519.
Curincuaro Achurin, locality in Michoacan, v., 518.
Curinghóa, town, Sonora, i., 608.
Curipajan, person in Michoacan, v., 519.
Currency, Hyperboreans, i., 108, 133; Columbians, i., 192, 217,
239; Californians, i., 347, 385, 409, 435; New Mexicans, i.,
545, 583; Mexicans, i., 637; ii., 381-2; Cent. Americans, i.,
700; ii., 736-7; Mississippi Valley, antiq., iv., 778-9.
Currents, effects on N.W. coast, i., 38, 153; v., 52-3.
Curtains, Nahuas, ii., 582; Mayas, ii., 787.
Cururu, Honduras, antiq., iv., 71.
Cuscatlan, name of Salvador, ii., 123.
Cushnas, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
451; lang., iii., 650.
Cushooks, tribe of Chinooks, i., 222-50; location, i., 309.
Cusiyaes, Lower Californian sorcerers, i., 567.
Custepeques, Chiapas, antiq., iv., 353.
Custom-houses, Nahuas, ii., 564.
Cutaneous-diseases, Hyperboreans, i., 68; New Mexicans, i., 568;
Mexicans, i., 638; Cent. Americans, i., 778.
Cutaras, tribe of Isthmians, i., 747-85; location, i., 749.
Cutecos, North Mex. tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 609.
Cutganes, tribe of Pueblos, i., 526-56; lang., iii., 685.
Cuyama, i., 459, see Kuyam.
Cuyamaca, village, South California, i., 458.
Cuyamanque, Pueblo village, i., 527.
Cuyamu, South Cal. tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 459.
Cuyupuri, high-priest of Michoacan, v., 518.
Cuyutlan, Colima, antiq., iv., 572.
Cuzcatlan, name of Salvador, v., chap. xii.
Cuzco, Peru, antiq., iv., 804; v., 47.
Cycle, Nahua calendar, ii., 327, 505; v., 463; Maya calendar,
ii., 761-5.
Cypress, i., 214; ii., 557; iv., 502, 527.
D
Dabaiba, Isthmian goddess, iii., 498.
Daggers, i., 104-5, 164, 188.
Dahnohabes, Cent. Cal. tribe, i., 361-401; location, i., 451.
Daho-tena, (Acheto-tena), tribe of Tinneh, i., 114-137; loc., i.,
149.
Dalles (Dallas), i., 151, 222, 227, 239, 258, 289, 304.
Dams, see Weirs and Embankments.
Dan (Tamub), Guatemala tribe, i., 686-711; location, i., 789;
hist., v., chap. xi.
Dances, Hyperboreans, i., 66-7, 84-5, 92-3, 112, 119-20; iii.,
145, 507; Columbians, i., 170, 197-200, 219, 243, 281-2;
Californians, i., 351-2, 392-3, 397, 411, 416-17; New Mexicans,
i., 515-16, 550-2, 566, 586-7; Mexicans, i., 635, 664; ii.,
243, 260-1, 288-91, 311-12, 323-8, 329-31, 333-4, 337-8, 340,
393, 586, 617-19, 354, 359-60; iii., 386, 392, 409-10, 426-7,
429; v., 486; Cent. Americans, i., 697, 705-6, 709, 733, 735-8;
ii., 669, 689, 697-8, 700-1, 703, 707, 710-14.
Daparabopos, North Mex. tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 611.
Darien, Nations and tribes described, i., 747-85; location, i.,
794-7; special mention, i., 751, 753, 765, 769, 771, 784-5,
796; lang., iii., 793-5.
Darts, Hyperboreans, i., 90; New Mexicans, i., 562, 582;
Mexicans, ii., 335, 408-10; iii., 404; Central Americans, i.,
722, 760-2; ii., 720, 742-3.
Dates, Isthmian drink from, i., 775.
David, town, Isthmus, antiq., iv., 16-17.
Deaf and Dumb, at Comalá, i., 638; lang., iii., 4.
Dean Canal, i., 294.
Death, Hyperboreans, i., 76, 93; Columbians, i., 172-3, 247-8;
Californians, i., 354-60, 420-1; New Mexicans, i., 509-10, 524,
569; Mexicans, iii., 129, 401-2; Cent. Americans, i., 744-5,
782-3; ii., 657-9; iii., 53-4.
Debts, Maya laws concerning, ii., 654, 659.
Decorations, Nahuas, ii., 272, 284, 332, 389, 555-6, 571-2,
582-3.
Decoys, hunting and fishing, i., 55, 90, 185, 263, 336, 375-6,
577.
Deep Bay, British Columbia, antiq., iv., 741.
Deer, Hyperboreans, i., 50, 55-7, 77-8, 117, 135; Columbians,
i., 162, 187-9, 201, 211, 213, 230-1, 234, 258, 260, 263-4;
Californians, i., 330, 336-7, 344, 347, 367-8, 373, 403, 405,
424-6, 428; New Mexicans, i., 481-4, 490, 538, 551, 574, 577;
iii., 80; Mexicans, i., 620-1, 625, 627, 648, 650; iii., 129,
131-2; Cent. Americans, i., 694-5, 721; ii., 708, 720-1; iii.,
70-1.
Deer Creek, i., 456.
Deformity, Mexicans, i., 588, 638; ii., 592, 625; Mayas, ii.,
681-2.
Degothi Kutchin (Loucheux), tribe of Tinneh, i., 114-37;
location, i., 146; special mention, i., 129, 131, 137; myth.,
iii., 141-2; lang., iii., 586.
Deguthee Dinees, name for Kutchins, i., 115.
Del Norte County, i., 443, 445; iii., 161.
Del Norte Valley, i., 599.
Deluge, myths, v., 138; Hyperboreans, iii., 100, 103; v., 14;
Californians, iii., 86, 88, 547-8; v., 14; New Mexicans,
iii., 76, 78-9; v., 14; Mexicans, iii., 64, 70, 72; v., 12-13,
20, 193-4, 209; Cent. Americans, iii., 46-7, 74; v., 13-14;
Peruvians, v., 14-16.
Deozacuancu, station, Quiché migration, v., chap. xi.
Derricks, Aztecs, ii., 556.
Des Chutes, Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91; location, i.,
320.
Des Chutes River, i., 262, 320; iii., 638.
Desertion, punishment for, ii., 418, 746.
Deserts, i., 153, 324, 472.
Desolation Sound, i., 183-4, 298.
Despotism, ii., 61, 185, 191-2, 634.
Destruction Island, i., 303.
Development, causes and principles of, ii., 18-80.
Diamond River, i., 466, 597.
Diamond Spring, California, antiq., iv., 705.
Diarrhea, i., 287, 742; ii., 592, 600.
Dice, gambling, ii., 300.
Didues (Didiùs), Lower Cal. tribe, i., 556-71; location, i.,
603; lang., iii., 687-93.
Diegueños (Comeyas, Deguinos, Diegeños, Dieguinas, Dieguinos),
South Cal. tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 402, 457-8; special
mention, i., 409-10; myth., iii., 525; lang., iii., 684-6.
Diggers, tribe of Shoshones, i., 422-42; location, i., 464; name,
i., 326; lang., iii., 661-2.
Digothis, name for Kutchins, i., 115.
Dinneh, i., 115, see Tinneh.
Diriamba, village, Nicaragua, i., 792.
Dirians (Dirias), Guatemala tribe, i., 686-711; location, i.,
688, 792; myth., iii., 493; v., chap. xii.
Diriomo (Diriomé), village, Nicaragua, i., 792.
Discipline, priests, iii., 338-40, 427, 433, 435-6, 473, 489.
Discoidal stones, California, antiq., iv., 701-2.
Disease, see Medicine and name of disease.
Dishes, Columbians, i., 164-5, 190, 236; Californians, i., 434;
iv., 693-4, 702; Mexicans, ii., 285, 361, 475, 483-4; Cent.
Americans, i., 697, 701; ii., 723, 752.
Disobedience, punishment of, ii., 242, 246, 418-19, 662.
Distaff, i., 165; iii., 372.
Distortion of Physique, Hyperboreans, i., 72, 97-100; Columbians,
i., 158-9, 181-2, 226-9, 256-7; New Mexicans, i., 559;
Mexicans, i., 622; Cent. Americans, i., 717; ii., 731-2.
Ditches, see Excavations.
Divine representatives, Nahuas, ii., 319-27, 331-3, 337, 339;
iii., 309, 313.
Divisions, of nations, i., 36-7; ii., 124.
Divorce, Nahuas, ii., 262-3; see also Marriage.
Doctors, see Medicine and Sorcerers.
Dog-Ribs, i., 144, see Thlingcha-dinneh.
Dog River, i., 320.
Dog-Rivers (Cascade Indians), Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91;
location, i., 320.
Dogs, Hyperboreans, i., 62-3, 118; iii., 104-6; Columbians, i.,
159, 166, 171, 182-3, 202, 211, 215-16, 264, 267, 285; New
Mexicans, i., 506, 518, 544, 561; Mexicans, i., 634; ii., 605,
611, 614; iii., 129, 330, 392, 538; Cent. Americans, i., 696,
700, 708, 723, 758, 760; ii., 692-3, 703-4, 720-1; iii., 466.
Dog-wood, used for medicine, i., 204.
Dohme, i., 607, see Eudeves.
Dolls, Koniagas, i., 81-2.
Dolores, Guatemala, antiq., iv., 138.
Dolores de Agua Caliente, village, Durango, i., 614.
Dolores River, i., 465; Utah, antiq., iv., 733.
Domestic animals, Nahuas, ii., 353.
Donkeys, Pueblos, i., 544.
Don Pedro's Bar, Cal., antiq., iv., 703.
Doors, Hyperboreans, i., 51, 74; Columbians, i., 231-2;
Californians, i., 334-5, 372; New Mexicans, i., 486, 533, 535;
Nahuas, ii., 556, 573; Mayas, ii., 784-5.
Dorachos (Doraches), tribe of Isthmians, i., 747-85; location,
i., 796; special mention, i., 759, 766, 780-1; lang., iii.,
794.
Dory, Mosquito boat, i., 725.
Dos Cabaces Mt., i., 595.
Dos Pueblos, village, South Cal., i., 459.
Dough, Nahua offerings and idols, iii., 297-8, 315-16, 336, 344,
347, 371, 408, 425.
Douglas Canal, i., 293.
Douglas City, Cal., antiq., iv., 707.
Dove, Nahua deluge myth., iii., 66, 68-9.
Down, see Feathers.
Dowry, Maya, marriage, ii., 666-7.
Drake's Bay, i., 365.
Drama, Hyperboreans, i., 93; Columbians, i., 170, 200;
Californians, i., 393; New Mexicans, i., 586; Mexicans, ii.,
286, 291-2; Cent. Americans, i., 705-6, 736-8, 774; ii., 700,
711-12.
Drawbridges, see Bridges.
Drawers, Maya dress, ii., 727.
Dreams, i., 202-3, 723, 734, 741; ii., 211, 796.
Dresden Codex, Mayas, ii., 771-2.
Dress, origin and significance of, ii., 77-8; Hyperboreans, i.,
46-50, 61, 67, 72-4, 88-9, 100-2, 116-17, 122, 125, 128, 131-3,
135; Columbians, i., 153, 158-60, 170, 179-82, 229-30, 257-9;
Californians, i., 329-34, 352, 358-9, 367-71, 387-8, 403-4,
410, 416, 423-6; iii., 166; New Mexicans, i., 480-4, 530-3,
550-1, 558-9, 567, 573-5; iii., 180; Mexicans, i., 620-3,
648-51; ii., 144-5, 179-80, 207, 213-15, 243, 290-1, 298, 305,
307, 314-15, 318-31, 333-4, 337, 363-77, 395-6, 401-7, 413-14,
428-9, 604-8, 614-16, 621; iii., 259-60, 324-5, 333-4, 339,
353-61, 369, 385-7, 390-2, 407-8, 411-12, 416-18, 422-3, 425-7,
433, 435-437; Cent. Americans, i., 689-92, 705-6, 715, 736-7,
744-5, 751-4, 764, 782-3; ii., 635, 662-3, 683, 688-9, 707,
710, 713, 726-35, 741; iii., 473.
Drinks, Hyperboreans, i., 76; Californians, i., 394, 437; New
Mexicans, i., 517, 549-50, 586; Mexicans, i., 636, 654, 664-5;
ii., 359-60; iii., 243; Cent. Americans, i., 706-7, 739, 774-6;
ii., 703, 723-5.
Droit de Seigneur, i., 584-5; ii., 671.
Drouth, see Climate.
Drowning, sacrifice by, ii., 306, 308.
Drums, i., 91, 393, 516, 552, 586, 705, 738, 765, 774; ii.,
292-3, 404-5, 412, 583-4, 713.
Drumsticks, i., 552, 705; ii., 293.
Drunkenness, Hyperboreans, i., 57; Columbians, i., 169, 243;
Californians, i., 354, 437; New Mexicans, i., 515, 517, 549-50,
566, 586-7; Mexicans, i., 628, 635-6, 664; ii., 285, 333,
360-1, 394, 460-2, 617, 627; Cent. Americans, i., 706-7, 735,
774; ii., 641, 689, 694, 718, 724-5, 803.
Dry Creek, Cal., antiq., iv., 707.
Dry Creek Valley, i., 449.
Dtchè-ta-ut-'tinnè, lang., iii., 587.
'Dtinnè, i., 114, see Tinneh.
Ducks, i., 50, 577, 625-6, 760; ii., 351, 721.
Duckwarra Lagoon, Mosquito coast, antiq., iv., 27.
Duelling, Nahuas, ii., 628.
Dulce, gulf, Guatemala, v., chap. xi.
Dung, poison antidote, i., 762.
Dungeness, i., 302.
Durango, nations and tribes, i., 571-91, 617-44; special mention,
i., 623; myth., iii., 179; lang., iii., 667, 710, 717-19;
antiq., iv., 600-1; hist., v., 222.
Duties, see Taxes.
Dwamish, tribe of Sound Indians, i., 208-22; location, i., 300.
Dwamish Lake, i., 300.
Dwamish River, i., 300.
Dwarfs, Nahuas, ii., 183.
Dwellings, Hyperboreans, i., 42, 50-4, 74-5, 89, 102-3, 118,
123-4, 129; Columbians, i., 160-1, 169, 183-5, 191, 211-12,
231-2, 259-61; Californians, i., 334-6, 371-3, 404-5, 426-7;
New Mexicans, i., 485-7, 533-8, 559-60, 575; iv., 668-60;
Mexicans, i., 24, 624, 651-2; ii., 160-74, 336, 553-74; iii.,
240, 255; Cent. Americans, i., 692-3, 717-18, 732, 754-8, 780;
ii., 783-9.
Dyeing, i., 166, 345, 503, 657, 698, 724, 766; ii., 370, 486-7,
752.
Dysentery, i., 521, 708, 742; ii., 600.
Dzawindanda, Miztec king, v., 415-16.
Dze-Yaxkin, ii., 757, see Yaxkin.
E
Eagle Prairie, i., 446-7.
Eagles, i., 105, 172, 580, 716; ii., 160, 327, 337; iii., 78-9,
129, 356; v., 13-4.
Early County, Mississippi Valley, antiq., iv., 767-8.
Ear-ornaments, Hyperboreans, i., 97, 128; Columbians, i., 159,
182, 211, 229; Californians, i., 333, 368-9, 426; New Mexicans,
i., 482, 559, 574-5; Mexicans, i., 623, 649-51; ii., 290, 307,
372, 395; iii., 238, 325, 369, 385, 416; Central Americans, i.,
691, 717, 752-4; ii., 731-3.
Earth, various uses of, Hyperboreans, i., 51, 72, 75, 89, 107,
130; Columbians, i., 210, 212, 257-8, 271; Californians, i.,
333-4, 369, 371-2, 404, 424, 426, 434-5; New Mexicans, i., 481,
500, 532-3, 535-6, 546; Mexicans, i., 623-4, 631, 650-2; ii.,
317-18, 372, 599; Central Americans, i., 718, 766; ii., 733-4,
750; myths., iii., 121-2; Phallic worship, iii., 502.
Earthquake, Mexican symbol, iii., 129; events, v., 463, 468, 472.
Earthworks, see Embankments.
Eating, i., 75-6, 163, 187-8, 214, 266, 560-1.
Eating-houses, Nahuas, ii., 357, 384.
Eb, Maya day, ii., 755-6, 760.
Ecalchot, Nicaragua god, iii., 491.
Ecatepec (Ecatepc, Ehecatepec), station, Aztec migration, v.,
321-4.
Ecatl, iii., 491, see Ehecatl.
Ecatzin (Echecalzin, Ehecatzin), Nahua chief, v., 243.
Eccatl, Nahua chief, v., 243.
Ecclemáches (Ecclemachs, Ekklemaches), Central Californian tribe,
i., 361-401; location, i., 363, 454; lang., iii., 653.
Ecgeagan, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
454.
Echecalzin, v., 243, see Ecatzin.
Echehóa, town, Sonora, i., 608.
Echeloots, Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91; location, i.,
320; special mention, i., 260, 267, 274.
Echilat, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, 454.
Echuah (Ekchua, Ekchuah), Maya god, ii., 692, 738; iii., 462,
466.
Ecitin, v., 297, see Xitzin.
Eclikimos, tribe of Thlinkeets, i., 94-114; location, 143.
Eclipse, i., 666, 777; ii., 798; iii., 110-11.
Ecnab, ii., 756, see Ezanab.
Edchawtawhoot-dinneh, i., 144, see Beaver Indians.
Edmy, Chepewyan expression of complaint, i., 135.
Education, Californians, i., 413-14; Mexicans, ii., 240-51,
401-2, 492-3, 538-40; iii., 432, 437; Central Americans, i.,
704, 734, 777; ii., 661-4, 767, 788.
Edùes (Edú, Equù), Lower Californian tribe, i., 556-71; location,
i., 604; lang., iii., 687-93.
Edwards Creek Mountains, i., 462.
Edznab, ii., 756, see Ezanab.
Eegloo, i., 54, see Igloo.
Eehs, North Californian tribe, i., 326-61; location, i., 447.
Eel River tribes, North Californian tribe, i., 326-61; special
mention, i., 326-7, 331-2, 362, 364, 367, 442, 446-8, 451;
lang., iii., 593, 642, 647.
Eels, i., 214, 339.
Eemitches, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
363.
Eenaghs (Eenahs), i., 446, see Ehneks.
Eesteytochs, tribe of Haidahs, i., 155-74; location, i., 294.
Effigies, Nahua burial, ii., 606, 611, 614, 616-17, 620-1.
Egan Cañon, i., 467.
Eggs, food, i., 625, 652, 694, 720, 759; ii., 356; medicine, ii.,
599.
Egypt, American origin-traces, v., 55-63.
Ehatesets (Ayhuttisaht), tribe of Nootkas, i., 174-208; loc., i.,
295.
Ehecatepec, v., 324, see Ecatepec.
Ehecatl (Ecatl, Hecat), Nahua day, ii., 511-12, 516-17; iii., 57;
name of Quetzalcoatl, iii., 267, 491.
Ehecatonatiuh, Nahua age, ii., 504.
Ehecatzin, v., 243, see Ecatzin.
Ehihalis, tribe of Sound Indians, i., 208-22; location, i., 303.
Ehneks (Eenaghs, Eenahs, Pehtsik), North Cal. tribe, i., 326-61;
location, i., 446; language, iii., 642.
Ehutewa, South Cal. tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 460.
Eiscap, i., 139, see Icy Cape.
Ejoni, Acagchemem 1st man, iii., 164.
Ek Balam Chac, Maya god, ii., 701.
Ekchua (Ekchuah), ii., 692, 738, see Echuah.
Ekel Bacab, Maya god, iii., 466.
Ekklemaches, i., 454, see Ecclemaches.
Elab (Elah), Tzendal day, ii., 767.
Elarroyde, Cent. Cal. tribe, i., 361-401; location, i., 453.
El Baño, at Masaya, Nicaragua, antiq., iv., 31.
El Castillo, Centla ruins, Vera Cruz, antiq., iv., 445.
El Dorado County, Cal., antiq., iv., 705.
El Fuerte, town, Sinaloa, i., 607.
El Henditare, royal title, Michoacan, v., 511, 519.
Eld's Inlet, i., 301.
Elech, name of month, Chiapas, ii., 766.
Elemehumkillanwaist (Skyappe), Okanagan god, iii., 153, 519.
Eleunaxciay, South Cal. tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 459.
Elikinoos, tribe of Thlinkeets, i., 94-114; lang., iii., 579.
Elizabeth, town, North Cal., i., 442.
Eljman, South Cal. tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 459.
Elk, see Deer.
Elk Mountain Utes, tribes of Shoshones, i., 422-42; location, i.,
469.
Elk River, i., 144, 443.
Elkwhahts, tribe of Sound Indians, i., 208-22; location, i., 303.
Elliott's Bay, i., 301.
Ellos de los Animas, locality, Arizona, i., 469.
Elmian, South Cal. tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 459.
Elotepec, town, Oajaca, i., 681.
Elotl, boiled maize, ii., 354.
Eluaxcu, South Cal. tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 459.
Emal, Yucatan, antiq., iv., 261.
Embalming, i., 780, 782-3; ii., 603-4.
Embankments, i., 185, 212, 263; ii., 564, 721; v., 412-13;
antiq., iv., 379, 500, 523-4, 536-7, 632-3, 740-1, 747, 750-73.
Embroidery, dress, i., 584, 690-1, 716; ii., 363-4.
Emeralds, i., 583; ii., 173, 372, 481, 606; v., 325-6; see also
Chalchiuite.
Emetics, i., 743; ii., 269, 599.
Emku, Maya baptismal feast, ii., 684.
Empire, Aztecs, limits of, v., 471-3.
Encarnacion, Tamaulipas, antiq., iv., 593.
Enekelkawa, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i.,
460.
Eneshurs (Eneeshurs), Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91;
location, i., 320; special mention, i., 274.
Eno, Acagchemem title given to the Coyote, iii., 163.
Enob, ii., 767, see Evob.
Enteeatook River, i., 316.
Entertainments, see Feasts.
Entrails, i., 49, 67, 73-5, 104, 162-3, 374, 424, 490, 560, 562.
Entrenchments, see Fortifications.
Environment, influence on development and progression, i., 153-4;
ii., 41-5; v., 5.
Epcoaquacuiltzin, Nahua priest, iii., 434.
Epcoatl, Nahua drowning sacrifice, iii., 333.
Epeoatl, Tlalocs' temple, iii., 324.
Epidemics, ii., 593, 794.
Epuepaniuhqui, Nahua sacrificial decoration, iii., 333.
Equelchacan, Yucatan, antiq., iv., 211.
Equùs, i., 604, see Edùes.
Ermine, dress, i., 425.
Escabas, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 611.
Escaupiles, cotton armor, i., 655.
Escelens (Escellens, Eslens, Eslenes), Cent. Cal. tribe, i.,
361-401; location, i., 363, 454; special mention, i., 386,
388-9, 396; lang., iii., 653.
Escoria, province and tribe of Isthmians, i., 747-85; location,
i., 749, 795; special mention, i., 753; lang., iii., 794.
Eshquates, i., 295, see Esquiates.
Eskimos (Eskimantik, Eskimaux, Esquimantsic, Esquimaux, Innuit,
Keralit, Uskeemi, Usquemows), one of the five families into
which the Hyperboreans are divided. Manners and customs of all
its nations and tribes described together, i., 40-69; physique,
i., 45-7; dress, i., 46-50; dwellings, i., 50-4; food, i.,
54-8; implements and weapons, i., 58-9; boats, sledges,
etc., i., 59-63; property and commerce, i., 63-5; government,
i., 65; women and marriage, i., 65-6; amusements, i., 66-7;
miscellaneous customs, i., 67-8; art, i., 68; character, i.,
68; medicine, i., 68-9; burial, i., 69; locality and name, i.,
25, 37, 40-2, 138-9; myth., iii., 128, 141, 516, 518; lang.,
iii., 557, 575-80.
Eslanagans, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
454.
Eslens, i., 363, see Escelens.
Esmischue, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i.,
458.
Esnispele, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i.,
458.
Espave, Isthmian title, i., 770.
Espiiluima, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i.,
458.
Espíritu Santo Bay, Yucatan, antiq., iv., 254.
Espíritu Santo Echojoa (Echonova), village, Sonora, i., 607.
Espíritu Santo Island, i., 604.
Espita, Yucatan, antiq., iv., 236.
Esquiates (Eshquates), tribe of Nootkas, i., 174-208; location,
i., 295.
Esquimalt, British Columbia, antiq., iv., 740.
Esquimantsic, i., 41, see Eskimos.
Esquimatha, Guatemala, antiq., iv., 119.
Esquimaux, i., 40, see Eskimos.
Estait, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 458.
Estorica, a stick for throwing javelins, i., 761.
Estuc, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 459.
Estufas, see Sweat-houses.
Etaminuas, Chinook priests, iii., 156.
Ethnography, i., 25, 95-6, 152; v., 150.
Etiquette, origin and effects, ii., 78-9; Nahuas, ii., 178-9,
284, 420-1; Mayas, ii., 635, 646, 711.
Etl, Nahua beans, ii., 355.
Etla, Zapotec dialect, iii., 754-5; Oajaca, antiq., iv., 375-6.
Etzalli, Nahua food, iii., 325, 339; see also Etzalqualiztli.
Etzalqualiztli (Eçalcoaliztli, Etzacualiztli, Etzalcualiztli,
Etzalcualiztly, Etzalli, Etzalqualitztli, Etzalqualixtli,
Etzaqualiztli, Ezalioaliztli, Ezalqualliztli, Exolqualiztli,
Hetzalqualiztl), Nahua month, ii., 324, 508, 509; iii., 325,
334.
Etzatlan, locality, Mexico, v., 509.
Eubaous, i., 592, see Comanches.
Eudeves (Dohme, Eudebes, Euderas, Hegues, Hequis, Heves), North
Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 572, 606-7; special
mention, i., 582; lang., iii., 695, 699-702.
Eulachon (Uthlecan), see Candle-fish.
Euotalla River, i., 319.
Euphorbia, herb used for snake-bites, i., 521.
Euquachees, North Californian tribe, i., 326-61; location, i.,
442.
Eurocs, North Californian tribe, i., 326-61; location, i., 327,
444; special mention, i., 336, 348, 350; myth., iii., 161,
523-4; lang., iii., 641.
Eutahs (Eutaws), i., 464-5, see Utahs.
Evil Spirits, see Superstitions.
Evob (Enob), Tzendal day, ii., 767.
Ewentoc, Quiché chief, v., chap. xi.
Ewintes (Uintahs, Uinta Utes, Uinta Yutas, Uwintys), tribe of
Shoshones, i., 422-42; location, i., 463-4, 469.
Exbalanque (Exbalanquen), v., chap. xi., see Xbalanque.
Excanjaques, tribe of Apaches, i., 473-526; location, i., 599.
Excavations, i., 74-5, 124, 160, 231, 260, 334-5, 337, 371-2,
426-7, 486, 537-8, 554-5; antiq., iv., 31, 70, 116-17, 120,
169, 175, 211-12, 244, 252-3, 263, 265, 344, 407-9, 445-6, 448,
477-8, 484-5, 503, 524-7, 659, 661, 676-7, 736, 765, 768.
Exenimuth (Cexeninuth), tribe of Nootkas, i., 174-208; location,
i., 295.
Exocuillo-o-alixtli, Nahua eye disease, iii., 342.
Exolqualiztli, ii., 508, see Etzalqualiztli.
Exotl, Nahua beans, ii., 355.
Explorations, i., 27-32; iv., 142-51, 289-94, 390-1, 426, 605-6,
617-19, 622-5, 719.
Exquinan, Tlascaltec war ceremony, ii., 431.
E'yackimahs, i., 317, see Yakimas.
Eyacque, Acagchemem title of the coyote, iii., 163.
Eyak, Koniaga evil spirit, iii., 143.
Eyakema Valley, i., 320, see Yakima Valley.
Eycoac, station, Aztec migration, v., 323.
Eyes, Hyperboreans, i., 46, 72, 116; Columbians, i., 157, 177-9,
210, 225-6, 255-6; Californians, i., 328-9, 354, 364-6; New
Mexicans, i., 477-9, 529, 558, 573; Mexicans, i., 619, 646-8;
ii., 599, 624-5; Central Americans, i., 688, 714-15, 750-1;
ii., 802.
Ezalioaliztli (Ezalqualliztli), ii., 508, see Etzalqualiztli.
Ezanab (Ecnab, Edznab), Maya day, ii., 756, 760.
Ezcomachas, Nahua nation, v., 511.
Ezhuahuacatl, Nahua title, ii., 138.
Eztlepictin, Teotenanca tribe, v., 280.
F
Face, Hyperboreans, i., 46, 48, 72, 88, 116, 127; Columbians, i.,
157, 177-8, 225-6; Californians, i., 328, 365-6; New Mexicans,
i., 477-9, 529-30, 573; Mexicans, i., 618-19, 646-7; Central
Americans, i., 688, 714-15; ii., 802.
Fainting-stone, Mexico, antiq., iv., 540-1.
Fairs, i., 167, 217, 239, 273-4; ii., 378-9, 385, 736; v., 415.
Famines, v., 413, 460, 499; chap. xi.
Fans, i., 544, 706; ii., 488, 646, 713.
Fantasma, Honduras, lang., iii., 783.
Faraones (Pharaones, Taracones), tribe of Apaches, i., 473-526;
location, i., 474, 594.
Fashion, tyranny and effects of, ii., 76-9.
Fasts, Hyperboreans, i., 111; iii., 142; Columbians, i., 170,
202-3, 246; iii., 156; Californians, i., 414-15; New Mexicans,
i., 520, 553, 581; Mexicans, ii., 147, 206, 258, 261, 303,
312-14, 317, 335, 339, 428, 608, 617, 622, 678, 682; iii.,
249, 334-8, 346, 383, 395, 407, 429, 440-1; v., 258; Central
Americans, i., 663-4; ii., 690-1, 695, 699, 719, 741; iii.,
471, 487, 499.
Fatigue, Isthmian remedy for, i., 776.
Fawalomnes, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
450.
Fax, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 459.
Feasts, Hyperboreans, i., 66-7, 84-5, 92-3, 134; Columbians,
i., 164, 167, 169-71, 188, 191, 193, 199, 219, 243; iii.,
151; Californians, i., 350-52, 410-11; New Mexicans, i., 512,
515-16, 550-2, 566-7, 586-7; Mexicans, i., 628; ii., 252, 258,
260, 266-268, 272, 276, 280-1, 283-6, 302-41, 387, 391-7, 428,
612, 621, 623; iii., 63, 313-17, 323-4, 332-48, 353-62, 385-95,
404-29, 446, 448; Central Americans, i., 730, 735, 772; ii.,
641, 656, 662, 667-9, 676, 679, 684, 687-711; iii., 484.
Feather River, i., 381, 450, 451, 455, 457; lang., iii., 648-9.
Feathers, Hyperboreans, i., 72, 90, 101, 105, 117, 128;
Columbians, i., 159-60, 166, 170-2, 179, 187, 200, 211, 215,
258; Californians, i., 331, 347, 367-70, 377-8, 381-2, 387-8,
392, 396, 410, 424-6, 434; New Mexicans, i., 482-4, 495-6,
504, 522, 531-2, 541, 551, 558, 574-5, 579, 583; iii., 180;
Mexicans, i., 620-3, 649-50; ii., 148, 174, 259, 290, 307,
314, 323-7, 333-4, 337, 363, 366-8, 404-7, 484, 488-91, 572-3,
606-7, 615, 619, 621; iii., 238, 301, 313, 318, 324-5, 356-61,
369, 385-7, 390-2, 398, 400, 404, 407, 411, 416-18, 422, 426-7;
v., 325, 515-16; Central Americans, i., 691, 702, 705-6,
715-16, 723, 726, 750-4; ii., 635, 641, 693, 707, 726-30,
741-3, 752, 789.
Features, see Face.
Fecundity, see Women.
Feet, i., 90-1, 177, 477-9, 529-30, 573, 689.
Fences, i., 185, 718, 756; ii., 348, 718.
Fenelon River, i., 466.
Fern, food and medicine, i., 79, 214, 354.
Ferndale, California, antiq., iv., 707.
Fertilizer, Maya agriculture, ii., 717.
Festivals, see Feasts.
Fetichism, iii., 22, 33-8, 108-9.
Fever, i., 245-6, 394, 521, 554, 568, 588, 638-9, 667, 743, 778;
ii., 592-3, 596, 599-600, 794.
Fibre, various uses of, i., 558-9, 563, 574, 582-3, 630, 648,
657, 697, 699, 754; ii., 363, 365, 409, 484, 743, 752.
Fiddletown, California, antiq., iv., 707.
Figs, drink from, ii., 723.
Filifaes, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 611.
Filmore Valley, i., 468.
Fine Gold Gulch, i., 456.
Fines, punishment by, ii., 457, 656-9, 673.
Fire, Hyperboreans, i., 51-2, 58, 79, 91-2; iii., 96-7, 101;
Columbians, i., 189, 216, 236, 267; Californians, i., 339, 346,
357, 377, 430, 433; iii., 115-17, 159, 547; New Mexicans, i.,
498, 502, 519-20, 535, 537, 554, 563, 577; iii., 172; Mexicans,
i., 666; ii., 276, 280, 315, 330, 333, 491, 583-4; iii., 306,
376, 385-95, 416-17; v., 326, 463; Central Americans, i., 695,
722, 761-2, 782; ii., 670, 691-2, 696, 701-2; iii., 50, 482;
v., chap. xi.
Fire-arms, Nootkas, i., 188.
Firebugs, used for light, ii., 573.
Fish, Hyperboreans, i., 40, 55-6, 75-6, 90, 103-4, 118, 123, 129;
Columbians, i., 159, 162-3, 168-9, 171, 185-8, 209, 212-14,
232-4, 261-3, 265-6; Californians, i., 323, 337-40, 374-6,
378, 405-6, 427-30; New Mexicans, i., 482, 488, 538-9, 560-2,
576-8; Mexicans, i., 624, 652, 655; ii., 342, 352-3, 413; iii.,
410-11; Central Americans, i., 694, 719-21, 758-60, 762, 768;
ii., 653, 698, 708, 720-1, 750.
Fish Utes, tribe of Shoshones, i., 422-42; location, i., 470.
Fitch's Ranch, i., 449.
Fitzhugh Sound, i., 295.
Flags, ii., 323, 405, 427, 607, 615, 619, 699-700, 710, 712;
iii., 404, 426.
Flatbow Lake, i., 252, 311.
Flatbow River, i., 252, 263, 311.
Flatbows, i., 251, 311, see Kootenais.
Flathead Lake, i., 313.
Flathead River, i., 252, 312-13.
Flatheads, i., 312-13, see Salish.
Flattening the Head, see Head-flattening.
Flax, i., 182, 185, 368.
Flaying, captives, ii., 309, 311, 332, 429, 431, 457; iii.,
308-9, 353, 355, 413, 415, 420, 472.
Flesh, i., 90, 127, 162, 187, 288-9, 479, 721; ii., 711, 721.
Flies, i., 625; ii., 721.
Flint, i., 59, 88, 188-9, 235, 341-2, 377-9, 431, 434, 541,
562-3, 578-9, 655, 667, 722, 761; ii., 479-80, 557, 742-3, 750;
iii., 129, 179, 268, 281.
Floating gardens, see Chinampas.
Floats, i., 213-14, 719.
Flood, see Deluge.
Floors, i., 259, 535, 718, 755; ii., 161, 556, 572, 787; iv.,
125, 159, 165, 169, 273, 309, 630, 653-4.
Flores, town, Guatemala, iv., 133.
Flore's Creek, i., 443.
Florida, iv., 747; v., 191.
Flowers, i., 368, 396, 631, 649-50, 730-1; ii., 290, 315, 328,
349, 491, 689, 734; iii., 407, 420-1.
Flunmuda, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
453.
Flutes, i., 516, 552, 586, 738; ii., 317, 713; iv., 462-3.
Flying-game, Nahuas, ii., 295-6.
Flying gods, Miztecs, iii., 71-2.
Fomentations, Lower California, medicine, i., 568.
Fonechas, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
363.
Food, influence of, i., 18, 40; Hyperboreans, i., 54-8, 75-9,
90, 103-4, 118, 123, 125, 129, 135; iii., 147; Columbians, i.,
153, 161-4, 185-8, 191, 212-14, 232-5, 261-7; Californians, i.,
336-40, 373-7, 405-7, 427-30; New Mexicans, i., 477, 487-92,
538-40, 555, 576-8, 590; Mexicans, i., 624-6, 640-1, 652-4,
667-8; ii., 163-4, 174-8, 318-19, 342-62, 384, 612, 615, 623;
Central Americans, i., 694-6, 709, 718-22, 743-4, 758-60,
780-3; ii., 679, 715-25, 741, 798, 800-1.
Fool's Prairie, i., 313.
Football, i., 552, 586-7.
Footprints, of gods, ii., 333.
Foot-races, Nahuas, ii., 413.
Force, action and elements of, ii., 6-16.
Forehead, Hyperboreans, i., 116; Columbians, i., 177-8;
Californians, i., 364-5; New Mexicans, i., 477, 558; Mexicans,
i., 619, 647; ii., 624; Central Americans, i., 688, 714-15.
Forest Hill, California, antiq., iv., 706.
Forest Home, California, antiq., iv., 707.
Forests, i., 38-9, 114, 153, 156, 323-4, 385, 651; ii., 88-90,
471-2; iv., 298.
Fork Lake, i., 300.
Fornication, punishment for, ii., 469, 651, 659, 675.
Fort Alexander, i., 310.
Fort Ancient, Mississippi Valley, antiq., iv., 756.
Fort Boirie, i., 462.
Fort Boise, i., 461.
Fort Bridger, i., 463.
Fort Colville, i., 314.
Fort Confidence, i., 144.
Fort Halkett, lang., iii., 587.
Fort Helvetia, i., 450.
Fort Hill, Mississippi Valley, antiq., iv., 755.
Fortifications, Columbians, i., 160, 212; New Mexicans, i.,
534-6, 542; antiq., iv., 582-91, 603, 613, 637, 645-6, 664-5,
675, 715; Mexicans, i., 628, 655-6; ii., 414-17, 558, 562,
568; antiq., iv., 368-9, 375, 383-4, 412-13, 431-3, 439-61,
467, 480, 486-7, 503, 550-2; v., 503; Central Americans, i.,
756-7; ii., 743-5, 788-91; antiq., iv., 124-5, 131, 255, 268;
Mississippi Valley, antiq., iv., 750-7, 762-5; Peru, antiq.,
iv., 804.
Fort Liard, lang., iii., 587.
Fort McLoughlin, i., 295.
Fort Mojave, i., 467.
Fort Nisqually, i., 301.
Fort Ross Indians, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401, 449;
special mention, i., 364, 368, 381, 388, 398.
Fort Rupert, i., 175, 190-1, 296, 298.
Fort Simpson, i., 155, 167, 173-4, 293-4; lang., iii., 587.
Fort Walla Walla, Washington, antiq., iv., 735.
Fountains, ii., 565, 571, 587; iv., 457-8.
Four, Tlaloc sacred number, iii., 348.
Four Creeks, i., 363, 456-7.
Fowl, i., 694; ii., 702, 719, 721.
Foxes, i., 50, 258, 341, 551, 625; ii., 716.
Fox Islands, i., 87, 89, 141-2.
Francis Lake, lang., iii., 587.
Fraser Lake, lang., iii., 607.
Fraser River, i., 115, 145, 172, 175, 185, 251, 271, 278, 295-7,
312; iii., 613.
Frederick Sound, i., 143.
Fresno County, California, antiq., iv., 707.
Fresno River, i., 363, 398, 455.
Frijoles, beans, i., 694.
Fringe, Nahua dress, ii., 366-7, 369, 374.
Frogs, i., 405, 576; ii., 356; iii., 116-17, 360, 429; iv., 24.
Fruit, i., 234, 265, 333, 538-9, 549-50, 559, 560, 574, 576,
624-5, 652, 658, 694, 700; ii., 347, 718-19, 722.
Fuca, i., 222, see Juan de Fuca.
Funerals, see Burial.
Funnel, Isthmian dress, i., 751-2.
Fur, i., 29-31, 50, 73-4, 89, 100, 160, 182-3, 216, 230, 347,
425.
Furnaces, Nahuas, ii., 478.
Furniture, i., 54, 692, 718; ii., 174-5, 572-3, 786-7.
Future, i., 2-3; ii., 604-5, 616, 618, 622-3; iii., 34-5, 401-2,
405, 510-44.
Fyules, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
454.
G
Gabilanes (Gavilanes), North Mexican tribe, i., 572-91; location,
i., 612.
Gagavitz, iii., 477, see Hacavitz.
Gagcoh Valley, i., 788.
Galel Qamahay, Cakchiquel title, ii., 640.
Galel Xahil, Cakchiquel royal title, ii., 640; v., chap. xi.
Galena, Mississippi Valley, antiq., iv., 778-9.
Gale-Ziha, branch of Ilocab, v., chap. xi.
Galisteo, Pueblo village, i., 527, 600.
Gallinomeros, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location,
i., 362, 449; special mention, i., 372, 386, 390; lang., iii.,
643-4.
Galpons, (Galpones), corridor of council-house, Nicaragua, ii.,
646.
Gambling, Hyperboreans, i., 112-13, 122; Columbians, i., 169,
198, 219, 243-4, 280-1; Californians, i., 353-4, 394, 415-16,
437; New Mexicans, i., 516, 552-3, 587; Mexicans, ii., 299-301.
Gamchines, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
453.
Game, i., 39, 114, 153, 156, 187, 263, 323-4, 337, 405-6, 576;
ii., 350-1, 652, 659, 693, 720.
Ganchebi (Canchebiz, Canchevez, Ganchebirse), Guatemala tribe,
i., 686-711; location, i., 787.
Ganel, Quiché-Cakchiquel day, ii., 767.
Gardens, ii., 571, 573, 575, 789.
Gardner Channel, i., 155, 294.
Garlands, ii., 372, 620; iii., 313, 423, 426.
Garments, see Dress.
Garucha, a rope bridge, i., 693.
Garzas, i., 572, see Carrizas.
Gaulas, Mosquito tribe, i., 711-47; location, i., 713; lang.,
iii., 783.
Gavilanes, i., 611, see Gabilanes.
Geese, i., 75, 333, 337; ii., 721.
Geguep, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 459.
Gekaquch, a Cakchiquel ruler, v., chap. xi.
Gekaquchi, a Cakchiquel princely family, v., chap. xi.
Geliec, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 459.
Gelo, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 459.
Gemex, tribe of Pueblos, i., 526-56; location, i., 600.
Génau, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i., 453.
Genoa, town, Nevada, i., 469.
Gens de Bois, i., 147, see Han Kutchin.
Gens de Bouleau (Birch Indians), tribe of Tinneh, i., 114-37;
location, i., 147.
Gens de Buttes, i., 147, see Tenan Kutchin.
Gens de Fou, i., 147, see Tathzey Kutshi.
Gens de Foux, i., 147, see Tutchone Kutchin.
Gens de Large, i., 147, see Natche Kutchin.
Gens de Milieu, tribe of Tinneh, i., 114-37; location, i., 115,
147.
Georgetown, California, antiq., iv., 705.
Georgia, Mississippi Valley, antiq., iv., 767-8.
Georgia Gulf, i., 296.
Gergecensens (Gerguensens, Gerzuensens), Central Californian
tribe, i., 361-401; location, i., 363, 452.
Gerguensens (Gerzuensens), i., 452, see Gergecensens.
Gesture-language, iii., 2-5, 556.
Geysers, locality, California, i., 452.
Ghalashat, name for San Nicolas Island, i., 402.
Ghanan, ii., 767, see Chanan.
Ghocan, name for Palenque, iv., 295.
Ghowel (Huey Zacatlan), Chiapas, antiq., iv., 354.
Giants, i., 750; ii., 600; iii., 64, 67; iv., 695; v., 24, 49-50,
139, 197-200.
Gifts, see Presents.
Gig Harbor, i., 301.
Gijames, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 611.
Gila (Xila) River, i., 528, 593, 595-9, 601-2; lang., iii.,
594-5.
Gilding, see Plating.
Gileños (Xileños), tribe of Apaches, i., 473-526; location, i.,
474, 596; lang., iii., 685.
Gilimis, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
454.
Girdle, see Belt.
Givim, v., 70, see Hivim.
Gix, ii., 755, see Ix.
Gladiatorial Stone, ii., 586; iv., 509-10.
Glass, i., 48, 483; ii., 557, 573.
Glazing, pottery, i., 500, 698, 769; ii., 483; iv., 19, 63-5,
383, 647.
Gleuaxcuyu, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i.,
459.
Gloves, i., 258; ii., 298, 731.
Glue, i., 91, 130; ii., 489.
Gluttony, see Eating.
Gnudzavui-Gnuhu, locality, Oajaca, i., 678.
Gnuundaa, locality, Oajaca i., 678.
Goajiros, Isthmian tribe, i., 747-85; location, i., 796.
Goasacoalco, iii., 275-6, see Goazacoalco.
Goats, i., 215-16, 544.
Goazacoalco (Coatzacoalco, Goasacoalco, Goatzacoalco,
Guasacualco, Guazacualco), province and river, Vera Cruz, i.,
645, 666, 680; ii., 112, 619; iii., 259, 275-6; v., 259, 298,
421, 473.
Godamyous (!), tribe of Chinooks, i., 222-50; location, i., 307.
Goggles, Eskimos, i., 69.
Goitres, i., 588, 638.
Gold, New Mexicans, i., 543, 583; Mexicans, i., 631, 648, 651,
657; ii., 147, 173-5, 285, 290, 372, 376-7, 382, 406-8, 473-9,
606; iii., 285, 324; antiq., iv., 346, 376, 383, 455; Central
Americans, i., 727-8, 752, 754, 763, 766-9; ii., 732, 742,
749-50, 787; antiq., iv., 18, 20, 22-3, 66; Mississippi Valley,
antiq., iv., 778-9; Peru, antiq., iv., 792-4.
Gold Bluff, i., 445-6.
Golden Gate, myth., iii., 89.
Gold-Harbors, tribe of Haidahs, i., 155-74; location, i., 292.
Gold Hill, California, antiq., iv., 706.
Goldsmiths, Nahuas, ii., 475-8; iii., 411.
Gold Springs Gulch, California, antiq., iv., 701-2, 706.
Golovin Sound, i., 141.
Golovnin (Golownin) Bay, i., 70, 141.
Gonorrhœa, see Venereal Disease.
Goose Creek, i., 469.
Goose Lake, i., 444.
Gosh Ute Lake, i., 422.
Gosh Utes (Gosha Utes, Goshautes, Goships, Goshoots, Gosh Yutas),
tribe of Shoshones, i., 422-42; location and name, i., 422,
467-8; special mention, i., 428; lang., iii., 661-2.
Gossampine, see Cotton.
Gourds, i., 544, 551-2, 582, 630, 656; ii., 398, 484, 709, 752;
v., chap. xi.
Government, its relation to civilization, ii., 60-6, 71-4;
Hyperboreans, i., 65, 80, 92, 100-1, 108, 121, 123-5, 130-2,
134; Columbians, i., 167-8, 170, 173, 180-2, 185, 187-8, 193-6,
217, 240, 247-8, 258, 262, 269-70, 275-6; Californians, i.,
347-9, 358, 385-8, 409-10, 435; New Mexicans, i., 507-10,
546-7, 564-5, 584; Mexicans, i., 632, 659-60; ii., 133-239,
373-7, 418-19, 433-72, 603-14, 619-22, 628; iii., 210-20,
225-30, 259, 273-4, 432, 726; v., 244-9, 255, 264, 350-1, 404,
456-8; Central Americans, i., 701-2, 728-9, 735, 753, 755, 758,
764, 769-71, 781-4; ii., 630-60, 669, 736-7, 740-1, 787-90,
799-801; iii., 73; v., chap. xiii.
Goxicas, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 611.
Granada, Nicaragua, antiq., iv., 47, 60; New Mexico, antiq., iv.,
674.
Granaries, see Store-houses.
Gran-Chimú, Peru, antiq., iv., 798-800.
Grande Ronde Valley, i., 254, 319.
Grande de San Pedro Lake, i., 612.
Grand River, i., 461, 464.
Granville, Ohio, antiq., iv., 771.
Grass, food, i., 103, 170, 340, 373-5, 406; manufactures, etc.,
i., 73, 91, 107, 211, 214, 236, 258, 270, 330-1, 345, 368,
381-2, 425, 434, 486, 500, 502, 724, 765; ii., 574; iii., 129.
Grasshoppers, as food, i., 373-4, 405-6, 428, 488, 561.
Grass Valley, California, antiq., iv., 706.
Grave Creek, i., 308.
Graves, see Burial.
Gray's Harbor, i., 151, 209, 211, 215-17, 222, 303-4.
Grease, i., 129, 210, 333; iii., 145.
Great Bear Lake, i., 144.
Great Bear River Valley, i., 461.
Great Fish River, i., 145.
Great Lone Land, i., 114.
Great Salt Lake Basin, i., 152, 323-4, 461-3.
Great Slave Lake, i., 144.
Great South Pass, i., 461.
Greaves, ii., 377, 406-8, see Armor.
Greece, myth., compared with Nahua, iii., 444; American
origin-traces, v., 122-3.
Greenland, early settlement of, v., 106-15.
Green River, i., 300, 461-4.
Grepons, Nicaragua council-houses, ii., 646.
Greytown, i., 793.
Grijalva, Juan de, arrival on Mexican coast, v., 478.
G-tinkit, i., 96, see Sitkas.
Guacachula, city, Mexico, ii., 416.
Guachichiles (Cuachichiles, Guachachiles, Huacbichiles,
Huachichiles), North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i.,
572, 614; special mention, i., 632; lang., iii., 719.
Guaco, antidote for snake-bites, i., 589, 743.
Guadalajara, Jalisco, antiq., iv., 572.
Guadalupe River, i., 452.
Guaguayutla, village, Guerrero, i., 677.
Guaicuris (Guaicuras, Guaicures, Guaycúras, Waicuros, Waikur),
Lower Californian tribe, i., 556-71; location, i., 557-8,
603-4; special mention, i., 558-9, 565-7, 570; lang., iii.,
687-93.
Guailopos, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 609.
Guaimas, iii., 604, see Guaymas.
Guaimies (Huamies), Isthmian tribe, i., 747-85; location, i.,
796; special mention, i., 759.
Guainetas, Isthmian tribe, i., 747-85; location, i., 796.
Guainnonost, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i.,
459.
Guaipil, i., 621, see Huipil.
Guaislac, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 459.
Guajamina, locality, Lower California, i., 569.
Guajiqueros, Mosquito tribe, i., 711-47; location, i., 712;
special mention, i., 718, 722, 737-8.
Guajolote, Mexico, antiq., iv., 545.
Gualala (Walhalla, Wallalla) Creek, i., 449.
Gualalas, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
449; special mention, i., 386; lang., iii., 643.
Gualpi, (Gualpa, Hualpi, Jualpi), Moqui village, i., 528, 600-1.
Guamarœ, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; lang., iii., 719.
Guanacaste, Costa Rica, antiq., iv., 24.
Guanacauri Mt, v., 16.
Guanaja Island, i., 790; antiq., iv., 70.
Guanajuato, description of tribes, i., 617-44; ii., 133-629;
location, i., 673, 677; myth., iii., 541; lang., iii., 737-41;
antiq., iv., 577-8.
Guanines, gold ornaments, i., 752.
Guanipas, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 611.
Guanitiquimanes, Oajaca tribe, hist., v., 528.
Guanlen, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
453.
Guarapo, South Mexican drink, i., 665.
Guarara, Isthmian province, lang., iii., 794.
Guards, Nahuas, ii., 183, 245.
Guasabas, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 606.
Guasacualco, iii., 276, see Goazacoalco.
Guasavas, village, Sonora, i., 606.
Guashillas, tribe of Haidahs, i., 155-74; location, i., 294.
Guasistagua, Honduras, antiq., iv., 71.
Guaslaique, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i.,
458.
Guastecs, i., 674, see Huastecs.
Guatemala (Quauhtemalan), antiq., iv., 108-38; hist., v., 298,
349, 460-1, chap. xi.; for information concerning tribes, see
Guatemalans and Maya nations.
Guatemalans (Guatemaltecs), one of the three families into
which the tribes of Central America are divided. Manners and
customs of all its nations and tribes described together, i.,
686-711; civilized nations, ii., 630-803; location, i., 682,
786-92; ii., 121-2; Physique, i., 688-9; ii., 802; Dress, i.,
689-92; ii., 726-34; Dwellings, i., 692-3; ii., 783-94; Food,
i., 694-6; ii., 715-25; Personal Habits, i., 696; ii., 734-5;
Implements and Manufactures, i., 697-9; ii., 748-52; Weapons
and War, i., 696-7; ii., 739-47; Boats, i., 699; ii., 739;
Property and Commerce, i., 699-700; ii., 735-8; Art, i., 700-1;
ii., 748-82; Government, i., 701-2; ii., 631-60; Marriage
and Women, i., 702-4; ii., 664-86; Education, ii., 661-4;
Amusements, i., 704-7; ii., 687-714; Miscellaneous Customs,
i., 707-8; ii., 796-8; Medicine, i., 708-9; ii., 794-6; Burial,
i., 709; ii., 798-802; Character, i., 709-11; ii., 803; myth.,
iii., 74-5, 129, 474-90; v., 13, 20; lang., iii., 726, 759-60;
hist., chap. xi.
Guatulco, Oajaca, antiq., iv., 374; hist., v., 214, 425.
Guatusco, iv., 445, see Huatusco.
Guatusos, (Indios Blancos, Pranzos), Isthmian tribe, i., 747-85;
location and name, i., 748, 794-5; special mention, i., 750-1,
758, 784; lang., iii., 793.
Guautla, Vera Cruz, antiq., iv., 461.
Guavi, i., 680, see Huaves.
Guaxaca, i., 679, see Oajaca.
Guaximala, Nicaragua, antiq., iv., 35.
Guaxtecas, v., 208, see Huastecs.
Guayacan, a species of wood, i., 579, 778; ii., 795.
Guayangares, name for Tzintzuntzan, v., 516.
Guayave, a thin corn cake, i., 540.
Guaycúras, i., 557, see Guaicuris.
Guaymas, (Guaimas), North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location,
i., 605; lang., iii., 704-5.
Guazabas, iii., 699, see Guazaves.
Guazacualco, i., 666, see Goazacoalco.
Guazalingo, province, Mexico, i., 675.
Guazamoros, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 611.
Guazapares, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 610;
lang., iii., 711.
Guazaves (Guazabas), North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location,
i., 609; lang., iii., 699, 707.
Gucumatz (Tepeu, Tepeuh), Quiché ruler and god, ii., 648, 716-17;
iii., 45, 135, 475; v., 23, 170, 188, chap. xi.
Güegüetenango, i., 787, see Huehuetenango.
Gueiquizales, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 611.
Guenocks, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
363, 651.
Guerrero, tribes described, i., 617-44; ii., 133-629; location,
i., 677-8, 790; lang., iii., 749, 752; antiq., iv., 423-4.
Guetares, Isthmian tribe, i., 747-85; location, i., 795.
Gugures, Isthmian tribe, i., 747-85; special mention, i., 752.
Guichicovi, village, Oajaca, i., 679-80.
Guicholas, Central Mexican tribe, i., 617-44; location, i., 672.
Guiengola, Oajaca, antiq., iv., 368-71; hist., v., 444-5.
Guillicas (Guilucos), Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401;
location, i., 362, 449; lang., iii., 650.
Guima, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 459.
Guimen, i., 453, see Guymen.
Guipaulavi, Moqui village, i., 600.
Guisoles, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 611.
Guixa, v., chap. xii., see Huixa.
Guixolotes, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 613.
Gulf of Fonseca, i., 791.
Guloismistac, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location,
i., 453.
Gum, i., 130, 172, 204, 217, 286, 434, 439, 639, 692, 698, 776;
ii., 485, 600, 734; v., 325.
Gumarcaah, ii., 637, see Utatlan.
Gummesacapemes, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i.,
613.
Gutaras, Nicaragua sandals, ii., 731.
Guylpunes, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
453.
Guymen (Guimen), Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401;
location, i., 453.
Guzman Lake, i., 595; iii., 594.
Gwangwa Pagua, name for Tangaxoan II., v., 525.
Gwosdeff Islands, i., 64.
Gymnasium, ii., 662, 713; iv., 172-3, 230-3.
Gypsum, ii., 556, 558, 570, 572, 581.
H
Haab, Maya year, ii., 759.
Habasto, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
453.
Habenapo, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
451.
Hacavitz (Gagavitz), Quiché god, iii., 50-2, 477; v., 181,
547-56, 562, 569-71, 574.
Hacavitz Mountain, v., 549-53, 556, 560, 564.
Haeeltzuk, i., 294, see Hailtzas.
Haglli, tribe of Apaches, i., 473-526; location, i., 599.
Hagulgets, tribe of Haidahs, i., 155-74; location, i., 294.
Hahamogna, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i.,
460.
Haidahs, one of the nine families into which the Columbians are
divided; manners and customs of all its nations and tribes
described together, i., 155-74; physique, i., 156-8; dress,
i., 158-60; dwellings, i., 160-1; food, i., 161-4; weapons,
implements, and manufactures, i., 164-6; boats, i., 166;
property and trade, i., 167; government, i., 167-8; women and
marriage, i., 168-9; amusements, i., 169-70; miscellaneous
customs, i., 170-2; medicine, i., 172; burial, i., 172-3;
character, i., 173-4; location of tribes, i., 151, 292-5;
myth., iii., 149-50, 520; lang., iii., 604-6.
Haidahs (Haïdas, Hydahs), tribe of Haidahs, i., 155-74; location
and name, i., 292-3; special mention, i., 157, 203.
Hailtzas (Haeeltzuk, Haeelzuk, Hailtsa, Hailtzuk, Hautzuk),
tribe of Haidahs, i., 155-74; location, i., 155, 295; special
mention, i., 157-8, 170-1; lang., iii., 607.
Hair, i., 12-14; Hyperboreans, i., 46-7, 72, 86, 88, 117, 119,
128, 131-2; iii., 148; Columbians, i., 157-9, 166, 173, 178-80,
182-3, 195, 206, 210-11, 215-16, 225-6, 229, 246, 255-7, 270,
288; Californians, i., 331, 357, 364-6, 368-70, 397, 402, 404,
420, 424; New Mexicans, i., 477-84, 496, 523, 529-32, 544, 551,
558-9, 567, 569, 573-5, 582-3, 590; Mexicans, i., 619, 621-2,
646-7, 649-51; ii., 252, 307, 324, 329, 333, 370-1, 403, 408,
461, 484, 599, 605, 624; iii., 238, 364, 387, 392, 435; Central
Americans, i., 689-91, 714-16, 744, 750-2, 754; ii., 651,
729-31, 741.
Haitlins, i., 175, 298, see Teets.
Hakoopin, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 460.
Halach Winikel, Tutul Xiu title, ii., 636; v., chap. xiii.
Halchedomas, tribe of Apaches, i., 473-526; location, i., 599.
Halchis, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
453.
Halibut, food, Hyperboreans, i., 104; Columbians, i., 162, 186,
214.
Haliotis, see Pearls.
Hallams, tribe of Nootkas, i., 174-208; location, i., 296.
Hamaca, Mexican hammock, i., 656.
Hamai-Uleü, Quiché queen, v., 572.
Hamburg Indians (Tka), North Californian tribe, i., 326-61;
location, i., 447; lang., iii., 640.
Hamechuwa, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i.,
460.
Hammersly's Inlet, i., 301.
Hammocks, i., 658, 697-9, 724, 765-6, 782; antiq., iv., 82-3.
Hamockhaves, i., 597, see Mojaves.
Hamook-häbî Mountains, i., 597.
Hanags (Haynaggis), North Californian tribe, i., 326-61;
location, i., 442, 445; lang., iii., 593.
Hanegas (Anega, Hennegas), tribe of Haidahs, i., 155-74;
location, i., 292-3.
Han-Kutchin (An-Kutchin, Gens de Bois), tribe of Tinneh, i.,
114-37; location, i., 115, 147; lang., iii., 587.
Hannakalals (Hannakallals), tribe of Chinooks, i., 222-50;
location, i., 307.
Haracotin, mountain, Michoacan, v., 518.
Harasgna, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 460.
Hare, i., 50, 373, 424, 538, 578; ii., 368, 721-2; iii., 80.
Harem, Nahuas, ii., 182-3.
Harney Lake, i., 463.
Harno, Moqui town, lang., iii., 671, 681.
Harpies, Isthmian myth., iii., 500-1.
Harpoons, i., 56, 719; ii., 721.
Harrison River, lang., iii., 613.
Harvest-feasts, i., 735; ii., 340, 713-14.
Haslintahs, North Californian tribe, i., 326-61; location, i.,
445.
Hatawa, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 460.
Hatchets, i., 59, 104, 164, 345, 434, 543, 724, 765; ii., 482,
737, 749-50; see also Axes.
Hats, Hyperboreans, i., 74, 88-9, 101; Columbians, i., 159, 166,
182-3, 211, 230, 258-9; Californians, i., 330-1, 345, 358, 368;
New Mexicans, i., 481-4, 531-2, 551, 558-9, 575; Mexicans, i.,
620, 648, 650; Central Americans, i., 690-1, 699, 715-16, 754.
Hatzal, Guatemala, antiq., iv., 131.
Hatzcab, Maya forenoon, ii., 755.
Hautzuk, i., 158, see Hailtzas.
Hauzaurni, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
454.
Havic-häbî Mountains, i., 597.
Hawhaw, California, lang., iii., 651.
Hayate, Maya mantle, ii., 727.
Haynaggis, i., 445, see Hanags.
Hayocingo, locality, Mexico, v., 472.
Head, i., 46, 72, 329, 426, 569, 573, 689, 714.
Head-flattening, Columbians, i., 151, 158, 180, 210, 226-8,
256-7; Mexicans, i., 651; ii., 281; Central Americans, i., 717,
754; ii., 681-2, 731-2, 802; iv., 304.
Hebonomas, tribe of Apaches, i., 473-526; location, i., 598.
Hecat, iii., 491, see Ehecatl.
Hecatotonti, Nahua idols, iii., 343.
Hegues, i., 607, see Eudeves.
Hehighenimmo, i., 313, 316, see Sans Poils.
Helluland, North-east America, v., 106.
Hellwits, tribe of Chinooks, i., 222-50; location, i., 306, 317.
Helmets, i., 105, 235, 706; ii., 403, 405, 407, 742.
Hemes, Pueblo province, i., 527.
Hemlock, i., 162, 204.
Hemp, i., 162, 164-5.
Hennegas, i., 293, see Hanegas.
Hepowwoo, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 460.
Hequis, i., 607, see Eudeves.
Heralds, i., 202, 379, 388; see also Ambassadors.
Heraldry, i., 193, 202.
Herbs, various uses of, i., 57, 103, 124, 172, 204, 220, 233,
286, 333, 340, 354, 373-4, 387, 395, 406, 419, 439, 503, 521-2,
537, 566, 568, 588-9, 633-4, 639-40, 667, 709, 742-3, 754, 776,
778, 782; ii., 287, 595, 598, 600, 710, 734, 795.
Hermita (Llano de la Culebra), town, Guatemala, i., 788.
Hermosillo, village, Sonora, i., 602.
Herradura Bay, i., 751.
Herring, i., 104, 162, 186, 212.
Héthtoyas, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
456.
Hetzalqualiztl, ii., 509, see Etzalqualiztli.
Heves, i., 607, see Eudeves.
Hiaqua, a shell used for money, i., 217, 239.
Hiaqui, i., 572, 605, see Yaquis.
Hicipan, Michoacan ruler, v., 524.
Hicucaxe, king of Michoacan, v., 524.
Hidalgo, Guerrero, antiq., iv., 423-4.
Hides, see Skins.
Hieroglyphics, Columbians, i., 161, 172, 193; antiq., iv.,
734-6; Californians, antiq., iv., 690-1, 715-17, 724, 733-4;
New Mexicans, i., 507, 545-6; antiq., iv., 620, 631, 638-41,
643-5, 648-9, 661, 673, 679-81; Mexicans, ii., 240-1, 413, 443,
487-8, 499, 523-52; iii., 437; antiq., iv., 304-602 passim;
v., 140-2, 479-80; Central Americans, ii., 115-16, 656, 756-7,
767-82; antiq., iv., 22-277, passim; v., 142; Mississippi
Valley, antiq., iv., 784-5; v., 75-6; Peru, antiq., iv., 806;
resemblances to Egyptian, v., 61-2.
Hietans, i., 592, see Comanches.
Hijames, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 611.
Himeris, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 606;
lang., iii., 699.
Hinas, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 614; lang.,
iii., 719.
Hiokowitz, Yucatan, antiq., iv., 212.
Hios, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 607.
Hipil, i., 650, see Huipil.
Hishquayaht, tribe of Nootkas, i., 174-208; location, i., 295.
Historians, Spanish, etc., bibliography, ii., 158-60; v., 142-9.
History, explorations, western North American, i., 27-32;
introductory remarks on aids to research, etc., v., 133-55;
Northern tribes, v., 536-9; Nahua nations, ii., 96-114; iii.,
270-1, 307-8; iv., 470; pre-Toltec period, v., 188-236; Toltec
period, v., 237-88; Chichimec period, v., 289-399; Aztec
period, v., 400-82; Tlascala, v., 483-507; Michoacan, v.,
508-26; Oajaca, v., 526-36; Maya nations, ii., 114-23, 632-4,
637-8; iv., 107, 280-1, 359-62; pre-Toltec, v., 158-88, 223-36;
Quiché-Cakchiquel, v., 540-602; Chiapas, Honduras, etc., v.,
603-14; Yucatan, v., 615-34.
Hivim (Givim), name of Hurte country, v., 70.
Hix, Tzendal day, ii., 767, see Ix.
Hizos, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 609.
Hobnil, Maya god, ii., 692, 699.
Hochiquetzal, name of Chalchihuitlicue, iii., 367.
Hock (Huk), Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
450; lang., iii., 650.
Hoe, i., 582, 630; ii., 348.
Hoeras, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 611.
Hogs, i., 652, 694, 721, 725, 758; ii., 721.
Hohgates, North Californian mythic persons, iii., 177.
Hohilpos (Hopilpos), Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91;
location, i., 312-13.
Hohocam, Pima mythic persons, iii., 79-80.
Hohs, tribe of Sound Indians, i., 208-22; location, i., 303.
Hokandikahs (Salt Lake Diggers), tribe of Shoshones, i., 422-42;
location, i., 463.
Holcanes, Maya paid troops, ii., 740.
Holkan okot, Maya war-dance, ii., 693.
Holom, ancient city, Guatemala, v., chap. xi.
Holon Chan Tepeuh, Tutul Xiu leader, v., 227, chap. xiii.
Holpop, Maya title, ii., 711.
Homamish, tribe of Sound Indians, i., 208-22; location, i., 302.
Honcut, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
450.
Honduras, tribes described, i., 711-47; Civilized nations, ii.,
630-803; location, i., 790, 792-4; ii., 121; myth., iii.,
485-6, 496; lang., iii., 726, 759-60, 782-3; antiq., iv.,
69-105; hist., v., 472, 541, 558, chap. xii.
Honey, i., 576-7, 586, 625, 654, 694, 726, 739; ii., 357, 599,
699, 722-4; iii., 313.
Honey Lake, i., 468.
Hood Bay, i., 143.
Hood's Canal, i., 208, 301-2; lang., iii., 613.
Hoodsinoos (Hoodsunhoos, Hootsinoos), tribe of Thlinkeets, i.,
94-114; location, i., 96, 143; lang., iii., 579.
Hoofs, used for ornaments, i., 482, 522, 574.
Hooks, i., 76, 90, 104, 164, 185-6, 212-14, 233, 236, 262, 407;
ii., 353.
Hoonids (Hooneaks, Huna Cow, Hunnas), tribe of Thlinkeets, i.,
94-114; location, i., 142.
Hoopahs (Hoopas), North Californian tribe, i., 326-61; location,
i., 327, 445; special mention, i., 334, 344, 348-51; lang.,
iii., 584, 592-3.
Hoopah Valley, i., 327, 445.
Hoops, Central California, game with, i., 393-4.
Hootsinoos, i., 143, see Hoodsinoos.
Hóp, locality, north-east coast of America, v., 110.
Hopaiuh, village, North California, i., 444.
Hopeton, Mississippi Valley, antiq., iv., 760-2.
Hope Valley, i., 469.
Hopilpos, i., 313, see Hohilpos.
Horcasitas, village, Sonora, i., 605.
Horcasitas River, i., 605.
Horn, i., 58, 117, 164, 189, 235, 248, 270-1, 342, 344, 432, 434,
542, 582; ii., 292-3, 412, 713.
Hornitos, California, antiq., iv., 707.
Horn Mountain Indians, tribe of Tinneh, i., 114-37; location, i.,
114, 144; special mention, i., 117-19.
Horocroc, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
453.
Horoscope, ii., 253, 271-2, 663; iii., 482.
Horses, i., 154, 259, 267-74, 280-4, 433, 435, 438-9, 490, 492,
505-6, 518, 523, 539, 542, 544, 561, 583, 725; iii., 483.
Horse Shoe Bend, California, antiq., iv., 707.
Horse Sound, i., 207.
Hospitals, i., 583; ii., 596.
Hot Creek, i., 443.
Hoteday, i., 447, name for Yrekas.
Hotlimamish, tribe of Sound Indians, i., 208-22; location, i.,
302.
Hottrochtac, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location,
i., 454.
Houaguan (Wonagan), tribe of Haidahs, i., 155-74; location, i.,
292.
House of Birds, at Uxmal, Yucatan, antiq., iv., 190-1.
Houses, see Dwellings.
Houtgna, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 460.
Hovenweep River, Utah, antiq., iv., 732-3.
Howachez, i., 455, see Howetsers.
Howchuklisaht (Ouchuchlisit), tribe of Nootkas, i., 174-208;
location, i., 295.
Howe Sound, i., 298.
Howetsers (Howachez), Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401;
location, i., 363, 455-6.
Howkumas, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
451.
Howteteoh, North California, lang., iii., 642.
Hoxtotipaquillo, locality, Jalisco, i., 672.
Huabes (Huabi), i., 680, see Huaves.
Huacas, tombs, Chiriquí and Peru, antiq., iv., 17, 792.
Huacbichiles, iii., 719, see Guachichiles.
Huachi, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
454.
Huachichiles, i., 614, see Guachichiles.
Huaconex, medicinal plant, ii., 599.
Huactlatohuani, Chichimec imperial title, v., 299.
Huactli, a Toltec king, v., 250.
Huadíbis, village, Sonora, i., 608.
Huahuapan (Huajuapan), locality, Oajaca, i., 677; antiq., iv.,
421.
Hualahuises, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; lang., iii., 714.
Hualapais (Hualpais, Wallpays), tribe of Apaches, i., 473-526;
location, i., 475, 597; special mention, i., 477-8.
Hualapai Valley, i., 597.
Hualpi, i., 601, see Gualpi.
Hualquilme, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
454.
Huamares, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 572.
Huamies, i., 796, see Guaimies.
Huanuco el Viejo, Peru, antiq., iv., 801-4.
Huapalcalco, locality, Vera Cruz, i., 671.
Huaraches, Mexican sandals, i., 620.
Huasna, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 458.
Huastecs, (Cuextecas, Guastecs, Guaxtecas, Huaxtecs), Nahua
nation, i., 617-44; ii., 133-629; location and name, i., 674;
ii., 127; special mention, i., 638; ii., 114, 365; lang., ii.,
500; iii., 759, 776-81; hist., v., 207-8, 239, 539; chap. xiii.
Huastepec, town, Mexico, ii., 575.
Huatiquimanes, Oajaca tribe, hist., v., 528.
Huatusco (Guatusco, Quauhtochco), Vera Cruz, antiq., ii., 417;
iv., 439-45.
Huaves (Guavi, Huabes, Huabi, Huavi, Wabi), Nahua nation, i.,
644-70; ii., 133-629; location, i., 645, 680; ii., 111-12;
special mention, i., 647-8, 652, 658-9, 666, 668; ii., 379;
lang., iii., 757-8; hist., v., 529-30, 532, 534.
Huaxteca, locality, Vera Cruz, i., 674.
Huaxtecs, i., 674, see Huastecs.
Huaxyacac, fortified city, Oajaca, i., 679; antiq., iv., 384;
hist., v., 439, 444.
Hubo, Itza god, iii., 482.
Huchun, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
453.
Hudcoadans, tribe of Pueblos, i., 526-56; lang., iii., 685.
Hudson Bay, i., 29-30, 38, 62-3, 114, 143-4; lang., iii., 584.
Hudson Strait, i., 46, 50, 60, 63.
Huehuequauhtitlan, locality, Mexico, iii., 257.
Huehuetan, Chiapas, antiq., iv., 354; hist., v., 160, chap. xii.
Huehuetenango (Güegüetenango), locality, Guatemala, i., 787;
antiq., iv., 128-30; hist., v., 555.
Huehuetenuxcatl, a Toltec leader, v., 284.
Huehueteotl, name for Xiuhtecutli, iii., 385.
Huehuetiliztli, Nahua age, ii., 505.
Huehuetl, Nahua drum, ii., 293.
Huehuetlan, province, Mexico, v., 346.
Huehue Tlapallan, ancient home of Toltecs and Chichimecs, ii.,
504-5; iii., 270; v., 18, 209-20.
Huehuetoca (Huehuetocan), Mexico, antiq., iv., 549; hist., v.,
242, 476.
Huehuetzin, a Chichimec leader, v., 272, 277, 282-6; lord of
Huexotzinco, v., 437-8, 499.
Hueicolhuacan, v., 323, see Huey Culhuacan.
Hueicolhues, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 607.
Hueiteopixqui, Nahua priest, iii., 432.
Huejutla, city, Mexico, ii., 568; antiq., iv., 528-9.
Huemac, name for Quetzalcoatl, iii., 267, 283-4; Chichimec king,
v., 220; identified with Tezcatlipoca and others, v., 259,
261-5, 484, 528.
Huemac II., (Atecpanecatl, Iztacquauhtzin, Tecpancaltzin,
Yztaccaltzin), Toltec king, v., 267-86.
Huemac III., (Matlacxochitl), Toltec king, v., 286.
Hueman (Huematzin), a Toltec prophet, v., 211, 242-52.
Huenejel, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 458.
Hueneme, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 459.
Huenepel Ninyuelgual, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22;
location, i., 458.
Huepaca, village, Sonora, i., 606.
Huetzalin, a Xochimilca chief, v., 309.
Huetzin (Huitzin), a Toltec king, v., 220, 250-6, 272-3; Acolhua
prince, v., 303-5, 309, 316-19.
Huetzin II., lord of Coatlichan, v., 333.
Huexachtitlan, station, Aztec migration, v., 323.
Huexotla, a city of Mexico, ii., 441; hist., v., 319-20, 333-4,
373-4, 380, 392-5.
Huexotzinco, city, Mexico, ii., 112, 127, 142; hist., v., 307-10,
318, 426, 459-64, 483-507.
Hueycalpixques, Nahua officials, ii., 237.
Huey Culhuacan (Hueicolhuacan), station, Aztec migration, v.,
323.
Hueymiccailhuitl, Nahua month, ii., 331, 510.
Hueyotlipan, fortified town, Tlascala, v., 503.
Hueypachtli, Nahua month, ii., 511.
Hueypuchtlan, station, Teo-Chichimec migration, v., 487.
Hueytecuilhuitl, Nahua month, ii., 326, 510.
Huey-Teopixqui, Nahua order of priests, ii., 202.
Hueytlato, province, Honduras, v., chap. xii.
Huey Tlatoani Chichimecatl Tecuhtli, Chichimec imperial title,
v., 299.
Hueytozoztli (Veitozoztli), Nahua month, ii., 317, 509; iii.,
421.
Hueyxalan, station, Toltec migration, v., 212.
Hueyxotzin, Tlascala, antiq., iv., 477.
Huey Zacatlan, iv., 354, see Ghowel.
Huichiapan, village, Mexico, i., 674.
Huicholas (Huitcoles), Central Mexican tribe, i., 617-44; special
mention, i., 621; lang., iii., 719.
Huictli, Nahua shovel, ii., 348.
Huictlollinqui, Nahua god, v., 193.
Huietlaxcalli, species of corn cake, ii., 355.
Huijatoo, ii., 209, see Wiyatao.
Huililic (Huililoc), South Californian tribe, i., 402-22;
location, i., 459.
Huilocpalli, Nahua cake, ii., 312.
Huime, iii., 719, see Humes.
Huimen, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
453.
Huimolan, south boundary of Mexican empire, v., 473.
Huipil (Hipil, Guaipil, Vipilli), part of a woman's dress, i.,
621, 650, 691; ii., 368-9.
Huirivis, village, Sonora, i., 608.
Huitcoles, iii., 719, see Huicholas.
Huites, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 609;
lang., iii., 707.
Huitlapalan (Huitlapatlan), station, Toltec migration, v., 209,
214.
Huitz, a Toltec chief, v., 243.
Huitzilapan, locality, Puebla, i., 670; ii., 112; v., 242; name
for Tlascala, v., 249.
Huitzilihuitl, Aztec king, v., 330-1, 340.
Huitzilihuitl II., king of Mexico, v., 361-6.
Huitzilin, a humming-bird, ii., 489.
Huitzilopochco, city, Mexico, ii., 562; iii., 307.
Huitzilopochtli (Huitzilopuchtli, Huitziloputzli, Huitzlipochtli,
Ocelopuchtli, Uzilopuchtli, Vichilopuchitl, Vitziliputzli,
Vitzilopuchtli, Vizilipuztli, Vizliputzli), Nahua god, ii.,
144-7, 320-4, 328-9, 335, 337, 339, 395-6, 400, 559-60, 577-84,
605; iii., 187-8, 241, 247, 288-324, 427-8; iv., 512-14; v.,
85, 89, 220, 324-7, 345-6, 500.
Huitziloxitl, medicinal plant, ii., 599.
Huitzin, v., 252, see Huetzin.
Huitzitlan, city, Mexico, ii., 560.
Huitziton (Huitzitoc), an Aztec leader, iii., 290-1, 304-6; v.,
88, 306.
Huitzitzilaque, name for Tzintzuntzan, v., 516.
Huitzitzilin, a Toltec princess, v., 301.
Huitznahuac, city, Mexico, ii., 560; v., 253, 338, 404.
Huitznahuac-Teohuatzin, priestly title, ii., 202.
Huitznahuateocalli, a temple of Mexico, v., 409.
Huitzocteme, sacrificial stones, Tlascala, antiq., iv., 477.
Huitzquilocan (Huitzquilocal), station, Aztec migration, v., 324.
Huitzuahuacteohuatzin, Nahua priests, iii., 433.
Huixachtitlan, station, Aztec migration, v., 323-4.
Huixachtla, iii., 393, see Vixachtlan.
Huixa (Guixa) Lake, iii., 484; v., 609.
Huixapa, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 459.
Huixapapa, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i.,
459.
Huixázo, locality, Oajaca, i., 679.
Huixtocihuatl, Nahua goddess, ii., 325-6.
Huixton, a Tepanec leader, v., 331.
Huixtopetlacotl, Nahua plume, ii., 325.
Huixtoti, Nahua sacrifice, ii., 326.
Huizaquen Tochin Tecuhtli, a Chichimec prince, v., 314-19.
Huizteco, Guerrero, antiq., iv., 424.
Hulanapos, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
451.
Hulmecas, i., 671, see Olmecs.
Humaliju, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 459.
Human sacrifice, Hyperboreans, iii., 143; Columbians, iii.,
151; Mexicans, ii., 304-41, 394-7, 600-26, 704; iii., 61,
110-11, 265-460, passim; v., 205, 258-62, 268, 342-3, 346, 350,
394, 414, 440, 456, 463, 471, 478, 482, 497, 500-1; Central
Americans, i., 723; ii., 688-708, 796, 799-800; iii., 52,
471-2, 482-98; v., chap. xi., xiii.
Humboldt Bay, i., 327, 332, 446; lang., iii., 639, 643.
Humboldt County, California, antiq., iv., 707.
Humboldt River, i., 462, 464, 466, 469.
Humes (Huime), North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i.,
614; special mention, i., 575; lang., iii., 718.
Humetaha, suburb of Chiquix city, Guatemala, v., chap. xi.
Humming-bird, Nahua myth., iii., 67, 301-2, 304-5, 311-12, 404.
Humphrey Point, i., 47.
Hunab Ku, Maya god, iii., 462.
Hunac Eel, king of Mayapan, v., 625 et seq.
Huna Cows, i., 142, see Hoonids.
Hunahpu (Hun Ahpu), Quiché and Cakchiquel day, ii., 767; Quiché
ruler and god, iii., 478-80; v., 174-184, 544-6, 560, 566,
578-9.
Hunahpu mountain, v., 569.
Hunahpu (Hun Ahpu) Utïu, Quiché god, iii., 474; v., 170, 182.
Hunahpu (Hun Ahpu) Vuch, Quiché god, iii., 474; v., 170.
Hunas, North Californian tribe, i., 326-61; location, i., 443.
Hunavan, Guatemala god, iii., 74.
Hunbatz (Hun Batz), Quiché god, iii., 479; v., 174-80.
Hunca, town, Columbia, v., 24.
Huncahua, Muysca king, v., 24.
Hun Came, king of Xibalba, v., 175-80, 184.
Hunchbacks, in Nahua harem, ii., 183.
Hunchevan, Guatemala god, iii., 74.
Hun Chouen, Quiché god, iii., 479; v., 174-80.
Hunchunchan, Itza god, iii., 483.
Hunctu, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
453.
Hunhunahpu (Hunhun Ahpu), Quiché god, iii., 478-9; v., 174-5,
544.
Hunnas, i., 142, see Hoonids.
Huno Bix Gih, Quiché month, ii., 766.
Hunpictok, Yucatec temple, iii., 467; antiq., iv., 248.
Hunting, Hyperboreans, i., 56-7, 77-8, 91, 118, 123, 129, 135;
Columbians, i., 153-4, 161-2, 263-4; Californians, i., 336-7,
373, 375-6, 405-6, 428; New Mexicans, i., 488, 490-2, 561,
576-7; Mexicans, i., 652; ii., 166, 335-6, 344, 350-2; iii.,
403-6; Central Americans, i., 694, 720-1, 760; ii., 653, 691,
697-8, 708, 720-1.
Huntoh, Cakchiquel ruler and god, v., 549.
Huntzuy, Guatemala ruler and tribe, v., 563.
Hunyg, Cakchiquel ruler, v., 600.
Huocom, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
454.
Hurakan, Quiché god, iii., 45-6, 118, 134, 475-6; v., 171, 174.
Hurmal, name for Santa Rosa Island, i., 402.
Husbands, see Marriage.
Husistaic, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i.,
458.
Husorones, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 609.
Hutatecas, Guatemala tribe, i., 686-711; location, i., 787;
lang., iii., 760.
Huts, see Dwellings.
Hutucgna, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 460.
Huvagueres, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 607.
Hvitramannaland, name for North-east America, v., 113.
Hydahs, i., 292, see Haidahs.
Hydromel, as medicine, i., 588.
Hymeris, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 607.
Hyperboreans, one of the seven groups into which the natives
of the Pacific states are divided, located along the Arctic
seaboard, in Russian America, Alaska, and adjoining islands,
and from Hudson's Bay to latitude 55°, including also
the Aleutian Archipelago; subdivided into five families,
the Eskimos, Koniagas, Aleuts, Thlinkeets, and Tinneh or
Athabascas. Manners and customs of each described separately,
i., 35-137; locations, divisions and tribal boundaries, i.,
35-40, 137-149; myth., iii., 516-19; lang., iii., 562-3,
574-603; origin, v., 19.
Hyssop, Maya baptism, ii., 683-4.
I
Ialamma, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 459.
Ialamne, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 459.
Iamotamohuanichan, abode of Aztec Venus, iii., 377.
Iaotzin, iii., 199, see Tezcatlipoca.
I Bota, Cakchiquel month, ii., 766.
Ibueras (Ihueras), ancient name of Honduras, v., 214.
Ica, i., 603; iii., 687, see Ika.
Icauhtzin (Achcauhtzin, Icoatzin), Chichimec king, v., 220, 245.
Iccujenne, tribe of Apaches, i., 473-526; location, i., 474;
lang., i., 594-602.
Ichapilli, Mexican dress, i., 620.
Ichcahuepilli, a cotton breast-piece, ii., 406.
Ichenta, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
454.
Ichmul, Yucatan, antiq., iv., 240.
Ichpaa, name for Mayapan, v., chap. xiii.
Ichpuchco, station, Aztec migration, v., 323.
Icoatzin, v., 245, see Icauhtzin.
Iconoclasm, ii., 170-1, 525-8, 768; iv., 281, 502.
Icpactepecs, Nahua nation, subjugated, v., 471.
Icpalli, Nahua stools, ii., 231.
Icuex, an Acolhua chief, v., 332, 335.
Icxicohuatl, a Chichimec-Toltec chief, v., 485.
Icxiuh, a Zutugil princess, v., 575-6.
Icxochitlanex, Culhua king, v., 320, 330.
Icxotl, palm-leaf, ii., 484.
Icy Cape (Eiscap), i., 138-9.
Idaho, i., 315, 322, 422, 460, 463; lang., iii., 631, 660;
antiq., iv., 734.
Idakariúkes, North Californian tribe, i., 326-61; location, i.,
447.
Id-do-a, North Californian tribe, i., 326-61; lang., iii., 640.
Idibaes (Idibas), Isthmian tribe, i., 747-85; location, i., 797;
special mention, i., 785.
Idols, Hyperboreans, i., 84-5; iii., 145-7; Columbians, i., 161,
185, 193; Californians, iii., 166-7; New Mexicans, i., 590;
iii., 174; Mexicans, ii., 298-9, 318, 321, 329-31, 389, 391,
425, 428, 477, 482, 582-4, 605, 622; iii., 179, 196, 237-429
passim; antiq., iv., 346-600 passim; Central Americans, ii.,
689-713, 750-1, 800; iii., 463, 482-3, 493; antiq., iv., 18,
39-58, 66, 70-3, 89-94, 100, 111-139, 167-8, 202-3, 515-20,
242-8, 263-5, 277; Mississippi Valley, antiq., iv., 782; Peru,
antiq., iv., 805.
Iedocodamos, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 611.
Ieyxcohuatl, a Toltec chief, v., 229.
Ig, Quiché-Cakchiquel day, ii., 767.
Igh (Ygh), Tzendal day, ii., 767; a predecessor of Votan, v.,
164, 605.
Iglesia Vieja, Guerrero, antiq., iv., 424.
Igloo (Eegloo, Iglo, Iglu, Iglut), Eskimo snow house, i., 54.
Ignatzio (Ihuatzio), Michoacan, antiq., iv., 569-70.
Iguanas, i., 577, 652, 743, 759; ii., 693, 701, 720.
Ihcil ixchel, Maya feast, ii., 697.
Ihuatzio, iv., 570, see Ignatzio.
Ihueras, v., 214, see Ibueras.
Ihuimatzal, name for Tochintecuhtli, v., 333.
Ihuitlan, village, Guerrero, i., 677.
Ik, Maya day and god, ii., 756, 760; iii., 482.
Ika (Ica), Lower Californian tribe, i., 556-71; location, i.,
603; lang., iii., 687.
Ikánam, Chinook god, iii., 95, 155; v., 19.
Ikarucks, North Californian tribe, i., 326-61; location, i., 447.
Ikomag, locality, Guatemala, v., 570.
Ilamatlan, locality, Mexico, i., 675.
Ilancueitl, Nahua first woman, iii., 60; Culhua queen, v., 223,
354-61.
Ilhuicamina, surname of Montezuma I., v., 408.
Ilhuicatepec, station, Aztec migration, v., 324.
Ilhuicatl, prince of Zumpango, v., 329.
Ilhuicatitlan, temple of Mexico, ii., 585.
Iligajakh (Ilgajack, Ilgajak) River, i., 140.
Ililluluks, tribe of Aleuts, i., 87-94; location, i., 141.
Illinois, Mississippi Valley, antiq., iv., 766-7.
Ilocab, Guatemalan tribe, i., 686-711; location, i., 789; hist.,
v., 546-7, 549, 553-5, 560, 562, 571-3, 584, 589, 592.
Ilttekaïmamits, Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91; location, i.,
320.
Images, see Idols.
Imatacax, Nahua ornament, ii., 324.
Imatatohui, Tarasco month, ii., 521.
Immahah River, i., 317.
Imox (Mox), Quiché-Cakchiquel and Tzendal day, ii., 767;
ancestor of Votan, v., 69, 164, 605.
Implements, Hyperborean, i., 58, 64, 79-80, 91, 119, 122-3, 130;
Columbians, i., 164-5, 170, 179-81, 184, 187, 189-91, 193, 198,
211-14, 233-4, 270-1; antiq., iv., 739-40; Californians, i.,
345, 381-2, 407-8, 434-5; antiq., iv., 692-4, 697-712, 714-15;
New Mexicans, i., 500-2, 543-4, 563, 582, 590; antiq., iv.,
635, 677-8; Mexicans, i., 629-30, 640, 656-7; ii., 300, 348,
351, 474-84, 614, 621-2; iii., 512-13; antiq., iv., 344-6,
373-6, 383, 414, 422-3, 431-2, 446-7, 451, 462-3, 520, 554-61,
577, 611-13; Central Americans, i., 697-8, 724, 744, 765-6,
780-3; ii., 700, 749-51, 799-800; antiq., iv., 18-23, 58-62,
96, 102-3, 237-8, 278; Mississippi Valley, antiq., iv., 778-9,
781-4; Peru, antiq., iv., 792-4.
Inajalaihu (Inajalayehua), South Californian tribe, i., 402-22;
location, i., 459.
Inapanames, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 613.
Inaspetsums, Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91; location, i.,
317.
Inbani, Tarasco calendar sign and day, ii., 521-2.
Inbeari, Tarasco day, ii., 522.
Incantations, see Sorcerers.
Incense, Nahuas, ii., 145, 256-60, 318, 322-3, 327, 340, 393,
573; iii., 331, 438 passim; Mayas, i., 697; ii., 668, 688,
690-7, 700-6, 720, 745, 799; iii., 486.
Incest, i., 81, 117, 388-9, 515; ii., 466, 659, 676.
Inchini, Tarasco day, ii., 522.
Inchon, Tarasco calendar-sign, ii., 521-2.
Incomecanétook, Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91; location, i.,
312.
Indehuni, Tarasco month, ii., 521.
Indiana, Mississippi Valley, antiq., iv., 762-3.
Indian Gulch, California, antiq., iv., 707.
India-rubber, i., 639; ii., 298, 389, 393, 406, 599, 601, 719;
iii., 333-4, 340.
Indigo, i., 694, 698.
Indios Blancos, i., 748, see Guatusos.
Inethaati, Tarasco day, ii., 522.
Inettuni, Tarasco day, ii., 522.
Infanticide, i., 169, 242, 279, 390, 413, 590, 714, 781-2.
Ingaliks (T'Kitskes), tribe of Tinneh, i., 114-37; location,
i., 116, 133, 148; special mention, i., 63, 133; lang., iii.,
590-1.
Inheritance, laws of, i., 545, 664, 700, 769-70; ii., 224-9, 651,
653, 664.
Iniabi, Tarasco day, ii., 522.
Inicebi, Tarasco day, ii., 522.
Inichini, Tarasco day, ii., 522.
Inixotzini, Tarasco day, ii., 522.
Inizcatolohui, Tarasco month, ii., 521.
Inkalichljuaten, tribe of Tinneh, i., 114-37; location, i., 148.
Inkalits, tribe of Tinneh, i., 114-37; lang., iii., 590-1.
Inland Columbian families, fifth division of the Columbians,
comprising five of the nine families into which the Columbians
are divided, and consisting of the Shushwaps, Kootenais,
Okanagans, Salish, and Sahaptins, located between the
Cascade Range and the eastern limit of the Pacific States,
from latitude 52° 30' to 45°; manners and customs described
together, i., 250-91; physique, i., 254-6; dress, i., 256-9;
dwellings, i., 259-61; food, i., 261-7; personal habits, i.,
267; weapons and war, i., 268-70; implements and manufactures,
i., 270-1; boats, i., 271-2; property and trade, i., 272-4;
art, i., 274-5; government and slavery, i., 275-6; marriage,
women and children, i., 276-80; amusements, i., 280-2;
miscellaneous customs, i., 282-5; medicine, i., 285-7; burial,
i., 288-9; character, i., 289-91; location, divisions, and
tribal boundaries, i., 250-4, 310-21; myth., iii., 153-5;
lang., iii., 615-26.
Innoka River, i., 148.
Innuit, i., 40, see Eskimos.
Inodon, Tarasco calendar-sign, ii., 521-2.
Inoje, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 459.
Inpari, Tarasco day, ii., 522.
Inrini, Tarasco day, ii., 522.
Inscription Rock, New Mexico, antiq., iv., 648-50.
Insects, as food, etc., i., 153, 373-5, 405-6, 427, 430, 488,
560-1, 721; ii., 356; medicine, ii., 599, 601.
Insignia, i., 728, 753, 764; ii., 207, 403-4, 413-14, 419, 440,
614, 622, 646, 656, 741; iii., 433; v., 325.
Inspellums, Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91; location, i.,
312.
Intacaci, Tarasco month, ii., 521.
Intamohui, Tarasco month, ii., 521.
Intaniri, Tarasco day, ii., 522.
Intasiabire, Tarasco intercalary days, ii., 522.
Intaxihui, Tarasco month, ii., 521.
Intaxitohui, Tarasco month, ii., 521.
Intecamoni, Tarasco month, ii., 521.
Intechaqui, Tarasco month, ii., 521.
Intechotahui, Tarasco month, ii., 521.
Interment, see Burial.
Interunihi, Tarasco month, ii., 521.
Intestines, see Entrails.
Inteyabchitzin, Tarasco month, ii., 521.
Inthahui, Tarasco day, ii., 522.
Inthihui, Tarasco day, ii., 522.
Intiétooks, Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91; location, i.,
312.
Intihui, Tarasco calendar-sign, ii., 521.
Intoxication, see Drunkenness.
Intoxihui, Tarasco month, ii., 521.
Intzimbi, Tarasco day, ii., 522.
Intzini, Tarasco day, ii., 522.
Intzoniabi, Tarasco day, ii., 522.
Inuk, derivation of Innuit, i., 40.
Inundations, Mexico, hist., v., 453-4, 468.
Inxichari, Tarasco day, ii., 522.
Iolar, Mosquito year, i., 727.
Ionata, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 459.
Iooalliehecatl, Chichimec god, iii., 406.
Ipalnemoaloni (Ipalnemoan, Ipalnemohualoni), name of
Tloque-Nahuaque, iii., 56, 183, 185-6.
Ipandes, iii., 594, see Lipanes.
Ipapana, Totonac dialect, iii., 777.
Ipec, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 459.
Ipinchuari, a Chichimec Wanacace chief, v., 518.
Iqi-Balam (Iquibalam), Quiché fourth man, iii., 47; god and king,
v., 181, 552-6, 566, 584-5.
Iraghdadakh, Aleut creator, iii., 104.
Irimbo, Michoacan, antiq., iv., 571.
Irish, American origin traces, v., 121-2.
Iri Ticatame, a Chichimec Wanacace chief, v., 511-13.
Iron, i., 107, 164, 185, 341, 495; ii., 749; iv., 778, 794.
Iron-wood, bows of, i., 722.
Irrigation, i., 539; ii., 349, 718; antiq., iv., 619, 632, 635,
668-70, 676.
Irritilas, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 572,
612; lang., iii., 714.
Isalco, village, San Salvador, i., 791.
Isanthcagna, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i.,
460.
Isapa, village, Guatemala, i., 789.
Ishcats, Aleutian baskets, i., 91.
Ishgua (Ishguaget), South Californian tribe, i., 402-22;
location, i., 459.
Ishquats, tribe of Nootkas, i., 174-208; location, i., 295.
Isinglass, i., 271.
Isipopolames, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 611.
Isla del Cármen, i., 683.
Isle de Pierres (Linkinse), Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91;
location, i., 316.
Isleta, Pueblo village and tribe, i., 526-56; location, i., 527,
600; lang., iii., 681.
Isleta of the South, Pueblo village, i., 599.
Ismuracan, Central Californian lang., iii., 653.
Ispipewhumaugh, Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91; location, i.,
317.
Istaguacan, village, Guatemala, i., 787.
Istatole, Guatemalan drink, i., 706.
Isthmians, one of the three families into which the wild tribes
of Central America are divided; manners and customs of all its
nations and tribes described together, i., 747-85; physique,
i., 749-51; dress, i., 751-4; dwellings, i., 754-8; food, i.,
758-60; personal habits, i., 760; weapons and war, i., 760-5;
implements and manufactures, i., 765-7; boats and property,
i., 767-8; art, i., 769; government, i., 769-71; slavery, i.,
771-2; women and marriage, i., 772-4; amusements, i., 774-6;
miscellaneous customs, i., 776-7; medicine, i., 778-80; burial,
i., 780-4; character, i., 784-5; location of tribes, i., 794-7;
myth., iii., 498-501, 543-4; v., 14; lang., iii., 572-3, 793-5.
Istlavacan, locality, Guatemala, iii., 482.
Itáes, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i., 453.
Italapas, Chinook god, iii., 95, 155.
Itaywiy, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 460.
Itch, i., 86; iii., 415.
Ithkyemamits, Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91; location, i.,
317.
Itlachia, an idol ornament, iii., 238.
Ittege River, i., 148.
Ituc, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 459.
Ituchas, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
455.
Itukemuk, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 460.
Iturbide, Yucatan, antiq., iv., 252.
Itwha, Salish food, i., 265.
Itz, ii., 767, see Yiz.
Itza Lake, Guatemala, antiq., iv., 133.
Itzalane, city, Yucatan, iv., 151.
Itzamat Ul, Maya god, iii., 465.
Itzaob, Chichen rulers, v., 225; also name for Itzas, v., chap.
xiii.
Itzaquauh, a Chichimec chief, v., 293.
Itzas (Yzaes), Maya nation, i., 644-70; ii., 630-803; location
and name, i., 683; ii., 119-20, 127; special mention, i., 707,
709-10; ii., 633-6, 647, 657, 674, 680, 718, 723, 726, 733,
741, 743, 750, 768, 800; myth., iii., 482-3; hist., v., chap.
xiii.
Itzbachaa, Tarasco month, ii., 521.
Itzcalli (Izcalli), Nahua month, ii., 338, 509; iii., 109.
Itzcayotilmatli, Nahua court dress, ii., 374.
Itzcoatl, a Mexican commander, v., 362; king of Mexico, v.,
389-408.
Itzcohuatl, a Mexican lord, v., 501.
Itzcuintepec, city, Mexico, v., 463.
Itzcuintlan, locality, San Salvador, i., 790; v., 607.
Itzcuintli (Yzcuintli), Nahua day, ii., 512, 516-17.
Itziles, Mosquito tribe, i., 711-47; location, i., 713.
Itzlaquetlaloca, locality, Mexico, v., 472.
Itzmal Ul, name for Izamal, v., chap. xiii.
Itzmitl (Ixmitl), Acolhua chief, v., 303-4.
Itzqueye, Pipile goddess, ii., 706-7; iii., 484.
Itztitlan, city, Mexico, v., 463.
Itzucan, locality, Vera Cruz, i., 671; v., 202.
Ivory, i., 48, 59, 63, 165, 403.
Ix (Gix, Hix), Maya day and calendar sign, ii., 755-6, 760-1;
Yucatec divinity, iii., 122.
Ixazalvoh (Ixazaluoh), Maya goddess, ii., 752; iii., 462-3.
Ixcanleox, Maya goddess, iii., 463.
Ixcateopan, city, Mexico, v., 412.
Ixcatlan, town, Oajaca, ii., 261.
Ixcax, a Toltec chief, v., 297.
Ixcazozolot, v., 317, see Yacanex.
Ixchel, Maya goddess, ii., 678, 697.
Ixcontzin, lord of Iztapalocan, v., 374.
Ixcotl, palm-fibre, ii., 369.
Ixcozauhqui, name of Xiuhtecutli, iii., 385.
Ixcuina, name of Tlazoltecotl, iii., 377.
Ixcuinames, Nahua religious sect, v., 282.
Ixil, Guatemalan lang., iii., 760.
Iximché (Patinamit, Tecpan Guatemala), city, Guatemala, i., 789;
ii., 121, 637, 790; antiq., iv., 121-3; hist., v., 556, 570,
593, 595, 598, 601-2.
Ixliuechahuexe, v., 250, see Ixtlilcuechahuac.
Ixmitl, v., 304, see Itzmitl.
Ixmixuch (Yhuixoch, Yhyozochtl), a Toltec princess, v., 299.
Ixmol, Maya priestess, ii., 701.
Ixnacan Katun, Maya priest's title, ii., 647.
Ixnextlacuilolli, Nahua court dress, ii., 374.
Ixteocale, Nahua title, ii., 324.
Ixtlahuaca, locality, Mexico, i., 674.
Ixtlahuacan, village, Zacatecas, i., 672.
Ixtle, Mexican fibre, i., 657-8.
Ixtlilcuechahuac (Aixtilcuechahuac, Ixliuechahuexe,
Ixtlilcuechanac, Tlachinotzin, Tlalchinoltzin, Tlaltecatl,
Tlaltecatl Huetzin, Tlilquechahuac, Tlilque Chaocatlahinoltzin,
Tzacatcatl, Tzacatecatl), Toltec king, v., 250.
Ixtlilton, iii., 409, see Yxtliton.
Ixtlilxochitl, Chichimec king, ii., 609; v., 351-3, 359-79;
Chichimec prince, v., 451, 474-7.
Iyacatecuhtli (Iyacacoliuhqui, Iyacatecutli, Jacacoliuhqui,
Jacateuctli, Yiacatecuhtli, Yacacoliuhqui, Yacatecutli,
Yiacatecutli), Nahua god, ii., 328, 389, 491; iii., 416.
Izalcos, town, San Salvador, iii., 760.
Izamal, city, Yucatan, ii., 647; antiq., iv., 246-7, 266, 271;
hist., v., 224, chap. xiii.
Izcal, Cakchiquel month, ii., 766.
Izcohuatl, Teo-Chichimec chief, v., 490.
Izhuatl, species of palm-leaf, ii., 484.
Izmachi, city, Guatemala, v., 559-60, 564, 571-3, 576, 578.
Izmatletlopac, lord of Cuitlahuac, v., 349.
Izona, Maya god, iii., 462.
Izpapalotl, Nahua chief, v., 242.
Iztacacenteotl, name of Centeotl, ii., 340; iii., 350.
Iztacalco, city, Mexico, ii., 560; v., 345.
Iztacmaxtitlan, city, Mexico, ii., 417.
Iztacmixcoatl (Iztac Mixcoatl, Iztac Mixcohuatl, Iztacmixcuatl),
Nahua first man, iii., 60, 249; Nahua god, iii., 268, 403;
founder of Nahua nation, v., 223, 527.
Iztacquauhtzin, v., 267, see Huemac II.
Iztactlalocan, city, north-east Mexico, v., 472.
Iztamatzin (Iztamantzin), v., 495, see Iztantzin.
Iztantzin (Iztamantzin, Iztamatzin, Yztacima), high priest of
Cholula, v., 495.
Iztapalapan, city, Mexico, ii., 167, 567, 575.
Iztapalocan, city, Mexico, v., 372-3.
Iztaquauhtzin, lord of the Mazahuas, v., 349.
Iztauhiatl, medicinal herb, ii., 325.
Iztayub, Quiché king, v., 566.
Iztayul I., Quiché king, v., 560, 566, 571, 574-6, 581, chap.
xiii.
Iztayul II., Quiché king, v., 583-4.
Iztayul III., Quiché king, v., 594.
Izticpatli, Nahua medicine, ii., 599.
Iztlahuacan, town, Guatemala, i., 787.
Iztli, see Obsidian.
Izucan, city, Mexico, ii., 416.
J
Jacacoliuhqui, iii., 416, see Iyacatecuhtli.
Jacala, Mexico, antiq., iv., 549.
Jacateuctli, iii., 416, see Iyacatecuhtli.
Jackap, Nez Percés, food, i., 265.
Jackson, California, antiq., iv., 707.
Jacote, species of fruit, ii., 724.
Jaguar, Nahua coat of arms, ii., 160; medicine, ii., 600.
Jails, ii., 453-4, 657.
Jaímamares, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 611.
Jakons, i., 307, see Yakones.
Jalal, Yucatan, antiq., iv., 253.
Jalalog, locality, Oajaca, i., 681.
Jalancingo, Vera Cruz, antiq., iv., 451-2.
Jalap, i., 631; ii., 599.
Jalapa, town, Vera Cruz, i., 643; antiq., iv., 436; hist., v.,
530.
Jalcheduns, iii., 684, see Yalchedunes.
Jalisco (Yalisco), tribes described, i., 617-44; ii., 133-629;
special mention, i., 618, 622, 625, 631, 643; ii., 411, 625,
629; myth., iii., 447-8; lang., iii., 667, 717-19; antiq., iv.,
572-7; hist., v., 222, 323, 349, 509.
Jalliquamai (Jallicuamais), Cajuenche dialect, iii., 685-6.
Jalostotitlan, village, Zacatecas, i., 672.
Jamajabs, iii., 684, see Yamajabs.
Jamalteca, Honduras, antiq., iv., 71.
Jamiltepéc, village, Oajaca, i., 678, 681.
Janambre, Tamaulipas, lang., iii., 744.
Janaya, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 459.
Janogualpa, Moqui village, i., 528.
Jaotlalli, ii., 425, see Yauhtlalli.
Japan current, i., 38.
Japanese, lang., similarities, iii., 647; American origin-traces,
v., 51-4.
Japiams, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
449.
Jappayon, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
454.
Jarames, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 612.
Jaras, tribe of Mosquitos, i., 711-47; location, i., 713; lang.,
iii., 783.
Jaredites, America peopled by, v., 97.
Jargon, Chinook lang., iii., 631-4.
Jarquin, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
453.
Jars, i., 434, 500, 697-8, 724; see also Vases.
Jasper, ii., 161, 173, 557, 750.
Jasper House, locality, Rocky Mountains, i., 310.
Jaundice, remedy, i., 743.
Javelins, see Darts.
Jeachtacs, tribe of Sound Indians, i., 208-22; location, i., 301.
Jealousy, i., 65, 168-9, 218, 351, 388; ii., 381, 628, 803.
Jefferson County, Colorado, antiq., iv., 717-18.
Jemez (Jemes), Pueblo tribe and village, i., 526-56; location,
i., 599, 600; special mention, i., 527, 537, 550-1; lang.,
iii., 681-3.
Jervis Inlet, i., 298.
Jesters, Nahuas, ii., 177, 286, 289.
Jetans, i., 473, see Comanches.
Jewelry, i., 768; ii., 363, 475-7, 619, 750.
Jews, American origin-traces, i., 18; v., 77-102, chap. xiii.
Jews-harp, Mosquito music, i., 738.
Jiboa, San Salvador, antiq., iv., 69.
Jicarillas (Jicorillas), i., 490, see Xicarillas.
Jiloltepec (Xilotepec, Xilotepeque), village, Guatemala, i., 673,
787.
Jiquilite, Mosquito dye, i., 724.
Jiquilpan, Michoacan, antiq., iv., 571.
Jiutemal, v., 577, see Xiuhtemal.
Jlaacs (Slacus), South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location,
i., 458.
J'lorida Mountain, i., 595.
Joaltecutli, Nahua god, iii., 112.
Jobas, i., 606, see Jovas.
Jocoatole, Guatemalan drink, i., 706.
Johamares, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 611.
John Day Rivers, Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91; location,
i., 320.
John Day River, i., 254, 319-20.
Johnson Strait, i., 176, 194, 296-7.
Jongoapi, i., 601, see Xongopavi.
Jopes, i., 677, see Tlapanecs.
Joquizará, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
453.
Jorse, Vera Cruz, antiq., iv., 451.
Josquigard, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
453.
Jovas (Jobas, Ovas), North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location,
i., 572, 606; special mention, i., 578, 582; lang., iii., 699.
Jualpi, i., 601, see Gualpi.
Juan de Fuca Strait, i., 222, 296, 302; iii., 613.
Jubuganti River, i., 796.
Juchium, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
453.
Judges, Nahuas, ii., 384-5, 434-9, 442-6; Mayas, ii., 642, 655.
Jugelnuten, tribe of Tinneh, i., 114-37; location, i., 148.
Jug-jak, Koniaga god, i., 85.
Juigalpa, Nicaragua, antiq., iv., 33-4, 58, 61.
Juiup, Quiché god, iii., 482.
Jukchana (Junnaka, Junna) River, i., 147.
Julime, North Mexican lang., iii., 714.
Julimeños, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 612.
Jumes, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 611.
Junaka, i., 147, see Jukchana.
Junakachotana (Junnachotana), tribe of Tinneh, i., 114-37;
location, i., 147-8.
Junatca, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
453.
Juniamuc, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
453.
Junin, Peru, antiq., iv., 804.
Junna, i., 147, see Jukchana.
Junnachotana, i., 148, see Junakachotana.
Juntas, see Cerro de las Juntas.
Jupes (Tupes), tribe of Apaches, i., 473-526; location, i., 473.
Juquila, locality, Oajaca, i., 680.
Juris, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i., 453.
K
Kaadgettees, tribe of Thlinkeets, i., 94-114; location, i., 143.
Kaaskquatees, tribe of Thlinkeets, i., 94-114; location, i., 143.
Kabah, Yucatan, antiq., iv., 204-10, 271-6.
Kab-ul, Maya symbol, Yucatan, antiq., iv., 248.
Kace, i., 340, see Kice.
Kachiquels, i., 788, see Cakchiquels.
Kachisupal, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i.,
459.
Kachuma, i., 459, see Aketsum.
Kachumas, i., 458, see Chumas.
Kadakamans, Lower Californian tribe, i., 556-71; location, i.,
603.
Kadiak (Kadjak, Kadyak, Kodiak) Island, i., 69-71; iii., 104.
Kadiaks, see Koniagas.
Kaeyah Khatana, name for Ingaliks, i., 133.
Kagataya Koung'ns (Kagataia-kung'n), name for Aleuts, i., 87.
Kahnyak, i., 306, see Cooniacs.
Kahruks, i., 327, see Cahrocs.
Kahsowahs, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i.,
457.
Kahtai, tribe of Sound Indians, i., 208-22; location, i., 302.
Kahunkles, tribe of Chinooks, i., 222-50; location, i., 307.
Kahweyahs, (Kahweahs), i., 456-7; iii., 651; see Cahuillos.
Kaigan Harbor, i., 293.
Kaiganies (Kaiganees, Kaigáni, Kaigany, Kegarnie, Kigarnies,
Kigarnee, Kygànies, Kygargeys, Kygarneys, Kygàni, Kygarnies),
tribe of Haidahs, i., 155-74; location, i., 155, 292-3; special
mention, i., 157, 164-5, 173-4; lang., iii., 604-5.
Kailtas, North Californian tribe, i., 326-61; location, i., 445;
special mention, i., 335, 348-9; myth., iii., 133-4, 524;
lang., iii., 643.
Kainamares (Kainamas, Kainameahs), i., 386, 449, see Kanimares.
Kaipetl, village, North California, i., 444.
Kaiyak, i., 61, see Kyak.
Kaiyuhkatana, name for Ingaliks, i., 148.
Kaiyuh Mountains, i., 148.
Kajak, i., 61, see Kyak.
Kajatschims, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location,
i., 449.
Kakas (Kakes, Kakus), tribe of Thlinkeets, i., 94-114; location,
i., 96, 143; lang., iii., 579.
Kak Upacat, Uxmal ruler and god, v., chap. xiii.
Kalapooiah (Kalapooyah, Kalapuya), i., 223, 249, 309, see
Calapooyas.
Kalechinskojes, tribe of Aleuts, i., 87-94; location, i., 141.
Kalicknateck, Trinity River Indian god, iii., 176.
Kaliouches, tribe of Sound Indians, i., 208-22; location, i.,
303.
Kalispelm Lake, i., 313.
Kalispelms (Kalispels), i., 276, 313, see Pend d'Oreilles.
Kaljush (Kaluga, Kalusch, Koliugi, Koljush, Kolosch, Kolosh,
Koloshians), Kolush, name for Thlinkeets, i., 95.
Kamash (Kamas, Kamass), i., 265, see Camass.
Kamloops, Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91; location, i., 311;
special mention, i., 290.
Kamloops Lake, iii., 613.
Kamucu, Quiché song, iii., 52.
Kamulas, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 459.
Kan, Maya day and calendar sign, ii., 755-6, 760-1.
Kanagist, i., 69, see Koniagas.
Kanal Acantun, Maya god, ii., 703.
Kancune Island, Yucatan, antiq., iv., 260.
Kangjulit, Koniaga dialect, iii., 576.
Kangmali Innuits (Kangmali Innuins), tribe of Eskimos, i., 40-69;
location, i., 42, 138.
Kaniag, Innuit name, i., 69.
Kanil, Guatemalan god, iii., 482.
Kanimares (Kainamares, Kainameahs, Kannimares, Kyanamaras),
Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i., 362, 449;
special mention, i., 386, 398.
Kanisky, i., 149, see Kenai.
Kankin, Maya month, ii., 757-8.
Kansas, i., 592.
Kanté, a Maya litter, ii., 702.
Kantunile, Yucatan, antiq., iv., 237.
Kanugh, iii., 149, see Khanukh.
Kanu Uayeyab, Maya idol, ii., 702.
Kaons, tribe of Chinooks, i., 222-50; location, i., 307.
Kaouais, i., 307, see Kowais.
Kaoulis, i., 310, see Cowlitz.
Kaquaith, tribe of Sound Indians, i., 208-22; location, i., 302.
Karquines (Carquin), Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401;
location, i., 363, 452-3; lang., iii., 650.
Karquines Straits, i., 363, 452.
Karweewee (Artsmilsh), tribe of Chinooks, i., 222-50; location,
i., 305.
Kaseks, Koniaga sorcerers, i., 85.
Kashim, i., 66, see Casine.
Kassaaus, tribe of Haidahs, i., 155-74; location, i., 293.
Kassima River, i., 450.
Kataghayekiki, name for natives of Unimak and Alaska, i., 87.
Katahuac, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 459.
Kathlaportles (Katlaportles), i., 306, see Cathlapootles.
Katlagakya, tribe of Chinooks, i., 222-50; location, i., 306.
Katlámat, i., 304, see Cathlamets.
Katlaminimims, i., 306, see Cathlanamenamens.
Katlawewalla, tribe of Chinooks, i., 222-50; location, i., 309.
Katlawotsetts (Kiliwatshats), tribe of Chinooks, i., 222-50;
location, i., 308.
Katlendarucas (Katlendarukas), Central Californian tribe, i.,
361-401; location, i., 455; lang., ii., 653.
Katun, Maya cycle, ii., 761-2; iv., 274.
Kauwehs, North Californian tribe, i., 326-61; location, i., 444.
Kaviak Peninsula, i., 37, 141.
Kaviaks (Kaveaks), tribe of Koniagas, i., 69-87; location, i.,
70, 141; special mention, i., 73, 81.
Kawcho Dinneh (Hare Ind.), tribe of Tinneh, i., 114-37; location,
i., 144; special mention, i., 121, 136; lang., iii., 585.
Kawitchen (Kawitchin, Kawitshin), i., 296, 299, see Cowichin.
Kawwelth, i., 292, see Kowwelth.
Kayab, Maya month, ii., 757-8.
Kayouse (Kayuse), i., 319, see Cayuse.
Kechi, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 458;
lang., iii., 660, 674-9.
Keeches (Keechis), tribe of Haidahs, i., 155-74; location, i.,
293.
Keechumakarlo (Keechumakailo), tribe of Haidahs, i., 155-74;
location, i., 294.
Keekheatla (Keetheatla), tribe of Haidahs, i., 155-74; location,
i., 294.
Keelalles, Chinook doctors, iii., 156.
Keenathtoix, tribe of Haidahs, i., 155-74; location, i., 293.
Keesarn, tribe of Haidahs, i., 155-74; location, i., 292.
Keethratlah, tribe of Haidahs, i., 155-74; location, i., 293.
Keewuck, Haidah paradise, iii., 520.
Keewuckkow, Haidah chief paradise, iii., 520.
Keeyeks, Thlinkeet spirits of warriors, iii., 148, 516.
Kegarnie, i., 293, see Kaiganie.
Kellespems, i., 314, see Pend d'Oreilles.
Kelp, see Sea-weed.
Kelsey River, i., 399.
Kelussuyas, i., 304, see Calapooyas.
Kelutsah (Ketutsah), tribe of Haidahs, i., 155-74; location, i.,
293.
Kenai (Kanisky, Kenai-tena, Kenaize, Kenaizi, Kenayzi, Kinai,
Thnaina, Tnaina Ttynai), tribe of Tinneh, i., 114-37; location,
i., 114, 116, 147, 149; special mention, i., 132-4; myth.,
iii., 517; lang., iii., 584, 588-91.
Kenai Peninsula, i., 116, 139, 147, 149.
Kenaizi (Kenayzi), i., 139, 149, see Kenai.
Kenchen Kieg, tribe of Haidahs, i., 155-74; location, i., 293.
Kentucky, Mississippi Valley, antiq., iv., 767, 776.
Keralit, i., 41, see Eskimos.
Keres (Queres), tribe of Pueblos, i., 526-56; special mention,
i., 529, 551-2; lang., iii., 600, 673, 681-3.
Kerne Island, v., 66.
Kern River, i., 455-6.
Kern Valley, lang., iii., 651.
Kesmali, California, antiq., iv., 692.
Kespriano Island, i., 143.
Ketandou, tribe of Haidahs, i., 155-74; location, i., 293.
Ketlakaniaks, tribe of Chinooks, i., 222-50; location, i., 306.
Ketlane, i., 293, see Kitlan.
Ketoonokshelk, tribe of Haidahs, i., 155-74; location, i., 293.
Kettle Falls, i., 252, 314, see Chaudières.
Ketutsah, i., 293, see Kelutsah.
Ketwilkcipa, tribe of Haidahs, i., 155-74; location, i., 293.
Kewaughtchenunaughs, Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91;
location, i., 312.
Kewaughtohenemachs, Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91; location,
i., 316.
Kewick, Yucatan, antiq., iv., 218.
Keyataigmutes, (Kijataigmjuten, Kijataigmüten, Kijataigmutes,
Kijaten), tribe of Koniagas, i., 69-87; location, i., 70, 140.
Khalalons, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
453.
Khanukh (Kanugh), Thlinkeet god, iii., 101, 145-6, 149.
Khoulpouni, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
453.
Kialarnes, locality, North-east coast, America, v., 109.
Kicab, v., 595, see Quicab.
Kicab Tanub, v., 566, see Quicab Tanub.
Kice (Kace), North Californian food, i., 340.
Kichtak (Kightak, Kikchtak), name for Kadiak, i., 69.
Kicksatees, tribe of Thlinkeets, i., 94-114; location, i., 143.
Kickuallis, tribe of Sound Indians, i., 208-22; location, i.,
300.
Kickuallis River, i., 300.
Kidnapping, laws against, ii., 459-60, 650-1, 659.
Kigarnees (Kigarnies), i., 293, see Kaiganies.
Kighigusi, name for Akutans, i., 87.
Kightak, i., 69, see Kichtak.
Kij, Quiché god, iii., 482.
Kijataigmjuten (Kijataigmüten, Kijataigmutes, Kijaten), i., 140,
see Keyataigmutes.
Kik, resin, ii., 701.
Kikchtak, i., 69, see Kichtak.
Kikiallis, tribe of Sound Indians, i., 208-22; location, i., 300.
Kikiallis River, i., 300.
Kilcatah, tribe of Haidahs, i., 155-74; location, i., 294.
Kiliwatsals, i., 307, see Killawats.
Kiliwatshats, i., 308, see Katlawotsetts.
Killamooks (Callemax, Callemeux, Callimix, Kilamooks, Kilamukes,
Killamucks, Killamuks, Killimous, Killimux, Killymucks,
Nsietshawus, Tillamooks), tribe of Chinooks, i., 222-50;
location, i., 223, 304, 307; special mention, i., 237-8, 250;
lang., iii., 618, 626.
Killawats (Kiliwatsals), tribe of Chinooks, i., 222-50; location,
i., 307.
Killaxthocles, tribe of Sound Indians, i., 208-22; location, i.,
303.
Killimous (Killimux), i., 223, 304; iii., 618, 626, see
Killamooks.
Killsmaht (Kilsamat), tribe of Nootkas, i., 174-208; location,
i., 295.
Killuspehn River, i., 311, see Pend d'Oreille River.
Killymucks, i., 250, see Killamooks.
Kilsamat, i., 295, see Killsmaht.
Kimmooenims, Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91; location, i.,
317.
Kin, Maya day, ii., 755.
Kinakanes, Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91; location, i., 312.
Kinaroalax, i., 294, see Kinawalax.
Kinawalax (Kinaroalax), tribe of Haidahs, i., 155-74; location,
i., 293-4.
Kincaid Flat, California, antiq., iv., 699-700.
Kinehahau, name of Hunab Ku, iii., 462; Maya royal title, v.,
630.
Kingiktorsoak Island, Greenland, antiq., v., 114.
Kings, Nahuas, ii., 133-85, 265-6, 322, 373-7, 441, 471-2,
603-14, 619-22; v., 244-536; Mayas, ii., 631-42, 727-8, 788-90,
800-1; v., 172-188, 540-602.
King's River, i., 363, 455-6; lang., iii., 651.
Kingsborough's Pyramid, at Uxmal, Yucatan, antiq., iv., 192.
Kinich-Ahau-Ytzamná, name for Cinchau Yzamna, ii., 696.
Kinich Kakmo, Maya idol, iii., 464; antiq., iv., 248; hero and
god, v., 621.
Kinikkinik (Kinnik-kinnik), substitute for tobacco, i., 354,
437-8.
Kinkipar, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 460.
Kinklas, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
450; lang., iii., 650.
Ki Pomos, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
362, 448.
Kipunaiak (Kipunajakh) River, i., 140.
Kishawin, tribe of Haidahs, i., 155-74; location, i., 292.
Kisheys (Kis Kies, Kiskys), Central Californian tribe, i.,
361-401; location, i., 450; lang., iii., 649.
Kishishai, Apache corn-planter, i., 501.
Kishtsamah (Chacha), Okanagan evil spirit, iii., 153, 519.
Kishunak (Kishunakh, Kyschunack) River, i., 140.
Kispachalaidy, tribe of Haidahs, i., 155-74; location, i., 293.
Kisshick Lake, i., 147.
Kitahon, tribe of Haidahs, i., 155-74; location, i., 293.
Kitatels, tribe of Haidahs, i., 155-74; location, i., 294.
Kitchaclaith, tribe of Haidahs, i., 155-74; location, i., 293.
Kitegues, i., 138, see Kittegarutes.
Kithateen, tribe of Haidahs, i., 155-74; location, i., 293.
Kitlan (Ketlane), tribe of Haidahs, i., 155-74; location, i.,
293.
Kitlope, tribe of Haidahs, i., 155-74; location, i., 294.
Kitsagas, tribe of Haidahs, i., 155-74; location, i., 294.
Kitsalas, tribe of Haidahs, i., 155-74; location, i., 294.
Kitsiguchs, tribe of Haidahs, i., 155-74; location, i., 294.
Kitspayuchs, tribe of Haidahs, i., 155-74; location, i., 294.
Kitswingahs, tribe of Haidahs, i., 155-74; location, i., 294.
Kitswinscolds, tribe of Haidahs, i., 155-74; location, i., 174,
294; special mention, i., 174.
Kittamaat (Kittamuat), tribe of Haidahs, i., 155-74; location,
i., 294.
Kittears, tribe of Eskimos, i., 40-69; location, i., 138.
Kittegarutes (Kitegues), tribe of Eskimos, i., 40-69; location,
i., 49, 138.
Kitunaha, i., 311, see Kootenais.
Kitwillcoits, tribe of Haidahs, i., 155-74; location, i., 293.
Kiwomi, Queres dialect, iii., 682.
Kizh, South California, lang., iii., 660, 674-8.
Klackamas, i., 310, see Clackamas.
Klahars, tribe of Nootkas, i., 174-208; location, i., 295.
Klahohquahts, i., 295, see Clayoquots.
Klahosahts (Klaizzahts, Klaizzarts), tribe of Nootkas, i.,
174-208; location, i., 295; special mention, i., 178, 207;
lang., iii., 609.
Klahous, i., 298, see Clahoose.
Klaizzahts (Klaizzarts), i., 178; iii., 609; see Klahosahts.
Klakalamas, tribe of Chinooks, i., 222-50; location, i., 306.
Klakhelnks, tribe of Chinooks, i., 222-50; location, i., 306.
Klamacs, i., 444, see Klamaths.
Klamath Lake, i., 327-9.
Klamath Mts., i., 327.
Klamath River, i., 327, 444-7.
Klamaths (Clamet, Klameth, Lutuamis, Tlamaths, Tlamatl), North
Californian tribe, i., 326-61; location and name, i., 327, 444;
special mention, i., 330, 333-4, 337-40, 342, 344-51, 357, 361;
lang., iii., 639-42.
Klaooquates (Kla-os-quates), i., 207, 295-6, see Clayoquots.
Klatskanai, tribe of Chinooks, i., 222-50; location, i., 305.
Klatskanai River, i., 305.
Klayquoits, i., 296, see Clayoquots.
Kliavakans, tribe of Haidahs, i., 155-74; location, i., 293.
Kliketats (Clickahuts, Clickitats, Klicatats, Klickatacks,
Klickatats, Klikatats, Klikitats, Whulwhypums), Inland
Columbian tribe, i., 250-91; location and name, i., 253-4, 305,
321; special mention, i., 227, 255-60, 265, 271, 273-4, 277,
280, 287, 289-90; lang., iii., 620-4.
Klinkits, iii., 149, see Thlinkeets.
Kluckhaitkwee, Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91; location, i.,
312.
Klues (Cloos), tribe of Haidahs, i., 155-74; location, i., 292.
Klusquis, a reed, i., 261.
Knight's Ferry, California, antiq., iv., 707.
Knitting, Pueblos, i., 544.
Knives, Hyperboreans, i., 59, 80, 90, 104-5; Columbians, i., 235,
268; Californians, i., 345, 378, 408, 434; New Mexicans, i.,
563; Mexicans, i., 655; ii., 313, 479-80; iii., 58, 179; iv.,
556-8; Central Americans, i., 765; ii., 743, 750; iii., 488.
Kodiak, i., 139, see Kadiak.
Koetenais, i., 251, see Kootenais.
Kogholaghi, name for Unalaskans, i., 87.
Kokwaiytoch, tribe of Haidahs, i., 155-74; location, i., 294.
Koliugi (Koljush, Kolosch, Kolosches, Koloshians, Kolush), i.,
94-5, 142, see Kaljush.
Koltshanes (Koltschanes, Koltschanen), tribe of Tinneh, i.,
114-37; location, i., 116, 148; special mention, i., 61, 134;
lang., iii., 591.
Komux, i., 175, see Comux.
Konägen, Kadiak dress, i., 73.
Konah, Inland tribes, food, i., 265.
Konekonep, Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91; location, i., 312.
Koniagan Archipelago, i., 37-8, 70.
Koniagas, one of the five families into which the Hyperboreans
are divided; manners and customs of all its nations and tribes
described together, i., 69-87; physique, i., 71-2; dress, i.,
72-4; dwellings, i., 74-5; food, i., 75-9; boats, weapons,
i., 79; implements and manufactures, i., 79-80; government and
slavery, i., 80-1; women and marriage, i., 81-3; amusements,
i., 84-5; medicine, i., 85-6; mourning and burial, i., 86;
character, i., 86-7; location, i., 37, 69-71, 139-41; myth.,
iii., 104, 122, 143; lang., iii., 575-8.
Koniagas (Konægi, Koniagi, Konjagen), tribe of Koniagas, i.,
69-87; location, i., 70, 139; special mention, i., 72, 75-6,
81, 383.
Konnichtchates, tribe of Sound Indians, i., 208-22; location, i.,
303.
Koo-cha-koo-chin, iii., 586, see Kutcha Kutchin.
Kookatee, tribe of Thlinkeets, i., 94-114; location, i., 143.
Kooskooskia (Kooskooskee, Kooskooskie) River, i., 317.
Kootanais (Kootanie) River, i., 264, 311.
Kootenais (Cottonois, Coutanies, Flatbows, Kitunahas, Kootanies,
Kootonais, Kootonays, Kootoonais, Koutanies, Kutanàe, Kútani,
Kutnehas), Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91; location, i.,
151, 251-2, 311; special mention, i., 254-5, 261, 264-5, 267-8,
272-3, 278, 290-1; lang., iii., 619-20.
Kootonie Fort, Washington, i., 311.
Kootsuck, Nootka dress, i., 182.
Korekins, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
454.
Koschhiginskojes, tribe of Aleuts, i., 87-94; location, i., 141.
Kosetahs, North Californian tribe, i., 326-61; location, i., 447.
Koskiemos (Koskeemos, Kuskema), tribe of Nootkas, i., 174-208;
location, i., 295-6.
Kosmitas (Kosmiti), Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401;
location, i., 453.
Kot-à-Kutchins, i., 147, see Kutcha Kutchins.
Kotzebue Sound, i., 37-70, 138-9, 141; iii., 576.
Koumchaouas, i., 292, see Cumshewas.
Koutanies, i., 311, see Kootenais.
Kowais (Kaouais), tribe of Chinooks, i., 222-50; location, i.,
307.
Kowanga, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 459.
Kowitchan, i., 175, see Cowichin.
Kowooses (Cooses), North Californian tribe, i., 326-61; location,
i., 442.
Kowwelth (Kawwelth), tribe of Haidahs, i., 155-74; location, i.,
292.
Koyukuk River, i., 133.
Kuantlun, i., 297, see Kwantlum.
Kublai Khan, Mongol emperor, v., 44.
Kuepak, Yucatan, antiq., iv., 212.
Kugans, Aleut spirits, iii., 144.
Kuimuchquitoch, tribe of Haidahs, i., 155-74; location, i., 294.
Kujaki, Koniaga shields, i., 79.
Kukhnyak, i., 306, see Cooniacs.
Kukuth-Kutchin, tribe of Tinneh, i., 114-37; location, i., 147.
Kulahuasa, i., 459, see Calahuassa.
Kulanapo, Central Californian lang., iii., 643-7.
Kullas-Palus, i., 314, see Pend d'Oreilles.
Kullespelm, i., 313, see Pend d'Oreilles.
Kumcutes, tribe of Nootkas, i., 174-208; location, i., 296.
Kuprianoff (Kuprinoff) Island, i., 143.
Kuro Siwo, name for the Japan current, v., 52.
Kuschkukchwakmüten (Kusckockwagemuten, Kuskokwigmjuten,
Kuskokwimen, Kuskutchecook), i., 70, see Kuskoquigmutes.
Kushkish, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
449.
Kusil, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 459.
Kusi-Utahs, tribe of Shoshones, i., 422-42; special mention, i.,
440; lang., iii., 662.
Kuskema, i., 296, see Koskiemo.
Kuskokwigmjuten (Kuskokwigmutes), i., 77, 140, see
Kuskoquigmutes.
Kuskoquigmutes (Kuskokwigmjuten, Kuskokwimen, Kusckockwagemuten,
Kuschkukchwakmüten, Kuskoquim, Kuskutchewak, Kuskwogmuts),
tribe of Koniagas, i., 69-87; location, i., 70, 140; special
mention, i., 71-3, 75, 77, 80; lang., iii., 576, 580, 589.
Kuskoquim Bay, i., 140.
Kuskoquim River, (Kuskokwim, Kuskokwina), i., 70, 116, 140, 148.
Kutanàe (Kútani), i., 311, see Kootenais.
Kutcha Kutchins (Kutsha Kutshi, Koo-cha-koo-chin, Kot-à-Kutchin),
tribe of Tinneh, i., 114-37; location, i., 115, 147; lang.,
iii., 586.
Kutchins (Kutshins), tribe of Tinneh, i., 114-37; location, i.,
114-15, 146; special mention, i., 63, 127-32, 137; lang., iii.,
584, 586-8.
Kutnehas, i., 311, see Kootenais.
Kutzghatushl, Thlinkeet mythical bird, iii., 99.
Kuwichpackmüten, i., 140, see Kwichpagmutes.
Kuwichpack, i., 140, see Kwichpak.
Kuyam (Cuyama), South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location,
i., 459.
Kwalhioqua, tribe of Chinooks, i., 222-50; location, i., 305;
lang., iii., 592.
Kwantlums (Kuantlun), tribe of Nootkas., i., 174-208; location,
i., 175, 297.
Kwenaiwitl (Kwaiantl, Quinayat), tribe of Sound Indians, i.,
208-22; location, i., 303.
Kwichluagmutes (Kwichljuagmjuten), tribe of Koniagas, i., 70-87;
location, i., 70, 140-1.
Kwichluak (Kwichljuakh, Kwichluwack) River, i., 140-1.
Kwichpagmutes (Kwichpagmjuten, Kwichpak-meuts, Kuwichpackmüten,
Kwygyschpainagmjuts), tribe of Koniagas, i., 70-87; location,
i., 70, 140; lang., iii., 576.
Kwichpak (Kuwichpack, Kwickpakh, Kwikhpak), River, i., 70, 140-1.
Kyak (Kaiyak, Kajak), Alaskan boat, i., 60.
Kyanamaras, i., 449, see Kanimares.
Kycucuts, tribe of Nootkas, i., 174-208; location, i., 296.
Kyganies (Kygáni, Kygany, Kygargeys, Kygarneys, Kygarnies), i.,
174, 292-3, see Kaiganies.
Kyohquaht, i., 295, see Kyuquot.
Kyoose (Kyoots), i., 254, 273, see Cayuse.
Kyro Island, i., 143.
Kyschunack, i., 140, see Kishunak.
Kyuquots (Cayuquets, Kyohquaht, Kyuquets), tribe of Nootkas, i.,
174-208; location, i., 295.
L
Labassas, i., 294, see Lebassas.
Labná, Yucatan, antiq., iv., 211, 215-17; hist., v., 632.
Labphak (Labpak), Yucatan, antiq., iv., 249-52.
Labranza, Honduras, antiq., iv., 70.
La Breña, Durango, antiq., iv., 600-1.
Labyrinth, Arizona, antiq., iv., 639.
Lacandon Mountains, v., 623.
Lacandones, Maya nation, i., 686-711; ii., 630-803; location, i.,
645, 687, 786-7; special mention, i., 693, 695-703, 705, 707-8,
710; ii., 739, 751, 785, 803; myth., iii., 484; lang., iii.,
761.
Lacayamu, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 459.
Lachea, name of Zapotec country, i., 679.
Lachixila, locality, Oajaca, i., 679.
Lackweips, tribe of Haidahs, i., 155-74; location, i., 294.
Lacomnis, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
450.
Ladders, i., 160-1, 183, 260, 334, 535, 757; ii., 581.
Laekquelibla (Lockqualilla), tribe of Nootkas, i., 174-208;
location, i., 295-6.
La Goleta, locality, South California, i., 459.
La Goleta Estero, locality, South California, i., 459.
Lagoons, North Californian tribe, i., 326-61; location, i., 445.
Laguaachas, North Californian tribe, i., 326-61; location, i., 443.
Laguna, Pueblo village and tribe, i., 526-56; location, i., 600;
myth., iii., 174; lang., iii., 681; antiq., iv., 665.
Laguna de Copala, lang., iii., 664-5.
Laguna de Terminos, v., 196.
Laguna Mora, Chiapas, antiq., iv., 353.
Lagunas (Tataguas), South Californian tribe, i., 402-22;
location, i., 458.
Laguneros, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 612;
special mention, i., 577, 585, 590; lang., iii., 714.
Lahamas, Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91; location, i., 314.
Lahuh-Ah, Cakchiquel ruler, v., 594.
Lahuh Noh, Cakchiquel ruler, v., 600.
Lahuhquieh, Mame lord, v., 595.
Laimónes, i., 603, see Laymones.
Lajamini, Honduras, antiq., iv., 71.
La Joya, village, South California, i., 460.
Lajuchu, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 458.
Lake Bigler, i., 469, see Tahoe Lake.
Lake Superior, iv., 778, 783.
Lakes (Senijextee), Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91; location,
i., 314.
Lakisumnes, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
450.
Lamagi, Guatemala tribe, hist., v., 561.
Lamak, Guatemala tribe, hist., v., 546.
Lamalles, tribe of Chinooks, i., 222-50; location, i., 309.
Lamam (Lamanès), Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401;
location, i., 453.
Lamanites, American origin traces, v., 98-101.
Lamas, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i., 362,
449, 451.
Lamat, Maya day, ii., 755-6, 760.
Lamaytun, ii., 762, see Amaytun.
Lambat, Tzendal day, ii., 767; Chiapanec hero, v., 605.
Lamps, see Candles.
Lamsim, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
453.
Lances, see Spears.
Lancets, ii., 479, 601.
Lands, tenure, i., 191, 583, 700; ii., 223-30, 445-6, 462-3,
652-4.
Langley, locality, Vancouver Island, i., 297-8.
Language, general observations, i., 5, 12, 15; ii., 27; iii.,
2-13, 551-62; Hyperboreans, iii., 562-3, 574-92; Columbians,
i., 564-5; iii., 592-634; Californians, iii., 565-8, 635-79;
New Mexicans, i., 528; iii., 568-70, 680-722; Mexicans, ii.,
91, 106, 111, 114; iii., 74, 570-1, 723-58; v., 352; Central
Americans, ii., 645, 733; iii., 571-3, 759-95; as a historical
aid, v., 151.
Lantscheff Island, i., 60.
Laollaga, Oajaca, antiq., iv., 373.
Lapappu, Central California, lang., iii., 650.
La Patera, islet, South California, i., 458-9.
La Paz, town, Lower California, i., 603-4.
Lapiene's House Indians, i., 146, see Ta-Kuth-Kutchin.
Lapototots, i., 450, see Sapototots.
La Puente, locality, South California, i., 460.
La Purissima, locality, South California, i., 458.
Lard, i., 653, 768.
Lartielo, Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91; location, i., 314.
Las Flores, village, South California, i., 460.
La Soledad Mission, lang., iii., 654.
Lassen's Butte, locality, North California, i., 447.
Lassics, North Californian tribe, i., 326-61; location, i., 446;
lang., iii., 593.
Lasso, i., 493, 724.
Las Vegas River, i., 464.
Lath oc Katun, ii., 762, see Chek oc Katun.
La Tortuga, Puebla, antiq., iv., 465-6.
Latour-Allard Collection, Mexican Republic, antiq., iv., 560.
Law, see Government.
Law-Courts, ii., 442-5, 656.
Lawyers, ii., 444, 655.
Laymones (Laimónes, Limonies), Lower Californian tribe, i.,
556-71; location, i., 603; lang., iii., 687.
Lead, i., 165, 180; ii., 473; iv., 794.
Leather, i., 88, 183, 227-8, 258, 331, 482, 504; ii., 407.
Leaves, i., 331, 368, 521, 577; ii., 574, 784.
Lecatuits, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
452.
Lechugilla, medicine, i., 589.
Lee Panis, i., 593, see Lipanes.
Leeshtelosh, tribe of Chinooks, i., 222-50; location, i., 309.
Leewa, Mosquito water-spirit, iii., 497.
Leggins, i., 258, 424-5, 482-4, 531.
Leg-guards, Nahuas, ii., 407.
Legs, Hyperboreans, i., 88; Columbians, i., 158, 176-7, 210,
224-5, 254; New Mexicans, i., 531.
Lempa River, v., chap. xii.
Lencas, Guatemala tribe, i., 686-711; location, i., 790; lang.,
iii., 783.
Lenderi, locality, Nicaragua, i., 792.
Leoba, iv., 389, see Liobaa.
Leon, city, Nicaragua, i., 792; antiq., iv., 32, 60-1; hist., v.,
613.
Leon River, i., 797.
Leprosy, i., 354, 709, 742; ii., 340.
Lewire, Mosquito water-spirit, i., 741.
Lewis River, i., 148, 317, 462; iii., 620.
Liam, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 459.
Liard River, i., 144-5.
Libantone, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
453.
Libertad, Nicaragua, antiq., iv., 33-4, 59-60.
Liberty, Mississippi Valley, antiq., iv., 758-9.
Libisa, species of venomous fish, ii., 408.
Lichen, see Moss.
Lickawis, tribe of Chinooks, i., 222-50; location, i., 307.
Lighthouses, Mexico, ii., 566-7; v., 507.
Lightning, i., 588; iii., 118, 324; v., 524.
Ligin Ka, Cakchiquel month, ii., 766.
Liguaces, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 611.
Lillooet, locality, British Columbia; lang., iii., 613.
Lime, i., 577, 626, 653; ii., 556, 558, 581, 722, 784.
Limonies, i., 603, see Laymones.
Lines, fishing, i., 104; ii., 721.
Lingham, Phallic-worship, iii., 501.
Liniooh, name for Santa Cruz Island, i., 402.
Linkinse, i., 316, see Isle de Pierres.
Lintels, Yucatan, antiq., iv., 158-273 passim; Chiapas, antiq.,
iv., 302, 351-2, 360; Oajaca, antiq., iv., 398, 404; Colorado,
antiq., iv., 722; Peru, antiq., iv., 803.
Liobaa (Leoba, Liubá, Luiva, Lyoba, Lyobaa, Yobaa, Yopaa), name
for Mitla, Oajaca, antiq., iv., 389.
Lion, food and dress, i., 491, 648, 701-2.
Lion-snake, Miztec god, iii., 71.
Lipanes (Ipandes, Lee Panis, Lipajenne, Lipans), tribe of
Apaches, i., 473-526; location, i., 474, 593-4; special
mention, i., 479, 495; lang., iii., 563, 594.
Lip-ornaments, Hyperboreans, i., 47-8, 72, 88, 98-100; iii., 581;
Columbians, i., 158-9, 182; New Mexicans, i., 559; Mexicans,
i., 623; ii., 307, 372-3, 376; iii., 238, 387; Central
Americans, i., 691, 717, 752, 754; ii., 731-2.
Lips, Mexicans, i., 619, 647; Central Americans, i., 688, 714-15.
Liria, locality, Nicaragua, i., 792.
Lisahuato, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i.,
458.
Lishus, i., 450, see Sishus.
Lisichi, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 459.
Lithodendron Creek, Arizona, antiq., iv., 644.
Litter, ii., 180, 606-7, 620, 635, 641, 702.
Little Colorado Mountains, i., 467.
Little Grass Valley, California, antiq., iv., 707.
Little Miami River, Mississippi Valley, antiq., iv., 764.
Little Salt Lake Valley, i., 468.
Liubá, iv., 389, see Liobaa.
Livangebra, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
453.
Livangelva, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
453.
Lixus River, v., 66.
Liyúes, Lower Californian tribe, i., 556-71; lang., iii., 687-93.
Lizards, i., 405, 428, 488, 539, 561; ii., 599, 602; iii., 129.
Llaneros, tribe of Apaches, i., 473-526; location, i., 474, 595.
Llano de la Culebra, i., 788, see Hermita.
Llano Estacado, i., 591.
Llatu, Inca head-dress, v., 46.
Locènes, Guatemala tribe, i., 686-711; lang., iii., 761.
Loch, Quiché chief, v., 564.
Locklomnees, i., 450, see Socklumnes.
Lockqualillas, i., 296, see Lackquelibla.
Locobo, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
454.
Locollomillos, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location,
i., 451.
Locusts, famine caused by, v., 601.
Lodges, see Dwellings.
Logwood, Maya commerce, i., 658.
Lojos Aogni, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i.,
459.
Lolmet Ahau, Quiché official, ii., 644.
Lolmet Quehnay, Quiché official, ii., 644.
Loloncooks, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
447.
Lompoc (Lompoe), South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location,
i., 458-9.
Longtonguebuffs, tribe of Chinooks, i., 222-50; location, i.,
309.
Long Valley, i., 469.
Loomis, i., 209, see Lummis.
Loomnears, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
456.
Looms, i., 165, 191, 215-16, 502-3, 544, 582, 630, 724, 766-7.
Lopas, North Californian tribe, i., 326-61; location, i., 445.
Lopillamillos (Lupilomis), Central Californian tribe, i.,
361-401; location, i., 451.
Lopstatimnes, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location,
i., 450.
Loquamish, tribe of Sound Indians, i., 208-22; location, i., 301.
Loquilts, Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91; location, i., 311.
Lorenzo, village, South California, i., 458.
Loreto, village, Lower California, i., 557, 603-4; lang., iii.,
687.
Los Alamos, village, Sonora, i., 607.
Los Angeles, village and county, South California, tribes
described, i., 402-22; special mention, i., 403-4, 407, 409,
411, 420, 460; myth., iii., 84; v., 19; antiq., iv., 695; town,
Puebla, i., 671.
Los Cruces, village, South California, i., 459.
Los Dolores, village, Sonora, i., 606.
Los Edificios, name of Quemada ruins, Zacatecas, antiq., iv.,
580.
Los Llagos Canada, locality, South California, i., 458.
Lost River, i., 327, 443.
Lototen, i., 327, see Rogue River Indians.
Loucheux, i., 146, see Degothi Kutchin.
Loucitta, locality, Central California, i., 455.
Loughborough's Channel, i., 194.
Louisiana, Mississippi Valley, antiq., iv., 764.
Lovedale, Mississippi Valley, antiq., iv., 767.
Lower California, i., 556-71, 591-2, 603-4; antiq., iv., 601-2.
Lower Californians, one of the four families into which the New
Mexicans are divided. Manners and customs of all its nations
and tribes described together, i., 556-71; physique, i., 558;
dress, i., 558-9; dwellings, i., 559-60; food, i., 560-2;
weapons and war, i., 562-3; implements and manufactures, i.,
563; boats and property, i., 563-4; art, i., 564; government,
i., 564-5; marriage and women, i., 565-6; amusements, i.,
566-8; medicine, i., 568-9; burial, i., 569-70; character, i.,
570-1; location, i., 556-7, 603-4; myth., iii., 83-4; lang.,
iii., 568, 686-93.
Lower Klamath Lake, i., 327, 443.
Lower Stanu Creek, i., 793.
Lower Yukon, i., 116.
Low Gap, locality, Central California, i., 446, 451.
Lowhims, Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91; location, i., 317.
Lucayasta, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
455.
Luchasmi, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
454.
Luckasos (Luckkarsos), tribe of Chinooks, i., 222-50; location,
i., 307.
Lucktons, tribe of Chinooks, i., 222-50; location, i., 307.
Lucuyumu, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 459.
Lugups, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 459.
Luianeglua, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
453.
Luidneg, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
453.
Luijta, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 459.
Luiva, iv., 389, see Liobaa.
Lujanisuissilac, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location,
i., 459.
Lulanna (Sulanna), tribe of Haidahs, i., 155-74; location, i.,
292.
Lummi River, i., 299.
Lummis (Loomis), tribe of Sound Indians, i., 208-22; location,
i., 208, 299; special mention, i., 210, 219, 222; lang., iii.,
615.
Lupercalia, Nahua festival, ii., 338.
Lupilomis, i., 451, see Lopillamillos.
Lurin Valley, Peru, antiq., iv., 796-7.
Lutuamis, i., 444, see Klamaths.
Luupsch, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 459.
Lynn Canal, i., 96, 100-1, 142.
Lyoba (Lyobaa), ii., 209; iv., 389.
M
Mac, Maya month, ii., 691, 757-8.
Macana (Macuahuitl), Nahua sword, i., 493, 655; ii., 409, 743.
Macanootoonys, North Californian tribe, i., 326-61; location, i.,
442.
Macaoaquez (Macoaques), Central Mexican tribe, i., 617-44;
location, i., 676; special mention, i., 622.
Macat (Mazat), Nicaragua god, iii., 492.
Macataxtli, Nahua priest's dress, iii., 335.
Macaws, i., 176, see Classets.
Macehuales, Nahua term for plebeians, ii., 217.
McElmo River, Colorado, antiq., iv., 727-31.
McGillivray's River, i., 311.
McGilvary's, California, antiq., iv., 707.
Machete, Central American chopping knife, i., 655-6, 697.
Mackanotins, North Californian tribe, i., 326-61; location, i.,
442.
Mackenzie River, i., 37, 42, 45-6, 138, 144, 146.
Macmillan River, lang., iii., 587.
Macoba, Yucatan, antiq., iv., 252-3.
Macon, Mississippi Valley, antiq., iv., 768.
Macoyahuis, i., 607, see Cues.
Macsinum, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i., 453.
Macuahuitl, ii., 743, see Macana.
Macuexhuacan, city, Mexico, v., 242.
Macuextli, Nahua precious stones, ii., 319.
Macuilacatltecuhtli, Teo-Chichimec chief, v., 489.
Macuilmalinatzin, Mexican prince, v., 455, 505.
Macuilxochiquetzalli, name of Chalchihuitlicue, iii., 367, 407.
Macuilxochitl, Nahua god, ii., 300; iii., 406-7.
Macuilxuchil, city, Oajaca, v., 531.
Madison, Mississippi Valley, antiq., iv., 764.
Madison Bay, i., 301.
Madoc (Madawc), a Welsh prince, v., 116-18.
Mad River, i., 329, 332, 446, 451; lang., iii., 593, 642.
Magdalena, locality, Sonora and Jalisco, i., 606, 672; Oajaca,
antiq., iv., 372.
Magdalena Bay, i., 603-4.
Magemutes (Magagmjuten, Magimuten, Magmjuten), tribe of Koniagas,
i., 69-87; location, i., 70, 140.
Maggots, as food, i., 55, 695.
Magicians, see Sorcerers.
Magmjuten, i., 140, see Magemutes.
Magot, species of tree, i., 579.
Maguacate, medicinal herb, i., 588.
Maguey (Agave), i., 488-9, 517, 559-699 passim; ii., 347, 357-65
passim, 484, 600, 724, 727, 752.
Maguiaquis, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 609.
Mahakh, Aleut goddess, iii., 104.
Mahoe, species of tree, i., 722, 724, 760, 766.
Mahogany, boats, i., 658, 699, 725.
Mahquinalo, a Cakchiquel chief, v., 560.
Mahuames, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 612.
Mahucutah (Maucotah), Quiché third created man, iii., 47; a
divine person, or high-priest, v., 181, 546, 549, 552-6, 566-7,
584-5.
Maiconeras, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 611.
Maiz, city, San Luis Potosí, i., 673; lang., iii., 742.
Maize, i., 430, 489, 693-5, 706, 719, 739, 758-60, 775; ii., 145,
343, 347-50, 354-5, 619, 679, 702-3, 710, 716-20, 723, 737;
iii., 241, 325, 349, 358-63, 404; v., 193-4.
Majibel, Lower Californian fourth season, i., 564.
Majiben, Lower Californian fifth season, i., 564.
Majiibenmaaji, Lower Californian sixth season, i., 564.
Makahs, i., 302, see Classets.
Makalay, Trinity River Indians' evil spirit, iii., 176.
Makomas, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
449.
Makuschinskoja, tribe of Aleuts, i., 87-94; location, i., 141.
Malaguecos (Malahuecos), North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91;
location, i., 613.
Malah, a Zutugil prince, v., 572.
Malahuecos, i., 612, see Malaguecos.
Malahues, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 459.
Malay, lang., traces, iii., 646.
Malcam, Quiché widower, ii., 802.
Malcuitlapilco, suburb of Mexico, ii., 560.
Malemutes (Maleigmjuten, Malimüten), tribe of Koniagas, i.,
70-87; location, i., 70, 138, 141; special mention, i., 71, 73,
77-8, 81; lang., iii., 580.
Malico, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 459.
Malik Ocok Kin, Maya dawn, ii., 755.
Malila, locality, Mexico, i., 675.
Malimüten, i., 141, see Malemutes.
Malinalcas, Nahua nation, i., 677-78; ii., 133-629; name, ii.,
127-8; hist., v., 307-10.
Malinalco, town and province, Mexico, i., 677; antiq., iv., 504;
hist., v., 310, 323, 328.
Malinalli, Nahua day, ii., 512, 516-17; lord of Tlachquiauhco,
v., 461.
Malinalxochitl, Chichimec princess, v., 303; Aztec princess, v.,
327-8.
Malinche, see Cerro de la Malinche.
Malincheños, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 613.
Mallets, i., 189, 237, 270-1.
Mallin, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
454.
Maltese Cross, iv., 481, 498; see also Cross.
Malvaitac, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
453.
Mamalhoaztli, a constellation, iii., 112.
Mamalihuasco, Acolhua lordship, v., 303.
Mama-lil-a-culla (Mamalilacula, Marmalillacalla), tribe of
Nootkas, i., 174-208; location, i., 176, 295-6.
Mamamchic, name for Coya Mama Oella, v., 46.
Mama Oello, Peruvian goddess, iii., 269.
Mamatlavicoa, Nahua game, ii., 334.
Mamazorras, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 611.
Mames, Maya nation, i., 687-711; ii., 630-803; location and name,
i., 787; ii., 128; lang., iii., 760-1, 766-7; hist., v., 541-2,
555, 563, 566, 569, 576-7, 585, 591, 593, 595.
Mamhéni, Otomí City, v., 243.
Mamites, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 610.
Mamnits, tribe of Chinooks, i., 222-50; location, i., 306.
Mamum, Inland Columbian tribe, food, i., 265.
Mam Yoc, name of Mames, i., 787.
Managua, city, Nicaragua, v., 613.
Managua Lake, i., 791-2; antiq., iv., 32; v., 613.
Manatee, a sea-cow, i., 719-20.
Manazaquepet, Guatemalan tribe, i., 686-711; location, i., 789.
Manches, Guatemala tribe, i., 686-711; location, i., 682, 687;
special mention, i., 710; myth., iii., 482.
Manchika, Queen of Sheromogula, v., 46.
Manco, v., 46, see Mango.
Manco Capac, Peruvian god, iii., 269; v., 46.
Mandans, name given to early Welch colonists, v., 118.
Mandingos, tribe of Isthmians, i., 747-85; location, i., 797;
special mention, i., 752, 784.
Mandioc, Mosquitos, food, i., 721.
Mangnés, i., 792, name for Nagarandas.
Mango (Manco), first Inca of Peru, v., 46.
Mani, city, Yucatan, ii., 699-700; antiq., iv., 220; v., 634.
Maniani, Honduras, antiq., iv., 71.
Manik, Maya day, ii., 755-6, 760.
Manilahuh, Zutugil king, v., 586-7.
Mankeesh, Yucatan, antiq., iv., 253.
Mannawousut, tribe of Nootkas, i., 174-208; location, i., 295.
Manosaht, tribe of Nootkas, i., 174-208; location, i., 295.
Manos Prietas, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i.,
611.
Manovapa (Manowapa), Tarasco god, iii., 446; v., 517.
Mantles, i., 630, 690, 751; ii., 364, 366-7, 374-5, 406, 604-5,
615, 618, 621, 727-8; iii., 416, 423.
Manufactures, Hyperboreans, i., 79-80, 107, 130; Columbians,
i., 164-7, 190-1, 215-16; Californians, i., 345, 381-2, 407-8;
New Mexicans, i., 544, 563; Mexicans, i., 630, 657; ii., 384,
474-91; Central Americans, i., 698-9, 724, 766-7; ii., 752.
Manzanilla, used as poison, i., 723, 762.
Manzanillos (San Blas Indians), tribe of Isthmians, i., 747-85;
location, i., 796; special mention, i., 753, 784.
Manzanita, North California, food, i., 340.
Mapilca, Vera Cruz, antiq., iv., 455.
Mapimi, see Bolson de Mapimi.
Maps, i., 68, 165, 239, 274-5; ii., 224, 236, 380, 388, 424, 443,
487-8; iv., 283, 748-9.
Mapulcanas, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 613.
Maquelnoteers, North Californian tribe, i., 326-61; location, i.,
443.
Maquiapemes, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 612.
Maran, ii., 677, see Chin.
Marani, Inland Columbian tribe, food, i., 265.
Maraveres, Central Mexican tribe, i., 617-44; location, i., 672.
Marcasite, used for painting, ii., 327; iii., 360-1.
Mar de Cortés, see California Gulf.
Margajita, a species of mineral, ii., 478, 480.
Marhoos, tribe of Chinooks, i., 222-50; location, i., 305.
Maribios (Maribichoa), Guatemala tribe, i., 686-711; location,
i., 791.
Maricopa Copper Mine, i., 528, 601.
Maricopas (Cocomaricopas), tribe of Pueblos, i., 526-56;
location, i., 526, 602; special mention, i., 530, 533-4, 544,
547-53, 555-6; myth., iii., 131, 527; lang., iii., 684-6.
Maricopa Wells, i., 602.
Marietta, Mississippi Valley, antiq., iv., 767.
Mariguana, a narcotic herb, i., 633.
Mariguanes, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 613.
Marimba, a musical instrument, i., 664, 705, 738.
Marin County, Cal., i., 363, 452.
Maripenda, a medicinal plant, ii., 599.
Mariposa County, California, antiq., iv., 707.
Markets, i., 700; ii., 378, 383-6, 440, 564-8, 646, 736-7; v.,
421.
Markland, locality, north-east coast of America, v., 107.
Marmalillacalla, i., 295, see Mama-lil-a-culla.
Marriage, Hyperboreans, i., 66, 81-3, 92, 110-11, 117, 123,
127, 130-4; Columbians, i., 168-70, 192, 195-8, 218, 241-2;
Californians, i., 349-51, 388-91, 410-12, 436-7; New Mexicans,
i., 511-15, 547-9, 565-6, 584-6; Mexicans, i., 632, 661-3; ii.,
251-66, 442, 628; Central Americans, i., 702-4, 729-34, 772-4;
ii., 642, 651, 664-75, 711; iii., 473.
Martilpar, i., 295, see Murtilpar.
Martinez, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 613.
Martinez, California, antiq., iv., 709.
Martinez Point, i., 301.
Martin Lake, i., 144.
Mary River, i., 462, see Humboldt River.
Masacatan, village, Guatemala, i., 787.
Masagneve, Moqui village, i., 528.
Masalla Magoons, (Masallamagoons), Central Californian tribe, i.,
361-401; location, i., 449; lang., iii., 643.
Masanais, i., 601, see Moszasnavi.
Masatzin, Chichimec king, v., 220.
Masaya, city, Nicaragua, i., 792; antiq., iv., 31, 35-6.
Maschal, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 459.
Masiaca, village, Sonora, i., 607.
Masks, Hyperboreans, i., 93, 97, 101; iii., 145, 148; Columbians,
i., 159, 170, 181, 186, 193; Californians, i., 393; New
Mexicans, i., 532, 550-1; Mexicans, i., 630; ii., 291, 314,
341, 480, 482, 490, 603, 606, 620; iii., 289, 295, 341, 385,
390-2, 394-5; antiq., iv., 479, 495, 556-9; Central Americans,
ii., 713, 733, 750; antiq., iv., 67, 236.
Masonahs, North Californian tribe, i., 326-61; location, i., 443.
Mason's Plantation, Mississippi Valley, antiq., iv., 768.
Massets (Massettas, Massettes, Massetts, Massits, Mosettes),
tribe of Haidahs, i., 155-74; location, i., 155, 292.
Mastamho, Mojave god, iii., 175.
Mastate, Maya dress, ii., 726.
Matacaxtli, Nahua armlets, ii., 395-6.
Matahuay, South Californian village, i., 458.
Matalánes, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
453-4; lang., iii., 652.
Mataluhtli, Nahua drink, ii., 359.
Matape, village, Sonora, i., 606-7.
Matchclats (Michlaits, Muchlaht), tribe of Nootkas, i., 174-208;
location, i., 295.
Matchemnes, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
450; lang., iii., 649.
Matelpys, tribe of Nootkas, i., 174-208; location, i., 296.
Matemecatl, Nahua brachials, ii., 404.
Matevil (Mathowelia), Mojave god, iii., 175, 526.
Mathlanobs, i., 309, see Multnomahs.
Mathowelia, iii., 175, see Matevil.
Matiares, village, Nicaragua, i., 792.
Matiliha (Matillija), South Californian tribe, i., 402-22;
location, i., 459.
Matlaccoatl, Toltec king, v., 266.
Matlacxochitl, name for Huemac and Tezcatlipoca, v., 261, 286.
Matlahuacallan, station, Aztec migration, v., 323.
Matlalcueje, name for Chalchihuitlicue, iii., 367; Tlascala
heights, v., 504-5.
Matlalquac, Nahua female sacrifice, iii., 345.
Matlaltzincas (Matlaltzinchi), Nahua nation, i., 617-44; ii.,
133-629; special mention, i., 622; ii., 411; location and name,
i., 677; ii., 128; myth., iii., 446; lang., iii., 747-8; hist.,
v., 307-10, 432-5, 510, 523-4.
Matlaltzinco, province of Mexico, i., 676; v., 432-5, 472.
Matlaluca, Vera Cruz, antiq., iv., 445.
Matlalxihuitl, a flower used for dyes, ii., 486.
Matlalzahuatl, a species of pestilence, i., 638.
Matlatlihuitzin, Mexican king, v., 492-3.
Matlazahua, i., 674, see Mazahuas.
Matlose, Nootka spirit, iii., 151.
Matoles, iii., 643, see Mattoles.
Matomey Ki Pomos, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401;
location and name, i., 362, 448.
Mats, Hyperboreans, i., 91, 107; Columbians, i., 160-3, 166,
173, 184, 187, 190, 211-12, 220, 231, 236-7, 259-61, 270-1;
Californians, i., 336, 345; New Mexicans, i., 575, 582;
Mexicans, i., 624, 656; ii., 161, 361, 386, 440, 572, 621;
iii., 335; iv., 402; Central Americans, i., 697-9, 724, 745,
766; ii., 669, 739, 787.
Mattole Creek, i., 447.
Mattoles (Matoles), Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401;
location, i., 447; myth., iii., 86; v., 14, 19; lang., iii.,
643.
Matzahuas, i., 674, see Mazahuas.
Matzopetztli, Nahua bracelets, ii., 404.
Maucotah, see Mahucutah.
Maugna, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 460.
Mauhemi, i., 350, see Mow-wee-mas.
Mawish, Nez Percés' spirit of fatigue, i., 284.
Max, a species of leaf in Yucatan, ii., 737.
Maxatecaz, Nahua maskers, iii., 429.
Maxcanú, Yucatan, antiq., iv., 262.
Maxio, Toltec queen, v., 271.
Maxixcatzin, Ocotelulco lord, v., 503.
Maxtla, a Tepanec prince, and king of Coyuhuacan, v., 373,
384-94, 499; lord of Tlachco, v., 439.
Maxtlatzin, a Toltec noble, v., 276, 283-4.
Maxtli, Nahua dress, ii., 144, 365-6, 618, 726-8.
Mayacomas (Mayacmas), Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401;
location, i., 363, 451-2.
Mayapan, ancient name and capital of Yucatan, i., 645; ii.,
632-7, 654; antiq., iv., 240-3, 268, 274-5, 277; hist., v.,
159, 224-7, 615, 618-19, 622-3, 626, 629-34.
Maya nations, manners and customs described, i., 645-747; ii.,
630-803; government, property, etc., ii., 632-60; education,
ii., 661-4; marriage, women, etc., ii., 664-86; food, ii.,
718-25; dress, ii., 726-34; war, weapons, etc., ii., 740-7;
implements and manufactures, ii., 748-52; art, ii., 753-82;
dwellings, etc., ii., 783-94; medicine and superstitions, ii.,
794-8; burial, ii., 798-801; physique, ii., 802; character,
ii., 803; location, i., 645-6, 683, 786-92; ii., 128-9; myth.,
iii., 461-96, 541-3; v., 87; lang., iii., 558, 571, 724,
759-76; v., 616; hist., v., 157-8, 540-634.
Mayas, tribe of South Mexicans and one of the Maya nations,
i., 644-70; ii., 630-803; location and name, i., 645-6, 683;
special mention, i., 647-64, 667, 669; ii., 91, 117-21, 631-7,
647-705, 711-803; myth., iii., 461-73, 541-2; v., 87; lang.,
iii., 558, 571, 724, 759-62, 773-6; v., 616; origin, v., 22;
hist., v., 157-8, 614-34.
Mayavel, Nahua female sacrifice, iii., 345.
Mayo River, i., 607-8.
Mayos, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location and name, i.,
572, 607; special mention, i., 582, 590; lang., iii., 667,
707-10.
Mayotla, ii., 563, see Moyotlan.
Maza, Nahua war-club, ii., 409.
Mazacohuatl (Otziuhcohuatl), Nahua chief, v., 243.
Mazahuacan, district in Northwest Mexico, i., 674.
Mazahuas (Matlazahua, Matzahua, Mazahui, Mozahui), Central
Mexican tribe, i., 617-44; location, i., 674; v., 510; lang.,
iii., 737, 741.
Mazames, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 611.
Mazamorra, maize porridge, iii., 360.
Mazapiles, Central Mexican tribe, i., 617-44; location, i., 672;
lang., iii., 719.
Mazat, iii., 492, see Macat.
Mazatecs (Mazotecas), Maya nation, i., 644-70; ii., 630-803;
location, i., 680; special mention, i., 646; ii., 261; myth.,
iii., 131-2; lang., iii., 752-3.
Mazatepec, station, Toltec migration, v., 213.
Mazatl, Nahua day, ii., 511-12, 516-17; Tepanec commander, v.,
393.
Mazatlan, province, Guerrero, hist., v., 411-12.
Mazatsal Peaks, i., 595.
Mazatzin, Culhua king, v., 256, 330-1.
Mazotecas, iii., 131, see Mazatecs.
Measles, i., 286, 521, 568, 638, 667, 742.
Meat, see Flesh.
Meatwho, i., 312, see Battlelemuleemauch.
Mecamecan, Mexico, antiq., iv., 496-7.
Mecapalli, a strap to support burdens, ii., 386.
Mecitl (Mexi), name for Huitzilopochtli, v., 88, 324, 346.
Mecochiliztli, lunar period, ii., 504.
Meconetzin, v., 270, see Acxitl.
Mecos, Central Mexican tribe, i., 617-44; location, i., 672;
lang., iii., 743.
Medals, ii., 732; iv., 118-19, 346.
Medellin, Vera Cruz, antiq., iv., 434.
Medicine, Hyperboreans, i., 68-9, 85-6, 113, 120, 124;
Columbians, i., 172, 204-5, 219-20, 228, 245-6, 285-7;
Californians, i., 354-6, 358, 394-5, 418-19, 439; iii., 160;
New Mexicans, i., 521-2, 542, 554, 568-9, 588-9; Mexicans, i.,
638-40, 667; ii., 268-9, 460, 591-602; iii., 353, 409, 415,
421; Central Americans, i., 708-9, 741-3, 778-80; ii., 794-8,
see names of diseases.
Medicine-men, see Sorcerers.
Mediotaquel, Acaxee dialect, iii., 718.
Meewocs (Meewa, Meewie), Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401;
location, i., 455; special mention, i., 375, 393, 395; myth.,
iii., 522.
Méhtehs, North Californian tribe, i., 326-61; location, i., 444.
Meidoos, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
451; lang., iii., 648, 652.
Mejibo, Lower Californian first season, i., 564.
Melzolzin, v., 243, see Metzoltzin.
Men, Maya day, ii., 755-6, 760.
Menaches, tribe of Shoshones, i., 422-42; location, i., 464.
Mendocino County, i., 447, 451.
Menguis (Menquis), i., 558; iii., 687, see Monquis.
Menstruation, i., 82, 110-11, 242, 278-9, 351, 549.
Merced County, California, antiq., iv., 707.
Merced River, i., 455-6; iii., 651.
Merchants, Nahuas, ii., 386-97, 616; v., 415, 443, 600; Mayas,
ii., 736-8.
Mérida, city, Yucatan, iii., 467; antiq., iv., 243-4.
Merivales Mountains, i., 795.
Mesa Verde, Colorado, antiq., iv., 719.
Mescal, Mexican drink, i., 517, 664.
Mescaleros (Mezcaleros), tribe of Apaches, i., 473-526; location
and name, i., 474, 594; special mention, i., 505, 509, 523.
Mescales, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 612.
Mescalteco, Vera Cruz, antiq., iv., 451.
Meshonganawe, Moqui village, i., 601.
Mesquit-bean, Apache food, i., 487-8.
Messier Mound, Mississippi Valley, antiq., iv., 767-8.
Mesticatan, village, Zacatecas, i., 672.
Metals, i., 546, 727-8, 769; ii., 473-8, 749-50; iii., 255; iv.,
66-7, 102-3, 278, 778-9, 792-4.
Metaphors, common use of, iii., 35-7.
Metate (Metlatl), a corn-grinder, i., 489, 501, 540, 544, 629-30,
653, 656, 697, 721, 765; ii., 354, 361, 750.
Metazures, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 611.
Meteors, meteoric phenomena, Mexico, v., 446-7.
Metepec, a city of Matlaltzinco, v., 433.
Metlaltoyuca, Vera Cruz, antiq., iv., 458-61.
Metlapilli, a stone roller used with the metate, i., 630.
Metlatl, ii., 354, see Metate.
Metztli, a pre-Toltec hero, v., 205.
Metztli Itzacual (House of the Moon), Mexico, antiq., iv., 531-5.
Metzoltzin (Melzolzin, Metzotzin), a Toltec prince, v., 213, 243.
Meviras, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 611.
Mewahs, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
455.
Mexcala, town, Michoacan, i., 676.
Mexcala River, ii., 107, 109; v., 508.
Mexcaltepec, city, Michoacan, i., 678.
Mexi, v., 324, see Mecitl.
Mexicaltzinco, town, Mexico, ii., 562; v., 345.
Mexican Manuscript, ii., 772.
Mexicans, Central, one of the two families into which the tribes
of Mexico are divided; manners and customs of all its nations
and tribes described together, i., 617-44; civilized nations,
ii., 133-629; physique, i., 618-19; ii., 624-5; dress, i.,
620-3; ii., 363-77; dwellings, i., 624; ii., 160-74, 553-89;
food, i., 624-6; ii., 342-62; personal habits, i., 626;
weapons and war, i., 627-9; ii., 400-32; implements, arts and
manufactures, i., 629-31; ii., 473-92; oratory and poetry,
ii., 492-7; boats and property, i., 631; ii., 397-9; commerce,
ii., 378-97; government, i., 632; ii., 133-239, 433-72; women
and marriage, i., 632-5; ii., 251-81; education, ii., 240-51;
amusements, i., 635-6; ii., 283-301; festivals and feasts,
ii., 302-41; arithmetic, ii., 497-500; calendar, ii., 502-22;
hieroglyphics, ii., 523-52; medicine, i., 638-40; ii., 591-602;
burial, i., 640-1; ii., 603-23; character, i., 641-4; ii.,
626-9; myth., ii., 200-15, 245-6, 292, 302-41, 388-97, 604-5,
616-23; iii., 55-74, 109-13, 119-23, 128-9, 181-231, 237-460,
511-15, 532-41; lang., iii., 570, 723-48; antiq., iv., 504-23,
553-64; hist., ii., 91-114; iii., 270, 307-8; v., 307-510,
595-7, 600-1, 606; location, i., 617, 670-8; name, v., 324-5.
Mexicans, Northern, one of the four families into which the New
Mexicans are divided; manners and customs of all its nations
and tribes described together, i., 571-91; physique, i.,
572-3; dress, i., 573-5; dwellings, i., 575; food, i., 576-8;
weapons and war, i., 578-82; implements and manufactures, i.,
582-3; boats and property, i., 583; art and government, i.,
583-4; women and marriage, i., 584-6; amusements, i., 586-7;
miscellaneous customs, i., 587-8; medicine, i., 588-9; burial,
i., 589-90; character, i., 590-1; myth., iii., 111, 178-81,
529-32; lang., iii., 569-70, 706-22; antiq., iv., 568-614;
location, i., 571, 604-14.
Mexicans, Southern, one of the two families into which the wild
tribes of Mexico are divided; manners and customs of all its
nations and tribes described together, i., 644-70; physique,
i., 646-8; dress, i., 648-51; dwellings, i., 651-2; food, i.,
652-4; personal habits, i., 654; weapons and war, i., 655-6;
implements and manufactures, i., 656-7; boats, property, etc.,
i., 658-9; government, i., 659-60; slavery, i., 661; women
and marriage, i., 661-3; amusements, i., 664-5; miscellaneous
customs, i., 665-6; medicine and burial, i., 667-8; character,
i., 668-70; myth., iii., 448-73; lang., iii., 570-1, 748-58;
location, i., 644-6, 678-83.
Mexicapan, a ward of Tezcuco city, v., 404.
Mexica-tlalli, Mexican war-lands, ii., 225.
Mexicatl-Teohuatzin, Mexican pontiff, ii., 201; iii., 433.
Mexico, nations and tribes described, i., 617-44; civilized
nations, ii., 133-629; location, i., 670-8; myth., iii., 55-70,
181-444, 505-6; lang., iii., 723-41; antiq., iv., 480-549;
hist., ii., 92-106; v., 237-510.
Mexico City, ii., 160-6, 414-15, 559-67; iii., 307; v., 343-6,
355-8; antiq., iv., 504-20.
Mexitl (Mexitly, Mextli), name of Huitzilopochtli, iii., 296.
Mexochitl, an emetic, ii., 599.
Mexoyotzin, a Toltec noble, v., 272-3.
Mexquital, town, Mexico, i., 674.
Mextozolitzli, lunar period, ii., 504.
Méyemmas, North Californian tribe, i., 326-61; location, i., 445.
Meyuncame, Durango god, iii., 179.
Mezcaleros, i., 474, see Mescaleros.
Mezquites, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 611.
Meztitlan, province, Mexico, iii., 431; antiq., iv., 544; hist.,
v., 260, 335, 475.
Meztitlanecs, Nahua nation, i., 617-44; ii., 133-629; location,
i., 675.
Miahuaxochitl, Mexican princess and queen, v., 363.
Miamisburg, Mississippi Valley, antiq., iv., 777-8.
Mica, Mississippi Valley, antiq., iv., 782.
Micaotli, Mexico, antiq., iv., 537.
Micapetlacoli, Nahua goddess, iii., 396.
Miccacuicatl, Nahua funeral chant, ii., 607.
Miccailhuitzintli, Nahua month, ii., 328, 510.
Mice, as food, i., 405, 430, 561, 576.
Michatoyatl, river, Guatemala, v., 607.
Michitlatecotle, iii., 396, see Mictlantecutli.
Michlaits, i., 295, see Matchclats.
Michoacan (Michuacan), tribes, etc., described, i., 617-44; ii.,
133-629; location, i., 674-8; myth., iii., 66-7, 403, 445-7,
541; lang., iii., 737, 744-7; antiq., iv., 569-72; hist., ii.,
107-8; v., 434, 508-26.
Michoacaques, i., 643, see Tarascos.
Micksucksealtons (Micksucksealtoms), Inland Columbian tribe, i.,
250-91; location, i., 312-14.
Micla (Mimilla), Guatemala, antiq., iv., 115.
Mictecacihuatl, iii., 401, see Mictlancihuatl.
Mictlan, Nahua Hades, ii., 648; iii., 396, 534-6; locality, San
Salvador, i., 484; v., 609-11.
Mictlancalco, subterranean palace, iii., 254; iv., 544.
Mictlancihuatl (Mictanihuatl, Mictecacihuatl, Miquitecacigua),
Nahua goddess, iii., 396-402; v., 41.
Mictlantecutli (Michitlatecotle, Mictlanteuctli, Miquitlamtecotl,
Miquitlantecotli), Nahua god, ii., 338, 340; iii., 59, 396-403;
iv., 514.
Mictlanteucyòhua, Nahua calendar sign and god, ii., 516.
Mictlantongo, Miztec dialect, iii., 749.
Mictlanzinco, locality, Mexico, v., 472.
Midwives, i., 634; ii., 268-71, 678.
Miemissouks, tribe of Sound Indians, i., 208-22; location, i.,
300.
Migrations, Hyperboreans, i., 71, 87, 116; Columbians, iii., 608;
Californians, i., 325; iii., 637-8; general, v., 138-9; Nahua
nations, ii., 537-9, 543-51, 559-60; pre-Toltec, v., 165-8,
188-208; Toltecs, v., 208-18, 565-7; Chichimecs, v., 218-20;
Nahuatlacas, v., 220-3, 305-10; Maya nations, v., 165-8, 180-8,
223-30, 537-42, 546, 554-6, 565-7, 604-13, 616-7.
Miguihui (Miguigui), South Californian tribe, i., 402-22;
location, i., 459.
Mijes, Maya nation, i., 645-70; ii., 133-629; location, i., 645,
679; ii., 111-2; special mention, i., 646-8, 651-2, 659, 666,
668-9; ii., 278, 379; myth., iii., 458; lang., iii., 756-7;
hist., v., 530-3.
Milaketkuns, Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91; location, i.,
312.
Milchimalli, Nahua war lands, ii., 227.
Milijaes, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 612.
Milkwanen, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i.,
460.
Millbank Sound, i., 155, 158, 227, 292-5; iii., 606.
Millbank Sound Indians, tribe of Haidahs, i., 155-74; location,
i., 294; special mention, i., 159, 168, 171, 174.
Millerton, California, antiq., iv., 707.
Milnaoatl, Nahua male sacrifice, iii., 345.
Milpa, a cornfield, ii., 717.
Mimals, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
450.
Mimbreños, tribe of Apaches, i., 473-526; location, i., 474, 595.
Mimbres mountains and river, i., 595.
Mimich (Mitmitzichi), Nahua chief, v., 242.
Mimics, i., 68, 437, 551, 706, 736-8; ii., 286, 291-2, 309, 712.
Mimilla, iv., 115, see Micla.
Mina, locality, Chihuahua, lang., iii., 712, 716.
Mines, i., 727-8; ii., 473-4, 749-50; iv., 544-5, 673, 697-707,
783-4.
Miopacoas, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 611.
Mipacmas, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
362.
Miquetanteot, Nicaragua god, iii., 492.
Miquitecacigua, iii., 396, see Mictlancihuatl.
Miquitlamtecotl (Miquitlantecotli), iii., 396, see
Mictlantecutli.
Miquiztli, Nahua day, ii., 511-12, 516-17.
Mirador, Vera Cruz, antiq., iv., 447.
Mirador, El, at Huanuco el Viejo, Peru, antiq., iv., 801-3.
Mirrors, i., 623; ii., 480, 482, 713, 735; iii., 238; iv., 383.
Misalahs, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
449.
Misantla, Vera Cruz, antiq., iv., 448-51.
Miscanaka, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i.,
459.
Miscellaneous customs, Hyperboreans, i., 67-8, 118-19, 125;
Columbians, i., 201-3, 245, 282-5; Californians, i., 417-18;
New Mexicans, i., 517-21, 538, 553-4, 587-8; Mexicans, i.,
636-7; iii., 393; Central Americans, i., 707-8, 740-1, 776-7.
Mish, common termination of names of Nisqually tribes, i., 208.
Mishla, Mosquito drink, i., 739.
Miskaiwhu, tribe of Sound Indians, i., 208-22; location, i., 300.
Misquique, Mexico, antiq., iv., 500-1.
Mission Dolores, i., 363, 452-3.
Missions, i., 29, 173, 291, 325.
Missisissepono, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location,
i., 458.
Mississippi, lang., iii., 726-7; antiq., iv., 767, 769-70; v.,
93-5.
Mississippi Valley, antiq., iv., 746-90; v., 538.
Missopeno (Sopono), South Californian tribe, i., 402-22;
location, i., 459.
Missouri, Mississippi Valley, antiq., iv., 769.
Missouri River, i., 311.
Missouris, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i.,
458.
Mistéken, i., 678, see Miztecs.
Mita, town, Guatemala, i., 787.
Mithouie River, i., 316.
Mithouies, Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91; location, i., 316.
Mitic, town, Jalisco, i., 672.
Mitl, Nahua god, ii., 337; Toltec king, v., 253, 263-4, 297;
Tlascaltec ruler, v., 349, 497.
Mitla, Oajaca, antiq., i., 665; ii., 570; iv., 388-417; v.,
59-60; hist., v., 232, 444, 464, 528-9, 535.
Mitliné, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
453.
Mitliztac, Chichimec chief, v., 293.
Mitmitzichi, v., 242, see Mimich.
Mitnal, Maya hell, iii., 542.
Mitote, Nahua dance, ii., 289.
Mitre, ii., 325, 730; iii., 249, 427, 473.
Mittens, see Gloves.
Miuty, Tacullie name for chief, i., 123.
Mixco, town, Guatemala, i., 787; v., 597; antiq., iv., 119-20;
Tlascala, antiq., iv., 477.
Mixcoa, Nicaragua god, iii., 492.
Mixcoatl, Nahua god, ii., 335-6, 351-2; iii., 118, 403-6.
Mixcohua, king of Culhuacan, v., 484.
Mixcohuas, tribe of Nahuas, hist., v., 241.
Mixcohuatepec, name of a temple in Mexico, v., 409.
Mixcohuatl, Chichimec king, v., 220; (Mixcohuatzin), king of
Tlatelulco, v., 349, 364.
Mixcohuatl Amacohtle, Nahua chief, v., 242.
Mixcohuatl Mazatzin, a Toltec ruler, v., 241, 248-50.
Mixiuhtlan, locality, Mexico, v., 345.
Mixquiahuala, Mexico, antiq., iv., 545.
Mixtecapan, i., 678, see Miztecapan.
Mixtecas (Mixtèques), i., 671, 678, see Miztecs.
Mixtecatl, Nahua chief, v., 223; founder of Miztecs, v., 527.
Mizquiahuala, station, Aztec migration, v., 324.
Mizquic, province, Mexico, v., 310, 346.
Mizquicas, Nahua nation, ii., 133-629; name, ii., 129; hist., v.,
307-10.
Mizquihuacan, city, Vera Cruz, i., 675.
Mizquitl, a Tlascaltec chief, v., 497.
Mizquiyahualan, station, Chichimec migration, v., 294.
Miztec Alto, Miztec dialect, iii., 749-52.
Miztecapan (Mixtecapan), province, Oajaca, i., 678; ii., 109;
hist., v., 415-17, 443-7, 461-2, 526-7, 531-6.
Miztec Bajo, Miztec dialect, iii., 749-52.
Miztecs, (Mistéken, Mixtecas, Mixtèques), Nahua nation, i.,
645-70; ii., 133-629; location and name, i., 645, 678; ii.,
109-10, 129; special mention, i., 646-8, 652-3, 657, 659-60,
668-9; ii., 142, 207-9, 228-9, 261, 277, 280, 368, 371, 466,
624, 629; myth., iii., 70-3, 513, 541; v., 13, 20; lang., iii.,
745-52; v., 527; hist., v., 206-7, 239, 443, 461-3, 499, 526-7,
531-5.
Moachets (Moouchat, Mowalchits), tribe of Nootkas, i., 174-208;
location, i., 295.
Moädoc, i., 327, 443, see Modocs.
Moahtockna, i., 327, see Modocs.
Möalkais, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
451.
Moan, ii., 758, see Muan.
Moats, see Excavations.
Moc, name of month in Chiapas, ii., 766.
Moccasins, see Shoes.
Mochan Xiu, Mayapan ruler, v., 634.
Mochicaui, village, Sonora, i., 608.
Mochopa, village, Sonora, i., 606.
Mociaquezqui (Mocioaquetza, Mocioaquezque), a woman who died in
childbed, ii., 269; iii., 364-6.
Mocomatzin, v., 349, see Montezuma.
Mocorito, Sinaloa, lang., iii., 707.
Mocuexpaltia, a military badge, ii., 401.
Modoc Lake, i., 443.
Modocs (Möadoc, Moahtockna, Modocks), North Californian tribe,
i., 326-61; location, i., 327, 443-4; special mention, i.,
330-4, 340, 346, 350-1, 357, 361; myth., iii., 524; lang.,
iii., 640.
Moetwas, North Californian tribe, i., 326-61; location, i., 443.
Mogollon (Mogoyen, Black Mesa), i., 475, 595.
Mohave, i., 597, see Mojave.
Mohuaches, tribe of Shoshones, i., 422-42; location, i., 464.
Moiocoiatzin, name for Tezcatlipoca, iii., 199.
Moiyas, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
451.
Mojave River, i., 597.
Mojaves (Mohaves, Hamockhaves), tribe of Apaches, i., 473-526;
location and name, i., 475, 597; special mention, i., 477-8,
480-2, 487, 489, 493, 500-2, 505-6, 508, 512, 517, 519-25;
myth., iii., 175, 526; lang., iii., 684-6.
Mokaskel, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 460.
Mokelumnes (Mokelumnees, Mukelemnes, Mukeemnes, Muthelemnes),
Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i., 450;
lang., iii., 649-50.
Mokelumne (Moquelumne) Hill, California, antiq., iv., 704.
Mol (Mool), Maya month, ii., 700-1, 757-8.
Molango, locality, Mexico, i., 675.
Molcaxetes, plates, ii., 285.
Moleje, locality, Lower California, i., 603.
Mollales (Moleles), tribe of Chinooks, i., 222-50; location, i.,
310, 319-20.
Molo, Chiapanec hero, v., 605.
Molo (Mulu), Tzendal day, ii., 767.
Moltnomahs (Moltnomas), i., 304; iii., 626; see Multnomahs.
Molpilli, Nahua baptismal name, ii., 275.
Momacaico, Nahua sacrifice, ii., 335.
Mombacho Mt, Nicaragua, antiq., iv., 30, 48.
Momostenango, city, Guatemala, v., 587.
Momotombita Island, Nicaragua, antiq., iv., 52-4.
Momoxtles, ancient tombs, Guerrero, antiq., iv., 423.
Momuztli, Nahua altar, ii., 328.
Monapostiac, Oajaca, antiq., iv., 374; v., 529.
Monexico, Nicaragua council, ii., 646.
Money, see Currency.
Mongol civilization in Peru, v., 44-8.
Monguis, i., 604, see Monquis.
Monkey Indians, tribe of Shoshones, i., 422-42; location and
special mention, i., 423.
Monkeys, i., 721, 759; ii., 351; iii., 129; v., 172, 209.
Monogenesis, i., 4-6; v., 7-9.
Mono Lake, i., 466.
Monoliths, ii., 555, 572; iv., 115, 138, 275, 399, 448, 538-9,
805.
Mono Pi Utes, tribe of Shoshones, i., 422-42; location, i., 467.
Monos, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i., 456;
special mention, i., 365; lang., iii., 661.
Monotheism, iii., 23, 55-6, 196-8.
Monquis (Menguis, Menquis, Monguis, Monquies, Monquoi, Moquis),
Lower Californian tribe, i., 556-71; location, i., 558, 603-4;
special mention, i., 423; lang., iii., 687-93.
Montana, i., 422, 463; lang., iii., 631; antiq., iv., 734.
Montaños, tribe of Isthmians, i., 747-85; location, i., 794.
Monte Alban, Oajaca, antiq., iv., 377-84.
Montecristo, village, Tabasco, i., 683.
Monte Cuyo, Yucatan, antiq., iv., 261.
Monte Penulco, Mexico, antiq., iv., 546.
Monte Real, name of Misantla, iv., 448.
Monterey Indians, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401;
location, i., 363, 454; special mention, i., 366-7, 369, 381,
384, 388, 398; lang., iii., 653.
Montezuma (Mocomatzin, Moteuhzomatzin), lord of Coatlichan, v.,
349.
Montezuma I. (Moteuczoma, Moteuhzoma), king of Mexico, i., 554,
586; ii., 139, 181-2, 191-4, 237-9, 404, 451-3; iii., 76-7, 80,
171-5; v., 366, 389-424, 534-5, 537.
Montezuma II., king of Mexico, v., 455-82, 501-2, 595, 600.
Montezuma Ilhuicamina, see Montezuma I.
Montezuma (Quetzalatl, Tula, Tullanatl) River, v., 243.
Montezuma's Bath, Mexico, antiq., iv., 524-6.
Months, Nahua calendar, ii., 508-14; Maya calendar, ii., 756-8,
760-1, 766.
Monuments, burial, i., 113, 357, 523, 783.
Moolallels, tribe of Chinooks, i., 222-50; location, i., 309.
Moon, superstitions and worship, i., 587, 666, 741; iii., 62, 82,
84-6, 100-101, 111-12, 152, 187, 190, 502, 547.
Moon Valley, i., 362.
Mooshahneh, Moqui town, iv., 669.
Mootaeyuhew, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i.,
460.
Moouchat, i., 295, see Moachet.
Mopanes, Guatemalan tribe, i., 686-711; location, i., 682, 786.
Moquelumne, iii., 650, see Mokelumne.
Moquihuix, governor of Tlatelulco, v., 411, 417-18, 429-31.
Moquis (Moquinos), tribe of Pueblos, i., 526-56; location, i.,
526, 528, 600-1; special mention, i., 529-30, 540, 544, 547,
551, 554-6; iv., 668-70; myth., iii., 80, 131, 175, 527; v.,
20; lang., iii., 660, 671-4.
Moraiuhs, North Californian tribe, i., 326-61; location, i., 444.
Moraleños, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 613.
Moreri, tribe of Isthmians, i., 747-85; location, i., 795.
Moresby Island, i., 292.
Mormon, theory of origin, v., 96-102.
Mormon Creek, California, antiq., iv., 702.
Moro, El, New Mexico, antiq., iv., 648.
Moro Mountains, iii., 595.
Morshewskojes, tribe of Aleuts, i., 87-94; location, i., 141.
Mosaic, ii., 314, 376-7, 482, 488-90, 606, 750; iii., 385, 390-2;
iv., 395, 400-1, 407-8, 410, 557-9.
Mosette, i., 292, see Massets.
Mosquito Coast, antiq., iv., 25-8.
Mosquitos, one of the three families into which the wild tribes
of Central America are divided; manners and customs of all its
nations and tribes described together, i., 711-47; physique,
i., 714-15; dress, i., 715-17; dwellings, i., 717-18; food,
i., 718-22; personal habits, i., 722; weapons and war, i.,
722-3; implements and manufactures, i., 724; boats, i., 724-5;
property and commerce, i., 725-6; art, i., 726-8; government
and slavery, i., 728-9; women and marriage, i., 729-35;
amusements, i., 735-9; superstitions and miscellaneous customs,
i., 740-41; medicine, i., 741-3; burial, i., 744-5; character,
i., 745-7; myth., iii., 496-8, 543; lang., iii., 571-2, 782-90;
location of tribes, i., 712-13, 792-4.
Mosquitos (Sambos), tribe of Mosquito family, i., 711-47;
location and name, i., 713, 794; special mention, i., 714-16,
723, 728, 731, 736, 745-6; lang., iii., 783.
Moss, i., 86, 227, 264-7.
Moszasnavi (Masanais, Moxonavi), Moqui village, i., 600-1.
Motagua River, i., 788-9; v., 593.
Moteuczoma (Moteuhzoma), v., 391, see Montezuma I.
Moteuhzomatzin, v., 349, see Montezuma.
Mother-of-pearl, see Pearl.
Moth-worm, Navajo myth., iii., 81.
Motilones, tribe of Isthmians, i., 747-85; location, i., 796.
Motlaxquiantota, Nahua feast, iii., 390.
Motucas, tribe of Mosquitos, i., 711-47; location, i., 713;
lang., iii., 783.
Motzontecomaitotia, Nahua dance, ii., 311.
Mound-builders, speculations concerning, iv., 744-90; v., 538-9.
Mound City, Mississippi Valley, antiq., iv., 758.
Mounds, Central America, antiq., ii., 647; iv., 24, 27, 32-4,
69-76, 117-18, 124, 129, 131, 139, 167, 198-204, 215, 219-20,
236-7, 240-7, 252, 261-2, 270-1; Mexico, antiq., iv., 350-614,
passim; Arizona, antiq., iv., 633-4, 675-6; California,
Utah, and Colorado, antiq., iv., 695-718; Oregon and British
Columbia, antiq., iv., 735-42; Mississippi Valley, antiq., iv.,
747-78; Peru, antiq., iv., 792, 798-803.
Mount Adams, i., 254.
Mountain of the Sun, Oajaca, v., 531-2.
Mount Baker, i., 299.
Mount Cacatepec, ii., 335.
Mount Diablo, i., 363, 452.
Mount Fairweather, i., 142.
Mount Hood, i., 320.
Mount Matlalcueje, ii., 312.
Mount Rainier, i., 321.
Mount St Elias, i., 94, 96, 142; iii., 579.
Mount St Helens, i., 321.
Mount Shasta, i., 328, 330; iii., 90-1, 593.
Mount Tocitlan, ii., 567.
Mount Vancouver, i., 320.
Mourning, Hyperboreans, i., 86, 119, 125-7, 134; Columbians, i.,
173, 180, 192, 206, 247-8, 288-9; Californians, i., 357-60,
370, 396-7, 420-21, 440; New Mexicans, i., 523-4, 555, 569-70,
590; Mexicans, ii., 331, 606-8, 613-23; Central Americans, i.,
709, 716, 744-5, 781-4; ii., 801-2.
Moustache, see Beards.
Mouth, Hyperboreans, i., 46; Columbians, i., 177-8, 225;
Californians, i., 364-6; New Mexicans, i., 573; Mexicans, i.,
647; Central Americans, i., 714.
Mouth-stone, burial, ii., 606, 614, 619, 799; iii., 515.
Movas, village, Sonora, i., 601.
Mowatchits, i., 295, see Moachets.
Mow-wee-mas (Mauhemi), North Californian name for chiefs, i.,
348.
Mox, ii., 767, see Imox.
Moxic, Tzendal day, ii., 767; Chiapanec hero, v., 605.
Moxonavi, i., 601, see Moszasnavi.
Moyotlan (Mayotla), suburb of Mexico, ii., 563.
Moyucuyatzin, Nahua god, iii., 194.
Mozahui, i., 675, see Mazahuas.
Mozcas, iii., 269, see Muyscas.
Mozeloquitzin, Chichimec king, v., 220.
Mozot, medicinal herb, ii., 795.
Mptolyas Cañon, Oregon, antiq., iv., 734.
Muan (Moan), Maya month, ii., 692, 757-8.
Mucaw, a species of wood, i., 761.
Mucchita, Nayarits' abode of souls, iii., 529.
Muchlaht, i., 295, see Matchclat.
Muckalucs, North Californian tribe, i., 326-61; special mention,
i., 351.
Muck-a-muck, North Californian food, i., 358.
Mud, see Earth.
Muddy River, i., 464.
Muerto Island, Isthmus, antiq., iv., 20.
Muetasac, name of month in Chiapas, ii., 766.
Mugeres Island, Yucatan, antiq., iv., 260-1.
Mugu, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 458-9.
Muhasal, Towka boy of 10 years, i., 732.
Muingpe, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
453.
Mukelemnes (Mukeemnes), i., 450, see Mokelumnes.
Mulatos, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 613.
Mules, i., 490-2, 496, 505, 539, 544, 561, 659.
Mullateco, Central Californian dialect, iii., 650.
Multnomahs (Mathlanobs, Moltnomas, Moltnomahs), tribe of
Chinooks, i., 222-50; location, i., 309; special mention, i.,
229; lang., iii., 626.
Mulu, v., 605, see Molo.
Muluc, Maya day, calendar sign, and god, ii., 703, 755-6, 760-1;
iii., 122.
Mumah, Quiché sanctuary, iii., 481.
Mumaltachi, Central California, lang., iii., 650.
Mummies, ii., 604; iii., 54, 500.
Mumuehitl, parched corn, ii., 354.
Muna, Yucatan, antiq., iv., 199.
Mupu, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 459.
Muqui, Moqui village, i., 528.
Murder, i., 124, 168, 171, 348-9, 386, 409-10, 435, 509-10, 770;
ii., 458-9, 651, 657.
Murex, for dyeing, i., 630.
Murphy's Flat, California, antiq., iv., 704.
Murtilpar (Martilpar), tribe of Nootkas, i., 174-208; location,
i., 295.
Muscleshell Rapids, i., 321.
Museums, Mexican Republic, antiq., iv., 553-64.
Mushaiina, Moqui village, i., 528, 600.
Music, Hyperboreans, i., 112; Columbians, i., 165, 170, 200-1,
281-2; Californians, i., 354, 393, 416; New Mexicans, i.,
515-16, 552, 584, 586; Mexicans, i., 631, 635, 656, 664-8;
ii., 285-6, 288-94, 313, 412, 426-7, 492, 617, 620-1; iii.,
62-3, 336-7, 341-2, 347, 427; antiq., iv., 478, 504, 520, 561;
Central Americans, i., 705, 732, 735-8, 744, 764, 774, 782; ii.,
646, 706-7, 711-14, 746; antiq., iv., 19-20; v., 632.
Musk-rat, Tacully myth., iii., 98.
Mustac, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
455.
Muthelemnes, i., 450, see Mokelumnes.
Mutistuls, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
452.
Mutsunes, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
454; lang., iii., 653-4.
Muutzizti (Muutzicat), Central Mexican tribe, i., 617-44;
location, i., 672; lang., iii., 719-21.
Muvinábores, tribe of Apaches, i., 473-526; location, i., 592.
Mux, name of month in Chiapas, ii., 766.
Muyscas (Mozcas), a Columbian tribe, myth., iii., 269; v., 24.
Myacoma, Napa dialect, iii., 650.
Myer's Ravine, California, antiq., iv., 706.
Mystic Tree, temple, Chiapas, antiq., iv., 343.
Mythology, general observations, iii., 5, 13-41, 510-5;
Hyperboreans, iii., 98-106, 140-9, 516-19; v., 14; Columbians,
i., 170-1, 202-3, 283-4; iii., 94-8, 149-57, 519-22;
Californians, i., 387-8, 397, 400, 405, 421-2; iii., 84-94,
157-69, 175-7, 522-6, 545-50; v., 14; New Mexicans, i., 520,
538, 553-4, 587-8; iii., 75-85, 169-75, 526-9; v., 13-14;
Mexicans, i., 634, 665-6; ii., 200-15, 245-6, 292, 302-41,
388-97, 604-5, 616-23; iii., 55-74, 109-13, 119-23, 128-9,
179-231, 237-460, 511-15, 527-8, 532-41; v., 12-13, 84-91, 350,
514, 528; Central Americans, i., 707-8, 740; ii., 663; iii.,
42-55, 74-5, 461-501, 541-4; v., 13-14, 87, 171-2, 545-8, 572,
610, 618-9; physical myths, iii., 108-26; animal myths, iii.,
127-39; phallic rites, iii., 501-9; mound builders, iv., 787;
Peruvians, v., 14-17.
N
Naaneeaaghees, tribe of Thlinkeets, i., 94-114; location, i.,
143.
Nabe Ligin Ga, Quiché month, ii., 766.
Nabe Mam, Quiché month, ii., 766.
Nabe Pach, Quiché month, ii., 766.
Nabe Tzih, Quiché month, ii., 766.
Nabey Mam, Cakchiquel month, ii., 766.
Nabey Pach, Cakchiquel month, ii., 766.
Nabey Togic, Cakchiquel month, ii., 766.
Nabey Tumuzuz, Cakchiquel month, ii., 766.
Nabiltse, North Californian lang., iii., 642.
Naboh Choweshaks, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401;
location, i., 447.
Nacalxur, v., 252, see Nacaxoc.
Nacameri, village, Sonora, i., 601.
Nacameri River, i., 605.
Nacapahuazcan, locality, Puebla, v., 490.
Nacaugna, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 460.
Nacaxoc (Nacalxur, Nacaxoc Mitl, Nacaxzoch, Nacazxoc, Nacazxot),
Toltec king, v., 252, 261, 297.
Nacazpipilolxochi, Cholultec priest, v., 495-6.
Nachan (Pachan), name applied to Palenque, iv., 294-5; hist., v.,
159, 163, 187, 221.
Nackneck River, i., 140.
Nacochtli, Nahua ear-rings, ii., 404.
Nacon, Maya title, ii., 693, 741; iii., 473.
Nacooche Valley, Mississippi Valley, antiq., iv., 768.
Nacori, village, Sonora, i., 606-7.
Nacuix, name of Chichimec country, v., 219.
Nacxit, king of Copan, v., 552, 558.
Nacxitl, Nahua god, iii., 416.
Náélims (Nahelems), tribe of Chinooks, i., 222-50; location, i.,
307.
Nagailers, tribe of Tinneh, i., 114-37; location, i., 145.
Nagarandas, i., 792, see Nagrandans.
Naggeuktormutes (Naggeuktoomutes), tribe of Eskimos, i., 40-69;
location, i., 42, 138.
Nagrandans (Nagarandas, Nagrandas), Guatemala tribe, i., 686-711;
location, i., 688, 792; hist., v., 613.
Nagualism, belief in a guardian spirit, i., 740; ii., 277; iii.,
458-9, 467, 482.
Nagun-alayeksa, i., 37, see Unalaska.
Nahajuey, i., 459, see Nahuey.
Naha-'tdinnè, Kutchin dialect, iii., 587.
Nahchess River, i., 320.
Nahelems, i., 307, see Náélims.
Nahlohs, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
449.
Nahual Teteuctin, Nahua order of chivalry, v., 253.
Nahua Nations (Nahoas), manners and customs, ii., 133-629;
name, ii., 129; government, ii., 133-239, 433-72; education,
ii., 240-51; marriage, ii., 251-66; women and children, ii.,
266-81; amusements, ii., 283-301; festivals and feasts, ii.,
302-41; food, ii., 342-62; dress, ii., 363-77; commerce, ii.,
378-97; boats, ii., 397-9; weapons and war, ii., 400-32; arts
and manufactures, ii., 473-92; oratory and poetry, ii., 492-7;
arithmetic, ii., 497-500; calendar, ii., 502-22; hieroglyphics,
ii., 523-52; dwellings and architecture, ii., 160-174,
553-89; medicine, ii., 591-602; burial, ii., 603-23; physique,
ii., 624-5; character, ii., 626-9; manners and customs also
described with Mexicans Central and Southern, i., 617-70;
location, i., 617, 670-81; myth., ii., 200-15, 245-6, 292,
302-41, 388-97, 604-5, 616-23; iii., 55-74, 109-13, 119-23,
128-9, 179-231, 237-460, 511-15, 532-41; v., 84-91, 350; lang.,
iii., 723-58; v., 352, 508, 510, 527, 537; hist., ii., 91-114;
iii., 270, 307-8; v., 188-538, 541-6, 553-7, 561, 564-8, 595-7,
601, 606, 616-17, 621, 623.
Nahuatlacs, Central Mexican tribe, i., 617-44; location, i.,
675-6; hist., v., 305-10.
Nahuatls, Guatemalan tribe, i., 686-711; special mention, i.,
701.
Nahualoztomecas, Nahua merchants, ii., 381.
Nahuey (Nahajuey), South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location,
i., 459.
Nahui Ollin Tonatiuh, Nahua calendar sign, ii., 339; v., 205.
Nahuixochitl, lord of Tzotzolan, v., 461-2.
Naiagutls, North Californian tribe, i., 326-61; location, i.,
444.
Naig (Naique), Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location,
i., 453.
Naila, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 458.
Najarites, i., 607, see Nayarits.
Nalalsemoch, tribe of Haidahs, i., 155-74; location, i., 294.
Nalegak, Eskimo title of chief, i., 65.
Nambe, Pueblo village, i., 527, 599; lang., iii., 681.
Nambe Creek, i., 599.
Names, Hyperboreans, i., 37, 40-1, 69-71, 87, 94-5, 111-12,
116, 121; Columbians, i., 151-2, 202, 219, 222, 245, 248, 279,
288; Californians, i., 325-6, 344, 357, 438, 468; iii., 636;
Mexicans, i., 634-5, 670; ii., 85, 274-5; v., 324, 346; Mayas,
ii., 665, 680-1; antiq., iv., 154, 294-6; metaphoric, iii.,
35-6.
Namocuix, Chichimec king, v., 220.
Nanacatl, an intoxicating mushroom, ii., 394.
Nanahuani, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i.,
459.
Nanahuatzin, Nahua god, iii., 60; v., 204-5.
Nanaimo River, i., 298.
Nanaimos, tribe of Nootkas, i., 174-208; location, i., 175, 298.
Nanchititla, Mexico antiq., iv., 480.
Nanihehecatl, name of Quetzalcoatl, iii., 267.
Nanoose, tribe of Nootkas, i., 174-208; location, i., 176, 296.
Nanoose Harbor, i., 298.
Nantena, Tinneh fairies, iii., 142.
Naolin, Nahua god, iii., 109.
Naolingo (Tatimolo), Totonac dialect, iii., 777-8.
Napas, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i., 363,
451, 453; lang., iii., 650.
Napatecutli, Nahua god, iii., 417-18.
Napa Valley, i., 363, 451-2.
Napobatins, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
451.
Napousney, Trinity River god, iii., 176.
Napuat, (Quetahtores), tribe of Apaches, i., 473-526; location,
i., 592.
Naranjan, city, Michoacan, v., 511.
Narcotics, i., 667; ii., 330, 600.
Narices, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 613.
Narkocktau, tribe of Nootkas, i., 174-208; location, i., 295.
Nasals, tribe of Chinooks, i., 222-50; location, i., 305.
Nasas, i., 614, see Nazas.
Nascud, Tinneh dialect, iii., 585.
Nashville, Mississippi Valley, antiq., iv., 776.
Naskootains, tribe of Tinneh, i., 114-37; location, i., 146.
Nasomahs, tribe of Chinooks, i., 222-50; location, i., 308.
Nasqually, i., 301, see Nisqually.
Nass, tribe of Haidahs, i., 155-74; location, i., 155, 293-4;
special mention, i., 156, 173; lang., iii., 606-7.
Nass River, i., 38, 94, 142, 155, 293-4.
Nass-Shakieyehl, home of Yehl, iii., 146.
Nata, Nahua Noah, iii., 66.
Natá, tribe of Isthmians, i., 747-85; location, i., 795; lang.,
iii., 794.
Natages (Natajes), tribe of Apaches, i., 473-526; location, i.,
474; iii., 595.
Natche Kutchin (Gens de Large), tribe of Tinneh, i., 114-37;
location, i., 115, 147.
Natchez, Florida tribe, early condition and lang., v., 538-9.
Nateotetain River, i., 146.
Nateotetains, tribe of Tinneh, i., 114-37; location, i., 114,
146; special mention, i., 127.
Nate-sa, i., 132, see Natsahi.
National Buena Esperanza, locality, Central California, i., 455.
National Museum, Mexico, antiq., iv., 560-3.
Natividad Navajoa (Navohoua), village, Sonora, i., 607.
Natividad, Puebla, antiq., iv., 477-8.
Natliautin, tribe of Tinneh, i., 114-37; location, i., 145.
Natora, village, Sonora, i., 606.
Natsahi (Nate-sa), Kutchin clan, i., 132.
Na-tsik-Kut-chin (Na-tsik-koo-chin), tribe of Tinneh, i., 114-37;
location, i., 147; lang., iii., 586.
Nature, influence on physique and character, see Environment.
Natykinskojes, tribe of Aleuts, i., 87-94; location, i., 141.
Nauaq, epithet for Tonacateotle, iii., 191.
Nauhtlan, city, Vera Cruz, v., 439.
Nauhyotl, Chichimec king, v., 220.
Nauhyotl I. (Nauhyotzin), Toltec king, v., 248, 256, 263-5.
Nauhyotl II., Toltec king, v., 276.
Nauhyotl III. (Coyol, Coyotl), Toltec king, v., 299-304.
Nauhyotl IV., Toltec king, v., 361-4.
Nauhyotzin, v., 248, see Nauhyotl I.
Nauni, name for Comanches, i., 473.
Navahóa (Navohoua), i., 607-8, see Natividad Navajoa.
Navajas, see Cerro de las Navajas.
Navajo River, i., 465.
Navajos (Navahoes, Navajoes, Navajoos), tribe of Apaches,
i., 473-526; location and name, i., 464, 475, 596; special
mention, i., 477-8, 482-3, 486, 488-91, 494-5, 498, 501-6, 508,
510, 512-13, 520-5; myth., iii., 81-3, 117, 120, 171, 528; v.,
20; lang., iii., 602.
Navajo Spring, Arizona, antiq., iv., 644.
Navigandis, tribe of Isthmians, i., 747-85; special mention, i.,
785.
Navigation, pre-historic, v., 10-11, see also Boats.
Navohoua, i., 607, see Natividad Navajoa.
Navon de los Pecos, i., 600, see Pecos.
Nawdowessies, tribe of Haidahs, i., 155-74; special mention, i.,
158.
Naweetees, i., 295, see Newittees.
Nawloks, Haidah spirits, iii., 150.
Nawmooits, tribe of Chinooks, i., 222-50; location, i., 309.
Nayab chab, Maya intercalary days, ii., 759.
Nayarit (Nuevo Toledo), locality, Jalisco, i., 671-2; v., 509.
Nayarits (Najarites), North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location,
i., 607; lang., iii., 719-20.
Nayeb haab, Maya intercalary days, ii., 759.
Nazas (Nasas), North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i.,
613.
Neachesna River, i., 307.
Neah Bay (Waadda), i., 220, 302.
Near Island, i., 87.
Nebah (Nebak), Guatemala, antiq., iv., 131.
Neçalhualcoiotl, ii., 134, see Nezahualcoyotl.
Necaoalpilli, name for Tezcatlipoca, iii., 199.
Necatitlan, suburb of Mexico, ii., 560.
Nechecolees (Nechakokes, Nechecolies), tribe of Chinooks, i.,
222-50; location, i., 223, 306; special mention, i., 230.
Necketos (Neekeetoos), tribe of Chinooks, i., 222-50; location,
i., 307.
Necklaces, i., 368-9, 482, 533, 551, 559, 574, 623, 649-51, 732,
752, 754; ii., 376, 733.
Necociautl, name for Tezcatlipoca, iii., 199.
Necomanchees (Nickomins), tribe of Chinooks, i., 222-50;
location, i., 305.
Necoons, tribe of Haidahs, i., 155-74; location, i., 292.
Necootimeighs, Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91; location, i.,
317.
Necuametl, ancient country of Chichimecs, v., 219.
Necultas, tribe of Nootkas, i., 174-208; location, i., 298.
Neecelowes, i., 293, see Neeslous.
Needles, i., 73, 79, 91, 191, 236, 407, 563.
Neekeetoos, i., 307, see Necketos.
Neerchokioons, tribe of Chinooks, i., 222-50; location, i., 306.
Neeshenams (Neshenams), Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401;
location, i., 451; special mention, i., 386, 389, 397; myth.,
iii., 531-2, 545-6; lang., iii., 648-9, 652.
Neeslous (Neecelowes), tribe of Haidahs, i., 155-74; location,
i., 293-4.
Neetlakapamuch, British Columbia, lang., iii., 613.
Neewamish, tribe of Sound Indians, i., 208-22; location, i., 300.
Neewamish River, i., 300.
Negritos, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 611.
Negroes, Isthmian slaves, i., 772; antiq., iv., 427.
Neguales, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 611.
Nehalem River, i., 305.
Nehannes (Nehannees, Nohhannies), tribe of Tinneh, i., 114-37;
location, i., 148-9; special mention, i., 125; lang., iii.,
587.
Neixcotlapatli, an emetic, ii., 599.
Nemalquinners, tribe of Chinooks, i., 222-50; location, i., 309.
Nemontemi, Nahua intercalary days, ii., 275, 508.
Nemshous (Nemshans, Nemshaws, Nemshoos), Central Californian
tribe, i., 361-401; location, i., 450; lang., iii., 649.
Nena, wife of Nahua Noah, iii., 66.
Nennequi, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
454.
Nephites, American origin-traces, v., 98-101.
Nepohualtzitzin, Nahua knotted records, ii., 551.
Nequametl, Chichimec king, v., 220.
Nequatolli, a kind of gruel, ii., 355.
Nequen, maguey cloth, ii., 364, 406, 484.
Nequiteh, Trinity River god, iii., 176.
Neselitch, tribe of Chinooks. i., 222-50; location, i., 307.
Nespeelum Creek, i., 316.
Nespeelums, Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91; location, i.,
315.
Nespods, tribe of Nootkas, i., 174-208; location, i., 295.
Nesquallis, i., 301, see Nisquallies.
Netecuitotoli, Nahua dance, ii., 290.
Netela, South Californian lang., iii., 660, 674-8.
Netentzzoponiztli, a Nahua disease, ii., 267.
Neteteliztli, Nahua dance, ii., 288.
Netonatiuhqualo, Nahua festival, ii., 339.
Netotoliztli, Nahua dance, ii., 295.
Nets, Hyperboreans, i., 55-6, 76, 90, 118, 123; Columbians,
i., 162-4, 185-7, 212-14, 233, 262; Californians, i., 337-9,
375-6, 406, 428; New Mexicans, i., 488, 500-2, 539, 562-3,
566; Mexicans, i., 652, 656-7; ii., 351-2; v., 325; Central
Americans, i., 694, 697-8, 708, 719, 724, 760, 765; ii., 721,
752.
Nettles, i., 185, 568.
Netzicho, Zapotec dialect, iii., 754.
Neuchallets (Neuchadlits, Noochahlaht), tribe of Nootkas, i.,
174-208; location, i., 295.
Neuksack, i., 209, 299, see Nooksak.
Neukwers, tribe of Sound Indians, i., 208-22; location, i., 299.
Neutubvig, tribe of Sound Indians, i., 208-22; location, i., 300.
Neuwitties, i., 295, see Newittees.
Nevada, manners and customs of tribes, i., 422-42; location, i.,
322, 460, 465-9; lang., iii., 661-3; antiq., iv., 713-14.
Nevada County, California, antiq., iv., 706.
Nevichumnes, i., 450, see Newatchumnes.
Nevome, Pima dialect, iii., 695.
New Almaden, California, antiq., iv., 696.
Newark, Mississippi Valley, antiq., iv., 758-9, 785.
Newaskees, tribe of Chinooks, i., 222-50; location, i., 309.
Newatchumnes (Nevichumnes, Newichumnes), Central Californian
tribe, i., 361-401; location, i., 450; lang., iii., 649.
Newatees, i., 175, see Newittees.
Newathie, Mojave god, iii., 175.
New Caledonia, i., 145, 313.
Newchemas (Nuchimas), tribe of Nootkas, i., 174-208; location,
i., 295; special mention, i., 178, 182; lang., iii., 608.
New Dungeness, locality, Washington, i., 212.
New Granada, iv., 15, see Colombia.
Newicarguts, tribe of Tinneh, i., 114-37; location, i., 115, 147.
Newittees (Naweetees, Newatees, Neuwitties, Newette), tribe of
Nootkas, i., 174-208; location, i., 175, 292, 295.
New Mexicans, one of the seven groups into which the natives
of the Pacific States are divided, located in New Mexico,
Arizona, Lower California, Sonora, Sinaloa, Chihuahua, Durango,
Coahuila, Nuevo Leon, northern Zacatecas, and western Texas,
between latitudes 36° and 23°, longitude, 96° and 117°,
subdivided into four families--the Apaches, Pueblos, Lower
Californians, and Northern Mexicans; manners and customs of
each described separately, i., 471-614; location, divisions and
tribal boundaries, i., 471-3, 591-614; myth., i., 520, 538,
553-4, 587-8; iii., 75-85, 169-75, 526-31; lang., i., 528;
iii., 568-9, 680-722; antiq., i., 537-8; iv., 615-86; origin,
v., 20; hist., v., 537-8.
New Mexico, tribes, i., 471-556, 591-601; lang., iii., 593-5,
660-4, 680-3; antiq., iv., 615-86.
New River, i., 445, 458, 597.
New River Indians, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location,
i., 458.
New York, antiq., iv., 750-1.
New York Flat, California, antiq., iv., 707.
Nexapa, locality, Nicaragua, i., 790; v., 532, 534.
Nexichas (Nexitzas), i., 680, see Beni Xonos.
Nexoxocho, Nahua goddess, iii., 396.
Nextepelma, Nahua god, iii., 396.
Neyetse-Kutshi, tribe of Tinneh, i., 114-37; location, i., 147.
Nezahualcoyotl (Neçahualcoiotl, Nezahualcojotl), Acolhua monarch,
ii., 134, 447, 471-2, 589; iii., 184, 196-8; v., 372-428,
498-9.
Nezahualpilli, Acolhua monarch, ii., 134, 220, 447-50, 610; v.,
421-75, 499, 507.
Nez Percé River, i., 318.
Nez Percés, Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91; location and
name, i., 152, 253, 316-17; special mention, i., 254-8, 260,
265, 267-74, 276-9, 282, 284, 287, 289-91; myth., iii., 95,
156, 520; lang., iii., 621-5.
Nguyuk, tribe of Aleuts, i., 87-94; location, i., 141.
Niahbella Pomos, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401;
location, i., 448.
Nicahtagah, Quiché god, v., 181, 547.
Nicaragua, nations described, i., 686-711; ii., 645-803;
location, i., 688, 790-4; special mention, i., 711; ii., 123,
645-7, 650-4, 666-7, 670-2, 674, 676, 678, 708-10, 713-14,
718-25, 728-34, 737, 739-47, 749-52, 766, 770-1, 785, 790,
793-4, 800-3; myth., iii., 75, 132, 490-6, 507, 543; v., 13;
lang., iii., 723, 726, 759-60, 783, 791-3; antiq., iv., 28-67;
hist., v., 472-3, 529, 604, 612-13.
Nicaragua Lake, i., 790-2, 795; ii., 123; v., 613; antiq., iv.,
28-30.
Nicaraguans, name for Niquirans, v., 613.
Niccoutamuch, i., 310, see Nicoutamuch.
Nichqum, name of month in Chiapas, ii., 766.
Nickomins, i., 305, see Necomanchees.
Nicola Lake, lang., iii., 613.
Nicola River, lang., iii., 613.
Nicoutameens, i., 310, see Nicoutamuch.
Nicoutamuch (Niccoutamuch, Nicoutameens, Nicutemuch), Inland
Columbian tribe, i., 250-91; location, i., 310; special
mention, i., 258, 290.
Nicoya, province and city, Costa Rica, v., 605.
Nicoya Gulf, i., 752, 791-2; v., 613.
Nightan, tribe of Haidahs, i., 155-74; location, i., 292.
Nihaïb, Quiché title, ii., 643-4; v., 546, 552, 566-7, 580.
Nijapa Lake, Nicaragua, antiq., iv., 31, 37.
Nijoras, tribe of Apaches, i., 473-526; location and name, i.,
475, 598; lang., iii., 684.
Nikaas (Nikas), tribe of Chinooks, i., 222-50; location, i., 307.
Nikozliautin, tribe of Tinneh, i., 114-37; location, i., 145.
Nima-Amag, name of Qulaha, i., 787.
Nima Camha, Quiché title, ii., 644.
Nimahuinac, Cakchiquel king, v., 598, 609.
Nima Quiché (Nimaquiché), Quiché chief, v., 565, 576, 578, 604.
Nimcakahpec, city, Guatemala, v., 584.
Nim Chocoh Cawek, Quiché title, ii., 639, 644; v., 602.
Nimkish (Nimkis, Nimpkish), tribe of Nootkas, i., 174-208;
location, i., 176, 295-6, 298; special mention, i., 183.
Nimkish River, i., 298.
Nimpokom, city, Guatemala, i., 788; antiq., iv., 131; v., 555.
Nimxob Carchah, name for Carchah, v., 175, 544.
Ninstence, tribe of Haidahs, i., 155-74; location, i., 292.
Ninumbees, Shoshone spirits, iii., 157.
Ninus, name for Mox, v., 605.
Nio, Sinaloa, lang., iii., 707.
Niparaya (Niparaja), Pericúi god, iii., 83, 169, 529; v., 20.
Nipomo, grave at San Luis Obispo, California, antiq., iv., 692.
Niquirans, (Nicaraguans), Guatemala tribe, i., 668-711; location,
i., 688, 792; hist., v., 613.
Nisquallies (Nesquallis, Skwalls, Squallies), tribe of Sound
Indians, i., 208-22; location, i., 208, 299, 301; special
mention, i., 210, 214, 217, 220, 222; myth., iii., 97-8; lang.,
ii., 618.
Nisqually (Nasqually) River, i., 301.
Nitinaht River, i., 295.
Nitinats, (Nitinahts, Nitteenats, Nittinahts), tribe of Nootkas,
i., 174-208; location, i., 175, 296; special mention, i., 178,
189-90, 208; lang., iii., 609.
Nitinat Sound, i., 175, 295-7.
Niyuna, name for Comanches, i., 473.
Noaches, tribe of Shoshones, i., 422-42; location, i., 464.
Noah, origin theory, v., 9-12.
Nobles, Mexicans, ii., 186-200, 225, 373-7, 441; iii., 434; v.,
456-7; Central Americans, i., 770-1; ii., 636-44, 663-4, 673-4,
693-4, 727, 784-5; v., 579-82, 588-9, 591-2.
Nocasari, village, Sonora, i., 605.
Noches, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 460;
lang., iii., 686.
Nochiztlan, Miztec dialect, iii., 749.
Nochiztli, cochineal insect, ii., 486.
Noconi (Yiuhtas), tribe of Apaches, i., 473-526; location, i.,
592.
Nocto, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 459.
Nocuma, Acagchemem god, iii., 164.
Noh, Quiché-Cakchiquel day, ii., 767.
Nohcacab, Yucatan, antiq., iv., 200-2, 211, 218-9.
Nohenial, name for west Yucatan, v., 615.
Nohhannies, i., 148, see Nehannes.
Nohioalli, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
454.
Nohpat (Noh Pat), Yucatan, antiq., iv., 202, 211.
Nohtscho, village, North California, i., 444.
Noimucks, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
451.
Noisas, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
451.
Noiyucans, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
451.
Noj, Istlavacan god, iii., 482.
Nombre de Dios, town, Zacatecas, i., 614; town, Darien, iii.,
794; v., 613.
Nomee Cults, North Californian tribe, i., 326-61; location, i.,
442.
Nomee Lacks (Nome Lackees), North Californian tribe, i., 326-61;
location, i., 442, 451.
Nomenuches (Poruches), tribe of Shoshones, i., 422-42; location,
i., 464.
Nonohualca, Chichimec king, v., 220.
Nonohualcas, Tabasco tribe, i., 644-70, ii., 133-629; location
and name, i., 791; ii., 112, 129; hist., v., 196, 229, 562.
Nonohualcatl, Culhua king, v., 250, 256, 300, 313, 316, 320.
Nonohualco (Nonualcat), region and locality, Tabasco, v., 229,
562.
Noobimucks, North Californian tribe, i., 326-61; location, i.,
442.
Noochahlaht, i., 295, see Neuchallet.
Nookchues, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
363, 456.
Nooklummi (Nukhlumi), tribe of Sound Indians, i., 208-22;
location, i., 299; lang., iii., 615.
Nooksak (Neuksack, Nooksahk, Nootsak), tribe of Sound Indians, i.,
208-22; location, i., 208, 299; special mention, i., 210, 213,
218, 220; lang., iii., 615.
Noosdalums (Noostlalums, Nusdalums), tribe of Sound Indians, i.,
208-22; location, i., 302.
Noosehchatl, tribe of Sound Indians, i., 208-22; location, i.,
301.
Nootchoos, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
455.
Noothums, tribe of Sound Indians, i., 208-22; location, i., 300.
Nootkas, one of the nine families into which the Columbians are
divided; manners and customs of all its nations and tribes
described together, i., 174-208; physique, i., 176-9; dress,
i., 179-82; dwellings, i., 183-5; food, i., 185-8; weapons, i.,
188; war, i., 180-1, 188-9; boats, i., 189-91; implements and
manufactures, i., 180, 184, 189-91; property and trade, i.,
191-2; art, i., 192-3; government and slaves, i., 180-1, 191,
193-5; women and marriage, i., 195-8; amusements, i., 198-201;
miscellaneous customs, i., 201-3; medicine, i., 204-5; burial,
i., 205-6; character, i., 206-8; myth., iii., 96-7, 150-2, 514,
522; lang., iii., 608-12, 664; location of tribes, i., 151,
155, 174, 295-8.
Nootkas (Nootkahs, Noutkas, Nutkas), tribe of Nootkas, i.,
174-208; location, i., 175, 295; special mention, i., 189, 208;
myth., iii., 150-2, 514, 522; lang., iii., 608-12, 664.
Nootka Sound, i., 150-1, 174-5, 181, 194, 203, 295, 297; antiq.,
iv., 736.
Nopaltzin, Chichimec king, v., 294-320, 330; Acolhua prince, v.,
335.
Norfolk Sound, i., 142, 159.
Northern Californians, see Californians, Northern.
North Island, i., 293.
Northern Mexicans, see Mexicans, Northern.
Northern tribes, hist., v., 536-8.
Norton Sound, i., 61-2, 70, 138, 141.
Nose, Hyperboreans, i., 46, 88, 116; Columbians, i., 177-8, 210,
225-6, 255-6; Californians, i., 328, 364-6; New Mexicans, i.,
530, 558; Mexicans, i., 619, 647; Central Americans, i., 688,
714-15, 750.
Nose-ornaments, Hyperboreans, i., 49, 72, 88, 97, 122, 128;
Columbians, i., 159, 181-2, 210-11, 229; Californians, i., 333,
347, 403, 424; New Mexicans, i., 559, 574-5; Mexicans, i., 622,
649-51; ii., 372, 376, 395; Central Americans, i., 752-4; ii.,
731-3.
Noser (Noza), North Californian tribe, i., 326-61; location, i.,
447.
Notonatos (Nutonetoos), Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401;
location, i., 456.
Notoowthas, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
363, 456.
Noumpolis, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
453.
Noyaxche, Yucatan, antiq., iv., 252.
Noza, i., 447, see Noser.
N'Pockles, i., 312, see Sans Poils.
N'poolthla, Inland Columbian tribes, food, i., 265.
N'quachamish, tribe of Sound Indians, i., 208-22; location, i.,
300.
N'quutlmamish, tribe of Sound Indians, i., 208-22; location, i.,
300.
Nsietshawus, i., 307, see Killamooks.
Ntshaautin, tribe of Tinneh, i., 114-37; location, i., 145.
Nuchusk, tribe of Tinneh, i., 114-37; location, i., 149.
Nuclukayettes, tribe of Tinneh, i., 114-37; location, i., 115,
147.
Nueva Segovia, locality, Nicaragua, i., 793; antiq., iv., 62.
Nuevo Leon, i., 473, 571, 591, 593, 604; lang., iii., 593;
antiq., iv., 597.
Nuevo Toledo, i., 671, see Nayarit.
Nukhlumi, iii., 615, see Nooklummi.
Nuklukahyet, locality, Alaska, i., 133.
Nulaautin, tribe of Tinneh, i., 114-37; location, i., 145.
Numeration, see Arithmetic.
Numguelgar, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i.,
459.
Numpali, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
453.
Nunatangmutes (Nuna-tangmë-uns), tribe of Eskimos, i., 40-69;
location, i., 42, 138.
Nunatok River, i., 42, 138.
Nuñez Gaona Bay, i., 181.
Nunnery, at Chichen, Yucatan, antiq., iv., 223-5.
Nures, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 607.
Nuri, village, Sonora, i., 601.
Nursing, see Children.
Nusdalums, i., 302, see Noosdalums.
Nushagak (Nuschagack, Nuschagakh, Nushergak) River, i., 70,
139-40.
Nushergagmut, name for Keyataigmutes, i., 140.
Nusklaiyum, name for Clallams, iii., 615.
Nutka, i., 194, see Nootka.
Nutonetoos, i., 456, see Notonatos.
Nutonto, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 459.
Nuwungmutes (Nuwangmeuns), tribe of Eskimos, i., 40-69; location,
i., 42, 138.
O
Oajaca (Guaxaca, Oaxaca), i., 644-8, 652, 678-82, 790; ii.,
109-11; lang., iii., 748-9, 763; antiq., iv., 367-423; hist.,
v., 206-7, 239, 263, 473, 526-7.
Oajaca City, Oajaca, antiq., iv., 374-5.
Oakinackens (Oakinacks), i., 257, 312, see Okanagans.
Oak Point, i., 304.
Oanbos, village, Sonora, i., 601.
Oars, see Paddles.
Oath, i., 771; ii., 146, 443-4, 656; iii., 382.
Oat Valley People, i., 448, see Ballo Ki Pomos.
Oavanti, Nahua sacrifice, ii., 309.
Oaxaca, i., 678, see Oajaca.
Obayas, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 612.
Obelisks, see Columns.
Observatory Inlet, i., 174, 293-4; lang., iii., 606.
Obsidian, i., 90, 343, 377-8, 431-2, 495, 627-8; ii., 161,
408-10, 479-80, 601; iii., 238; iv., 237, 544-5, 556-8.
Oc, Maya day, ii., 755-6, 760.
Ocanes, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 611.
Occabayanti, tribe of Isthmians, i., 747-85; location, i., 795.
Ocean current, see Current.
Ocelome, Nahua military order, ii., 403.
Ocelopuchtli, iii., 57, see Huitzilopochtli.
Ocelotentlapalliyiticycacocelotl, Nahua court dress, ii., 374.
Ocelotl, Nahua day, ii., 512, 516-17.
Oceloxochitl, v., 299, see Ozolaxochitl.
Oceloxroch, v., 299, see Ozolaxochitl.
Ocelunacace, Nahua sandals, iii., 423.
Ochecamnes, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
450; lang., iii., 649.
Ochoyos, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
454.
Ochpaniztli, Nahua month, ii., 331, 510.
Ochre, i., 131, 403-4; ii., 474, 487, 556, 558, 572; iii., 435.
Ocipila, v., 323, see Ocopipilla.
Ocki, Utah term for trout, i., 466.
Ocki Pah Utes (Ocki Pi Utes), tribe of Shoshones, i., 422-42;
location, i., 466-7.
Ocna, Maya feast, ii., 690.
Oc na kin, Maya sunset, ii., 755.
Ococingo, Chiapas, antiq., iv., 346-52; hist., v., 187.
Ocolco, a suburb of Tezcuco, v., 351.
Ocopetlayuca, city, Mexico, v., 309.
Ocopipilla (Ocipila), station, Aztec migration, v., 323.
Ocoronis, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 607;
lang., iii., 707.
Ocotelulco, a quarter in Tlascala city, ii., 412; v., 496-8.
Ocotic, village, Jalisco, i., 672.
Ocotl, a species of pine, ii., 487, 600-1; iii., 435.
Ocotlan, Zapotec dialect, iii., 754-5.
Ocotox (Acotoch), Chichimec chief, v., 317-8, 332, 335.
Octli, Nahua drink, ii., 285, 359, 600.
Ocuillan, town, Mexico, i., 677.
Ocuiltecs, Central Mexican tribe, i., 617-44; location, i., 676;
lang., iii., 748.
Odeeilahs, North Californian tribe, i., 326-61; location, i.,
447.
Offerings, origin of, iii., 30-1, 34-5; New Mexicans, iii.,
174, 178-80; Mexicans, i., 641, 665; ii., 259, 279-80, 303-40,
351-2, 389-96, 587, 601, 612-23; iii., 307-8, 313, 336 passim;
v., 88; Central Americans, ii., 662, 678-710, 719-21, 738, 796;
iii., 72, 481, 493; see also Sacrifices.
Ogden Valley, i., 469.
Ogden's Channel Islands, i., 294.
Oglemutes, i., 140, see Aglegmutes.
Ogus, an Asiatic prince, v., 47.
Ohaguames, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 612.
Ohiat, tribe of Nootkas, i., 174-208; location, i., 295.
Ohio, Mississippi valley, antiq., iv., 751.
Ohlones (Sulones, Costanos), Central Californian tribe, i.,
361-401; location, i., 453.
Ohuapan, city, Guerrero, v., 412.
Ohueras, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 609; lang.,
iii., 707.
Ohyaht, tribe of Nootkas, i., 174-208; location, i., 295.
Oiatuch, tribe of Nootkas, i., 174-208; location, i., 295.
Oiclela, tribe of Nootkas, i., 174-208; location, i., 295.
Oil, i., 47, 55, 63, 72, 78, 86, 103, 162-3, 180, 186, 188,
215-16, 716, 743, 753, 765; ii., 487, 599.
Ointment, i., 204, 568; ii., 145, 214, 598-9; iii., 433.
Oioksecumnes, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location,
i., 450.
Oiyotls, North Californian tribe, i., 326-61; location, i., 444.
Ojai (Aujay), South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i.,
459.
Ojo del Pescado, New Mexico, antiq., iv., 647-8.
Okanagan Lake, i., 251.
Okanagan River, i., 251, 253, 312.
Okanagans (Oakinackens, Oakinacks, Okinakanes), tribe of
Shushwaps, i., 250-91; location, i., 251, 312-13; special
mention, i., 256-7, 260, 262, 264-5, 268, 270-2, 275-6, 278-81,
284, 288-90; myth., iii., 153-4, 519; lang., iii., 616; origin,
v., 22.
Okenokes, North Californian tribe, i., 326-61; location, i., 445.
Okkowish, name for Modocs, i., 444.
Okot uil, Maya dance, ii., 697.
Okowvinjha, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i.,
459.
Okshee, name for Klamaths, i., 444.
Olalti, name of month in Chiapas, ii., 766.
Olamentkes, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
449; lang., iii., 648, 654.
Olanches (Olash), Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401;
location, i., 450, 456.
Olancho, locality, Honduras, i., 790, 793; antiq., iv., 70.
Olcacaran, medicinal plant, i., 640.
Olchones, i., 453, see Alchones.
Old age, treatment of aged, i., 390, 437, 515, 568.
Oleepas, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
450; special mention, i., 389-90, 398.
Olemos, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
453.
Olestura, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
453.
Olhones (Oljon), Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401;
location, i., 453; iii., 653; lang., iii., 653.
Oliliuhqui, Nahua drug, ii., 601.
Oliman, station, Quiché migration, v., 185, 562.
Olintepec, Guatemala, antiq., iv., 124.
Olives, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 613;
lang., iii., 744.
Oljon, i., 453, see Olhones.
Ollantaytambo, Peru, antiq., iv., 804.
Olleppauh'lkahtehtls, North Californian tribe, i., 326-61;
location, i., 445.
Ollin, Nahua day, ii., 512, 516-17.
Olmecatl, Olmec ruler, v., 196.
Olmeca Vixtoti, Olmec provinces, v., 190, 197.
Olmecs (Hulmecas, Olmecas, Olmèques, Ulmecs), Nahua nation, i.,
617-44; ii., 133-629; location and name, i., 671; ii., 112-14,
129; special mention, ii., 343, 554; lang., iii., 724; origin,
v., 22; hist., v., 195-202, 484, 488, 491, 499, 527-8, 606-7,
612-13, 616, 621.
Olmolococ, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
453.
Olohzabkamyax, Maya feast, ii., 700.
Oloman, Quiché tribal name and station, v., 21, 546, 561-2.
Olompalis, i., 453, see Olumpali.
Olonutchamnes, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location,
i., 450.
Olówedocs, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location and
name, i., 456.
Oloweéyas, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location and
name, i., 456.
Olowits, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location and
name, i., 456.
Olpen, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i., 453.
Olumpali (Olompalis), Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401;
location, i., 453.
Omaca (Omeacatl), lord of Tlalmanalco, v., 349.
Omahá, North Californian god, iii., 176, 523.
Omatchamnes (Omochumnies, Omutchamnes, Omutchumnes), Central
Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i., 450; lang., iii.,
649.
Omaxtux, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 459.
Ome Acatl (Omeacatl), Nahua god, iii., 408, see Omaca.
Omecioatl (Omecihuatl), name of Citlalicue, ii., 273; iii., 58,
370, 373.
Omens, of disaster, Mexico, v., 463-71, 526, 535, 601, 604.
Ometecuhtli (Ometecutli, Ometeuctli), name of Citlalatonac, iii.,
58, 370, 373.
Ometepec, i., 792; antiq., iv., 29-30, 33, 39, 58-9, 61, 63-5.
Ometochtli, Nahua god, and order of priests, ii., 202, 273, 297,
359; iii., 418, 434.
Omeyateite, Nicaragua god, iii., 492.
Omeyatezigoat, Nicaragua goddess, iii., 492.
Omi, village, Sonora, i., 608.
Omicxipan, Otomí noble, v., 317.
Omochumnies (Omutchamnes, Omutchumnes), i., 50, see Omatchamnes.
Ompivromo, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
453.
Onapa, village, Sonora, i., 601.
Onavas, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; special mention, i.,
590.
Onbi, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i., 454.
Onieletochs, tribe of Haidahs, i., 155-74; location, i., 294.
Oomiak (Umiak), Alaskan boat, i., 60.
Oonalashka (Oonalaska), i., 90, see Unalaska.
Ootlashoots, Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91; location, i.,
312; special mention, i., 258.
Oparrapa, village, Sonora, i., 606.
Ópatas (Opas), North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i.,
572, 605-6; special mention, i., 573-6, 581-3, 586-91; lang.,
iii., 684, 695, 699-704.
Opechisat (Opechisaht), tribe of Nootkas, i., 174-208; location,
i., 295; special mention, i., 179.
Opecluset, tribe of Nootkas, i., 174-208; location, i., 295.
Openoches, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
456.
Ophir, locality of, v., 64-5.
Ophthalmia, i., 68, 245, 285, 521.
Opico Volcano, Salvador, antiq., iv., 69.
Opochtli, iii., 410, see Opuchtli.
Opodepe, village, Sonora, i., 606-7.
Oposura River, i., 605-6.
Oppegachs, North Californian tribe, i., 326-61; location, i.,
445.
Opuchtli (Opochtli), Nahua god, iii., 410; Aztec chief, v., 358.
Oputo, village, Sonora, i., 606.
Oquinajual, name of month in Chiapas, ii., 766.
Oracles, i., 568; ii., 690; iii., 466, 483; v., 535-6, 606.
Oracle-stone, at Cahbaha, v., 601.
Oraibe (Oraive, Oraybe, Orayxa, Oreybe), Moqui village, i., 528,
600-1; lang., iii., 671.
Oranges, i., 652, 658.
Orations, see Speeches.
Oratories, ii., 164-5, 570-4, 687-8, 786; iii., 362, 409.
Oraybe, i., 600, see Oraibe.
Orayxa, i., 601, see Oraibe.
Orbaltzam, a Guatemalan ruler, v., 612.
Ore, Sinaloa, lang., iii., 707.
Oregon, tribes described, i., 222-91, 422-42; locations, i.,
304-22, 422, 460-3; lang., iii., 631, 660; antiq., iv., 734-5.
Orejones, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 611.
Oresta, Michoacan ruler, v., 513.
Oretigua, i., 791, see Orotiñans.
Oreybe, i., 601, see Oraibe.
Orientales, tribe of Apaches, i., 473-526; location, i., 473.
Origin, of American nations, v., 1-136, 538.
Oriza, food of Inland Columbian tribes, i., 266.
Orizava, Vera Cruz, antiq., iv., 435-6.
Ornaments, Hyperboreans, i., 72-3, 88-9, 97-100, 122, 128,
133; Columbians, i., 159, 165, 179-80, 182-3, 211, 258;
Californians, i., 333, 387-8, 424-6; New Mexicans, i., 482-4,
532-3, 558-9, 574-5; iii., 180; antiq., iv., 678; Mexicans, i.,
623, 649-51; ii., 290-1, 319-27, 337, 372-7, 395-6, 407, 440-1,
604, 606, 621; iii., 238, 249, 289-96, 314, 324-5, 385, 390-2,
423, 427; antiq., iv., 376, 383, 539; Central Americans, i.,
691, 716-17, 752-4; ii., 635, 732-3; antiq., iv., 18, 20, 22-4;
Mississippi Valley, antiq., iv., 778-9; Peru, antiq., iv., 792.
Orosaqui, village, Sonora, i., 606.
Orotiña, city, Nicaragua, v., 613.
Orotiñans (Oretigua), Guatemalan (Nicaragua) tribe, i., 686-711;
location, i., 688, 792; v., 613; lang., iii., 791-3.
Oroville, California, antiq., iv., 707.
Oruks, North Californian tribe, i., 326-61; location, i., 446.
Osacalis, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
454.
Ossegons, North Californian tribe, i., 326-61; location, i., 446.
Ostotl, Tlascala, antiq., iv., 478.
Ostuta, Chiapas, antiq., iv., 354.
Otaquitamones, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i.,
610.
Othomis, i., 673, see Otomis.
Otlatl, bamboo, ii., 410.
Otoacte, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
453.
Otolum (Ototiun, Otula), native name for Palenque, iv., 295.
Otomís (Othomis), Nahua nation, i., 617-44; ii., 133-629;
location and name, i., 617-18, 673-4; ii., 129-30; special
mention, i., 625, 630, 632, 634, 643; ii., 261, 308, 371-2,
500; myth., iii., 541; lang., iii., 725, 737-41; v., 39-40,
205-6; hist., v., 205-6, 239, 503, 506, 510.
Otomitl, Nahua chief, v., 223.
Otompan (Otompa, Otumba), a town and chief of Mexico, i., 673;
iv., 544; v., 255, 283, 317-19, 347, 476.
Otoncapolco, Mexico, antiq., iv., 502-3.
Ototiun, iv., 295, see Otolum.
Otter, i., 77, 90, 108, 160, 166-7, 182, 188, 213, 230, 258, 330,
367-70, 383, 425; iii., 147.
Ottetiewa River, i., 447, see Scott's River.
Otula, iv., 295, see Otolum.
Otumba, i., 673, see Otompan.
Oturbe, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
453.
Otziuhcohuatl, v., 243, see Mazacohuatl.
Otzoya, a district in Guatemala, i., 787.
Ouakich, name for Nootka tribes, i., 176.
Ouallamat, (Ouallamet), i., 309-10, see Willamette.
Oualla Oualla, i., 318, see Walla Walla.
Ouches, gold ornaments, i., 766.
Ouchuchlisit, i., 295, see Howchuklisaht.
Ouiamot, name for Chinigchinich, iii., 165.
Ouiot, Acagchemem mythical person, iii., 162-5.
Oukskenahs, North Californian tribe, i., 326-61; location, i.,
444.
Oulasser, iii., 497, see Wulasha.
Ouloulatines, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location,
i., 453.
Oumpini, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
453.
Ounalaska, i., 37, see Unalaska.
Ouraba, Sinaloa god, iii., 180.
Ousint, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
453.
Outchioung, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
453.
Ovas, i., 606, see Jovas.
Owens Lake, Cal., antiq., iv., 691.
Owens River, i., 466.
Owls, i., 171, 219, 405, 561, 741; iii., 128.
Oxametl, ii., 349, see Oyametl.
Oxib-Quieh, Quiché ruler, v., 566, 595, 602.
Oxlahuh-Tzy, Cakchiquel king, v., 594, 596-600.
Oxmutal, Yucatan, antiq., iv., 150.
Oxomoco, Nahua god, iii., 252; v., 190.
Oxomococipactonatl, Nahua inventor of medicine, ii., 597.
Oyametl (Oxametl), a species of tree, ii., 349, 557, 574.
Oyome, Chichimec ancient city, v., 219, 291.
Ozolaxochitl (Oceloxochitl, Oceloxroch), Toltec princess, v.,
299.
Ozomatli, Nahua day, ii., 512, 516-17; Zapotec king, v., 532.
Oztaxochitl, wife of Toltec chief, v., 297.
Oztolotl, station, Chichimec migration, v., 294.
Oztoman, city, Guerrero, v., 412, 442.
Oztoncalco, town, Guatemala, i., 787.
Oztoticpac, city, Mexico, v., 317, 333.
Oztotipac, station, Chichimec migration, v., 292.
Oztotl, v., 323, see Quinehuayan-Chicomoztoc.
Oztotlan, station, Aztec migration, v., 307, 324.
Ozumba, Mexico, antiq., iv., 496.
P
Paax, ii., 758, see Pax.
Paaylaps, tribe of Sound Indians, i., 208-22; location, i., 301.
Pabavit, Los Angeles County tribes, first woman, iii., 84.
Pabucos, South Mexican tribe, i., 644-70; location, i., 681.
Pacaitun River, i., 683.
Pacalay, Guatemala, antiq., iv., 131.
Pacam, Quiché god, v., 179.
Pacarabós, tribe of Apaches, i., 473-526; location, i., 592.
Pacasas, Acaxee dialect, iii., 719.
Pacandan Island, Michoacan, v., 519.
Pacawal, locality, Guatemala, v., 602.
Pachacamac, Peru, antiq., iv., 796-7; god, v., 47.
Pachagues, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 611.
Pachales (Paxchales), North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location,
i., 612.
Pachalocos, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 612.
Pachalum, locality, Guatemala, v., 559.
Pachan, iv., 295, see Nachan.
Pacheenas (Pacheenetts), i., 295, 297, see Patcheenas.
Pachera, Tarahumara dialect, iii., 711.
Pachhepes, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
454.
Pachoches, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 611.
Pachtli, Nahua month, ii., 511.
Pachtontli, Nahua month, ii., 511.
Pacimwane, Michoacan ruler, v., 517.
Pacoas (Pacuas), North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i.,
611-12.
Pacora, a province in Darien, i., 796.
Pacos, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 612.
Pacos, Isthmian slaves, i., 771.
Pacpoles, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 611.
Pacsiol, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 458.
Pacuaches (Paguachis), North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i.,
611-12.
Pacuas, i., 611, see Pacoas.
Pacuazin, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 611.
Pacumchac, Maya feast, ii., 693.
Paddles, i., 60, 106, 130, 166, 185, 188, 190, 216, 238, 346,
382, 384, 408, 563, 583, 631, 658, 699, 725, 767; ii., 739;
iii., 342.
Padoucas, Pawnee term for Comanches, i., 473.
Pafaltoes, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 612.
Pagouts, i., 441, see Pah Utes.
Pahcaba, term for sweat-house, i., 356.
Pahmetes, tribe of Shoshones, i., 422-42; location, i., 464.
Pahonahs, Shoshone water spirits, iii., 157.
Pahseego, food of Inland Columbian tribes, i., 265.
Pah Ute Creek, California, antiq., iv., 691.
Pah Utes (Pagouts, Pah Utahs, Pa-Utes, Pa Yutas, Pey Utes), tribe
of Shoshones, i., 422-42; location, i., 422, 465-6; special
mention, i., 424, 432-3, 441.
Pah Vants (Pahvents, Parant Utahs, Pa Vants), tribe of Shoshones,
i., 422-42; location, i., 422, 464, 468; special mention, i.,
442.
Pah Vant Valley, i., 464.
Pailsh (Pailsk), tribe of Sound Indians, i., 208-22; location,
i., 303.
Paint Creek, Mississippi Valley, antiq., iv., 755-6.
Painting, Hyperboreans, i., 47-8, 72, 84, 88, 97, 105-7, 122,
127, 130; Columbians, i., 159, 161, 165, 173, 178, 180-2,
184, 190, 193, 199, 206, 210-12, 216, 229, 236, 257, 274;
Californians, i., 333, 358, 370-1, 377-8, 393, 403-4, 424; iv.,
691-2; New Mexicans, i., 480-4, 495-6, 506-7, 531-2, 543-6,
550-1, 556, 559, 574-5; Mexicans, i., 622-3, 631, 649-51; ii.,
321-4, 333, 337, 363-4, 371-4, 405, 407, 486-8, 572; iii.,
386-7, 407-17, 435; iv., 306, 312, 400, 411; Central Americans,
i., 691, 701, 716, 752-4, 769; ii., 697, 700, 713, 724, 731-4,
741, 752, 768-70, 784, 787; iv., 19, 35-9, 63-5, 126, 189-90,
197, 219, 231-4, 275.
Paintzin, king of Xaltocan, v., 349.
Pai-uches, i., 440, see Pi Utahs.
Paiulee, Utah dialect, iii., 661.
Pai-Utes, i., 463, see Pi Utes.
Pajalames, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 610.
Pajalaques, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 611.
Pajalatames, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 611.
Pajalates, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 611.
Pajaritos, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 613.
Pajaro River, i., 455.
Pakoc, Itza god, iii., 483.
Pala, village, South California, i., 460.
Palaces, ii., 160-74, 440, 635, 787-9; antiq., iv., 123-5, 136-7,
154-285, 298-352, 391-412, 419-20, 431, 458-60, 523, 526, 544,
570, 798-9, 806.
Palaiks, North Californian tribe, i., 326-61; location, i., 447;
lang., iii., 640.
Palakahus, tribe of Chinooks, i., 222-50; location, i., 308.
Palanshan, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
450.
Palanshawl Ustu, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401;
location, i., 450.
Palagueques, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 613.
Palenque, ancient city, Chiapas, i., 683; ii., 118, 120, 633,
781-2; iii., 135; iv., 289-346; v., 58-9; hist., v., 169,
202-3, 232, 542, 544, 616, 619, 623.
Pallalts, tribe of Nootkas, i., 175-208; location, i., 298.
Pallawonaps, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; myth., iii.,
549-50.
Palletto Pallas, Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91; location,
i., 317.
Palm, various uses of, i., 166, 558, 560, 582, 589, 624, 630,
651-2, 690-3, 708, 716, 718, 722, 739, 755, 761, 765, 775; ii.,
363, 365, 484, 557; v., 221, 633.
Palmillas, forts, Vera Cruz, antiq., iv., 447.
Palmitos, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 612.
Palos Verdes, village, South California, i., 460.
Palouse (Paloose, Palus, Peloose, Peluse), Inland Columbian
tribe, i., 250-91; location, i., 253, 318; special mention, i.,
267, 290; lang., iii., 620-4.
Palouse River, i., 253, 317-18; myth., iii., 94-5.
Paloushiss, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
456.
Palpa, Mosquito food, i., 719.
Paltocac, i., 458, see Partocac.
Palus, i., 318, see Palouse.
Palux, tribe of Chinooks, i., 222-50; location, i., 305.
Pamaca, city, Guatemala, name for Zacualpa, v., 587.
Pamaques, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 611.
Pamasus, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 611.
Pames, Central Mexican tribe, i., 617-44; location, i., 617,
672-3; special mention, i., 624, 643; lang., iii., 742-3; v.,
510.
Pamoranos, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 612.
Pampopas, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 611-12.
Pancacoya River, Guatemala, antiq., iv., 120.
Panamá, Isthmian province and tribe, i., 747-85; location, i.,
796; special mention, i., 751, 770, 775-6, 784; antiq., iv.,
15-16.
Panamekas, tribe of Mosquitos, i., 711-47; location, i., 713.
Panchoy Valley, Guatemala, v., 569.
Panes, Acagchemem buzzard-feast, iii., 168.
Panguais (Panguajes), North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location,
i., 613.
Panniers, see Baskets.
Panoaia, v., 189, see Pánuco.
Panoteca, i., 674, see Panteca.
Panotlan, i., 674, see Pánuco.
Panquetzaliztli, Nahua month, ii., 337, 394-6, 511; iii., 323.
Panteca (Panoteca), name for Huastecs, i., 674.
Pantecatl, Nahua god, iii., 418.
Pantemit, Mayapan lord, v., 626.
Pantitlan, locality, Mexico, iii., 333; station, Aztec migration,
v., 323-4.
Pantla River, Michoacan, v., 508.
Pantlan (Panotlan), i., 674, see Pánuco.
Pantzic, plateau, Guatemala, v., 574.
Pánuco (Panoaia, Panotlan, Pantlan, Panutla), province, Vera
Cruz, i., 622, 674; ii., 230; antiq., iv., 461-3; hist., v.,
189, 191, 196.
Paogas, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 611.
Papábi-Ootam, i., 602, see Pápagos.
Pápagos, tribe of Pueblos, i., 526-56; location, i., 526, 529,
602-3; special mention, i., 533-4, 538-9, 541, 545, 549, 553,
555; myth., iii., 75-7; v., 13, 20; lang., iii., 685, 694-9.
Papahua Tlemacàzque, a class of priests, v., 239.
Papaloiotilmatlitenisio, Nahua court mantle, ii., 374.
Papalotl, Ocotelulco ruler, v., 497.
Papantla, pyramid, Vera Cruz, antiq., iv., 452-4; station, Aztec
migration, v., 324.
Papantzin, a Toltec noble, v., 268-70; Mexican princess, v.,
467-8.
Papaztac, Nahua god, iii., 418.
Paper, various uses, etc., ii., 307, 314-16, 322-34, 389-93, 444,
485-6, 524, 603-5, 614, 771; iii., 333, 340-6, 383-92, 426.
Papigochic River, i., 606.
Papudos, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 614.
Papuha, ancient home of Olmecs and Xicalancas, v., 196.
Papuhya, a mythic river, v., 178, 196.
Papuluka, a Guatemalan lordship, v., 597.
Parant Utahs, i., 464, see Pah Vants.
Paravan Valley, i., 468.
Parawat Utahs, tribe of Shoshones, i., 422-42; location, i., 464.
Paraxone, plateau, Guatemala, v., 574.
Parcialidades, name for Costa Rica tribes, i., 794.
Pariche, Cakchiquel month, ii., 766.
Paris, Isthmian province and tribe, i., 747-85; location, i.,
749, 795; lang., iii., 793-4.
Parka, Koniaga dress, i., 73-4.
Parras, Zacatec dialect, iii., 719.
Parras Lake, i., 576.
Parrazquin, Guatemala, antiq., iv., 124.
Parrots, i., 574, 652, 708, 754; ii., 489, 716.
Partitions, dwellings, i., 259, 535, 718; ii., 572, 784, 787.
Partocac (Paltocac), South Californian tribe, i., 402-22;
location, i., 458.
Paruraca, province and tribe of Isthmians, i., 747-85; location,
i., 796.
Pasalves, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 611.
Paschtol, i., 141, see Pashtolik.
Paschtoligmjuten (Paschtoligmüten, Paschtuligmüten), i., 141, see
Pashtoliks.
Pasecgna (Pasheckno), South Californian tribe, i., 402-22;
location, i., 459, 460.
Paseos, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 611.
Pasey Creek, i., 456.
Pashtolik Bay, i., 70, 141.
Pashtolik (Paschtol, Pestol) River, i., 70, 141.
Pashtoliks (Paschtoligmjuten, Paschtoligmüten, Paschtuligmüten),
tribe of Koniagas, i., 69-87; location, i., 70, 141.
Pasinogna, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i.,
460.
Pasitas, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 613.
Paso de Ovejas, Vera Cruz, antiq., iv., 438-9.
Pason, locality, Guatemala, i., 789.
Passaguates, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 610.
Passports, Nahua burial, ii., 604, 614; iii., 513, 537.
Pastalocos, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 611.
Pastancoyas, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 611.
Patacales, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 611.
Pataloma, i., 449, see Petaluma.
Patamagua Nacaraho, locality, Michoacan, v., 518.
Patapee, Carib basket, i., 724.
Patawats, North Californian tribe, i., 326-61; location, i., 446;
special mention, i., 329, 348, 350, 357, 361; lang., iii., 643.
Pataways, North Californian tribe, i., 326-61; location, i., 445;
lang., iii., 642.
Patcheena (Pacheena, Pacheenett), tribe of Nootkas, i., 174-208;
location, i., 175, 297.
Patinamit, ii., 637, see Iximché.
Patlachté, cacao money, ii., 381-2.
Patnetac, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
453.
Patoliztli, Nahua game, ii., 300.
Patolli, gambling beans, ii., 300.
Patolquachtli, cloth money, ii., 382.
Patook (Potook) River, i., 793-4; iii., 783.
Patulul, city, Guatemala, i., 788; v., 586.
Patzcuaro, station, Aztec migration, v., 323; city, Michoacan,
v., 521-2, 524.
Patzcuaro Isles, v., 511.
Patzcuaro Lake, ii., 107; v., 323, 328, 509.
Patzima, locality, Guatemala, v., 559.
Patzun, Guatemala, antiq., iv., 123-4.
Pautomaugons, Chinook war clubs, i., 237.
Pauzanes, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 612.
Pa Vants, i., 468, see Pah Vants.
Pavement, i., 185; ii., 575, 578; antiq., iv., 23, 175, 398, 466.
Pavilion River, i., 318.
Pawacume, Chichimec Wanacace ruler, v., 515-22.
Pawlowskojes, tribe of Aleuts, i., 87-94; location, i., 141.
Pawluchs, Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91; location, i., 317.
Pax (Paax), Maya month, ii., 693, 757-8.
Paxchales, i., 611, see Pachales.
Paxil Cayala, Quiché mythic region, ii., 716-17; v., 180, 184,
186.
Paxpili (Axpitil), South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location,
i., 458.
Payaguas, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 611.
Payanmin, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
454.
Payaqui, name for Chiquimula kingdom, v., 545.
Paya River, i., 796-7.
Payas, Guatemalan tribe, i., 686-711; location, i., 790.
Payas, tribe of Isthmians, i., 747-85; location, i., 797.
Paye-Tome, Brazil god, v., 23-4.
Paynal, Nahua god, iii., 387-8.
Paynalton, Nahua god, iii., 187, 298-9, 303.
Paysim, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
455.
Payuches i., 464, see Pi Utahs.
Pá Yutas, i., 466, see Pah Utes.
Payzanos, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 613.
Peace, see Treaties.
Peace River, i., 130, 144.
Peaches, i., 505, 539.
Peahay, food of Inland Columbian tribes, i., 265.
Pearl Island, lang., iii., 794.
Pearl Key Lagoon, i., 794.
Pearls, i., 165, 258, 382, 408, 558-9, 574, 583-4, 651, 768; ii.,
376, 481, 733, 750; iv., 782.
Pechetaro, locality, Michoacan, v., 518.
Pecos (Navon de los Pecos), Pueblo village, i., 527, 554, 600;
antiq., iv., 663, 671.
Pecquans, North Californian tribe, i., 326-61; location, i., 444.
Pecuris, iii., 682, see Picuris.
Pecyous, tribe of Chinooks, i., 222-50; location, i., 309.
Pedro, village, South California, i., 460.
Peel River Indians, i., 146, see Tatlit Kutchin.
Peel's River, i., 115, 146-7.
Peeshaaak, term of contempt among Sound Indians, i., 221.
Peh-tsik, term applied to some Trinity River tribes, i., 327,
444; see also Ehnek, iii., 642.
Pelaxilla, a Mexican princess, v., 446-7, 535.
Pelican, Ceris' dress, i., 574.
Pelloatpallahs, Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91; location, i.,
317.
Pelly River, i., 148; lang., iii., 587.
Pelones, tribe of Apaches, i., 473-526; location, i., 474.
Peloose (Peluse), i., 317-18, see Palouse.
Pelua, food of Inland Columbian tribes, i., 265.
Penance, ii., 147, 258, 261, 303-4, 312-14, 335, 688; iii., 249,
256, 383, 395, 404, 421, 436-7, 440-2, 487; v., 258.
Penandés, tribe of Apaches, i., 473-526; location, i., 592.
Peñasco Collection, Mexican Republic, antiq., iv., 560.
Pend d'Oreille Lake, i., 252, 313; antiq., iv., 734.
Pend d'Oreille (Killuspehn) River, i., 313.
Pend d'Oreilles (Calispellums, Calispels, Kalispelms, Kalispels,
Kellespem, Kullas-Palus, Kullespelms, Ponderas), Inland
Columbian tribe, i., 250-91; location, i., 252, 312-14; special
mention, i., 257, 260, 262, 267, 271-2, 278-80, 283-4, 289;
myth., iii., 522; lang., iii., 615.
Penn's Cove, i., 215, 221, 299.
Peñol, cave, Guatemala, antiq., iv., 117.
Peñoles, Oajaca, antiq., iv., 376.
Pensacola Island, Nicaragua, antiq., iv., 48-51.
Peor-Apis, Phallic-worship, iii., 501.
Pephtsoh, North Californian tribe, i., 326-61; location, i., 445.
Pepper, i., 653, 694-5, 700, 719; ii., 599, 718-19, 722; iii.,
336.
Pequine, a species of wild vine, i., 720.
Peranscuaro, Matlaltzinca festival, iii., 446.
Perfume, i., 651, 654, 730; ii., 161, 256-8, 287, 603, 614, 618,
620, 734.
Pericúis (Pericos, Periuches), Lower Californian tribe, i.,
556-71; location, i., 557, 604; special mention, i., 558-9,
565-7, 570; myth., iii., 83-4, 169-70, 529; v., 20; lang.,
iii., 687.
Perjury, punishment of, i., 770; ii., 444, 463, 656.
Personal habits, Hyperboreans, i., 49, 65, 111-12; Columbians,
i., 235, 267; Californians, i., 341, 377, 407, 430-1; New
Mexicans, i., 492-3, 540, 562; Mexicans, i., 626-7, 654;
Central Americans, i., 696, 722, 760; ii., 734-5.
Peru, antiq., iv., 791-807; civilization of, v., 44-51; migration
from, v., 529-30.
Peruqueta, province of Darien, i., 795.
Peruvians, myth., iii., 269; v., 14-17, 23-4; antiq., iv.,
791-807; civilization and origin, v., 44-51.
Pesso, Mosquito drink, i., 739.
Pestilence, Mexicans, i., 638-9; ii., 593; iii., 200-4; v.,
413-14; Guatemalans, v., 601.
Pestnjakow-swoje, tribe of Aleuts, i., 87-94; location, i., 141.
Petáh, root used as food, i., 374.
Petajaya, i., 540, see Pitahaya.
Petaluma (Pataloma, Petlenum), i., 449, 452-3.
Petalumas (Yolhios), Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401;
location, i., 363, 452.
Petampich River, Yucatan, antiq., iv., 260.
Petapa, Guatemala, antiq., iv., 120-1.
Petapa, hill, Chiapas, antiq., iv., 353.
Petapa, town, Oajaca, antiq., iv., 372.
Petate (Petlatl), a palm-leaf mat, i., 630, 656.
Petatlan, Sinaloa dialect, iii., 707.
Peten, province and city, Guatemala, i., 683, 786; ii., 634;
antiq., iv., 133-9; name for Yucatan, v., 614, 624.
Peten Lake, ii., 133-5, 138; iii., 483; v., 634.
Petlacalli, bamboo packing cases, ii., 386.
Petlenum, i., 453, see Petaluma.
Petticoats, i., 558, 574, 620-1, 648-50, 752; ii., 728.
Peyote, medicine, i., 589.
Pey Utes, i., 466, see Pah Utes.
Phallic-worship, relics of, iii., 501-9; iv., 41, 42, 44, 48, 50,
56-7, 66, 167, 175, 189, 196, 202, 276, 358, 481-2, 562; v.,
42-3.
Pharaones, i., 594, see Faraones.
Philadelphia Philosophical Society, Mexican Republic, antiq.,
iv., 560, 562.
Phlebotomy, i., 86, 395, 568, 667, 709, 743, 779; ii., 479-80,
601, 796.
Phœnicians, American origin-traces, v., 63-76.
Phonechas, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
456.
Physical Geography, Home of Hyperboreans, i., 38-9, 71; of
Columbians, i., 152-3, 156; of Californians, i., 323-4; of
New Mexicans, i., 471-2, 476, 556-7, 571-2; of Mexicans, i.,
616-17, 644-5; ii., 107; of Central Americans, i., 684-7, 712,
747-8; of American civilization, ii., 86-90; Yucatan, iv.,
140-2; Tabasco and Chiapas, iv., 287-8; Vera Cruz, iv., 425-6.
Physicians, see Medicine.
Physiognomy, see Face.
Physique, Hyperboreans, i., 45-7, 71-2, 88, 97, 116-17, 122,
132-3; iii., 578; Columbians, i., 176-9, 210, 224-5, 254-6;
Californians, i., 327-9, 364-7, 402-3; New Mexicans, i., 472-3,
477-9, 529-30, 558; Mexicans, i., 24, 618-19, 646-8; ii.,
624-5; Central Americans, i., 688-9, 714-15, 749-51; ii., 802;
Quetzalcoatl, iii., 250, 255, 260, 269, 273-4.
Piaba, village, Sinaloa, i., 614.
Piaces (Piachas), Isthmian sorcerers, i., 777.
Picacho River, i., 528, 601.
Picoris, i., 599, see Picuris.
Picote, whipping-post, Yucatan, antiq., iv., 167, 171, 175, 202.
Picture-writing, see Hieroglyphics.
Picula Kakla, Maya drink, ii., 703.
Picuris (Pecuris, Picoris), tribe of Pueblos, i., 526-56;
location, i., 599; lang., iii., 681-3.
Picyetl, Nahua tobacco, ii., 287.
Pi Edes (Py Edes), tribe of Shoshones, i., 422-42; location, i.,
422, 468; special mention, i., 430, 436, 440; lang., iii., 662.
Piedra de la Boca, statue, Nicaragua, antiq., iv., 54.
Piedra Grande (San Gaspar), Guerrero, antiq., iv., 424.
Piedra Pintal, at Caldera, Isthmus, antiq., iv., 16.
Pigeon River, i., 342.
Pigs, see Hogs.
Pihuiques, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 612.
Piiru, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 459.
Pijmos, i., 530, see Pimas.
Pike County, Mississippi Valley, antiq., iv., 763.
Pikek, Guatemala, antiq., iv., 131.
Piketon, Mississippi Valley, antiq., iv., 764-5.
Pilcalli, entail of land, ii., 229.
Pilgrims, v., 496, 532, 618.
Pillalli, lands of nobles, ii., 225.
Pillar of Death, at Mitla, Oajaca, antiq., iv., 408.
Pillar Rock, locality, Oregon, i., 304.
Pillars, see Columns.
Pilli, Nahua title, ii., 187.
Pillows, ii., 572, 786.
Piltzinteolli, Jaliscan god, iii., 447.
Piltzinteucyòhua, Nahua calendar sign and god, ii., 516.
Pimas, (Pijmos, Pimos), tribe of Pueblos, i., 526-56; location,
i., 526, 528-9, 601-2; special mention, i., 530, 532-4, 539,
541-5, 547-55; myth., iii., 78-80, 131, 526-7; v., 13-14, 20;
lang., iii., 569, 584-5, 694-8.
Pimocagna, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i.,
460.
Pimos, iii., 131, see Pimas.
Pimps, punishment of, ii., 469.
Pinaleños (Pinalinos, Piñals, Piñols), tribe of Apaches, i.,
473-526; location, i., 474, 595-6.
Piñal Mountains, i., 602.
Pinanacas, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 611.
Pinar, locality, Guatemala, v., 586.
Pine, various uses, i., 104, 156, 162-3, 172, 184-5, 189, 191,
204, 217, 237, 260, 266-7, 272, 346, 431, 439, 560, 692; ii.,
557, 599.
Pine-apple, i., 719, 739, 775; ii., 724.
Pineugna, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 460.
Pinogana, town, Darien, i., 796.
Pinolatl, gruel, i., 577.
Pinole (Pinolli), corn flour, i., 374, 577-8; iii., 360.
Piñols, i., 595, see Pinaleños.
Pinomes, i., 677, see Tlapanecs.
Pinotl, governor of Cuetlachtlan, v., 479.
Pinotl-Chochons, i., 677, see Tlapanecs.
Pintos, Central Mexican tribe, i., 617-44; location, i., 572,
613, 681; special mention, i., 574, 638-9, 643.
Pinula, town, Guatemala, i., 788.
Piocheque, tresses, ii., 371.
Piochtli, a scalp lock, ii., 371.
Pipes, i., 165, 189, 199, 237, 354, 382, 434-5, 544, 699, 705;
ii., 287; iv., 781.
Pipian, a stew, ii., 356.
Pipiles, Maya nation, i., 686-711; ii., 630-803; location and
name, i., 688, 790; ii., 123, 130; special mention, ii., 645,
651, 657-9, 665-70, 675, 678, 680-1, 706-8, 719, 728, 730, 741,
745-7, 800-1; myth., iii., 484-8, 507, 542; hist., v., 585-6,
598, 606-11.
Pipiolcomic, station, Aztec migration, v., 323.
Piraraylos, Isthmian title, i., 770.
Pirindas, name for Matlaltzincas, i., 677; hist., v., 523-4.
Piro, North Mexican lang., iii., 714.
Piscaous, i., 316, see Pisquouse.
Piscour River, i., 312.
Piscouse (Piscous), i., 316, see Pisquouse.
Pishquitpaws, i., 271, see Pisquitpaws.
Pishwanwapums, Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91; location, i.,
320.
Piskwaus, i., 316, see Pisquouse.
Pisones, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 612;
lang., iii., 744.
Pisquitpaws (Pishquitpaws, Pisquitpahs), Inland Columbian tribe,
i., 250-91; location, i., 321; special mention, i., 258, 271.
Pisquouse (Piscaous, Piscous, Piscouse, Piskwaus), Inland
Columbian tribe, i., 250-91; location, i., 253, 312, 316;
special mention, i., 275; lang., iii., 618.
Pisquouse River, i., 316.
Pistol River, i., 442.
Pita, a species of hemp, i., 657-8, 689-90, 697-9, 766; ii., 409.
Pitahaya (Petajaya), a fruit used for food, etc., i., 539-40,
550, 560, 576, 586, 624.
Pitao-Cocobi, Zapotec god, iii., 457.
Pitao Cozaana, Zapotec god, iii., 449.
Pitao-Xoo, Zapotec god, iii., 457.
Pitas, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 611.
Pitaycachi Valley, i., 595.
Pitcatches, i., 455, see Pitiaches.
Pitches, i., 433, see Sampitches.
Pitem (Pitemèns), Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401;
location, i., 453.
Pitiaches (Pitcatches), Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401;
location, i., 363, 455-6.
Pitisfiafuiles, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i.,
612.
Pitpan, Mosquito river boat, i., 725.
Pitt Archipelago, i., 155, 294.
Pitt River, i., 344, 447, 457.
Pitt River Indians, North Californian tribe, i., 326-61; special
mention, i., 329-30, 337, 341-6, 351, 353-5, 357-61; lang.,
iii., 638, 640.
Pi Utahs (Pai-Uches, Payuches, Piuchas), tribe of Shoshones, i.,
422-42; location, i., 464; special mention, i., 440.
Pi Utes (Pai Utes, Pyutes), tribe of Shoshones, i., 422-42;
location, i., 466-7; special mention, i., 431, 433, 437, 440-1;
myth., iii., 135; lang., iii., 661-2.
Pixahua, a Toltec prince, v., 297.
Pixbaex, Isthmian fruit, i., 759.
Placer County, i., 398, 450; antiq., iv., 706.
Placerville, town, California, i., 365; antiq., iv., 705.
Plagues, Toltec, hist., v., 274-5; see also Pestilence.
Plantain, see Banana.
Plant-sculpture, iv., 112, 114.
Plasters, medicine, i., 172, 395-6, 419, 568; ii., 598.
Plates, see Dishes.
Platforms, i., 160, 163, 338-9, 397, 718, 724, 782; ii., 322,
443, 556, 692, 703, 718, 785; iii., 425.
Plating, ii., 477, 750.
Playanos, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 460.
Plaza Mayor, Mexico, antiq., iv., 505-17, 520.
Plaza Tlatelulco, Mexico, antiq., iv., 517-19.
Pleasure-gardens, Nahuas, ii., 163-73.
Pleiades, Nahua sign for new fire, iii., 394.
Plenty, Nahua prayer for, iii., 200.
Plows, i., 543, 582.
Plumes, see Feathers.
Plummet, Nahuas, ii., 557.
Plunkett Creek, Mississippi Valley, antiq., iv., 768.
Poaramas, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 610.
Poblazon, New Mexico, antiq., iv., 663.
Poborosa, province and tribe of Isthmians, i., 747-85; location,
i., 795.
Pocam, Maya feast, ii., 696.
Pochotl, a species of seed, ii., 359; a Toltec prince, v., 285,
299-301; lord of Chalco Atenco, v., 349.
Pochtecas, Nahua merchants, ii., 380, 491, 616.
Pochtlan, a ward in Mexico city, ii., 491.
Pochútla, locality, Oajaca, i., 679.
Poçolatl, i., 578, see Pozole.
Pocomams, ii., 121, see Pokomams.
Pocomchi (Poconchi), i., 788, see Pokomams.
Pocorosa, Isthmian province and tribe, i., 747-85; location, i.,
796.
Poctepec, town, Guerrero, v., 412.
Pocyetl, Nahua tobacco, ii., 287.
Poetry, i., 701, 727; ii., 286, 493-7; v., 428.
Poggamoggon, club of Snake Indians, i., 431.
Poh-lik, Klamath appellation, i., 327, 444.
Pohoneeches, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location,
i., 455-6.
Póhono Fall, iii., 126.
Poiauhtla, a sacred place, Mexico, ii., 585; iii., 333.
Poin, name of month in Chiapas, ii., 766.
Point Adams, i., 304, 306.
Point Barrow, i., 42, 45, 47-8, 50, 69, 138; lang., iii., 576.
Point Concepcion, i., 458.
Point Grenville, i., 303.
Point Hopkins, i., 174.
Point Lewis, i., 306.
Point Nisuc, Yucatan, antiq., iv., 260.
Poison, i., 79, 343, 378-9, 432-3, 541, 577-9, 586-7, 722-3, 760,
762-3, 782; ii., 408-9, 721, 742-4.
Pojuaque, Pueblo village and tribe, i., 526-56; location, i.,
599; lang., iii., 681.
Pokboc, city, Yucatan, v., 632.
Pokerville, California, antiq., iv., 707.
Pokomams (Pocomams, Pokonchis), Maya nation, i., 686-711; ii.,
630-803; location and name, i., 788; ii., 121, 130; lang.,
iii., 760-1, 764-6; hist., v., 541, 555, 557-8, 561, 563-4,
566, 569, 576-7, 591, 593-4.
Pokoninos, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
456.
Pole (Popole), Yucatan, antiq., iv., 260.
Police, i., 546; ii., 565-7, 655.
Polish, Nahua architecture, ii., 560, 570-1, 573, 578-9, 581.
Politos, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 613.
Polokawynahs, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location,
i., 456.
Polonches, Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91; location, i., 317.
Poloyamas, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
456.
Polyandry, i., 66, 82, 197.
Polyer, i., 793, see Poyer.
Polygamy, see Marriage.
Pomos, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location and name,
i., 362, 448; special mention, i., 325, 379, 396; lang., iii.,
643-4, 646.
Pome Pomos, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location and
name, i., 362, 448.
Pompey, Mississippi Valley, antiq., v., 115.
Pomulumas, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 611.
Ponderas, i., 252, see Pend d'Oreilles.
Ponds, ii., 165, 353; iii., 435.
Pónida, village, Sonora, i., 606.
Pook, Mojave shell-money, i., 506.
Pop, (Poop, Popp), Maya month, ii., 695, 757.
Popkah, bulb eaten by Inland Columbian tribes, i., 265.
Popocatepetl, ominous eruption of, v., 460.
Popocaxtli, vase, Tlascala, antiq., iv., 479.
Popoconaltepetl, mountain, v., 207.
Popole, iv., 260, see Pole.
Popolocas (Popolucas), i., 677, see Tlapanecs.
Popol Winak Chituy, Quiché official, ii., 644.
Popol Winak Pahom Tzalatz Xcaxeba, Quiché official, ii., 644.
Popotlan, (Popotla), locality, Mexico, iii., 298; station, Aztec
migration, v., 323, name for Tacuba.
Pópulo, village, Sonora, i., 605.
Poquietl, perfume canes, ii., 206.
Porcupine, i., 128, 258, 425, 482-3, 753, 761; ii., 601.
Porcupine River, i., 115, 146-7.
Porpoise, i., 103.
Porsiuncula River, i., 456.
Port Discovery, i., 210-12, 219-20, 302.
Porterfield, California, antiq., iv., 704.
Porters, see Carriers.
Port Essington, i., 293.
Porticoes, Nahua market places, ii., 383, 565.
Portland Canal, i., 143, 293-4.
Port Ludlow, i., 302.
Porto Belo, i., 753.
Port Orchard, i., 216, 220, 222, 301.
Port Orford, i., 443.
Portrait-sculpture, antiq., iv., 56-8, 82, 99, 101, 168, 276-7,
381, 427, 435, 462-3, 502, 595; v., 424, 435, 455.
Portsmouth, Mississippi valley, antiq., iv., 758.
Port Townsend, i., 214, 302.
Port Trinidad, i., 342.
Poruches, i., 464, see Nomenuches.
Posole, i., 654, see Pozole.
Possession Sound, i., 299.
Posuamas, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 612.
Potaaches, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
455.
Potam (Potan), village, Sonora, i., 608.
Potatoes, i., 161-2, 167, 652.
Potlapiguas, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 606.
Potoancies, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
455.
Potoashees (Potoashs), tribe of Chinooks, i., 222-50; location,
i., 303, 305.
Poton, Guatemalan lang., iii., 760.
Potonchan, v., 226, see Champoton.
Potook, i., 794, see Patook.
Potoyantes, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; myth., iii.,
87; v., 19.
Potoyucca, Nahuas, food, ii., 357.
Potrero, village, South California, i., 460.
Pots, i., 185, 187, 434, 582, 656, 697, 724.
Potter Valley, i., 362, 448; lang., iii., 643.
Pottery, Columbians, antiq., iv., 735; Californians, i., 434;
antiq., iv., 710, 714-15, 718-20; New Mexicans, i., 500, 504,
543, 546, 582; antiq., iv., 575-7, 594, 600, 611-12, 633-4,
636, 642-4, 646-7, 661, 678-9; Mexicans, i., 658; ii., 483-4;
antiq., iv., 368, 372, 383, 387-8, 427-8, 462-3, 521, 526-7,
541-2, 547; Central Americans, i., 697-8, 701, 724, 766-7; ii.,
752, 787; antiq., iv., 19-23, 62-6, 70, 76, 137, 139, 199, 278;
Mississippi valley, antiq., iv., 779-80; Peru, antiq., iv.,
795-6.
Poultry, i., 538, 544, 652.
Power, see Government.
Poxtla, Vera Cruz, antiq., iv., 445.
Poyas, tribe of Mosquitos, i., 711-47; location, i., 712, 793;
special mention, i., 714, 716, 719-22, 726-8, 746; lang., iii.,
783.
Poyauhtlan, Teo-Chichimec settlement, v., 330; battles at, v.,
336, 487-8, 494, 497, 503.
Poyer Mts., i., 793.
Poyer (Polyer) River, i., 793.
Poytoquis, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; lang., iii.,
653.
Pozole (Posole, Poçolatl), a thin gruel, i., 577-8, 654.
Pozoltega, town, Nicaragua, i., 792.
Ppapp-Hol-Chac, Maya temple, Yucatan, antiq., iv., 248.
Pranzos, i., 748, see Guatusos.
Prayers, ii., 492, 689; iii., 30, 195-6, 200-30, 325-30, 370-5,
381-2, 438.
Precious stones, ii., 290, 372, 376, 481-2, 606, 635, 737, 750;
iii., 398.
Pregnancy, see Women.
Presents, Hyperboreans, i., 67, 84, 92; Columbians, i., 168, 172,
191-2, 196; Californians, i., 389, 411; New Mexicans, i., 500,
548, 565, 584; Mexicans, i., 632-3, 662-3; ii., 140, 256-7,
260, 272, 276, 286, 391, 421-4, 432, 446, 603, 607, 612, 617;
Central Americans, i., 702-3, 729-33, 740, 769, 772, 777; ii.,
635, 641, 647, 655, 666-70, 684, 694, 711, 799.
Priapus, Phallic-worship, iii., 501.
Priests, origin of, iii., 21-2, 31; New Mexicans, iii., 173;
Mexicans, ii., 142-3, 200-15, 243, 303, 307, 334, 401,
425, 428, 469, 608; iii., 431-8, 446-7; v., 500-1; Central
Americans, i., 716, 734, 740; ii., 647-8, 663, 682-4, 688-710,
727-30, 745, 769, 800; iii., 472-3, 489-90, 495-6, 499.
Priestesses, Mexicans, ii., 204-6, 245; iii., 435-6.
Priest Rapids, i., 253, 312, 316, 321.
Primoski, tribe of Koniagas, i., 69-87; location, i., 140.
Prince of Wales Archipelago, i., 143, 155, 292; iii., 604.
Princetown, California, antiq., iv., 707.
Prince William Sound, i., 70, 73, 79, 139, 149; iii., 588.
Prisoners, see Captives.
Privileges, ii., 168, 191, 221-2, 403-4.
Processions, ii., 144, 181-2, 255, 316-18, 322, 335-7, 350, 428,
432, 607-8, 617-21, 668, 689, 700, 710; iii., 297-9.
Property, Hyperboreans, i., 63-4, 128; Columbians, i., 167,
173, 184, 191-2, 201, 205-6, 217, 239, 247, 272-3, 288-9;
Californians, i., 347, 385, 396, 409, 439-40; New Mexicans, i.,
505-6, 522-3, 544-5, 555, 564, 569; Mexicans, i., 631, 640-1,
658-9, 664; ii., 263-4, 462-3, 611; iii., 241, 430-2; Central
Americans, i., 699-700, 725-6, 744, 768, 780-3; ii., 652-3,
659-60, 735-6, 798-801.
Prophecies, v., 466-9, 499, 526, 598-9, 633.
Prophets, see Sorcerers.
Proqueu, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
453.
Prostitution, i., 168-9, 195-7, 218, 278, 351, 436-7, 514-15,
549, 565-6, 585-6, 635, 773; ii., 266, 676.
Pructaca, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
453.
Pruristac, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
453.
Pshwanwappams (Pshawanwappam), Inland Columbian tribe, i.,
250-91; location, i., 320.
Ptolmes, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
456.
Puallipawmish (Pualliss), tribe of Sound Indians, i., 208-22;
location, i., 301.
Pualliss River, i., 301.
Puberty, i., 197, 351, 392, 414-15, 511, 548, 584, 772.
Pubugna, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 460.
Pucro River, i., 796.
Puebla, nations described, i., 617-44; ii., 133-629; special
mention, i., 620, 625, 671, 674-5; ii., 215; lang., iii., 737,
749; antiq., iv., 465-78; hist., v., 196-7, 527, 621.
Pueblito, Querétaro, antiq., iv., 549-50.
Pueblo Arroyo, New Mexico, antiq., iv., 662.
Pueblo Bonito, New Mexico, antiq., iv., 655-62.
Pueblo Chettro Kettle, New Mexico, antiq., iv., 655-62.
Pueblo Creek, i., 595; Arizona, antiq., iv., 637.
Pueblo de los Reyes, Tlascala, antiq., iv., 479.
Pueblo Hungo Pavie, New Mexico, antiq., iv., 655-62.
Pueblo Peñasco Blanco, New Mexico, antiq., iv., 653-62.
Pueblo Pintado, New Mexico, antiq., iv., 653-62.
Pueblos, one of the four families into which the New Mexicans
are divided; manners and customs of all its nations and tribes
described together, i., 526-56; physique, i., 529-30; dress,
i., 530-3; dwellings, i., 533-8; food, i., 538-40; personal
habits, i., 540; weapons and war, i., 541-3; implements and
manufactures, i., 543-5; art, i., 545-6; government, i.,
546-7; marriage and women, i., 547-9; amusements, i., 549-53;
miscellaneous customs, i., 553-4; medicine and burial, i.,
554-5; character, i., 555-6; myth., iii., 80-3, 114, 135-6,
171-5, 527-8; lang., iii., 568, 671-4, 680-3; antiq., iv.,
615-86; location of tribes, i., 526-9, 599-603; hist., v.,
537-8.
Pueblos, tribe of Pueblo family, i., 526-56; location, i., 526;
special mention, i., 529-32, 534-48, 550-1, 553-6; myth., iii.,
80-3, 114, 171-4, 527-8; lang., iii., 568, 671-3, 680-3.
Pueblo Una Vida, New Mexico, antiq., iv., 662.
Pueblo Viejo, iv., 73, name for Tenampua.
Pueblo Viejo, Vera Cruz, antiq., iv., 443-4, 451.
Pueblo Weje-gi, New Mexico, antiq., iv., 661.
Puente de los Bergantines, Mexico, antiq., iv., 528.
Puente Nacional, Vera Cruz, antiq., iv., 437-8.
Pugallipamish, i., 301, see Puyallupamish.
Pugallipi, i., 301, see Puyallup.
Puget Sound, i., 151, 208, 212, 214, 217, 219, 221-2, 298, 301;
lang., iii., 615.
Puget's Island, i., 307.
Puiáles, tribe of Sound Indians, i., 208-22; location, i., 299.
Puichon, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
453.
Puip, a medicinal plant, i., 522.
Pujuni, i., 450, see Bushumnes.
Pulpones (Pulpenes), Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401;
location, i., 363, 452.
Pulque, Mexican drink, i., 517, 636, 706; ii., 310, 359, 724;
iii., 348, 408-10; v., 207-8.
Pumpkin, see Calabash.
Punishment, see Government and Children.
Punta Arenas, locality, Darien, i., 797.
Punta Gorda, locality, Honduras, i., 793, 795.
Puplems, Acagchemem sorcerers, iii., 166.
Purísima, California, antiq., iv., 695.
Purísima Concepcion de Arnedo, locality, Nuevo Leon, i., 673;
lang., iii., 742.
Purmo, Lower California, antiq., iv., 602.
Puruai Mountain, i., 600.
Purutabui, Pericui god, iii., 84.
Purutea, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
453.
Pushunes, i., 450, see Bushumnes.
Putos Creek, i., 452.
Puyacantes, Comanche sorcerers, iii., 170.
Puyallupamish (Pugallipamish, Puyyallapamish), tribe of Sound
Indians, i., 208-22; location, i., 299, 301.
Puyallup (Pugallipi, Puyallop) River, i., 301.
Puycone, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
453.
Puzlumne, Central California, lang., iii., 649-50.
Py Edes, i., 468, see Pi Edes.
Pyramid Lake, i., 466.
Pyramids, ii., 555, 576, 579, 588-9, 794; antiq., iv., 26, 73-6,
82-9, 110-31, 169-71, 192-718 passim; v., 55-59, 200, 203.
Pytogius, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
455.
Pyutes, i., 466, see Pi Utes.
Q
Qakbatzulu, mountain, Guatemala, v., 569.
Qat, Quiché-Cakchiquel day, ii., 767.
Qatic, Cakchiquel month, ii., 766.
Qicinzigua, Pueblo village, i., 600.
Qoacul, Nihaïb prince, v., 552, 566.
Qoacutec, Nihaïb prince, v., 552, 566-7.
Qoahau, Quiché prince, v., 552, 567.
Qocaib, Quiché ruler, v., 552, 557, 559.
Qocamel, Ahau Quiché prince, v., 567.
Qocavib, Quiché ruler, v., 552, 557-60, 566, 571, 578.
Qochahuh, Nihaïb prince, v., 567.
Qocozom, Ahau Quiché prince, v., 567.
Qohaïl, locality, Guatemala, v., 583.
Qotbalcan, Cakchiquel king, v., 583-4.
Qotzibaha, Quiché prince, v., 567.
Qoxbaholam, Agaab town, v., 558.
Qu, iii., 192, see Cu.
Quaayayp, Pericúi god, iii., 169.
Quachic (Quagchil), Nahua title, ii., 403.
Quachictin, Nahua title, ii., 404.
Quachictli, Nahua royal decoration, ii., 404.
Quackenamish (Quáks'namish), tribe of Sound Indians, i., 208-22;
location, i., 301.
Quackolls (Cogwells, Coquilths, Quacolth, Qualquilths, Quaquidts,
Quaquiolts, Quawguults, Queehaquacoll, Queehavuacolt,
Quoquoulths), tribe of Nootkas, i., 174-208; location, i.,
175-6, 295-8; special mention, i., 177, 180; lang., iii., 608.
Quacktoe (Quactoe), tribe of Nootkas, i., 174-208; location, i.,
296.
Quacott, name for Haidah family, i., 292.
Quagchil, ii., 403, see Quachic.
Quahootze, Nahua god, iii., 151.
Quahtomahs, tribe of Chinooks, i., 222-50; location, i., 308.
Quahuacan, a Mexican chief, v., 347.
Quahuatlapal, locality, Mexico, v., 314.
Quahuitlehua (Quavitleloa), Nahua month, ii., 305, 509; iii.,
419.
Quahuitl-Icacan, station, Aztec migration, v., 323.
Quahuitonal, Culhua King, v., 330.
Quahunahuàc, i., 676, see Cuernavaca.
Quail, i., 331; ii., 310, 314, 322, 393; iii., 298, 395, 426,
437.
Quainu, tribe of Nootkas, i., 174-208; location, i., 295.
Quakars, tribe of Nootkas, i., 174-208; location, i., 296.
Quako, Inland Columbian tribes, food, i., 265.
Quáks'namish, i., 301, see Quackenamish.
Qualquilths, i., 296, see Quackolls.
Quama, Lower Californian sorcerer, i., 567.
Quamash, i., 265, see Camass.
Quanes, tribe of Nootkas, i., 174-208; location, i., 296.
Quanez, a Tlascaltec ruler, v., 491-8.
Quaoar, Los Angeles County tribes' god, iii., 84; v., 19.
Quaochpanme, name for Tarascos, ii., 371.
Quapilollan, a south Mexican province, v., 441.
Quaquacuiltin, Nahua order of priests, ii., 203; iii., 336.
Quaquauhnochtzin, Mexican ambassadors, ii., 421.
Quaquauhpitzahuac, Tepanec prince, and king of Tlatelulco, v.,
358, 360-4.
Quaquidts, i., 296, see Quackolls.
Quaquiolts, i., 296, see Quackolls.
Quarra, New Mexico, antiq., iv., 663.
Quarries, i., 165; ii., 480; antiq., iv., 414, 676.
Quathlapotles, i., 306, see Cathlapootles.
Quatomahs, North Californian tribe, i., 326-61; location, i.,
443.
Quatsinos (Quatsinu), tribe of Nootkas, i., 174-208; location,
i., 296; special mention, i., 180.
Quatsinos Sound, i., 296.
Quattamyas, tribe of Chinooks, i., 222-50; location, i., 308.
Quauhcalco, Nahua jail, ii., 453.
Quauhchinanco, town, Mexico, ii., 441; v., 298, 489.
Quauhiacatl, Nahua title, ii., 402.
Quauhnahuac, iv., 482, see Cuernavaca.
Quauhnelhuatlan, province of Guatemala, v., 460.
Quauhnexatolli, gruel of maize, ii., 355.
Quauhnochtli, (Acoahunotl, Quauhnuchtli), Nahua judge, ii., 436.
Quauhpanco, a South Mexican province, v., 441.
Quauhquelchula, Puebla, antiq., iv., 468; hist., v., 464, 490,
495, 504.
Quauhquetzal, lord of Tenamitec, v., 349.
Quauhtecan, town, Puebla, v., 495.
Quauhtemalan, name for Tecpan Guatemala, v., 349, 578.
Quauhtenanco, city, Oajaca, v., 443-6.
Quauhtepec, station, Aztec migration, v., 324, 412.
Quauhtepetl, place of sacrifice, iii., 333.
Quauhtepetla, Chichimec king, v., 220.
Quauhtetl, stone eagle, Mexican, antiq., iv., 482.
Quauhtexpetlatl, Toltec king, v., 256; Culhua prince, v., 304-5.
Quauhtin, Nahua title, ii., 403.
Quauhtinchan, city, Puebla, v., 420, 495.
Quauhtitenco, a Toltec town, Mexico, v., 297, 299.
Quauhtitlan, province and city, Mexico, ii., 337; iii., 252; v.,
242, 249, 324, 355, 369, 371, 392, 404-5.
Quauhtla, Acolhua chief, v., 317; city, Vera Cruz, v., 441.
Quautlapal, a Chichimec chief, v., 293.
Quauhtlaqualli, corn cake, ii., 355.
Quauhtlatohuatzin, king of Tlatelulco, v., 390.
Quauhtlequetzqui, an Aztec priest, v., 329, 331, 339.
Quauhtli, Nahua money, ii., 382; day, ii., 512, 516-17; Toltec
noble, v., 276, 283-4.
Quauhtlix, Toltec king, v., 257, 331.
Quauhtliztac, name for Totomalotecuhtli, v., 490.
Quauhtochco, ii., 417; iv., 445; see Huatusco.
Quauhtonal, Chichimec king, v., 220, 256.
Quauhtzintecuhtli, Teo-Chichimec chief, v., 490.
Quauhxicalco, place of cremation, ii., 585, 616, 619.
Quauhxilotzin, governor of Iztapalocan, v., 373.
Quauhyacac, city, Mexico, v., 296.
Quaulixicalcalico, Nahua altar, iii., 404.
Quauyetl, wild tobacco, ii., 287.
Quavitleloa, iii., 420, see Quahuitlehua.
Quawguult, i., 176, see Quackoll.
Quawteaht, Aht god, iii., 96-7, 152, 521.
Quebi, Isthmian title, i., 770.
Quecchi, Guatemalan dialect, iii., 760.
Quecholac, town, Oajaca, i., 679.
Quecholli, Nahua month and calendar sign, ii., 335-7, 351, 511,
515, 618; iii., 404-5.
Quechutl, a Mexican bird, iii., 374.
Quedexeños, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 612.
Queeahs, tribe of Haidahs, i., 155-74; location, i., 292.
Queehanicultas, tribe of Nootkas, i., 174-208; location, i., 298.
Queehaquacoll (Queehavuacolt), i., 295, see Quackoll.
Queen Charlotte Island, i., 151, 155, 158-9, 164-5, 170-4, 292,
295; lang., iii., 579, 604.
Queets, tribe of Sound Indians, i., 208-22; location, i., 303.
Quej (Qeh, Queh), ii., 758, see Ceh.
Quejupa, village, Sinaloa, i., 614.
Quelaptonlilts, tribe of Chinooks, i., 222-50; location, i., 305.
Quelenes, Maya nation, i., 644-70; ii., 630-803; location, i.,
645, 682; ii., 120-1; special mention, i., 648, 662; lang.,
iii., 761; hist., v., 565, 593, 603-4.
Queletzu, Central American bird, iii., 51.
Quema, Nihaib prince, v., 567.
Quemada, Zacatecas, antiq., iv., 578-92; v., 59; hist., v., 222.
Quemelentus, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location,
i., 453.
Quemeyá, Pima dialect, iii., 685.
Quenech, Quiché tribal name, v., 21, 546.
Queniult (Quinaielt) River, i., 303.
Queniults (Quenaielts, Quinaielt, Quinaik, Quinailee, Quinaitle,
Quiniults, Quinults), tribe of Sound Indians, i., 208-22;
location, i., 303; special mention, i., 210-14, 216, 220.
Queno, town, Darien, i., 795.
Quepanos, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 611.
Quepopan, ii., 563, name for Tlaquechiuhcan.
Quequetzalcohua, priests of Quetzalcoatl, iii., 259.
Querechos, tribe of Apaches, i., 473-526; special mention, i.,
493-5, 506, 508, 518.
Quereqto, locality, Michoacan, v., 512.
Queres, iii., 682, see Keres.
Querétaro, tribes described, i., 617-44; location, i., 672-4;
lang., iii., 737; antiq., iv., 549-53.
Quernauaca, i., 676, see Cuernavaca.
Querqueltins, tribe of Chinooks, i., 222-50; location, i., 305.
Quesaltenango, i., 788, see Quezaltenango.
Quet, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i., 453.
Quetahtores, i., 592, see Napuat.
Quetzal, a Mexican bird, ii., 326, 488-9, 635; Toltec king, v.,
220, 257; see also Cuetzal.
Quetzalacxoyatl, Chichimec prince, v., 475.
Quetzalalpitoai, Nahua ornament, ii., 376.
Quetzalapan, city, Tamaulipas, v., 472.
Quetzalatecuhtli (Quetzalteuhtli), lord of Xochimilco, v., 349.
Quetzalatl River, v., 243, name for Montezuma River.
Quetzalcoatl (Quetzaalcoatl, Quetzacoatl), Nahua god, i., 554;
ii., 202, 314, 324, 397, 584-5, 589, 706-8; iii., 57, 60-1,
110, 135, 195, 240-3, 248-87, 449-56, 484; v., 23-7, 87-8, 122,
188, 193-4, 197, 200-2, 215, 223, 226, 254-64, 268, 479-80,
484, 495, 527-8, 582, 606, 622.
Quetzalcoatl, Acxitl, king of Tollan, v., 270-86, 558, 611-12,
619-21; see also Acxitl and Topiltzin Acxitl.
Quetzalcoatl Chalchiuitl, v., 254, see Ceacatl Quetzalcoatl.
Quetzalcuitlapillan, province, South Mexico, v., 441.
Quetzallacxoyatl, Toltec king, v., 263, 266.
Quetzalpopoca, Toltec prince, v., 297.
Quetzaltehueyac, Chichimec-Toltec chief, v., 485.
Quetzaltehuyacixcotl, Teo-Chichimec chief, v., 490.
Quezaltenango (Quesaltenango), city, Guatemala, i., 787; antiq.,
iv., 124; hist., v., 555, 577, 591.
Quezaltepec, town, Oajaca, i., 680; hist., v., 229, 412, 472.
Quetzalxiuhtli, Teo-Chichimec chief, v., 490.
Quetzalxochitzin, v., 269, name for Xochitl.
Quiahanles, tribe of Haidahs, i., 155-74; location, i., 292.
Quiahtlale, ii., 425, see Yauhtlalli.
Quiahuitl, Nahua day, ii., 512, 516-17.
Quiahuiztlan, a quarter of Tlascala city, ii., 412; v., 497, 503.
Quianna, Pueblo village and tribe, i., 526-56; location, i., 601.
Quiarlpi, i., 252, 261-2, 315, see Chaudières.
Quiateot, Nicaragua god, iii., 120, 492.
Quiauhteucyòhua, Nahua calendar sign and god, ii., 516.
Quibaha, Guatemalan tribe, v., 546.
Quicab I. (Kicab), Quiché king, v., 566, 583-94.
Quicab II. (Kicab), Quiché king, v., 594-5, 598.
Quicab III. (Kicab), Quiché king, v., 566, 595.
Quicab IV. (Kicab), Quiché king, v., 566, 595.
Quicab Tanub (Kicab Tanub), Quiché king, v., 566, 595, 599.
Quicamopa, Yuma dialect, iii., 684.
Quichemel, Mexican female dress, i., 620.
Quichés (Utletecas), Maya nation, i., 686-711; ii., 630-803;
location and name, i., 687, 788; ii., 121, 130; v., 164, 556,
565; special mention, i., 691, 700, 703, 707, 710; ii., 632,
637-44, 687-9, 732, 742-4, 762, 766-7, 789, 796-802; myth.,
iii., 44-54, 474-90, 542; v., 20; lang., iii., 760-2, 767-73;
hist., v., 21-2, 157-88, 540-602, 619, 626, 634.
Quicksilver, ii., 474; iv., 794.
Quicksutinut (Quicksulinut), tribe of Nootkas, i., 174-208;
location, i., 295.
Quiechapa, locality, Oajaca, i., 679, 681; v., 532.
Quieetsos, tribe of Sound Indians, i., 208-22; location, i., 303.
Quieh, Quiché-Cakchiquel day, ii., 767.
Quierecuaro, locality, Michoacan, v., 512.
Quigyamas, tribe of Apaches, i., 473-526; location, i., 598.
Quihuimas, iii., 685, see Quiquimas.
Quilapan, Oajaca, antiq., iv., 376.
Quilaztli, ii., 269; iii., 363, see Cioacoatl.
Quilleliutes (Quillehutes), tribe of Sound Indians, i., 208-22;
location, i., 303; special mention, i., 222.
Quillequeoquas, tribe of Chinooks, i., 222-50; location, i., 305.
Quimichtin, Nahua spies, ii., 424.
Quimis, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 611.
Quinaielt (Quinaik, Quinailee, Quinaitle), i., 303, see Queniult.
Quinames (Quinametin), Central Mexican tribe, i., 617-44;
location, i., 670-1; hist., v., 197-200, 483.
Quinantzin, Chichimec king, v., 315-20, 331-47.
Quinayat, i., 303, see Kwenaiwitl.
Quinehuayan, Chicomoztoc (Oztotl), station, Aztec migration, v.,
323-5.
Quinicuanes, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 613.
Quinnecharts (Quinnechants), tribe of Sound Indians, i., 208-22;
location, i., 303.
Quinults, i., 303, see Queniults.
Quiotepec, Oajaca, antiq., iv., 418-21.
Quiquimas (Quihuimas), tribe of Pueblos, i., 526-56; lang., iii.,
685.
Quires (Querix), tribe of Pueblos, i., 526-56; location, i., 527;
special mention, i., 544.
Quirigua, Guatemala, antiq., iv., 108-15.
Quirogles (Quiroles, Quirotes), Central Californian tribe, i.,
361-401; location, i., 363, 453; lang., iii., 652.
Quitlahuacas, v., 308, see Cuitlatecs.
Quitlepanquetzin, Nahua burial ceremony, ii., 617.
Quitonaltia, offerings to the dead, ii., 612.
Quitzaenés, tribe of Apaches, i., 473-526; location, i., 592.
Quitzetzelohua, name for Napatecutli, iii., 417.
Quivers, i., 341, 431, 495, 541, 578, 627, 696; ii., 620.
Quiviras, tribe of Pueblos, i., 526-56; location, i., 527;
antiq., iv., 663, 672.
Quixté, Chiapas, antiq., iv., 354.
Quiyahuitztlan Anáhuac, station, Toltec migration, v., 213.
Quiyauhtzin, lord of Huexotla, v., 349.
Quíyechapa, Oajaca, antiq., iv., 375.
Quiyecolani, fort, Oajaca, v., 532.
Quiyecolani Mountains, i., 790.
Qulaha, city, Guatemala, i., 787.
Quoquoulth, i., 175, see Quackoll.
Quoratem River, i., 446.
Qwantlums, i., 209, see Kwantlums.
R
Rabbits, i., 229, 330, 403, 423-4, 427-30, 488, 538, 578, 625;
ii., 367, 720-1, 736-7; iii., 129.
Rabinal, town, Guatemala, i., 788; ii., 640-1; antiq., iv.,
130-1; hist., v., 546-9, 553-4, 556, 558, 561, 563, 571, 587,
591, 593.
Raccoon, Navajo myth., iii., 81.
Races, Human Race distinctions, etc., i., 12-26, 36, 87-8; iv.,
10-13.
Racing, i., 280, 552-3, 586; ii., 296-7, 399.
Rafts, see Boats.
Rahamun, Cakchiquel king, v., 590.
Rahpop-Ahih, Quiché title, v., 589.
Rahtzalam-Achih, Quiché title, v., 589.
Rahum (Raún), village, Sonora, i., 608.
Raiment, see Dress.
Rainbow, Peruvian myth., v., 16-17.
Rakes, for fishing, i., 104, 162, 186, 212, 233.
Ramas, tribe of Mosquitos, i., 711-47; location, i., 713, 793-4;
special mention, i., 714, 746; lang., iii., 783.
Ranas, Querétaro, antiq., iv., 550-1.
Ranchería, California collection of huts, i., 373.
Ranchería Valley, i., 362, 449.
Ranchito de Lugo, village, South California, i., 460.
Rancho del Chino, village, South California, i., 460.
Rancho de los Felis, village, South California, i., 460.
Rancho de las Piedras, Tamaulipas, antiq., iv., 595.
Rancho de los Verdugas, village, South California, i., 460.
Rancho de los Ybarras, village, South California, i., 460.
Randolph County, Mississippi Valley, antiq., iv., 762-3.
Rank, see Government.
Rape, punishment of, i., 660, 771; ii., 201, 466, 656, 659,
675-7.
Rat Indians, tribe of Thlinkeets, i., 96-114; location, i., 143.
Rat Island, i., 87, 142.
Rat River, lang., iii., 586.
Rats, as food, i., 374, 405, 427-30, 488, 561, 576, 625.
Rattles, i., 91, 705; ii., 293, 334, 646, 713, 737; iii., 385,
411.
Rattlesnake, i., 343; iii., 80.
Raún, i., 608, see Rahum.
Raven, i., 109; iii., 102-104.
Reckoning, see Arithmetic.
Records, historical, etc., ii., 523-33; v., 93-5, 103-5, 140-2,
160-5.
Red-Cap's Bar, locality, North California, i., 445.
Red Creek Cañon, Utah, antiq., iv., 715-17.
Red-hand, paintings, antiq., iv., 37-8, 164, 209, 212, 251, 257.
Red-Knives, tribe of Tinneh, i., 114-37; location, i., 144-5;
special mention, i., 121.
Red Lake, i., 470.
Red River, i., 594.
Redwood Creek, i., 329, 446; lang., iii., 643.
Redwood Valley, i., 362, 448.
Reeds, various uses, Hyperboreans, i., 74, 90; Columbians,
i., 261; Californians, i., 336, 341, 345, 368-9, 372, 377-8,
381-4, 393, 404, 406, 408, 428; New Mexicans, i., 494-5, 505,
533, 541, 558-63, 575-6, 579-83; Mexicans, i., 624, 627; ii.,
259, 300, 398, 406, 484, 573; iii., 334-5, 360, 435; Central
Americans, i., 692, 699, 722, 724, 754-6, 761, 774; ii., 742-3,
784-5.
Reese River, i., 462.
Refugio Playa, locality, South California, i., 459.
Reindeer, i., 118, 128-9.
Rekquas, North Californian tribe, i., 326-61; location, i., 444.
Relics, of Camaxtli, v., 497; see also Antiquities.
Religion, see Mythology.
Remedios, village, Sonora, i., 601.
Reno, town, Nevada, i., 469.
Reptiles, i., 373-5, 379, 405, 417, 419, 428, 430, 539, 560-1,
568, 576-7, 625, 758-9; ii., 234, 315, 356, 721.
Reservoirs, i., 539; ii., 565, 575; antiq., iv., 198, 201, 212,
221, 245, 249, 252-3, 260, 344, 419, 429-31, 460, 526-9, 589,
633, 638-70, 676, 798.
Resguardo, fortress at Utatlan, ii., 789; iv., 125, 128; v., 578.
Resin, i., 419, 562, 697; ii., 408; iii., 392.
Resurrection, belief in, iii., 514, 530-31; v., 86.
Revolution, see War.
Rewards, military, i., 764-5; ii., 400-3.
Reynosa, village, Tamaulipas, i., 613.
Rheumatism, i., 86, 204-5, 287, 354, 439, 521, 667, 709, 742;
ii., 795.
Ribbon-dance, Nahuas, i., 586; ii., 289-90.
Riddles, Nahua amusements, ii., 286.
Rincon, locality, South California, i., 459.
Rinconado, Vera Cruz, antiq., iv., 436.
Rincons, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
449.
Rings, i., 211; ii., 480, 732, 750; antiq., iv., 173, 177, 230-1,
256, 273.
Ringworm, cure for, i., 395.
Rio Alamo, i., 613.
Rio Alvarado, v., 473.
Rio de las Animas, i., 470.
Rio de la Antigua, Vera Cruz, antiq., iv., 437.
Rio Atoyac, i., 670; v., 197.
Rio Azul, i., 598; lang., iii., 684.
Rio Bravo del Norte, i., 592, see Rio Grande del Norte.
Rio Catasahà, Chiapas, antiq., iv., 344.
Rio Cazones (San Marcos), i., 675.
Rio Chachalacas, i., 675.
Rio Chama, i., 596.
Rio Champoton, Yucatan, antiq., iv., 263, 265.
Rio Charmer, i., 470.
Rio Chiquinguare, Honduras, antiq., iv., 72.
Rio Coahuayana, i., 676.
Rio Conchos, i., 610.
Rio del Corte, i., 682.
Rio Frio, i., 794-5.
Rio del Fuerte, i., 602, 607-9.
Rio Grande, i., 599-600, 672; iii., 594.
Rio Grande de Espeleta, i., 601.
Rio Grande (Bravo) del Norte, i., 526-7, 592-5; New Mexico,
antiq., iv., 662-74.
Rio Hacha, i., 796.
Rio Hassayampa, i., 475.
Rio Humace, i., 614.
Rio Jaïna, Yucatan, antiq., iv., 262.
Rio Jamapa, Vera Cruz, antiq., iv., 434.
Rio Lagartos, Yucatan, antiq., iv., 261.
Rio Lempa, i., 702.
Rio Mancos, i., 470.
Rio Marañon, Peru, antiq., iv., 804.
Rio Moche, Peru, antiq., iv., 799-800.
Rio de Montezuma, Mexico, antiq., iv., 549.
Rio Nayarit, i., 672; lang., iii., 719.
Rio Nazas, i., 614.
Rio Nexapa, lang., iii., 756.
Rio del Norte, see Rio Grande del Norte.
Rio Nueces, i., 611.
Rio de los Osos (Rio Ose), i., 595; iii., 595.
Rio Pantla, i., 676.
Rio Pánuco, boundary Mexican Empire, v., 473.
Rio del Partido, iv., 579, see Rio de Villanueva.
Rio de la Pasion, i., 700, 786.
Rio Paxa, i., 790.
Rio Pecos, i., 591, 594-5; iii., 593.
Rio Piaztla, i., 614.
Rio Picuris, i., 599.
Rio de la Plata, i., 470.
Rio Puerco, i., 595-6, 600; antiq., iv., 644, 672.
Rio Sabinas, i., 612.
Rio Salado (Salinas), iii., 684; antiq., iv., 634-5.
Rio Salinas, see Rio Salado.
Rio San Antonio, i., 611.
Rio de San Cosme, iv., 733.
Rio San Juan, iii., 782-3.
Rio San Marcos, i., 675, see Rio Cazones.
Rio San Pedro, i., 602.
Rio Secos, iii., 783.
Rio Sinaloa, i., 609; iii., 715.
Rio Suchil, i., 614.
Rio Tecomava, Oajaca, antiq., iv., 421.
Rio Tinto, i., 792.
Rio Tuerco, iii., 595.
Rio Ulua, i., 792.
Rio de los Ures, i., 602.
Rio Verde, i., 595; lang., iii., 684; antiq., iv., 634.
Rio de Villanueva (del Partido), antiq., iv., 579.
Rio Virgen, i., 598.
Rio Xoxo, antiq., iv., 379.
Rio Yaqui, i., 605.
Rio Zent, i., 795.
Rio Zuaque, i., 608.
Rio Zuñi, antiq., iv., 644-7.
Rita, New Mexico, antiq., iv., 663.
River Canal, i., 294.
Rjätscheschnojes, tribe of Aleuts, i., 87-94; location, i., 141.
Roads, ii., 387, 561-2, 575-6, 736, 790-1; antiq., iv., 24,
265-7, 374, 484, 526, 532, 541, 581-91, 690-1, 794-5.
Roatan Island, i., 790, 793; antiq., iv., 70.
Robesco, village, Sonora, i., 607.
Robles, Don Pedro de, Nihaib prince, v., 567.
Rocking-stones, Vera Cruz, antiq., iv., 434.
Rockland, California, antiq., iv., 706.
Rock-sculpture, see Hieroglyphics.
Rocky Mountain Indians, tribe of Tinneh, i., 114-37; location,
i., 145; special mention, i., 126-7; lang., iii., 619.
Rocky Mountains, i., 38, 114, 145-6, 151-3, 252, 311-12, 322,
461.
Rogue River, i., 222, 326, 327, 442-3.
Rogue River Indians (Lototen, Tootooton, Tototen, Tototin,
Tototutna, Totutime, Totutune, Toutouni, Tutoten, Tutunahs,
Tututamy), North Californian tribe, i., 326-61; location, i.,
327, 443; special mention, i., 328, 332, 338, 341, 344, 346,
355, 361.
Roil-roil-pam, name of Kliketat country, i., 254, 321.
Rojas, Don Juan de, Quiché king, v., 566.
Rollers, ii., 329, 354, 482-3, 557; iii., 385.
Romanons (Romanans), Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401;
location, i., 363, 453.
Romans, American origin traces, v., 123.
Roofs, i., 74, 89, 102, 161, 211, 334-5, 372, 404, 486-7, 535,
537, 560, 575, 624, 651-2, 692-3, 718, 755-6; ii., 161, 557,
571-4, 784-6; antiq., iv., 257, 269, 303, 325-6, 331, 339-403,
585-6, 666-7.
Roots, various uses, i., 57, 79, 90-1, 101, 103, 123, 130, 159,
166, 180, 187, 204, 212-14, 233-6, 261, 264-7, 340, 345, 354,
373-4, 406, 488, 491, 521, 560, 576, 589, 654, 694, 709, 721,
759, 762; ii., 365, 599, 722, 724, 768.
Rope, i., 58, 107, 185-6, 544, 693, 724; ii., 484, 752; iii.,
240.
Roquas River, i., 444.
Rosario, Guatemala, antiq., iv., 121.
Round Valley, i., 447, 451; lang., ii., 643, 648.
Rox Tzih, Quiché month, ii., 766.
Ruby Valley, i., 462.
Ru Cab Mam, Cakchiquel month, ii., 766.
Ru Cab Pach, Cakchiquel month, ii., 766.
Ru Cab Togic, Cakchiquel month, ii., 766.
Rucab Tumuzuz, Cakchiquel month, ii., 766.
Ruiatcot, Nicaragua god, iii., 492.
Rumal-Ahaus, Zutugil king, v., 585-6.
Rumsens (Runsiens), Central Californian tribe, i., 363-401;
location, i., 363, 454; special mention, i., 386, 388-9, 396;
lang., iii., 653-4.
Rushes, various uses, i., 182, 190-1, 211, 231, 236-7, 260,
270-1; see Reeds.
Russian River, i., 362, 397-8, 448; lang., ii., 647-8, 654.
S
Saalis, i., 312, see Salish.
Saaptins, i., 462, see Snakes.
Sabacché, Yucatan, antiq., iv., 211-12; v., 632.
Sabaibos, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 572,
614; lang., iii., 718.
Sabaism, iii., 112-13, 144, 171, 496-8.
Sacaa, Miztec priest, ii., 208.
Sacacal, Yucatan, antiq., iv., 219.
Sacatepeques, province, Guatemala, i., 788; hist., v., 577,
594-7.
Sacaton, locality, Arizona, i., 602.
Sacbé, Yucatan, antiq., iv., 200, 267.
Sachal Lake, i., 303.
Sachals, tribe of Sound Indians, i., 208-22; location, i., 303.
Sachets, i., 299, see Skagits.
Sa-chincos, name applied to Teets, i., 175.
Sachuen, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
454.
Sacks, see Bags.
Saco, Isthmian title, i., 770.
Sacramento River, i., 362, 367, 384, 450, 599; iii., 88.
Sacramento Valley, i., 365, 368-70, 381, 386, 388, 398, 450, 597;
lang., iii., 649.
Sacred Enclosures, Mississippi Valley, antiq., iv., 757-62.
Sacrificatorio, at Utatlan, Guatemala, antiq., iv., 126.
Sacrifice, Hyperboreans, i., 86, 108; Columbians, i., 288;
Californians, i., 387-8; New Mexicans, iii., 178-80; Mexicans,
i., 656, 665-6; ii., 147, 304-41, 420, 428-32, 443, 457, 479,
605; iii., 61, 110-11, 265-460 passim; v., 85-8, 258; Central
Americans, i., 708, 723, 740, 781-3; ii., 668, 678-9, 687-710,
745-7, 796-800; iii., 52, 466-98; iv., 199; v., 560, 572;
origin of, iii., 30-1; v., 572; see also Human-sacrifice.
Sacrificial stone, ii., 582-3, 707; iii., 293-4, 488; iv.,
509-11, 541; v., 471.
Sacrificios Island, Vera Cruz, antiq., iv., 427-8.
Sacsiol, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 459.
Sacspili, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 458.
Sadanes, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
453.
Saddles, i., 270-1, 439, 501, 726.
Saelies (Saeliss), i., 311-13, see Salish.
Sagayayumnes (Sagayacumnes), Central Californian tribe, i.,
361-401; location, i., 450; lang., iii., 649.
Sagin, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i., 454.
Sagunte, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
453.
Sahaptins (Shahaptans, Shawhaaptens), one of the nine families
into which the Columbians are divided, belonging to the Inland
families; manners and customs of all its nations and tribes
described together, i., 253-91; physique, i., 255; dress,
i., 256; dwellings, i., 259; war, i., 269; boats, i., 271;
implements and property, i., 271-3; Slavery, i., 276; women,
i., 278; medicine, i., 285; character, i., 290; myth., iii.,
94-5; lang., iii., 620-6; location of tribes, i., 152, 253-4,
316-21.
Sahéhwamish, i., 301, see Sawamish.
Sahmamish, tribe of Sound Indians, i., 208-22; location, i., 300.
Sahuaripa, village, Sonora, i., 606.
Sahuaripas, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 606;
lang., iii., 699.
Sails, i., 166, 658, 725; ii., 397-8, 739.
St Cyprian River, v., 66.
St Ignatius Mission, i., 313.
St John's River, i., 794.
St Joseph's River, i., 314.
St Lawrence Island, i., 59; lang., iii., 576.
St Mary's River, i., 313.
St Michael Island, i., 141.
St Thomas, in America, v., 25-6.
Saiustklas (Saiustkas, Saliutlas, Sayonstlas, Sayouslas,
Sinselaws, Suislaws), tribe of Chinooks, i., 222-50; location,
i., 308; special mention, i., 250.
Sajcay, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 459.
Sakhones, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
455; lang., iii., 653.
Sakisimmes, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
450.
Saklans, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
453.
Sakuméhu, tribe of Sound Indians, i., 208-22; location, i., 300.
Salachi, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 459.
Salama, Guatemala, antiq., iv., 130-1.
Salan Pomas, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location,
i., 448.
Salem, Mississippi Valley, antiq., iv., 759.
Salinas River, i., 455, 595-6, 598.
Salineros, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 605;
special mention, i., 576-8.
Salish (Saalis, Saelies, Saeliss, Selish), one of the nine
families into which the Columbians are divided, belonging to
the Inland families; manners and customs of all its nations
and tribes described together, i., 252-91; physique, i., 254-6;
dress, i., 256-7; dwellings, i., 261; food, i., 264; property
and art, i., 273-4; government, i., 276; marriage and children,
i., 276-9; myth., iii., 97-8, 154-5, 519; lang., iii., 615-20;
location, i., 252-3, 312-16.
Salish (Flatheads), Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91; location,
i., 252, 313; special mention, i., 195, 228, 252, 256, 258,
260, 264-5, 267-73, 275-9, 284, 287-91; myth., iii., 130, 520.
Saliutlas, i., 308; see Saiustklas.
Salmon, i., 55, 76, 129, 158, 162-3, 171, 178, 185, 212, 214,
229, 232-3, 239, 261-3, 337-9, 374.
Salmon River, i., 294, 317, 445-6, 463; lang., iii., 639, 642.
Salpilil, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 459.
Salses, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
363, 453; lang., iii., 652.
Salsipuedes Island, i., 605.
Salsonas, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
454.
Salt, i., 55, 103, 163, 186, 406-7, 430, 576, 581, 631, 638, 653,
694-5, 709, 726, 758, 760, 768; ii., 319, 325, 353-4, 722, 742;
v., 88, 459, 503.
Salt Creek, i., 794.
Saltillo, town, Coahuila, i., 614.
Salt Lake Diggers, i., 463; see Hokandikahs.
Salt Lake Valley, i., 469; antiq., iv., 714-15.
Salt-makers, Nahua festival, ii., 325.
Salt-petre, i., 634, 640.
Salt River, i., 528, 595, 601.
Salutation, i., 67-8, 120, 637, 665, 707, 741, 777; ii., 284,
635.
Salvador, tribes described, i., 684-711; ii., 630-803; special
mention, i., 688, 711; ii., 123; lang., iii., 723, 759-60;
antiq., iv., 68-9; hist., v., 585-6, 608-11.
Salves, see Ointment.
Salzon, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
453.
Samahtumiwhoolah, (White Man's Island), Okanagan mythical island,
iii., 153.
Samamish, tribe of Sound Indians, i., 208-22; location, i., 300.
Samdans, i., 143, see Sundowns.
Samilkanuighs, Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91; location, i.,
312.
Samindas (Samundas), Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401;
location, i., 447, 449.
Samish, tribe of Sound Indians, i., 208-22; location, i., 208,
299; lang., iii., 615.
Samish River, i., 299.
Sampitches (Pitches, Sampectches, Sampiches, San Pitches,
Sampichyas), tribe of Shoshones, i., 422-42; location, i., 469;
special mention, i., 433, 441; lang., iii., 661-2.
Sampitch Valley, i., 464, 469.
Samundas, i., 447, see Samindas.
Sanacté, Yucatan, antiq., iv., 211-12.
San Andres, locality, Durango, i., 614.
San Andres, locality, Guatemala, v., 587.
San Andres, California, antiq., iv., 704.
San Andres Chalchicomula, Puebla, antiq., iv., 468.
San Andres Chinipas, locality, Chihuahua, i., 609.
San Andres, Coamiat, village, Zacatecas, i., 672.
San Andres de Conicari, village, Sinaloa, iii., 707.
San Antonio, village, Central California, i., 367.
San Antonio, village, Guatemala, i., 789.
San Antonio, Puebla, antiq., iv., 468.
San Antonio Island, i., 604.
San Antonio de Padua, mission, Central California, lang., iii.,
656.
San Augustin, Durango, antiq., iv., 600.
San Bartolomé Batacosa, village, Sonora, i., 607.
San Bernabe Bay, i., 603-4.
San Bernardino County, i., 457-8.
San Bernardino Mountains, i., 402, 408, 457.
San Blas, town, Darien, i., 796.
San Blas Indians, i., 796, see Manzanillos.
San Buenavent River, i., 459.
San Buenaventura, Chihuahua, antiq., iv., 603.
San Buenaventura, mission, South California, i., 459; antiq.,
iv., 695.
San Carlos, mission, Central California, lang., iii., 653.
Sanchines, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
453.
San Christobal (San Chrisobal, San Cristoval), mission,
Guatemala, i., 788.
Sanchu, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 459.
San Clemente Island, i., 460.
San Cristóval, Oajaca, antiq., iv., 373; see also San Christobal.
San Christóval Teopantepec, Puebla, antiq., iv., 466.
Sand, i., 158, 163, 178, 181, 285, 395, 566, 722, 758; ii., 481;
iii., 80; v., 472.
Sandajuanes, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 611.
Sandals, see Shoes.
Sandia, i., 599, see Zandia.
San Diego County, i., 457-8, 460.
San Diego, town and mission, South California, i., 458.
San Dimas, locality, Durango, i., 614.
San Dionisio, village, Oajaca, i., 680.
Sanéls, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
362, 451; special mention, i., 386; myth., iii., 524; lang.,
iii., 643-4.
San Estevan Island, i., 604.
Sanetch, tribe of Nootkas, i., 174-208; location, i., 295-7.
San Felipe, Pueblo village, i., 458, 527, 600; lang., iii., 681;
antiq., iv., 663.
San Fernando, village, Lower California, i., 603.
San Fernando, mission, South California, i., 459-60; lang., iii.,
660, 675.
San Francisco, village, Oajaca, i., 680.
San Francisco Bay, Central California, i., 361-401, 452-3; lang.,
iii., 652; antiq., iv., 710-11.
San Francisco de Borgia, mission, Lower California, lang., iii.,
690.
San Francisco de Coahuila, mission, Coahuila, i., 610, 612.
San Francisco Istaltepec, village, Oajaca, i., 680.
San Francisco Javier (Xavier), mission, Lower California, i.,
603; lang., iii., 691-2.
San Francisco Mountains, i., 467, 598.
San Francisco de Ocuapa, village, Tabasco, i., 682.
San Francisco River, i., 594, 596.
San Francisco Xavier, mission, Tamaulipas, i., 613; see also San
Francisco Javier.
San Francisquito, village, Central California, i., 454.
San Francisquito Pass, California, antiq., iv., 691.
San Gabriel, mission, South California, i., 460; lang., iii.,
674-5.
San Gabriel River, i., 457.
Sangana, province, Darien, lang., iii., 794.
San Gaspar, iv., 424, see Piedra Grande.
San Giuseppe Island, i., 604.
San Gorgonio, village, Coahuila, i., 457.
San Gorgonio Pass, i., 457.
San Gregorio, Chiapas, antiq., iv., 353; see also Cerro de San
Gregorio.
San Ignacio, mission, Lower California, i., 603; lang., iii.,
690.
San Ignacio, village, Sonora, i., 609.
San Ignacio de Chicuris, village, Sonora, i., 609.
San Ignacio Otatitlan, village, Sinaloa, i., 614.
San Ignacio de Tesia, village, Sonora, i., 607.
San Ildefonso (Yldefonso), Pueblo town, i., 599; lang., iii.,
681.
San Jacinto, village, South California, i., 457.
San Jacinto Mountains, i., 402, 457.
San Joaquin River, i., 363, 454-6.
San Joaquin Valley, myth., iii., 88; lang., iii., 650; antiq.,
iv., 707-8.
San José, town, South California, i., 366, 452, 458, 460; antiq.,
iv., 22.
San José de Bocas, town, Durango, i., 610.
San José del Cabo, mission, Lower California, i., 604.
San José Comondú, town, Lower California, i., 603; lang., iii.,
691-2.
San José Island, i., 604.
San José de Pimas, village, Arizona, i., 601.
San José River, i., 600.
San José Teopari, village, Sonora, i., 606.
San Juan, Pueblo village, i., 527, 599; lang., iii., 681.
San Juan Baptista (Bautista), mission, Central California, i.,
454; lang., iii., 653.
San Juan Bautista Bay, i., 605.
San Juan Capistrano, mission, South California, i., 405, 460;
lang., iii., 674.
San Juan Guichicovi, town, Oajaca, i., 680.
San Juan Island, i., 208, 297.
San Juan Lake, Jalisco, antiq., iv., 575.
San Juan de los Llanos, Mexico, antiq., iv., 546.
San Juan del Obispo, mission, Guatemala, i., 789.
San Juan del Rio, town, Querétaro, i., 674.
San Juan del Rio, town, Zacatecas, i., 614.
San Juan River, i., 466, 470, 596, 795; iii., 81; New Mexico,
antiq., iv., 650-1; California, antiq., iv., 691.
San Juan Teul, Zacatecas, antiq., iv., 592.
San Juan Valley, New Mexico, antiq., iv., 650-1.
San Lázaro, New Mexico, antiq., iv., 663.
San Lorenzo, Coahuila, antiq., iv., 599.
San Lorenzo de Oguera, village, Sonora, i., 609.
San Luis de las Carretas, mission, Guatemala, i., 789.
San Luisieños (Luiseños), South Californian tribe, i., 402-22;
location, i., 460.
San Luis Obispo, California, antiq., iv., 692.
San Luis de la Paz, town, Guanajuato, i., 673; lang., iii., 742.
San Luis Potosí, i., 571-2, 593, 673; lang., iii., 737, 742, 780;
antiq., iv., 593.
San Luis Rey, mission, South California, i., 458, 460; lang.,
iii., 674.
San Marcos, village, South California, i., 459.
San Marcos, New Mexico, antiq., iv., 663.
San Marcos River, i., 602.
San Martero, Coahuila, antiq., iv., 599-600.
San Martin Luvianos, Mexico, antiq., iv., 480.
San Mateo, California, antiq., iv., 710.
San Mateo, village, Oajaca, i., 680.
San Mateo Malzura, village, Sonora, i., 606.
San Mateo Mountains, i., 595.
San Miguel, village, California, i., 366, 379, 386, 388, 402;
lang., iii., 658-9.
San Miguel, village, Chiapas, i., 682; lang., iii., 760.
San Miguel, village, Sonora, i., 608-9.
San Miguel, province, Salvador, i., 790.
San Miguel, Isthmus, antiq., iv., 17.
San Miguel del Milagro, Tlascala, antiq., iv., 478.
San Miguel de Mocorito, mission, Sinaloa, lang., iii., 707.
San Miguel Gulf, i., 797; lang., iii., 794.
San Nicolas, Vera Cruz, antiq., iv., 463.
San Nicolas Island, i., 402.
San Pablo, California, antiq., iv., 710.
San Pablo del Monte, Tlascala, antiq., iv., 477.
San Pasqual, village, South California, i., 458.
San Pedro, Pueblo village, i., 600.
San Pedro Alcántara, mission, Tamaulipas, i., 613.
San Pedro Guazave, village, Sinaloa, i., 609.
San Pedro las Huertas, mission, Guatemala, i., 789.
San Pedro River, i., 683.
San Pete, locality, Utah, i., 469.
San Pitches, i., 469, see Sampitches.
Sanpoil Creek, i., 315.
Sanpoils, i., 315, see Sans Poils.
San Rafael, mission, Central California, i., 363, 452; lang.,
iii., 647.
San Roche Island, i., 561.
San Salvador, see Salvador.
San Sebastian, village, Zacatecas, i., 672.
Sans Poils (N'pochles, Sanpoils, Sans Puelles, Sinapoils,
Sinipouals, Sinpauelish, Sinpavelist, Sinpoilish, Sinpoilschne,
Sinspeelish), Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91; location, i.,
315-16; special mention, i., 267, 290.
Santa Ana, Pueblo village, i., 527, 600; lang., iii., 681.
Santa Ana, village, South California, i., 400.
Santa Anna River, i., 457.
Santa Barbara, town, South California, i., 403-4, 459; antiq.,
iv., 695.
Santa Barbara Channel, i., 404.
Santa Catalina, Puebla, antiq., iv., 469.
Santa Catalina Cayamoa (Camoa), village, Sonora, i., 607.
Santa Catalina Island, i., 402, 408, 460; myth., iii., 134.
Santa Catarina, village, Guanajuato, i., 672; antiq., iv., 578.
Santa Clara, mission, Central California, i., 365, 398; lang.,
iii., 653-4.
Santa Clara, Pueblo village, i., 527, 599; lang., iii., 681.
Santa Clara River, i., 464, 468.
Santa Clara Valley, i., 452, 600.
Santa Cruz, mission, Central California, i., 381, 389, 392-3,
396, 398, 454; lang., iii., 656; antiq., iv., 696.
Santa Cruz, mission, Guatemala, i., 788.
Santa Cruz, village, Sonora, i., 606.
Santa Cruz del Quiché, locality, Guatemala, v., 564.
Santa Cruz Island, i., 402, 459; lang., iii., 658-9.
Santa Cruz River, i., 602.
Santa Delfina Cañon, Utah, antiq., iv., 733.
Santa Gertrudis, mission, Lower California, lang., iii., 691-2.
Santa Inez, mission, South California, i., 420, 459; lang., iii.,
651.
Santa Margarita, village, South California, i., 460.
Santa Maria, mission, Lower California, lang., iii., 690.
Santa Maria, village, Darien, i., 796.
Santa Maria, village, Oajaca, i., 680, 682.
Santa Maria, Yucatan, antiq., iv., 219.
Santa Maria Chimalapa, village, Oajaca, i., 682.
Santa Maria de los Alamos, Mexico, antiq., iv., 549.
Santa Maria River, Guatemala, antiq., iv., 120.
Santa Maria River, Vera Cruz, antiq., iv., 448.
Santa-Marta, province, Darien, i., 796.
Santander, town, Tamaulipas, i., 613.
Santa Rosa Island, i., 409, 449; antiq., iv., 694-5.
Santa Rosalía, village, Sonora, i., 601.
Santa Rosa de Nadadores, village, Coahuila, i., 612.
Santa Sinforósa, village, Chihuahua, i., 609.
Santa Ysabel, village, South California, i., 458.
Santiago, Pueblo village, i., 600.
Santiago, mission, Lower California, i., 604.
Santiago Ixcuintla, Jalisco, antiq., iv., 575-7.
Santo Domingo, Pueblo village, i., 527, 600; lang., iii., 681;
antiq., iv., 666-7.
Santo Domingo, village, Guatemala, i., 789.
Santo Domingo, village, Chiapas, iv., 290, 294.
Santo Tomas, village, Sonora, i., 606.
Santo Tomas, Peru, antiq., iv., 797.
Santoton, Chiapas, antiq., iv., 353.
San Vicente, province and city, Salvador, antiq., iv., 68-9.
San Vicente Mountain, i., 791.
San Vincent, Leeward Islands, i., 793.
San Yldefonso, i., 599, see San Ildefonso.
Sapotitlan, province, Guatemala, i., 788.
Sapototots (Lapototots), Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401;
location, i., 450.
Saptin River, i., 463, see Snake River.
Sapuyal, sapote kernel, i., 695.
Saracatzi, village, Sonora, i., 607.
Saraise, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
453.
Sarbacan, Nahua blow-pipe, ii., 351.
Sargentarukas, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location,
i., 454.
Saritscheff Island, i., 62.
Sarlistos (Sarlilsos), Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91;
location, i., 313, 315.
Sarontac, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
453.
Sarritehcas, tribe of Apaches, i., 473-526; location, i., 592.
Sarsaparilla, i., 726, 768.
Sarsis (Circees, Ciriés, Sarsi, Sorsi, Surcis, Sursees, Sussees),
tribe of Tinneh, i., 114-37; location, i., 145; lang., iii.,
584.
Sasaguel, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 459.
Saskatchewan River, i., 145; iii., 584.
Sasketoom, food of Inland Columbian tribes, i., 265.
Sassardis, tribe of Isthmians, i., 747-85; special mention, i.,
785.
Sassics, North Californian tribe, i., 326-61; special mention,
i., 344.
Sastés, i., 446, see Shastas.
Saticoy, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 459.
Saticoy River, i., 458-9; antiq., iv., 695-6.
Satumuo, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
453.
Satun Sat, Yucatan, antiq., iv., 262.
Saturaumo, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
453.
Satz-tzi-mitl, Nootka month, i., 193.
Saucelito, California, antiq., iv., 710.
Saucon, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
453.
Saukaulutuchs (Saukaulutucks), tribe of Nootkas, i., 174-208;
location, i., 175, 298; special mention, i., 188.
Saulapaguemes, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i.,
613.
Sautatho, i., 459, see Sitolo.
Savagism, i., 3-4, 25-6, 33-4, 154, 176, 324; ii., 1-6, 34-8,
342; iii., 30-41.
Savanerics, tribe of Isthmians, i., 747-85; location, i., 749,
796; special mention, i., 750, 756, 760; lang., iii., 794.
Savanna Bight Kay, Honduras, antiq., iv., 70.
Savinnars, tribe of Nootkas, i., 174-208; location, i., 295.
Sawamish (Sahéhwamish, Sayhaymamish, Sehehwamish), tribe of Sound
Indians, i., 208-22; location, i., 299, 301-2.
Saway Yanga, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i.,
459-60.
Saw-fish, Maya weapon, ii., 743.
Sawpaws, Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91; location, i., 317.
Sayhaymamish, i., 301, see Sawamish.
Sayokenek, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i.,
459.
Sayonstlas (Sayouslas), i., 307-8, see Saiustklas.
Saywamines, i., 450, see Seywamenes.
Sbanvinquil, Tzendal month, ii., 766.
Scaffolds, see Platforms.
Scalps (Scalping), i., 164, 215, 235, 269, 344, 380, 407, 425,
433-4, 496, 498, 500, 581, 629.
Scandinavians, American origin-traces, v., 102-15.
Scarification, i., 397, 440, 521, 523, 580, 588, 743, 776; ii.,
245, 279-80, 303, 324, 335, 425, 600, 658, 663, 678, 733; iii.,
52, 72, 241, 249, 256, 278, 336-7, 395, 421, 441-2, 471, 486.
Scatchetts, i., 301, see Skagits.
Sceptres, iii., 369, 407-27.
Schaitls, North Californian tribe, i., 326-61; location, i., 444.
Schaktol, i., 141, see Shaktolik.
Schaktulack, i., 141, see Shaktolik.
Schawill, village, Yucatan, i., 658-9, 663.
Scheeetstish, Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91; location, i.,
315.
Scheperrhs, North Californian tribe, i., 326-61; location, i.,
444.
S-chinkit, i., 96, see Sitkas.
Schissatuch, tribe of Nootkas, i., 174-208; location, i., 295.
S-chitcha-chon, i., 96, see Sitkas.
Schools, see Education.
Schoomadits, tribe of Nootkas, i., 174-208; location, i., 295.
Schopan (Schoopan), Koniaga male concubine, i., 82.
Schouchouap, i., 315, see Shushwap.
Schregons, North Californian tribe, i., 326-61; location, i.,
444.
Schrooyelpi, i., 315, see Chaudières.
Schumaginsk, i., 142, see Shumagin.
Schwoyelpi, i., 314, see Chaudières.
Sciatogas, Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91; location, i., 319.
Scomalt, Okanagan god, iii., 153.
Scontas, tribe of Chinooks, i., 222-50; location, i., 308.
Scorpion, i., 640; iii., 379-80.
Scott Island, i., 296.
Scottsburgs, tribe of Chinooks, i., 222-50; location, i., 308.
Scott's River (Ottetiewa), i., 447; antiq., iv., 707.
Scott's Valley, i., 447, 457; lang., iii., 637-8.
Sculpture, Hyperboreans, i., 68, 80, 91, 107; Columbians, i.,
161-2, 165, 181, 183, 192-3, 205-6, 238-9, 274; antiq., iv.,
734, 736; Californians, antiq., iv., 715-17; New Mexicans, i.,
507, 545-6; antiq., iv., 575-7, 590, 593-7, 620; Mexicans, i.,
631; ii., 161, 169-72, 478-81, 524, 566; antiq., iv., 313-22,
332-41, 347-59, 370-6, 381-8, 398, 415, 420-3, 427-8, 435-6,
444, 451-564 passim; Central Americans, i., 701, 769; ii.,
750-1, 775-7; antiq., iv., 16-17, 23-8, 39-138, 160-279 passim;
Mississippi Valley, antiq., iv., 781-5; Peru, antiq., iv.,
803-6; resemblances to Egyptian, v., 59-61.
Seacos, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
362, 449, 451.
Seal Harbour, i., 294.
Sea-lion, i., 59-60, 86, 89-90.
Seals, i., 49-50, 54-60, 73-4, 77-8, 86-8, 90-1, 160, 163, 186,
188, 190, 200, 214, 330, 383, 403, 627.
Seamystys, tribe of Chinooks, i., 222-50; location, i., 306.
Sea-otter, see Otter.
Seasons, see Calendar.
Seattles, tribe of Sound Indians, i., 208-22; location, i., 301.
Sea-water, uses of, i., 172, 762.
Sea-weed, various uses, i., 103, 163, 185, 187-8, 214; iii., 144.
Sebassas (Labassas, Shebasha), tribe of Haidahs, i., 155-74;
location, i., 155, 294; special mention, i., 157, 159, 170,
174.
Secatquonays, tribe of Thlinkeets, i., 94-114; location, i., 143.
Sechelt, tribe of Nootkas, i., 174-208; location, i., 176, 296,
298.
Sechomawe, Pueblo village and tribe, i., 526-56; location, i.,
601.
Secos, tribe of Mosquitos, i., 711-47; location, i., 712; special
mention, i., 726, 746; lang., iii., 783.
Secumnes (Sekamne, Sekomnes, Sicumnes), Central Californian
tribe, i., 361-401; location, i., 450; lang., iii., 649-50.
Seeds, various uses, i., 340, 373-5, 387-8, 406, 428, 430,
559-60, 577, 658, 734, 752; ii., 703; iii., 83, 297, 316, 344,
371, 395.
Seekroe, Mosquito festival, i., 735.
Seekywa, food of Inland Columbian tribes, i., 265.
Segatajenne, Apache tribal name, i., 474; iii., 594.
Seguyones, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 612.
Sehehwamish, i., 299, see Sawamish.
Sehuatoba, Sinaloa god, iii., 180.
Sehuiáb, Clallam demon spirits, iii., 95, 155.
Sejenne, Apache tribal name, i., 474; iii., 594.
Sekamish, tribe of Sound Indians, i., 208-22; location, i., 300.
Sekomnes, i., 450, see Secumnes.
Selawik Lake, i., 141.
Self-immolation, i., 781-3; ii., 610, 620-2; iii., 443; v., 205.
Selish, i., 312, see Salish.
Selloatpallahs (Sewatpallas), Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91;
location, i., 318.
Seltzerton, Mississippi Valley, antiq., iv., 767.
Semianmas, tribe of Sound Indians, i., 208-22; special mention,
i., 209.
Senacu, New Mexico, antiq., iv., 663.
Senijextees, tribal name of lakes, i., 314.
Sennatuchs, tribe of Nootkas, i., 174-208; location, i., 295.
Sennelkameen River, i., 312.
Senotes, subterranean springs, Yucatan, antiq., iv., 198, 201,
212, 221, 249.
Senuisacal, Yucatan, antiq., iv., 199.
Sepulture, see Burial.
Sequechul (Sequechil), Quiché king, v., 566, 595.
Serape, Mexican dress, i., 532, 582, 690.
Seraque, village, Darien, i., 795.
Seredkinskojes, tribe of Aleuts, i., 87-94; location, i., 141.
Seris, i., 604, see Ceris.
Serouskumne, Central California, lang., iii., 649.
Serpent, symbols, etc., ii., 556, 572, 578, 585, 751, 791; iii.,
129, 134-7, 171-3, 180, 398, 400; antiq., iv., 37, 185-7,
226-7, 229-31, 235; v., 87; see also Snakes.
Serpent River, i., 317, see Snake River.
Serrano de Cajones, Zapotec dialect, iii., 754.
Serrano de Ixtepec, Zapotec dialect, iii., 754.
Serrano de Miahuatlan, Zapotec dialect, iii., 754.
Serranos, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 458.
Serritos, village, South California, i., 460.
Servushamnes, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location,
i., 450.
Sesaguks, tribe of Aleuts, i., 87-94; location, i., 141.
Sesepaulabá, Moqui village, i., 528.
Seshats (Seshahts, Shecharts), tribe of Nootkas, i., 174-208;
location, i., 295, 297.
Sespe, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 459.
Seven, sacred number, iii., 270.
Seven Caves, name for Chicomoztoc and Tulan Zuiva, q. v.
Severnovskia, name for Chwachamaju, i., 449.
Severnozer, name for Chwachamaju, i., 449.
Sevier Lake, i., 422, 464-8.
Sevier (Severe) River, i., 467.
Sevier Valley, i., 464, 468.
Sewatpallas, i., 318, see Selloatpallahs.
Sexes, i., 93, 128, 170, 390, 393, 416-17, 551-2, 566, 703-4;
ii., 243-5, 290, 695, 723.
Sextapay, South California lang., iii., 656-8.
Seywamenes (Saywamines), Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401;
location, i., 450; lang., iii., 649.
Shahaptans, i., 316, see Sahaptins.
Shaistches, Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91; location, i.,
314.
Shaktolik (Schaktol, Schaktulack) Bay, i., 141.
Shalachmushumnes, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401;
location, i., 450.
Shalalas (Shalalahs, Shallalahs), tribe of Chinooks, i., 222-50;
location, i., 306-7.
Shaltattos (Shallatos), Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91;
location, i., 320-1.
Shaman, a sorcerer, i., 77, 85, 522; iii., 141-4, 147-8, 152.
Shamooinaughs, Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91; location, i.,
317.
Shanelkayas, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location,
i., 451.
Shasta Butte, locality, North California, i., 444, 447.
Shasta Mountains, i., 327, 447, 451.
Shasta River, i., 446.
Shastas (Chastay, Sasté, Shaste, Shasty, Weohows), North
Californian tribe, i., 326-61; location, i., 327, 446-7;
special mention, i., 333, 342, 344, 351, 361; myth., iii., 547;
v., 19; lang., iii., 640.
Shasta Valley, i., 447, 457; lang., iii., 637-8.
Shaste, i., 447, see Shastas.
Shasty, i., 447, see Shastas.
Shawhaaptens, i., 317, see Sahaptins.
Shaw's Flat, California, antiq., iv., 700.
Sheastukles, i., 307, see Shiastuckles.
Shebalne Pomos, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location,
i., 362, 448.
Shebashas, i., 294, see Sebassas.
Sheberetches, tribe of Shoshones, i., 422-42; location, i., 470.
Shecharts, i., 295, see Seshats.
Sheep, i., 215-16, 489, 502, 505, 544, 583.
Sheep Indians, i., 145, see Ambawtawhoot-Tinneh.
Shehees, tribe of Chinooks, i., 222-50; location, i., 309.
Shekoms, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
451.
Shells, various uses, Hyperboreans, i., 48, 72, 80, 97, 122, 128,
133; Columbians, i., 165, 179, 182, 186-92, 201, 206, 211, 217,
229, 239, 258; antiq., iv., 739-40; Californians, i., 330, 333,
347, 367-8, 381-2, 385, 393-4, 403, 407-9, 424-6; antiq., iv.,
709-10; New Mexicans, i., 482, 506, 532-3, 551, 558-9, 563,
574-5, 584; Mexicans, i., 622, 630; ii., 173, 175, 290, 292,
319, 325, 337, 374, 573; iii., 369, 385, 407, 416-17; Central
Americans, i., 691, 706, 717, 752, 754; ii., 684, 713, 729,
732-3, 737, 752; Mississippi Valley, antiq., iv., 782.
Shelter Cove, i., 449.
Shepowlawe, Moqui village, i., 601.
Sherwood Valley, i., 362, 448.
Sheswap, i., 311, see Shushwaps.
Shet-la-cane, Okanagan hair ornaments, i., 257.
Shewhapmuch, i., 251, see Shushwaps.
Shewhaps, i., 312, see Shushwaps.
Shiastuckles (Sheastukles), tribe of Chinooks, i., 222-50;
location, i., 307.
Shields, Hyperboreans, i., 79, 119; Columbians, i., 235;
Californians, i., 343, 431-2; New Mexicans, i., 493, 496, 541,
578-9; Mexicans, i., 627-8, 655; ii., 326, 337, 404, 406-7,
606, 618, 621; iii., 284-426 passim; Mayas, ii., 742.
Shimiahmoos, tribe of Sound Indians, i., 208-22; location, i.,
299; lang., iii., 615.
Shingle Springs, California, antiq., iv., 704-5.
Shipap, Pueblo village, i., 527.
Shirrydikas, tribe of Shoshones, i., 422-42; location, i., 461.
Shis Inday, 'Men of the woods,' name for Apaches, i., 474.
Shistakoostees (Sisticoostas), North Californian tribe, i.,
326-61; location, i., 443.
Shiuguermi, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
454.
Shíwinná, i., 600, see Siwinna.
Shljam Schoá, Koniaga god, iii., 143.
Shoalwater Bay, i., 209, 303, 305.
Shoalwater Bay Indians, tribe of Chinooks, i., 222-50; location,
i., 305.
Shoes, Hyperboreans, i., 49-50, 73; Columbians, i., 258;
Californians, i., 331, 424-6; New Mexicans, i., 480-4, 504,
531-2, 559, 569, 574; Mexicans, i., 620, 650; ii., 326, 337,
369-70, 375, 396, 405; iii., 435; Central Americans, i., 690,
716; ii., 635, 731.
Shokomish, i., 302, see Skokomish.
S'homamish, tribe of Sound Indians, i., 208-22; location, i.,
299, 301.
Shonomnes, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
450.
Shookanys, tribe of Chinooks, i., 222-50; location, i., 309.
Shoopshaps, i., 312, see Shushwaps.
Shooshaps, i., 310, see Shushwaps.
Shooshewaps, i., 310, see Shushwaps.
Shoremee, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
454.
Shoshokoes (Shoshocoes, Shoshocos), tribe of Shoshones, i.,
422-42; location, i., 460; special mention, i., 441-2; lang.,
iii., 661.
Shoshones, one of the four families into which the Californians
are divided; manners and customs of all its nations and tribes
described together; i., 422-42; physique, i., 422-3; dress, i.,
423-6; dwellings, i., 426-7; food, i., 427-30; personal habits,
i., 430-1; weapons and war, i., 431-4; implements, i., 434-5;
boats, property, government, i., 435; slavery, i., 435-6;
marriage and women, i., 436-7; amusements and miscellaneous
customs, i., 437-9; medicine and burial, i., 439-40; character,
i., 440-2; location, of tribes, i., 152, 322, 422, 460-70;
myth., iii., 93-4, 157; lang., iii., 567-8, 660-79.
Shoshones (Shoshonee, Shoshonie), i., 422, see Snakes.
Shoshoteos, i., 469, see Tosawees.
Shothoucs, i., 462, see Snakes.
S'Hotlemamish, tribe of Sound Indians, i., 208-22; location, i.,
301.
Shotos, tribe of Chinooks, i., 222-50; location, i., 306, 308.
Shouagan (Showgan), tribe of Haidahs, i., 155-74; location, i.,
292.
Shoushwaps, i., 310, see Shushwaps.
Shrouders, burial, ii., 603, 615, 619, 799-800; iii., 406.
Shucu, i., 458, see Xucu.
Shumagin (Schumaginsk) Islands, i., 61, 87, 142.
Shumeias, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; special
mention, i., 379; location, i., 448.
Shúmuthpà, Moqui village, i., 528, 600.
Shungopawe, i., 601, see Xougopavi.
Shushwap Lake, i., 310; iii., 613.
Shushwaps, one of the nine families into which the Columbians
are divided; manners and customs of all its nations and tribes
described together; i., 251-91; location, i., 151, 251-2,
310-12.
Shushwaps (Schouchouap, Shoopshap, Shooshaps, Shooshewap,
Shoushwaps, Shushwapmuch, Shuswapmuch, Shuswaps, Soushwap,
Suwapamuck), Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91; location, i.,
310-11; special mention, i., 256, 259-60, 264-5, 271, 276, 289;
lang., iii., 613.
Shuttle, i., 502, 582.
Shuyelpi, i., 314, see Chaudières.
Siahs (Sians), North Californian tribe, i., 326-61; location, i.,
446; lang., iii., 593.
Siamana Lake, i., 299.
Siamanas, tribe of Sound Indians, i., 208-22; location, i., 299.
Sianábones, tribe of Apaches, i., 473-526; location, i., 592.
Sians, i., 446, see Siahs.
Sibag-na, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 460.
Sibubapas, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 607.
Sicannis (Sicaunies, Sikanis), tribe of Tinneh, i., 114-37;
location, i., 114, 146; special mention, i., 125, 137; myth.,
iii., 517; lang., iii., 587.
Sicca, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i., 453.
Sichican, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
453.
Sickley River, i., 463.
Sicknaahuttys, tribe of Thlinkeets, i., 94-114; location, i.,
143.
Sickness, see Medicine.
Sicuiracha, Chichimec Wanacace ruler, v., 512-15.
Sicumnes, i., 450, see Secumnes.
Sicuraba, Acaxee dialect, iii., 719.
Sicxacames, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 611.
Sidanaks, tribe of Aleuts, i., 87-94; location, i., 141.
Sierra de Acha, i., 595.
Sierra Anahuac, i., 596.
Sierra Ancha, i., 595.
Sierra Blanca, i., 595.
Sierra de Canoas, Querétaro, antiq., iv., 550-2.
Sierra del Diablo, iii., 594-5.
Sierra Gorda, i., 673; lang., iii., 742-3.
Sierra Largua, i., 595.
Sierra de Macuilapa, i., 679.
Sierra Madre, ii., 87; iii., 710.
Sierra de Malinche, Tlascala, antiq., iv., 477.
Sierra del Mezquital, i., 613.
Sierra de los Mimbres, i., 475, 595-6; iii., 594-5.
Sierra del Nayarit, i., 672.
Sierra Nevada, i., 323, 422, 444, 466, 471-2.
Sierra de Palomas, Zacatecas, antiq., iv., 583.
Sierra Piñal, i., 595.
Sierra de Tamaulipa vieja, i., 613.
Sierra Valley, i., 469.
Sierras (Caruanas), South Californian tribe, i., 402-22;
location, i., 458.
Sieves, i., 544, 636.
Signals, i., 380, 497-8, 519-20, 697; ii., 425-7.
Sihimi, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 458.
Sihkran, Mosquito feast, i., 735.
Sihuicom, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 459.
Sijoh, Yucatan, antiq., iv., 262.
Sikanis, i., 125, see Sicannis.
Sikitipuc, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i.,
459.
Silan, Yucatan, antiq., iv., 261.
Silimastus, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i.,
458.
Silimi, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 458.
Silino, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 458.
Silisne, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 458.
Silk, i., 370, 648, 650, 657.
Silla, Pueblo village, i., 527; lang., iii., 681.
Silver, i., 370, 482-3, 504-5, 543, 574, 631, 752; ii., 173, 285,
372, 406, 473-8; iii., 325; iv., 778-9, 792-4.
Silver Creek, i., 793.
Simbalakees, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location,
i., 362-3.
Simerones, tribe of Isthmians, i., 747-85; lang., iii., 794.
Simi, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 459.
Similkameen River, i., 312.
Similkameens (Chitwout), Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91;
location, i., 312; lang., iii., 613.
Sinaahmish, i., 299, see Snohomish.
Sinacshops, Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91; location, i.,
320.
Sinahemish, i., 300, see Snohomish.
Sinahomish, i., 299, see Snohomish.
Sinahoumez, i., 300, see Snohomish.
Sinaloa, i., 591; lang., iii., 667, 694, 706-10; antiq., iv.,
601; Nahua migration, v., 222.
Sinaloas, (Cinaloas), North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location,
i., 572, 607; special mention, i., 576; myth., iii., 83, 180,
529; v., 20; lang., iii., 667, 694, 706-10.
Sinamish, i., 300, see Snohomish.
Sinapoils, i., 316, see Sans Poils.
Sinatcheggs, Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91; location, i.,
311.
Sineequomenach, Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91; location, i.,
315.
Sinews, various uses, i., 56, 58-9, 74, 76, 91, 104, 117, 164,
186, 188, 215, 235, 268, 341, 377-8, 431-2, 494, 541, 579; ii.,
408.
Sinicon, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 459.
Sinipouals, i., 316, see Sans Poils.
Sinkoman, name for Spokanes, i., 315.
Sinnock, Mosquito fishing-spear, i., 720.
Sinnomish, i., 301, see Snohomish.
Sinoquipe, village, Sonora, i., 606.
Sinpauelish, i., 316, see Sans Poils.
Sinpavelist, i., 310, see Sans Poils.
Sinpohellechachs, Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91; location,
i., 312.
Sinpoilish (Sinpoilschne), i., 315-16, see Sans Poils.
Sinselaws, i., 308, see Saiustklas.
Sinselaw River, i., 308.
Sinslihhooish, Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91; location, i.,
315.
Sinspeelish, i., 315, see Sans Poils.
Sintootoos (Sintootoolish), Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91;
location, i., 315.
Sintzicha Tangajuan, name for Tangaxoan, v., 516.
Sinwhoyelppetooks, Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91; location,
i., 312.
Sio Cotchmin, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location,
i., 454.
Sipanum, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
453.
Sipico, locality, Michoacan, v., 518.
Siplichiquin, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location,
i., 453.
Sipuca, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 459.
Siqiurionals, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location,
i., 456.
Siraguen Lake, Michoacan, antiq., iv., 570.
Sirout, Acagchemem mythical person, iii., 164-5.
Sisa, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 459.
Sisabanonase, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i.,
459.
Sisac, name of month in Chiapas, ii., 766.
Sisahiahut, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i.,
459.
Siscastac, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
453.
Sishus (Lishus), Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401;
location, i., 450.
Sisibotaris, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; special mention,
i., 585, 587, 590.
Sisichii, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 459.
Sisimbres, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 610.
Sisitcanogna, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i.,
460.
Sisjulcioy, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i.,
459.
Siskiyou County, California, i., 413-4; antiq., iv., 707.
Siskiyou Mountains, i., 443, 446.
Sisolop, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 458.
Sisticoostas, i., 443, see Shistakoostees.
Sisuchi, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 459.
Sitax, Yucatan, antiq., iv., 236.
Sitintajea, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
453.
Sitka Bay, i., 142-3.
Sitkas (G-tinkit, S-chinkit, S-chit-cha-chon, Sitcas,
Sitkaguouays, Sitka-Koans), tribe of Thlinkeets, i., 94-114;
location, i., 96, 143; special mention, i., 102-3; lang., iii.,
579.
Sitlintaj, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
453.
Sitolo (Sautatho), South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location,
i., 459.
Sittintac, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
453.
Situchi, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 459.
Siur Poils, Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91; location, i.,
314.
Siuslaws, i., 308, see Saiustklas.
Sivano, Pima mythical person, iii., 80.
Sivilihóa, town, Sonora, i., 608.
Siwinna (Shiwinnà), Moqui village, i., 528, 600.
Siyanguayas, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 611.
Siyante (Typoxi), Central California dialect, iii., 650.
Skaddals, Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91; location, i.,
320-1.
Skadjets, i., 299, see Skagits.
Skagit River, i., 299, 300.
Skagits (Sachets, Scatchetts, Skadjets), tribe of Sound Indians,
i., 208-22; location, i., 208, 299; special mention, i.,
211-12, 219, 222; lang., iii., 615.
Skaischilt'nish, Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91; location,
i., 315.
Skalzi, name for Kootenais, i., 251.
Skamnaminaughs, Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91; location, i.,
317.
Skamoynumacks (Skamoynumachs), Inland Columbian tribe, i.,
250-91; location, i., 312, 316.
Skatcat, tribe of Nootkas, i., 174-208; location, i., 296.
Skatkmlschi, Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91; location, i.,
314.
Skeawamish, tribe of Sound Indians, i., 208-22; location, i.,
300.
Skeawamish River, i., 300.
Skecheramouse, Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91; location, i.,
315.
Skeedans, i., 292, see Skiddans.
Skeena River, i., 155, 174, 293-4.
Skeenas, tribe of Haidahs, i., 155-74; location, i., 155, 294;
special mention, i., 174.
Skeetsomish, Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91; location, i.,
314.
Skeletons, antiq., iv., 71, 117-130, 237-40, 263-5, 368, 376,
428-30, 451, 474-5, 527, 577, 597-600, 692-707, 737-40, 775-6.
S'Ketehlmish, tribe of Sound Indians, i., 208-22; location, i.,
300.
Sketigets, i., 292, see Skiddegats.
Sketsomish, Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91; location, i.,
313.
Skeysehamish, tribe of Sound Indians, i., 208-22; location, i.,
300.
Skeysehamish River, i., 300.
Skidagates (Skidagatees), i., 165, 292, see Skiddegats.
Skiddans (Skeedans), tribe of Haidahs, i., 155-74; location, i.,
292.
Skiddegate Channel, i., 292.
Skiddegats (Sketigets, Skidagatees, Skidagates, Skidegats,
Skittageets, Skittdegates, Skittegás, Skittegetts), tribe of
Haidahs, i., 155-74; location, i., 155, 292; special mention,
i., 165, 174.
Skiens, Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91; location, i., 320.
Skillutes (Skilloots, Skiloots), tribe of Chinooks, i., 222-50;
location, i., 304, 306-7; special mention, i., 274; lang.,
iii., 626.
Skins, various uses, Hyperboreans, i., 46, 49-63, 69, 73-5, 79,
86-7, 89, 100, 102, 108, 117-18, 122, 128, 133; Columbians,
i., 159-60, 162, 166-7, 170, 182-3, 211, 214-15, 228-31, 235,
239, 258-61, 266, 270-2, 289; Californians, i., 330-1, 341,
343, 345, 347, 367-8, 377-8, 384, 388, 403, 423-6, 432, 440;
New Mexicans, i., 481-3, 486-7, 495-6, 505, 531-2, 541, 545,
558-60, 567, 574, 579, 583; Mexicans, i., 620-1, 627, 630,
648, 650, 657, 659; ii., 311, 363-9, 386, 406-7, 440, 486, 524;
iii., 355-8, 413, 415, 421; Central Americans, i., 705-6, 716,
726, 765, 768; ii., 731, 741-2, 771, 787.
Skitsuish (Skitswish), Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91;
location, i., 314; lang., iii., 618.
Skittageets (Skittdegates, Skittegás, Skittegetts), i., 292, see
Skiddegats.
Sklallam (Sklallum, S'klalum), i., 302; iii., 615, see Clallam.
Skoielpoi, name for Colvilles, i., 252.
Skokomish (Shokomish), tribe of Sound Indians, i., 208-22;
location, i., 301-2.
Skoocoom, Clallam evil spirit, iii., 155.
Skopeahmish, tribe of Sound Indians, i., 208-22; location, i.,
300.
Skowhomish, Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91; location, i.,
311.
Skowtous, Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91; location, i., 311.
Skrellings, account of, v., 110-12.
Sktahlejums, tribe of Sound Indians, i., 208-22; location, i.,
300.
Skuckstanajumps, tribe of Sound Indians, i., 208-22; location,
i., 300.
Skuckstanajumps River, i., 300.
Skulls, i., 12, 15, 46, 72, 158, 177, 204, 225; ii., 430-1,
585-6, 624; iii., 293, 345; iv., 740.
Skwalls, i., 301, see Nisquallies.
Skyappe, iii., 153, see Elemehumkillanwaist.
Skyuse, i., 265, see Cayuse.
Skywhamish, tribe of Sound Indians, i., 208-22; location, i.,
300.
Slacus, i., 458, see Jlaacs.
Slate, i., 59, 165, 188, 343; ii., 784-5.
Slavé, Kutchin dialect, iii., 587-8.
Slave River, i., 144.
Slavery, ii., 62; Hyperboreans, i., 65, 80-1, 108-9, 124-5, 135;
Columbians, i., 167-8, 171, 173-4, 177, 179, 188, 191, 195,
205, 217-18, 226-7, 240-1, 248, 276; Californians, i., 349,
388, 435-6; New Mexicans, i., 510-11; Mexicans, i., 661; ii.,
217-23, 455-62, 607-8, 610-13, 622, 626, 688-9, 737; iii.,
511-13; v., 394, 413-14, 452; Central Americans, i., 729,
771-2; ii., 649-51, 657-9; v., 631.
Sledges, i., 61-2.
Slings, i., 494, 541, 562, 627, 655, 696, 761; ii., 408-9, 743.
Slouacuss Tinneh (Slowacuss, Sluacuss-dinais), tribe of Tinneh,
i., 114-37; location, i., 145; lang., iii., 585.
Smahoomenaish, Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91; location, i.,
315.
Smalèhhus, tribe of Sound Indians, i., 208-22; location, i., 300.
Small-pox, i., 220, 246, 286, 394, 521, 568, 588-9, 638-9, 708,
742; ii., 594; v., 525, 601, 629.
Smelkámiah, tribe of Sound Indians, i., 208-22; location, i.,
300.
Smess, tribe of Nootkas, i., 175-208; location, i., 298.
Smess Lake, i., 298.
Smess River, i., 298.
Smith Inlet, i., 294.
Smith River, i., 330, 333, 346, 445-6; lang., iii., 593, 638.
Smockshops, tribe of Chinooks, i., 222-50; location, i., 306.
Smoke, i., 68, 133, 163, 184, 198-9, 213, 219, 243, 273, 282,
285, 339, 354, 380, 394, 433-8, 497-8, 515-17, 519-20, 550,
554, 566-8, 580, 633, 666, 720-1, 739, 742, 776; ii., 178,
285-8, 656, 673, 684; iii., 153, 171, 238.
Smoky Valley, i., 466.
Smoos, tribe of Mosquitos, i., 711-47; location, i., 712, 793;
special mention, i., 714, 716-17, 720, 746; lang., iii., 783.
Smulkamish, tribe of Sound Indians, i., 208-22; location, i.,
300.
Snake River, i., 152, 253, 317-18, 461-3; iii., 620.
Snakes (Shoshonee, Shoshones, Shoshonie, Shothoucs, Soshonies),
tribe of Shoshones, i., 422-42; location, i., 422, 461-3;
special mention, i., 424-6, 428, 430-5, 438, 440-1; lang.,
iii., 662.
Snakes, i., 374, 379, 405, 417, 419, 521, 539, 561, 576, 578-9,
587-9, 625, 649, 743, 762, 778; ii., 600, 602; iii., 268,
281-2, 290-1, 294, 298, 321-2, 324, 343-4, 348, 429.
Snares, see Traps.
Snelling, California, antiq., iv., 707.
Snihuax, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 459.
Snohomish (Sinaahmish, Sinahemish, Sinahomish, Sinahoumez,
Sinamish, Snowhomish), tribe of Sound Indians, i., 208-22;
location, i., 299-301; lang., iii., 615.
Snohomish River, i., 300.
Snoqualimich, tribe of Sound Indians, i., 208-22; location, i.,
300.
Snoqualimich River, i., 300.
Snoqualmook, tribe of Sound Indians, i., 208-22; location, i.,
299-300.
Snoquamish, tribe of Sound Indians, i., 208-22; location, i.,
301.
Snow, Eskimo dwellings, i., 53-4, 58; heavy fall in Mexico, v.,
413.
Snowhomish, i., 301, see Snohomish.
Snow-shoes, i., 63, 264.
Snuff, i., 76, 133; ii., 287-8, 600.
Soayalpis (Soaiatlpi), Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91;
location, i., 312; lang., iii., 616.
Sobaipuris, (Sobaypuris), tribe of Pueblos, i., 526-56; location,
i., 603; lang., iii., 694-5.
Sobas, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 606; lang.,
iii., 695.
Sochimanque, iii., 420, see Xochimanqui.
Sockamukes, tribe of Sound Indians, i., 208-22; location, i.,
300.
Sockatcheenums, Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91; location, i.,
311.
Socklumnes (Locklomnees), Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401;
location, i., 450.
Soclan, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
453.
Socoas, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
362, 449, 451.
Socoisukas, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
363, 452.
Socoléo, i., 788, see Zakuleu.
Socollomillos, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location,
i., 363.
Soconusco (Xoconochco), town and province, Chiapas, i., 680, 787;
iii., 760; hist., v., 425, 473, 530, 534, 602, 604, 606.
Socorro, New Mexico, antiq., iv., 663.
Soda Springs, Idaho, myth., iii., 93-4.
Sodomy, i., 81-2, 92, 415, 515, 585, 773-4; ii., 467-9, 664,
677-8; v., 198.
Sogups, tribe of Shoshones, i., 422-42; location, i., 464.
Soiilenu, i., 295, see Soiitinu.
Soiitinu, (Soiilenu), tribe of Nootkas, i., 174-208; location,
i., 295.
Soisehme, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
453.
Sokéakeits, North Californian tribe, i., 326-61; location, i.,
445.
Sokes, tribe of Nootkas, i., 174-208; location, i., 175, 295-7.
Sokulks, Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91; location, i., 321;
special mention, i., 258, 260, 267, 271, 278, 287, 289; lang.,
iii., 621.
Sola, town, Oajaca, i., 681.
Solano County, California, i., 452; iii., 650.
Soledad de las Canoas, town, Querétaro, i., 672.
Soliman Point, Yucatan, antiq., iv., 254.
Soloeis Cape, v., 66.
Sololá, town and province, Guatemala, i., 788; iv., 121; v., 577.
Sololumnes (Solomnies, Solumnees), Central Californian tribe, i.,
361-401; location, i., 450, 453; lang., iii., 649.
Soltecs, South Mexican tribe, i., 644-70; location, i., 681.
Sombrerito, Oajaca, antiq., iv., 422.
Somes (Somo), South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i.,
459.
Sonagna, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 460.
Songhies (Songes, Songhish), tribe of Nootkas, i., 174-208;
location, i., 296-7; myth., iii., 522.
Songs, i., 67, 112, 170-1, 190, 201, 219, 243, 281-2, 352-3, 358,
393, 516, 522, 550-2, 635, 664, 704, 707, 736-8, 782-3; ii.,
243, 285, 289, 293-4, 313, 607-8, 617-21, 669, 712; iii., 62-3;
see also Music.
Sonomas (Sonomellos, Sonomis), Central Californian tribe, i.,
361-401; location, i., 362, 449, 453.
Sonons, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
453.
Sonora, tribes described, i., 571-91; location, i., 604-12;
myth., iii., 178-9, 529; lang., iii., 583, 593-5, 667-70,
694-710, 717; antiq., iv., 603; hist., v., 221, 509.
Sonora River, i., 605.
Sonoras, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 607;
myth., iii., 178-9, 529; lang., iii., 667-71.
Sonsonate (Zonzonate), town, Salvador, i., 790; antiq., iv., 69;
hist., v., 608.
Soones, tribe of Apaches, i., 473-526; location, i., 598.
Soo-oo-it, name for inhabitants of Kadiak, i., 70.
Sopono, i., 459, see Missopeno.
Sopotatumne, Central California, lang., iii., 649.
Soquamish, i., 301, see Suquamish.
Soques, i., 647, see Zoques.
Sorcerer, name given to an Uxmal king, v., 633.
Sorcerers, Hyperboreans, i., 85, 113, 120-1, 124; iii., 141-4,
147-9; Columbians, i., 167, 170-2, 192, 200-5, 219, 245-6, 284,
286-7; iii., 130, 149-56; Californians, i., 344, 352-5, 386,
394-5, 418; iii., 158-65; New Mexicans, i., 522, 554, 567-8;
iii., 170-1, 180; Mexicans, i., 640-1, 667; ii., 253, 271-2,
317, 462, 601-2; iii., 241-2, 364; v., 450, 469, 533; Central
Americans, i., 703, 707, 709, 740-3, 777-80; ii., 211-12, 659,
688, 696-7, 719, 745, 797-8, 800; iii., 473, 495-500; origin
of, iii., 31.
Sormeh, feather ornaments, i., 482.
Sorsi, i., 145, see Sarsis.
Soshonies, i., 462, see Snakes.
Soteomellos (Sotomieyos), Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401;
location, i., 448.
Sotomoenu (Sotonoemu), South Californian tribe, i., 402-22;
location, i., 459.
Souissouns, i., 453, see Suisunes.
Soul, ideas of, iii., 34-5, 514-18.
Sound Indians, one of the nine families into which the Columbians
are divided; manners and customs of all its nations and tribes
described together, i., 208-22; physique, i., 156, 210; dress,
i., 210-11; dwellings, i., 211-12; food, i., 212-14; implements
and weapons, i., 214-15; manufactures, i., 215-16; boats, i.,
216-17; property and trade, i., 217; government and slavery,
i., 217-18; women and marriage, i., 218-19; amusements, etc.,
i., 219; medicine, i., 219-20; burial, i., 220; character, i.,
174, 220-2; location of tribes, i., 151, 208-9, 298-304.
Souscoc, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 459.
Soushwap, i., 310, see Shushwaps.
South Bay, i., 301.
Southern Californians, see Californians, Southern.
Southern Mexicans, see Mexicans, Southern.
South Fork, i., 445, 448.
Soyennom, Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91; location, i., 317.
Soyopa, village, Sonora, i., 606.
Spampt, Okanagan weapon, i., 268.
Spaniards, arrival on the Coast, v., 464-69, 473, 476, 478-82,
526, 535-6, 598-9, 601-2, 626-7, 629.
Spanish Flat, California, antiq., iv., 705.
Spanish historians, bibliography, ii., 158-60; v., 142-9.
Spatlam, food of Inland Columbian tribes, i., 265.
Spawn, food, i., 104, 163, 187-8; ii., 176.
Spears, Hyperboreans, i., 59, 77, 79, 104-5; Columbians, i.,
162-4, 185, 188, 212-14, 233-6, 262; Californians, i., 338,
341-2, 377-8, 406, 428, 431-2; New Mexicans, i., 493-6, 541,
578-9; Mexicans, i., 627, 655; ii., 351, 408, 410; Central
Americans, i., 696, 722, 760-1; ii., 742-3.
Speeches, i., 199, 352, 580-1, 708; ii., 146, 149-57, 252-3,
256-7, 266-8, 270-7, 387, 401-2, 439, 492-3, 607, 611, 621,
668; iii., 366-7, 588, 600-1.
Spells, see Charms.
Spies, ii., 387, 420, 424; v., 415.
Spindles, i., 503, 698; ii., 485, 679; iii., 372.
Spinning, i., 503-4, 657, 698, 724; ii., 245, 484-5, 752.
Spirits, belief in, i., 740-1, 777; iii., 34, 531-2.
Spirkin Island, i., 141.
Spokane River, i., 252, 315.
Spokanes (Spokans, Spokehnish, Spokeins, Spokihnish), Inland
Columbian tribe, i., 250-91; location, i., 252-3, 315; special
mention, i., 260, 264, 267, 273, 276-80, 289-90; lang., iii.,
615.
Spokehnish (Spokihnish), i., 315, see Spokanes.
Spokeins, i., 315, see Spokanes.
Spoons, i., 164, 187, 234, 236, 271, 345.
Springfield, Mississippi Valley, antiq., iv., 769.
Spruce-fir, various uses, i., 59, 61, 103, 130, 205.
Spuzzum, locality, British Columbia, i., 310.
Squahsinawmish, tribe of Sound Indians, i., 208-22; location, i.,
302.
Squaiaitl, tribe of Sound Indians, i., 208-22; location, i., 301.
Squaks'namish, tribe of Sound Indians, i., 208-22; location, i.,
299.
Squalliamish (Squalliahmish, Sqallyamish), tribe of Sound
Indians, i., 208-22; location, i., 299, 301.
Squallies, i., 301, see Nisquallies.
Squamaross (Squamaros), Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91;
location, i., 320-1.
Squawmisht, tribe of Nootkas, i., 174-208; location, i., 176,
296, 298.
Squinámish, tribe of Sound Indians, i., 208-22; location, i.,
300.
Squirrels, i., 50, 171, 488; iii., 130.
Srootlemamish, tribe of Sound Indians, i., 208-22; location, i.,
301.
Ssalayme, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
453.
Ssichitca, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
453.
Ssipudca, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
453.
Ssiti, Central Californian tribe, i., 301-401; location, i., 453.
S'slomamish, tribe of Sound Indians, i., 208-22; location, i.,
301.
Ssogereate, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
453.
Ssupichum, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
453.
Stachines (Stachins), i., 96, see Stikines.
Stackine, i., 143, see Stikeen.
Stakhins, i., 96, see Stikines.
Staktamish (Staktomish), tribe of Sound Indians, i., 208-22;
location, i., 299, 304.
Stalacom, i., 301, see Steilacoom.
Standards, see Flags.
Stanislaus County, California, antiq., iv., 707.
Stanislaus River, i., 455-6.
Stanu Creek, i., 793.
Statues, Mexicans, ii., 556; iii., 292, 294, 456; antiq.,
iv., 314, 336-7, 347-8, 372, 451-2, 457-8, 496, 541; Central
Americans, antiq., iv., 28, 39-58, 82, 89-99, 111-15, 150, 163,
186-9, 196-9, 202-3, 215-20; Peru, antiq., iv., 805.
Stature, Hyperboreans, i., 45, 71, 88, 116; Columbians, i.,
176-7, 224-5, 254-5; Californians, i., 328, 364-6, 402, 422;
New Mexicans, i., 477-9, 529-30, 558, 572-3; Mexicans, i., 618,
646-7; ii., 624-5; Central Americans, i., 688, 714; ii., 802.
Stealing, see Theft.
Stéhchasámish (Stitchassamish, Stitcheosawmish), tribe of Sound
Indians, i., 208-22; location, i., 301-2.
Stehllum (Stentlum), tribe of Sound Indians, i., 208-22;
location, i., 302.
Steilacoom (Stalacom) Creek, i., 301.
Steilacoomish (Steilacoomamish), tribe of Sound Indians, i.,
208-22; location, i., 301.
Steilaquamish, i., 300, see Stillaquamish.
Stekins, i., 96, see Stikines.
Stentlum, i., 302, see Stehllum.
Stephens Passage, i., 143.
Steptoe Valley, i., 463.
Stewart's Lake, i., 174.
Stickeens, i., 96, see Stikines.
Stietshois, Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91; location, i.,
314.
Stikeen (Stackine) River, i., 294, 143; iii., 579.
Stikines (Stachin, Stachine, Stackine, Stakhin, Stekin, Stickeen,
Stikeen, Stikein, Stikin, Stikine, Stychine), tribe of
Thlinkeets, i., 94-114; location, i., 96, 143; lang., iii.,
579.
Stillaquamish (Steilaquamish, Stoluchwámish), tribe of Sound
Indians, i., 208-22; location, i., 300.
Stillaquamish River, i., 300.
Stipu, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 459.
Stitchassamish (Stitcheosawmish), i., 301, 302, see
Stéhchasámish.
Stkámish, tribe of Sound Indians, i., 208-22; location, i., 300.
Stobshaddats, name for Yakimas, i., 320.
Stockades, see Fortifications.
Stoluchwámish, i., 300, see Stillaquamish.
Stone, various uses, i., 48, 51, 59, 76, 80, 91, 103, 107, 119,
123, 165, 185, 187, 189, 213, 234, 237, 268, 339, 344, 374,
406-8, 420, 434, 486, 522, 536, 545, 574, 649, 657, 696, 717,
724; ii., 259, 372, 475, 478, 557, 600, 702, 750-1, 784-94;
iii., 281, 485; iv., 16-806 passim.
Stony Mountains, i., 462, name for Rocky Mountains.
Store-houses, i., 52, 487, 533-5, 575; ii., 161, 163, 235, 349,
574; iii., 431.
Stotonias, tribe of Chinooks, i., 222-50; location, i., 307.
Straits Lake, i., 145.
Strangers, Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91; location, i., 310.
Straumey Island (Stream-Isle), v., 109.
Straumfiördr (Stream-Firth), locality, north-east coast of
America, v., 109.
Straw, various uses, i., 74, 259, 500, 533, 576, 648, 651, 690,
778; ii., 336, 784-5.
Streets, ii., 556-9, 567, 787-90.
Strong-bows, tribe of Tinneh, i., 114-37; location, i., 144.
Strum-strum, musical instrument, i., 738.
Stta Llimuh, Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91; location, i.,
311.
Stuart Lake, iii., 607.
Stucco, ii., 556, 572, 582, 794; antiq., iv., 126, 129, 171, 209,
215-16, 242, 247-59, 269, 276, 303-39, 351-2.
Stucu, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 459.
Sturgeon, i., 73, 213, 233, 262, 376.
Stychines, i., 96, see Stikines.
Suanaimuchs, tribe of Nootkas, i., 174-208; location, i., 295.
Suanga, village, South California, i., 460.
Suangna, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 460.
Suaqui, village, Sonora, i., 601.
Subchiam, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
453.
Subtiava (Subtiaba), village, Nicaragua, i., 792; antiq., iv.,
32, 54-7.
Succession, ii., 134-6, 140-3, 214, 633-41, 647; see also
Inheritance.
Suchiapa, town, Chiapas, i., 681.
Suchicoatlan, province, Mexico, i., 675.
Suchigin, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
453.
Suchiltepeques, province, Guatemala, i., 788-9.
Suchimilcos, i., 675, see Xochimilcas.
Suchitepec, locality, Guatemala, lang., iii., 760.
Suchni, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
453.
Sucking, medical practice, i., 355, 394-5, 589, 709, 779-80; ii.,
600.
Sucurawe, Michoacan ruler, v., 517.
Sugar-cane, i., 636, 652, 739.
Suicide, i., 121, 288, 744.
Suiesia, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 459.
Suislaws, i., 250, see Saiustklas.
Suisunes (Souissouns, Suysum), Central Californian tribe, i.,
361-401; location, i., 363, 452-3.
Suisun Valley, i., 363, 452.
Suizul, Guatemala, antiq., iv., 131.
Sukia, Mosquito sorceress, i., 740; iii., 497.
Sukwámes, tribe of Sound Indians, i., 208-22; location, i., 299.
Sula, locality, Honduras, i., 793.
Sulaco River, i., 793.
Sulanna, i., 292, see Lulanna.
Sulones, i., 453, see Ohlones.
Suma, North Mexico, lang., iii., 714.
Sumach, substitute for tobacco, i., 517.
Sumé, Brazilian god, v., 23-4.
Sun, myth., i., 587; ii., 303, 339, 706, 738; iii., 51, 60-1,
82, 85-6, 100, 109-11, 152, 161, 170, 178, 187, 190, 193-5,
365, 428, 437-8, 461, 483-4, 498, 502, 547-50; v., 205, 528;
phenomenon of three suns, v., 566.
Sunahúmes, tribe of Sound Indians, i., 208-22; location, i., 299.
Sunatoya Mountains, i., 463.
Sunchaque, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
453.
Sundowns (Samdans), tribe of Thlinkeets, i., 94-114; location,
i., 143.
Sun-hunters, i., 470, see Tabechyas.
Suntaho, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 458.
Superior Lake, iv., 778, see Lake Superior.
Superstitions, Hyperboreans, i., 76, 124; Columbians, i., 162,
171, 202-4, 219, 245, 283; Californians, i., 354-5, 360, 391,
395, 414-18; New Mexicans, i., 520, 553-4, 568-9, 587-8;
Mexicans, i., 634, 661, 665-7; ii., 267, 351, 500, 601-2,
626; iii., 110-13, 362-4, 394-5; iv., 408; Central Americans,
i., 707, 734, 740-3, 777; ii., 678, 719-20, 738, 796-8; iii.,
497-8, 500-1; iv., 215-16.
Suquamish (Soquamish), tribe of Sound Indians, i., 208-22;
location, i., 299, 301.
Suraminis, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
450.
Surcis, i., 145, see Sarsis.
Surgelp, evil spirit, Trinity River tribes, iii., 176.
Surgery, see Medicine.
Surillos (Cartakas), South Californian tribe, i., 402-22;
location, i., 458.
Surites, Matlaltzinca god, iii., 446; Tarasco high-priest, v.,
526.
Sursees, i., 145, see Sarsis.
Surugunti, tribe of Isthmians, i., 747-85; location, i., 795.
Suscols, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
363, 452; lang., iii., 650.
Sussees, i., 145, see Sarsis.
Suthsetts, tribe of Nootkas, i., 174-208; location, i., 295.
Sutter Creek, i., 456.
Suwapamuck, iii., 613, see Shushwap.
Suyacal, a species of palm leaf, i., 690.
Suysum, i., 453, see Suisunes.
Swarrow, food of Pueblos, i., 540.
Sweat-houses, i., 83, 356, 395, 537-8; ii., 595-6; iii., 159;
iv., 648, 650, 652, 659.
Sweetland, California, antiq., iv., 706.
Sweetwater Lake, i., 470.
Swielpree, tribal name of Colvilles, i., 314.
Swimming, i., 172, 198, 552, 666, 741; ii., 297.
Swodámish, tribe of Sound Indians, i., 208-22; location, i., 300.
Swords, i., 235, 379, 407, 655, 722, 761; ii., 310, 743.
Symbols, i., 18, 634; ii., 258, 272-3, 277; iii., 268, 280-5,
312-25, 352-4, 371-2, 396-8, 400, 403, 416-18; v., 90, 221.
Syphilis, see Venereal Disease.
Syrinx, a musical instrument, i., 738.
Szeukha, Pima god, i., 553; iii., 78-9; v., 14.
T
Taa, Honduras, lang., iii., 783.
Taamish, Haidah sorcerer, i., 170; iii., 150.
Tabahteas, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
451.
Tabai, Maya god, ii., 698.
Tabascans, Nahua nation, i., 644-69; ii., 133-629; special
mention, i., 648-9, 655-6, 658-9, 661; ii., 408, 619; lang.,
iii., 726, 759, 763; v., 616; hist., v., 239, 473, 631.
Tabasco (Tauasco), tribes described, i., 644-70; ii., 133-629;
location, i., 682, 790; ii., 112; name, ii., 111; lang., iii.,
726, 759, 763; antiq., iv., 287-8; hist., v., 239, 473, 631.
Tabasco, Zacatecas, antiq., iv., 592.
Tabasco River, i., 671.
Tabechyas (Sun-hunters), tribe of Shoshones, i., 422-42;
location, i., 470.
Tabeguachis, i., 465, see Tabiachis.
Tabe-naches, i., 464, see Tabiachis.
Tabi, Yucatan, antiq., iv., 217-18.
Tabiachis (Tabeguachis, Tabe-naches), tribe of Shoshones, i.,
422-42; location, i., 464.
Table-cloths, Mayas, ii., 722, 787.
Table Mountain, California, antiq., iv., 698-9.
Tables, i., 656; ii., 572; iv., 318.
Tabore, province, Darien, i., 796.
Taburon, i., 604, see Tiburon.
Tácames, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 611.
Tacatecatl, ii., 436, see Tlacatecatl.
Taches, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
456.
Tacóóns, tribe of Chinooks, i., 222-50; location, i., 307.
Tacu, Acagchemem mythical person, iii., 165.
Tacuache, a medicinal root, ii., 599.
Tacuba (Tlacopan), city, Mexico, ii., 92; antiq., iv., 503.
Tacubaya, locality, Mexico, iii., 405.
Tacullies (Carriers, Tacully, Takuli, Tokalis), tribe of Tinneh,
i., 114-37; location and name, i., 114-15, 121, 145; special
mention, i., 121-6, 130, 137; myth., iii., 98, 143, 517; v.,
19; lang., iii., 584, 591-2.
Tacultas (Tahcultahs), tribe of Nootkas, i., 174-208; location,
i., 298.
Taeeteetan, tribe of Thlinkeets, i., 94-114; location, i., 143.
Tagualilos, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 613.
Taguzgalpa, i., 793, see Tegucigalpa.
Tahahteen, lang., iii., 593.
Tahanos (Tahanas), tribe of Pueblos, i., 526-56; location, i.,
600.
Tahatens, North Californian tribe, i., 326-61; location, i., 445.
Tahco River, i., 148.
Tahcultahs, i., 298, see Tacultas.
Taheechaypah Pass, California, antiq., iv., 695.
Tahijuas, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 459.
Tahlewahs, i., 445, see Tolewahs.
Tahoe Lake, i., 469; iii., 89-90; v., 14.
Tahos, i., 600, see Taos.
Tahtoos, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
448; special mention, i., 391, 398; lang., iii., 643.
Tahuas, tribe of Mosquitos, i., 711-47; location, i., 713.
Tahucup, Tabascan canoe, ii., 398.
Tahus, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; special mention, i.,
584-5; myth., iii., 180-1; lang., iii., 719.
Taighs, i., 320, see Tairtlas.
Tailotlacs, tribe of Toltecs, v., 338.
Tairtlas (Taighs), Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91; location,
i., 320.
Taitinapams, tribe of Sound Indians, i., 208-22; location, i.,
304.
Taitzaes, Maya nation, i., 644-69; ii., 630-803; lang., iii.,
761.
Tajimaroa, v., 524, see Tangimaroa.
Takaitsky, name for Kaiyuh Mountains, i., 148.
Takama River, i., 304.
Takankóu, Thlinkeet spirit-land, iii., 148.
Tákeeyek, Thlinkeet land-spirit, iii., 148, 516.
Takoo Inlet, i., 143.
Takoo River, i., 143.
Takoos (Takos), tribe of Thlinkeets, i., 96-114; location, i.,
96, 143.
Taktik, locality, Guatemala, i., 788.
Takuli, i., 145, see Tacullies.
Ta-Kuth-Kutchin, tribe of Tinneh, i., 114-37; location, i., 146.
Talam, Guatemala, antiq., iv., 131.
Talamancas, tribe of Isthmians, i., 747-85; location, i., 748,
794; special mention, i., 758, 784; lang., iii., 793.
Talaquichis, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 612.
Talatui, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
450; lang., iii., 649-50.
Talawas, i., 445, see Tolewahs.
Talaxano, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 459.
Talcan, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
453.
Talchedunes, i., 598, see Yalchedunes.
Talches, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
363, 455.
Talkotins (Talcotins, Tautin), tribe of Tinneh, i., 114-37;
location, i., 115, 146; special mention, i., 125-6.
Tallarcittos, locality, Central California, i., 454.
Tallenches, i., 455, see Talluches.
Talluches (Tallenches), Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401;
location, i., 363, 455-6.
Talquatees, tribe of Thlinkeets, i., 94-114; location, i., 143.
Taltic, locality, Guatemala, i., 788.
Tamacaztobal, Nicaragua angel, iii., 493.
Tamagast, Nicaragua priest, iii., 495.
Tamagostat (Tamagostad), Nicaragua god, iii., 75, 490-1.
Tamajabs, i., 525, see Yamajabs.
Tamalanos, i., 452, see Tomales.
Tamales (Tamalli), a kind of meat pies, i., 577, 626, 653-4, 694;
ii., 356, 618, 722.
Tamallos, i., 452, see Tomales.
Tamals (Tamales, Tamalos), i., 452, see Tomales.
Tamanowas, Chinook spirits, iii., 156.
Tamath, Chinook paradise, iii., 519.
Tamaulipa Moza, locality, Tamaulipas, i., 613.
Tamaulipas, tribes described, i., 617-44; location of tribes,
i., 571, 593, 604, 674; ii., 114; special mention, i., 624,
632, 635; lang., iii., 727, 744, 759, 776; antiq., iv., 693-7;
hist., v., 239.
Tamaulipecos, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 613;
lang., iii., 744.
Tamazula, village, Sinaloa, i., 609.
Tamazulapa, Miztec dialect, iii., 749.
Tambla, Honduras, antiq., iv., 71.
Tambourine, i., 91, 112, 170.
Tamerlane, an Asiatic prince, v., 46.
Tamissee River, Tamaulipas, antiq., iv., 594.
Tamlocklocks (Yamlocklocks), Central Californian tribe, i.,
361-401; location, i., 450.
Tamoanchan (Temoanchan), first home of Nahuas in America, v.,
189-97, 621.
Tamolécas, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location and
name, i., 456.
Tampico, lang., iii., 781.
Tamp Pah-utes, tribe of Shoshones, i., 422-42; location, i., 464.
Tamub, Quiché princely family, i., 789; v., 546-56, 560, 562,
565, 588-9, 592, see Dan.
Tananah River, i., 147.
Tananahs, i., 147, see Tenan Kutchins.
Tanaquiapemes, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i.,
613.
Tancah (Tancaj), locality, Yucatan, v., 626.
Tanchi, Yucatan, antiq., iv., 211.
Tanela, locality, Panama Isthmus, i., 754.
Tanétze, locality, Oajaca, i., 679.
Tangaxoan I., Tarasco king, v., 516, 524.
Tangaxoan II., Tarasco king, v., 525-6.
Tanges-at-sa, i., 132, see Tengratsey.
Tangimaroa (Tajimaroa, Tlaximaloyan), city, Michoacan, v., 434,
477, 525.
Tanks, see Reservoirs.
Tankuché, Yucatan, antiq., iv., 262.
Tanna-kutshi, tribe of Tinneh, i., 114-37; location, i., 147.
Tanning, i., 49, 271, 345, 544, 657; ii., 363-5, 486.
Tanos, Pueblo village and tribe, i., 526-56; location, i., 601.
Tantsaut-'dtinnè, name for Red-knives, i., 144.
Tantsawhot-Dinneh, name for Copper Indians, i., 144.
Tanub, Tulan king, v., 554.
Tao Mountains, i., 465.
Taos (Tahos), Pueblo village and tribe, i., 526-56; location, i.,
527, 599-600; lang., iii., 681; antiq., iv., 664-5.
Taos, tribe of Mosquitos, i., 711-47; location, i., 713.
Tapaiaxin, a species of animal, ii., 599.
Tapalan, locality, Guatemala, v., 214.
Tapaligui, Nicaragua title, ii., 740-1.
Tapanissilac, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i.,
459.
Tapestry, ii., 161, 440, 484, 572.
Tapir, as food, i., 721; ii., 721.
Tapo, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 459.
Taptul River, i., 312, 319.
Taraacazcati, Nicaragua angel, iii., 493.
Taracones, i., 594, see Faraones.
Tarahumara (Taraumara), district of Chihuahua, i., 608-9.
Tarahumares (Tarahumáras), North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91;
location and name, i., 572, 609-10; special mention, i., 574-8,
582-3, 588, 590; lang., iii., 665-7, 672, 678, 706, 710-13.
Taraichi (Taraitzi), village, Sinaloa, i., 601, 609.
Tarapecha Chanhori, Chichimec Wanacace chief, v., 518.
Tararécua, locality, Chihuahua, i., 609.
Taras, Tarascos god, iii., 403, 446.
Tarascos (Michoacaques), Nahua nation, i., 617-44; ii., 133-629;
location, i., 676; special mention, i., 623, 625, 631, 640,
643; ii., 107-8, 130, 140-1, 214-15, 229, 353, 365-8, 371-2,
407-8, 417, 427, 458-9, 473, 490, 521-2, 609, 619-22, 625, 629;
myth., iii., 66-7, 403, 445-7, 541; v., 13; lang., iii., 737,
744-7; v., 508; hist., v., 307-10, 328, 434-5, 508-26.
Taraumara, i., 608, see Tarahumara.
Tariacuri, Tarasco king, v., 522-4.
Tarigaran, Michoacan ruler, v., 517.
Tarimi Chundido, locality, Michoacan, v., 520.
Tarpom, a fish, i., 719.
Tarro, locality, Central California, i., 455.
Tarshish, location of, v., 64-5.
Tartars, American origin-traces, v., 54.
Tashhuantas, North Californian tribe, i., 326-61; location, i.,
445.
Tash Utes (Tash Yutas), tribe of Shoshones, i., 422-42; location,
i., 464, 470.
Tassajo, dried meat, i., 695.
Tassels, i., 691; ii., 366-7, 369, 403, 405; iii., 369, 385,
407-17.
Tataguas, i., 458, see Lagunas.
Tatayac, Quiché prince, v., 592.
Tatché, South California, lang., iii., 656-8.
Tatéma, Tarahumare food, i., 577.
Tathzey-Kutshi (Gens du Fou, Tratsè-Kutshi), tribe of Tinneh, i.,
114-37; location, i., 147.
Tatimolo, iii., 777, see Naolingo.
Tatlit-Kutchin (Peel River Indians), tribe of Tinneh, i., 114-37;
location, i., 146; special mention, i., 127-8; lang., iii.,
586.
Tatouche, tribe of Sound Indians, i., 208-22; location, i., 302.
Tatquinte, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
453.
Tatshiautin, tribe of Tinneh, i., 114-37; location, i., 145.
Tattooing, Hyperboreans, i., 48, 72, 117, 127; Columbians, i.,
159, 182, 210-11, 229, 257; Californians, i., 332-3, 347,
369-71, 404, 424; New Mexicans, i., 480, 483, 532-3, 559,
574-5; Mexicans, i., 623, 651; ii., 371; Central Americans, i.,
691-2, 716-17, 753; ii., 651, 731, 733, 741.
Tauasco, i., 671, see Tabasco.
Taucos, Pueblo village and tribe, i., 526-56; location, i., 600.
Taulepa, Guatemalan dialect, iii., 760.
Tauro, Sinaloa dialect, iii., 707.
Tautin, i., 145, see Talkotins.
Tavorino, a poisonous fish, i., 762.
Tawalemnes (Touserlemnies, Turealemnes), Central Californian
tribe, i., 361-401; location, i., 450; lang., iii., 649.
Taxcal, Mayapan lord, v., 626.
Taxco, locality, Guerrero, ii., 382, 473.
Taxes, i., 344, 659, 728, 770; ii., 231-9, 380, 388, 464, 636,
642, 652-5, 720; iii., 430-1; v., 355, 381-2, 575.
Taxlipu, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 459.
Tayasal, Guatemala, antiq., iv., 133.
Tayauh, a Tepanec prince, v., 384-5.
Taylor Peak Mountain, iii., 86; v., 14.
Tays, i., 194, see Tyee.
Taysacaa, Miztec high-priest, ii., 207; v., 529.
Taywah, i., 601, see Tegua.
Tay-waugh, iii., 671, see Tegua.
Tazi, iii., 350, see Teteionan.
Tcatlaiz, town, Tlascala, v., 498.
Tchalabones (Tcholovonis), Central Californian tribe, i.,
361-401; location, i., 453.
Tchéilichs, i., 303, see Chehalis.
Tchilouits (Tchelouits), tribe of Chinooks, i., 222-50; location,
i., 306, 320.
Tchinkîtâné, i., 95, see Thlinkeets.
Tchinouk (Tchi-nuk), i., 304, see Chinook.
Tchipantchicktchicks, Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91;
location, i., 320.
Tchokoyems, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
449.
Tchololahs (Bald Hill Indians), North Californian tribe, i.,
326-61; location, i., 446.
Tcholoones, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
453.
Tcholovonis, i., 365, see Tchalabones.
Tchugatchih, i., 139, see Chugatsches.
Tchutski, i., 139, see Tschuktschi.
Teacuaeitzica (Teakuaeitzicai), Cora dialect, iii., 719, 721.
Teakuaeitzizti, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i.,
672.
Teatas, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 607.
Teates, i., 298, see Teets.
Teatlahuiani, iii., 418, see Tezcatzoncatl.
Teatzelhuia, name for Napatecutli, iii., 417.
Teayamiqui, v., 41, see Teoyaomique.
Tebacas, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 614;
lang., iii., 718.
Tebechyas (Sun-hunters), tribe of Shoshones, i., 422-42;
location, i., 464.
Tecali, a transparent stone, ii., 161, 557, 573.
Tecamachalco (Techamachalco), town, Guerrero, i., 677, 679.
Tecàrgonis, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 609.
Tecaté Valley, i., 458.
Tecayaguis, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 607.
Tecayahuatzin, lord of Huexotzinco, v., 504.
Tecayas, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 614.
Teccalli, an entail in Tlascala, ii., 229.
Teccizcalli, Nahua temple, ii., 585.
Techamachalco, i., 679, see Tecamachalco.
Techcatepec, station, Aztec migration, v., 323.
Techcatitlan, station, Aztec migration, v., 323-4.
Techcatl, sacred meteorite, iii., 248.
Techichis, Mexican dogs, ii., 721.
Techotl (Techotlala, Techotlalatzin), Chichimec king, ii.,
188-91; v., 335, 347-57, 366-7, 582; lord of Iztapalapan, v.,
439.
Techotlala (Techotlalatzin), v., 347, see Techotl.
Tecoatega, town, Nicaragua, ii., 713.
Tecolotlan, ancient name of Vera Paz, v., 349.
Tecomal, Mexico, antiq., iv., 546.
Tecomatl, a Mexican cup, ii., 484.
Tecomic, a Mexican chief, v., 347.
Tecos, i., 677, see Tlapanecs.
Tecoxepual, Quiché month, ii., 766.
Tecoxines, i., 677, see Tlapanecs.
Tecozahuitl, ochre, ii., 487.
Tecpan, town, Guerrero, i., 678; a Chichimec chief, v., 293;
station, Chichimec migration, v., 294; thirteen tribes of,
hist., v., 546, 555, 563.
Tecpan Atitlan, Guatemala, antiq., iv., 121.
Tecpancaltzin, Toltec king, v., 265-6; name for Huemac II., v.,
267.
Tecpanecs, iii., 724, see Tepanecs.
Tecpanèques, ii., 365, see Tepanecs.
Tecpan Guatemala (Tecpanguatemala), town, Guatemala, i., 789;
hist., v., 577.
Tecpanpouhque (Tecpantlaca), Palace people, ii., 224.
Tecpantlalli, Palace lands, ii., 224.
Tecpatepec, station, Chichimec migration, v., 294.
Tecpatitlan, i., 672, see Tepatitlan.
Tecpatl, Nahua day, ii., 505, 512, 516-17; iii., 57-8; lord of
Atotonilco, v., 349.
Tecpatlan, town, Chiapas, i., 682.
Tecpatzin, a Nahuatlaca chief, v., 88, 306.
Tecpayocan, station, Aztec migration, v., 323-4.
Tecpayuca, station, Aztec migration, v., 323.
Tecpoyo Acauhtli, a Toltec noble, v., 315.
Tecpoyotl, a court crier, ii., 436.
Tecualmes, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; lang., iii., 720.
Tecuciciotilmatli, a court mantle, ii., 374.
Tecucxicolli, priest's dress, ii., 315.
Tecuexes (Tejuejue, Tequexes), Central Mexican tribe, i., 617-44;
location, i., 672; lang., iii., 719.
Tecuhtlacuiloltzin, lord of Acolman, v., 349.
Tecuhtli, Nahua title, ii., 194-200, 437.
Tecuiche, Colorado River dialect, iii., 686.
Tecuilhuitzintli (Tecuilhuitontli), Nahua month, ii., 325, 352,
510.
Tecuiltecatl, an Acolhua prince, v., 377-8.
Tecuitlatl, Nahua food, ii., 356.
Tecum, Quiché king, v., 566, 594, 602.
Tecumbalam, Quiché mythic animal, iii., 47.
Tecum Umam, Quiché king, v., 566, 595.
Tecutlatoque, Nahua title, ii., 137.
Tecuzistecatl (Tezcociztecatl), Nahua god, iii., 62.
Tedexeños, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 613.
Teeswin, Apache drink, i., 517.
Teeth, i., 46, 91, 117, 158, 163, 177, 225, 244, 255-6, 333-4,
364-5, 530, 558, 619, 622, 647, 651, 701, 714, 722, 750, 752,
771; ii., 371-2, 624, 731-2; iii., 325, 398.
Teets (Haitlins, Teates), tribe of Nootkas, i., 174-208;
location, i., 175, 298; special mention, i., 185, 191, 208.
Tegua (Taywah, Tay-waugh, Téquà, Tigua), Pueblo village and
tribe, i., 526-56; location, i., 600; lang., iii., 671, 673,
681-3.
Teguaca, Honduras, lang., iii., 783.
Teguantepeque, i., 679, see Tehuantepec.
Tegucigalpa (Taguzgalpa), a district of Honduras, i., 790, 793;
lang., iii., 760; antiq., iv., 70.
Teguéco, town, Sonora, i., 608.
Tegueco River, i., 607.
Teguecos, i., 608, see Tehuecos.
Teguima, Opata dialect, iii., 699.
Teguioa, iii., 246, see Tezcatlipoca.
Teguis, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 606;
lang., iii., 699.
Tehama County, California, i., 442.
Tehamas, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; special mention,
i., 362.
Tehanghir, an Asiatic prince, v., 46.
Tehuacan el Viejo, Puebla, antiq., iv., 466.
Tehuantepec (Teguantepeque, Teoquantepec), Isthmus, i., 654, 658,
679-80; ii., 111-12; lang., iii., 757; antiq., iv., 368-74;
hist., v., 298, 349, 425, 443-7, 530, 534-6.
Tehuecos (Teguecos), North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location,
i., 608; special mention, i., 585; lang., iii., 707-10.
Tehuisos, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 607.
Teicauhtzin, Nahua vice-god, iii., 427.
Teicu, iii., 380, see Tlazoltecotl.
Teilpiloyan, Nahua jail, ii., 453.
Teiocoiani Tehimatini, name for Tezcatlipoca, iii., 210.
Teiotocan, locality, Mexico, ii., 441.
Teite, Nicaragua chief, ii., 645-6.
Teixamique, Nahua shrouders, iii., 406.
Teixhuihuan, Tlascalan title, ii., 229.
Teja, Quiché mythic personage, v., 599.
Tejano, Coahuila, lang., iii., 714-15.
Tejar, locality, Guatemala, i., 789.
Tejey, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i., 454.
Tejon, locality, South California, i., 458.
Tejon Indians, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i.,
460.
Tejuas, tribe of Apaches, i., 473-526; location, i., 474; iii.,
595.
Tejuejue, iii., 719, see Tecuexes.
Tejupilco, Mexico, antiq., iv., 480.
Tekax, Yucatan, antiq., iv., 219.
Tékeeyeks, Thlinkeet water-spirits, iii., 148, 516.
Tekep, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 459.
Tekunratums, Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91; location, i.,
312.
Telacalzin, Nahua chief, v., 243.
Telamé, South California, lang., iii., 656-8.
Telemnies, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i.,
457.
Telhuitl, paper offerings, iii., 343.
Telica, town, Nicaragua, i., 792.
Teloloapan, city, Guerrero, v., 442.
Telpochcalli, Nahua schools, ii., 243.
Telpochtiliztli, Nahua religious order, iii., 436.
Telpochtlato, Nahua teacher, ii., 243.
Telpuchtli, name for Tezcatlipoca, iii., 199.
Telpuchtlitaquitlamani, Nahua title, ii., 402.
Temacatzin, lord of Huexotzinco, v., 349.
Temacpalco, locality, Mexico, iii., 253, 257.
Temaitl, a priest's censer, iii., 335.
Temalacatl, gladiatorial stone, ii., 429, 586.
Temalcacaiotilmatlitenisio, a court mantle, ii., 374.
Temalpalco, locality, Mexico, v., 376.
Temamacpalitotique, sorcerers, iii., 364.
Tematzin, prince of Huexotzinco, v., 349.
Temazcalli (Temescal), Nahua steam bath, i., 355-6, 626, 639-40;
ii., 574, 595-6.
Temazcalteci, Nahua goddess, iii., 353.
Temazcaltitlan, locality, Mexico, v., 345.
Temecauh, Nahua mistress, ii., 264.
Temecula, village, South California, i., 460.
Temesathi, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i.,
459.
Temescal, i., 355-6, see Temazcalli.
Temeteti, California, antiq., iv., 692.
Temictzin, a Tlatelulco general, v., 421.
Temimiltepec, province of Mexico, v., 346.
Temoanchan, v., 191, see Tamoanchan.
Temoksees, tribe of Shoshones, i., 422-42; location, i., 468.
Temoris, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 610;
special mention, i., 575.
Tempanahgoes, i., 464, see Timpanogos.
Tempanecatl, v., 389, see Tlacaeleltzin.
Tempantzin, a Tailotlac chief, v., 338.
Tempatlahuac, a Teo-Chichimec chief, v., 490.
Temple of the Beau Relief, Chiapas, antiq., iv., 328-30.
Temple of the Cross, Chiapas, antiq., iv., 330-8.
Temple of the Sun, Chiapas, antiq., iv., 338-41.
Temple of the three Tablets, Chiapas, antiq., iv., 323-7.
Temples, Columbians, i., 165; Californians, i., 405, 409;
Mexicans, ii., 211, 227-8, 332-3, 414-15, 554, 560, 576-89,
613; iii., 192, 259-60, 272, 292-4, 430-1, 437-8, 447-8;
antiq., iv., 298-352, 376-84, 391-420, 431, 521-49, 574-5,
592-3; hist., v., 86, 265, 409, 422, 426, 438-40, 478; Central
Americans, i., 734-5; ii., 647, 787-94; iii., 477, 483-4, 494,
499; antiq., iv., 27-8, 82-9, 115-16, 136-7, 143-4, 154-285;
Peru, antiq., iv., 796, 800.
Tenamatlac, locality, Mexico, v., 378.
Tenamitec, locality, Mexico, v., 314.
Tenampua, Honduras, antiq., iv., 71, 73-7.
Tenancacaltzin, Acolhua king, v., 333-5.
Tenanches, sick nurses, i., 583.
Tenanco, locality, Mexico, v., 280.
Tenan Kutchin (Tananahs, Gens de Buttes), tribe of Tinneh, i.,
114-37; location, i., 115, 131, 147; special mention, i., 127,
131-2.
Tenawas, tribe of Apaches, i., 473-526; location, i., 473.
Tenayocan, city, Mexico, ii., 104; v., 292, 295, 311-12, 320,
332-5.
Tenayuca, serpent-symbols, iii., 137.
Tenexotzin, Tlascala, antiq., iv., 477.
Tenez, i., 681, see Chinantecs.
Tengratsey (Tanges-at-sa), Kutchin tribal name, i., 132.
Tenimes, i., 677, see Tlapanecs.
Teniqueche, South California, lang., iii., 686.
Tenisichs, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
456.
Tennessee, Mississippi Valley, antiq., iv., 766, 776.
Tenochtitlan, city, Mexico, ii., 414, 559; v., 343-6, 420-1, see
Mexico city.
Tenpenny Utahs (Utes), i., 463, 470, see Timpenaguchyas.
Tentetl, Nahua mouth-stone, ii., 404, 614.
Tenuai, Navajo tribal name, i., 474-5.
Tenuch (Tenuchtzin), a Mexican chief, v., 223, 345-6, 356.
Tenuckttau, tribe of Nootkas, i., 174-208; location, i., 295.
Teoamoxtli, divine book of Toltecs, v., 251.
Teobat, Nicaragua idols, iii., 493.
Teocahuitl, a species of pitch, ii., 372.
Teocalli, Nahua temple, ii., 576.
Teocaltiche, village, Jalisco, i., 672.
Teocaltitlan, village, Jalisco, i., 672.
Teochiapan, town, Chiapas, i., 681.
Teo-Chichimecs, Nahua nation, i., 617-44; ii., 133-629; location,
ii., 112-13; special mention, ii., 271, 595, 619; myth., iii.,
403; hist., v., 336-7, 487, 617.
Teocipactli, Nahua Noah, iii., 66, 68.
Teocuitlapopocatzin, lord of Cuetlaxcohuapan, v., 349.
Teo-Culhuacan (Téo-Colhuacan, Teuculhuàcan), station, Aztec
migration, i., 610, 676; v., 221, 323.
Teohicpalpan, supreme tribunal at Tezcuco, ii., 440.
Teohuacan, town, Oajaca, i., 679.
Teohuayacatzin, lord of Quiahuiztlan, v., 503.
Teohuiznahuac, station, Chichimec migration, v., 242, 487.
Teoicpalli, a sacred box, iii., 303.
Te-ok-a-wilk, name for Humboldt Bay Indians, i., 327, 446.
Teololinga, rocking stones, Vera Cruz, antiq., iv., 434.
Teonanacatl, a kind of mushroom, ii., 360.
Teopan, a quarter of Mexico city, also temple place, ii., 563,
576; v., 490.
Teopatli, divine unction, ii., 601; iii., 435.
Teopixca, locality, Chiapas, v., 604.
Teopixqui, order of priests, ii., 202.
Teoqualo, Nahua sacrament, iii., 300, 315.
Teoquantepec, v., 349, see Tehuantepec.
Teotbilche, Nicaragua god, iii., 492.
Teotecuhtli, Nahua high-priest, ii., 202; iii., 432.
Teotenancas, tribe of Nahuas, v., 280.
Teotes, Nicaragua gods, iii., 75.
Teotetl, name for obsidian, iii., 238.
Teoti, Pipile chief or pontiff, ii., 648; iii., 489.
Teotihuacan, city, Mexico, ii., 114, 441, 613; iii., 187; antiq.,
iv., 529-44; v., 55-6; hist., v., 190-2, 203-5, 238-9, 248,
281-84, 395.
Teotilac, Chiapas, antiq., iv., 353.
Teotitlan (Teutitlán), town, Oajaca, i., 680-1; hist., v., 444.
Teotl, Nahua god, iii., 110, 183-6, 193.
Teotlachco, locality, Mexico, iii., 298.
Teotla Cochoalco, station, Teo-Chichimec migration, v., 242, 487.
Teotlalale-Matlava-Tepeva, name for Tonacateotle, iii., 191.
Teotlalpan, valley, Tlascala, v., 498.
Teotleco, Nahua month, ii., 332-4, 510.
Teotost, iii., 492, see Toste.
Teotzapotlan, town, Oajaca, i., 679; hist., v., 324, 446, 530-1.
Teoxcahualco, town, Mexico, v., 412.
Teoxihuitl, Nahua divine year, ii., 304; iii., 429.
Teoyaomique (Teayamiqui, Teoyaomiqui), Nahua goddess, iii., 188,
397-400, 513; v., 41; Mexico, antiq., iv., 512-15.
Teoyaotlatohua, Nahua god, iii., 399.
Teozomaco, station, Aztec migration, v., 324.
Tepagues (Tepahues), North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location,
i., 608, 610; special mention, i., 581; lang., iii., 707.
Tepahpaca Teaaltati, name for Napatecutli, iii., 417.
Tepanabaz, Guatemalan drum, i., 705.
Tepanahuaste, Lacandon drum, i., 705.
Tepaneca, station, Aztec migration, v., 323.
Tepanecapan, a ward of Tezcuco city, v., 404.
Tepaneca Tecuhtli, Tepanec imperial title, v., 396.
Tepanecs (Tecpanecs, Tecpanèques), Nahua nation, i., 617-44;
ii., 133-629; location and name, i., 675; ii., 130; special
mention, ii., 92, 330-1, 365, 413; lang., iii., 724-5; hist.,
v., 307-482.
Tepanoaya, locality, Mexico, iii., 253.
Tepanteohuatzin, order of priests, ii., 202; iii., 433.
Tepantlatoani, Nahua lawyers, ii., 444.
Tepapayecan, station, Teo-Chichimec migration, v., 489.
Tepatec, locality, Mexico, v., 376.
Tepatitlan (Tecpatitlan), town, Jalisco, i., 672; antiq., iv.,
573.
Tepeaca, Puebla, antiq., iv., 467; hist., v., 420, 490, 495, 500.
Tepecanos, Central Mexican tribe, i., 617-44; special mention,
i., 628; lang., iii., 719.
Tepechpan, Nahua title, ii., 441.
Tepecoacuilco (Tepecuacuilco), town, Guerrero, i., 677; antiq.,
iv., 424.
Tepehuanes, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location and name,
i., 572, 613-14; special mention, i., 575, 585, 590; lang.,
iii., 667, 672, 678, 706, 717.
Tepeiac, town, Oajaca, i., 679.
Tepeilhuitl, Nahua month, ii., 334, 511; iii., 343.
Tepejacac, v., 323, see Tepeyacac.
Tepemaxalco, city, Matlaltzinco, v., 433.
Tepenec, station, Chichimec migration, v., 242, 487.
Tepepul, Quiché king, v., 566, 581, 583.
Tepepul II., Quiché king, v., 594.
Tepepulco, station, Chichimec migration, v., 294; town, Mexico,
v., 338, 476.
Tepeticpac (Texcalticpac), a quarter of Tlascala city, ii., 412;
v., 496-498, 503.
Tepetla, station, Toltec migration, v., 213.
Tepetlaoztoc, town, Mexico, ii., 441; v., 317, 497.
Tepetlapan (Tepetlapa), station, Aztec migration, v., 324.
Tepetoca, locality, Mexico, iii., 298.
Tepetzingo, locality, Mexico, iii., 333.
Tepeuh (Tepeu), name for Gucumatz, ii., 716-17; iii., 475;
Guatemala tribe, v., 21, 546; Quiché god, v., 170; station,
Quiché migration, v., 562; name for Iztayul, v., 574.
Tepeu Yaqui, Quiché title, ii., 644.
Tepexe el Viejo, Puebla, antiq., iv., 467.
Tepexic, locality, Mexico, i., 673; station, Aztec migration, v.,
323.
Tepexomaco, locality, Mexico, v., 297.
Tepeyacac (Tepejacac), station, Aztec migration, v., 323.
Tepeyollotli (Tepeyoloyòhua), Nahua calendar sign and god, ii.,
516.
Tepeyoloyòhua, ii., 516, see Tepeyollotli.
Tepic, Jalisco, antiq., iv., 574.
Tepieme, Nahua idols, iii., 347.
Tepitoton (Tepictoton), Nahua idols, iii., 419.
Tepocas, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 572,
605; special mention, i., 583; lang., iii., 704.
Tepolohua, name for Xayacamachan, v., 497-8.
Teponaztli (Teponaztle), Mexican musical instrument, ii., 293;
iii., 63; iv., 478.
Tepopochuiliztli, iii., 422, see Toxcatl.
Tepotzotlan, a province of Mexico, v., 375.
Tepoxch, Nahua sacrifice, iii., 345.
Tepozotlan, station, Teo-Chichimec migration, v., 487.
Tepuspe, village, Sonora, i., 607.
Tepuzculula (Tepuzculano), Miztec dialect, iii., 749, 751.
Tepuztecatl, Nahua god, iii., 418.
Téquà, i., 600, see Tegua.
Tequaquilli, Nahua chief priest, ii., 206.
Tequechmecaniani, name for Tezcatzoncatl, iii., 418.
Tequepas (Tequepes), South Californian tribe, i., 402-22;
location, i., 459.
Tequexes, iii., 720, see Tecuexes.
Teqüimas, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 606.
Tequinas, Isthmian sorcerers, i., 777.
Tequisquiac (Tequixquiac), station, Aztec migration, v., 323.
Tequitin tlacotl, tributary provinces, Mexico, ii., 236.
Tequizquitl, coarse salt, ii., 354.
Teremendo, Michoacan, antiq., iv., 571.
Terrabas (Tiribees, Tiribis), tribe of Isthmians, i., 747-85;
location, i., 748, 794-5; special mention, i., 784-5; lang.,
iii., 793; antiq., iv., 24.
Terra cotta, i., 705; antiq., iv., 22, 65-6, 72-3, 127, 263-5,
316-594 passim, 780.
Terrapa, village, Sonora, i., 606.
Terrenate Mountain, i., 603.
Terwars, North Californian tribe, i., 326-61; location, i., 442,
445.
Tésia, town, Sonora, i., 608.
Tesoro, see Cerro del Tesoro.
Tesotal, locality, Arizona, i., 602.
Tesuque (Tezuque), Pueblo town, New Mexico, i., 527, 599; lang.,
iii., 681; antiq., iv., 667.
Tête de Biche, locality, Utah, i., 464, 470.
Teteionan (Tazi, Toccy, Toci, Tocitzin, Tozi), Nahua goddess,
ii., 279, 308, 601; iii., 308-9, 350; v., 464.
Tête Jaune Cache, locality, British Columbia, i., 310.
Tetenanco, a city of Matlaltzinca, v., 433.
Tetepanco, station, Aztec migration, v., 323-4.
Tetevaltia, Nahua religious feast, ii., 395.
Tetevitl, Nahua paper offerings, iii., 346.
Tetikilhati, Totonac dialect, iii., 777.
Tetipac, Guerrero, antiq., iv., 424.
Tetipac el Viejo, Guerrero, antiq., iv., 424.
Tetlahto, Tezcucan title, ii., 189; v., 350.
Tetlahuehuetquizitzin, a Chichimec prince, v., 474-5.
Tetlimonamiquian, Nahua sacrifice, ii., 340.
Tetliyacac (Tetliyucatl), station, Teo-Chichimec migration, v.,
489.
Tetzaapan, Nahua temple bath, ii., 587.
Tetzateotl (Tetzauhteotl), name for Huitzilopochtli, iii., 289,
302.
Tetzauh, name for Tezcatlipoca, v., 324.
Tetzcoco, i., 676, see Tezcuco.
Tetzihuatzin, a Mexican princess, v., 363.
Tetzilacatl, Nahua gong, ii., 293.
Tetzitzimitl, a Teo-Chichimec chief, v., 490.
Tetzontli, a species of stone used for building, ii., 160, 557,
568, 570, 581; v., 454.
Teuculhuàcan, i., 676, see Teo-Culhuacan.
Teuhchimaltzin, an Acolhua officer, v., 448.
Teuhtlehuac, a Tepanec prince, v., 355-6.
Teul, locality, Jalisco, iii., 448; v., 509.
Teumetl, maguey wine, iii., 243.
Teupa, Pipile temple, ii., 707.
Teutecomatl, Nahua drinking cup, ii., 285.
Teutíla, town, Oajaca, i., 680-1.
Teutitlán, i., 680, see Tootitlan.
Texas, tribes described, i., 473-525; location, i., 591-4; lang.,
iii., 593-5, 660; antiq., iv., 597.
Texas Flat, California, antiq., iv., 702.
Texcalapa, locality, Mexico, iii., 245.
Texcalcevia, Nahua drink, ii., 359.
Texcalcevilo, Nahua drink, ii., 359.
Texcalla (Texcalticpac), v., 491, see Tlascala.
Texcalpa, Mexico, antiq., iv., 536-7.
Texcaltepec Mountain, v., 328.
Texcaltlauhco, mythical river, iii., 246.
Texcatlipocatl, name for Tezcatlipoca, v., 249.
Texochipantzin, v., 301, see Xochipantzin.
Texoloc, locality, Oajaca, i., 671.
Texones, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 613.
Texoxes, Nicaraguan sorcerers, iii., 495.
Teyahualco, locality, Mexico, v., 309.
Teyaohualohuani, Nahua slave traders, ii., 381.
Teyohualminqui, a Tlascaltec chief, v., 496-7.
Teyutlma, Clallam god, iii., 155.
Tezahuitl, name for Huitzilopochtli, iii., 289, 297, 303.
Tezcacalli, Nahua temple, ii., 585.
Tezcatlipoca (Taotzin, Teguioa, Tezcatlipuca, Tezcatlipucatl,
Titlacaâon), Nahua god, ii., 317-21, 332-4, 582, 603; iii.,
56-7, 62, 182-282, 422-5, 507; v., 86, 249, 259, 261-5, 268,
271-86, 426, 484, 486, 499.
Tezcatzoncatl (Teatlahuiani, Tequechmecaniani), Nahua god, ii.,
260; iii., 418.
Tezcocingo (Tezcozinco), city, Mexico, ii., 168-73; antiq., iv.,
523-6.
Tezcociztecatl, iii., 62, see Tecuzistecatl.
Tezcuco (Tetzcoco), city, Mexico, i., 675-6; ii., 92, 104;
antiq., iv., 520-3; myth., v., 20; hist., v., 249, 283, 317-19,
332-482, 499.
Tezcuco Lake, v., 203.
Tezihuaccoahuatl, v., 243, see Tzihuacohuatl.
Tezompan, town, Jalisco, i., 672.
Tezozomoc, Chichimec emperor, ii., 609; v., 341, 348-9, 351-5,
367-84; lord of Azcapuzalco, v., 464.
Tezpi, Nahua Noah, iii., 66-8; v., 13.
Tezulutlan (Tezulutan), name for Vera Paz, v., 565.
Tezuque, i., 599, see Tesuque.
Thamiens, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
363, 452; lang., iii., 653.
Theatre, see Drama.
Theft, punishment of, i., 64, 386, 509-10, 729, 770; ii., 455-8,
650, 656-8.
Thetliotin, tribe of Tinneh, i., 114-37; location, i., 145.
Thick-wood Indians, i., 144, see Beaver Indians.
Thilhoa, Nahua god, iii., 418.
Thipetotec, name for Xipe, iii., 411.
Thlingcha-dinneh (Dog-ribs), tribe of Tinneh, i., 114-37;
location, i., 144; special mention, i., 120-1, 136; lang.,
iii., 585.
Thlinkeets (Klinkits, Tchinkitâne), one of the five families
into which the Hyperboreans are divided; manners and customs
of all its nations and tribes described together, i., 94-114;
physique i., 97; dress, i., 97-102; dwellings, i., 102-3;
food, i., 103-4; weapons and war, i., 104-6; boats, i., 106-7;
manufactures and commerce, i., 107-8; government and slavery,
i., 108-9; Women, marriage, etc., i., 82, 109-12; amusements,
i., 112-13; medicine and burial, i., 113; character, i.,
113-14; myth., iii., 98-104, 129-31, 145-9, 516; v., 14, 19;
lang., iii., 579-83; location of tribes, i., 38, 94-6, 142-3.
Thlishatkmuches, Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91; location,
i., 314.
Thljegonchotana, tribe of Tinneh, i., 114-37; location, i., 148.
Thljegon River, i., 148.
Thnaina, i., 149, see Kenai.
Thoiga-rik-kah, name for Nez Percés, i., 253.
Thompson River, i., 251, 291, 310; iii., 613.
Thongeith, name for Cowichin, i., 175.
Thorames (Totorames), Central Mexican tribe, i., 617-44;
location, i., 672; hist., v., 509.
Thorns, various uses, i., 655; ii., 242, 245-6, 259, 601.
Thread, i., 79, 91, 107, 503, 657, 766; iii., 404.
Throne, ii., 440-1, 612, 621, 632-3, 637, 641-2, 646, 789, 794;
iii., 294, 390.
Thumiaterion, a Phœnician city, v., 66.
Thunder, i., 741; iii., 118, 324, 403.
Tiacapan, name for Tlazoltecotl, iii., 380.
Tiacapantzin (Tiacapapantzin), v., 330, see Tlacapantzin.
Tiahuanaco, Peru, antiq., iv., 805.
Tianazatlan, heights, Tlascala, v., 498.
Tianguez, Guatemalan market, i., 700.
Tianguiztengo, province, Mexico, i., 675.
Tianguiztepetl, locality, Mexico, v., 25.
Tianquiztli, Nahua market, ii., 383.
Tiazolteotl, name for Centeotl, iii., 350.
Tiba, Isthmian title, i., 770.
Tibahagna, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i.,
460.
Tibulca, cave near Copan, Honduras, antiq., iv., 82-3.
Tibulon, city, Yucatan, v., 632.
Tiburones, North Mexican tribe, i., 572-91; location, i., 572;
special mention, i., 583, 585, 590; lang., iii., 704.
Tiburon (Taburon) Island, i., 572, 604-5.
Ticeuiracocha (Ticeviracocha), v., 23, see Viracocha.
Ticitl, Nahua midwife, ii., 268.
Ticul, Yucatan, antiq., iv., 237-40.
Ticum, Yucatan, antiq., iv., 219.
Tie-poo-eet, i., 54, see Topek.
Tierra Amarilla, locality, Utah, i., 469-70.
Tierra Blanca, village, Chiapas, i., 682.
Tierra Caliente, ii., 89-90.
Tierra Fria, ii., 87.
Tierra Templada, ii., 87.
Tigalda Island, i., 141.
Tigaldas, tribe of Aleuts, i., 87-94; location, i., 141.
Tigers, i., 648, 716, 723, 752-3; ii., 259, 351, 720-1; iii.,
129.
Tigua, i., 600, see Tegua.
Tiguex, Pueblo province, New Mexico, i., 527, 538.
Tihax, Quiché-Cakchiquel day, ii., 767.
Tihoo, city, Yucatan, iii., 467; antiq., iv., 243-4.
Tihugun, Tinneh god, iii., 142.
Tikal, Guatemala, antiq., iv., 135-8.
Tilantongo, city, Oajaca, iii., 73; hist., v., 416, 461, 527-9.
Tilapa River, v., 602.
Tilema, Oajaca, antiq., iv., 374.
Tilijaes (Tilijais, Tilijayas), North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91;
location, i., 611-12.
Tillamooks, i., 307, see Killamooks.
Tilma (Tilmatli), Mexican mantle, i., 574, 620; ii., 366, 727.
Tilofayas, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 612.
Timbalakees, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location,
i., 449.
Timita (Timigtac, Titmictac), Central Californian tribe, i.,
361-401; location, i., 453.
Timpana Yutas, i., 470, see Timpenaguchyas.
Timpanigos, lake and desert, i., 465, 467.
Timpanigos Yutas, i., 440, see Timpanogos.
Timpanogos (Tempanahgoes, Timpanagos, Timpanigos Yutas,
Timpanoges, Timpanogs), tribe of Shoshones, i., 422-42;
location, i., 440, 462, 464, 469-70.
Timpenaguchyas (Tenpenny Utahs, Tenpenny Utes, Timpana Yutas),
tribe of Shoshones, i., 422-42; location, i., 470; special
mention, i., 440.
Timsim, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
453.
Tin, i., 483; ii., 382, 473-5; iv., 794.
Tinabsotis, Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91; location, i.,
314.
Tinachi, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 459.
Tinajas Altas, Sonora, i., 603.
Tinapihuayas, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 612.
Tinneh (Dinneh, 'Dtinnè, Tinnè, Ttynai), one of the five families
into which the Hyperboreans are divided; manners and customs
of all its nations and tribes described together, i., 114-37;
physique, i., 36, 116-17, 122, 127; dress, i., 117, 122, 128;
marriage and women, i., 117-18, 121, 123, 125-6, 132, 134;
Dwellings, i., 118, 123-4; Food, i., 118, 121, 123, 129, 135;
Weapons, i., 119; Amusements, i., 119-20, 122; Burial, i., 119,
125-7, 132, 134-5; Character, i., 120, 122, 135-7; Government,
i., 121, 123-4, 130-1, 134; Medicine, i., 124; Boats,
Implements, &c., i., 130; Myth., iii., 105-6, 131, 141-3, 518;
v., 19; lang., iii., 557-8, 583-603, 662-3; location of tribes,
i., 25, 38, 114-16, 143-9.
Tinum, Yucatan, antiq., iv., 236.
Tipitapa, village, Nicaragua, i., 792.
Tipitapa River, i., 792.
Tipotani, Nicaragua god, iii., 492.
Tiribees (Tiribis), i., 794-5, see Terrabas.
Tiripito, locality, Michoacan, v., 523.
Tisayac, Central Californian mythic person, iii., 125.
Titicaca Island, Peru, antiq., iv., 800-2.
Titicaca Lake, Peru, antiq., iv., 800-2, 805-6; v., 23.
Tititl, Nahua festival, ii., 337.
Titiyú, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
453.
Titlacaâon (Titlacahua, Titlacahuan, Titlacaoamoquequeloa,
Titlacoa, Titlacoan), names for Tezcatlipoca, iii., 57, 70,
191, 199, 214, 256; v., 259.
Titmictac, i., 453, see Timita.
Tiubta, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
455.
Tixualajtun, Yucatan, antiq., iv., 240.
Tizaapan, a district of Mexico, v., 340-1.
Tizajocan, v., 323, see Tizayocan.
Tizapetlan, Chiapas, antiq., iv., 353.
Tizatlacatzin, a Tlascaltec leader, v., 459, 504.
Tizatlalli, a species of stone, ii., 487.
Tizatlan, a quarter of Tlascala city, ii., 412; v., 497-8, 503.
Tizayocan (Tizajocan), station, Aztec migration, v., 323, 330.
Tizoc, king of Mexico, v., 417, 424, 436-9.
Tjuiccujenne, Apache tribal name, i., 474; iii., 594.
Tjulchide, Apache name for Rio Colorado, i., 595.
Tjunchi, Apache name for Rio Pecos, i., 595.
Tka, i., 447, see Hamburg Indians.
Tkhimkee, Aleut amulet, iii., 144.
T'kitskes, i., 148, see Ingaliks.
Tlaaltilzin, slaves for sacrifice, ii., 394.
Tlaamaviques, Nahua combatants, ii., 396.
Tlacabepan, Nahua vice-god, iii., 427.
Tlacacavili, Nahua mistress, ii., 264.
Tlacacebastla, Maya Quiché dialect, iii., 760.
Tlacacouhcan, Nahua temple, iii., 387.
Tlacaeleltzin (Tempanecatl), a Mexican commander, v., 389-90; a
Mexican prince, identical with Montezuma I., v., 423.
Tlacahua, Nahua title, ii., 187.
Tlacahuepancuextotzin, Nahua god, iii., 303.
Tlacahuepatzin (Tlacahuepantzin), a Mexican prince, v., 443, 459,
504.
Tlacalhuaztilmatli, a court mantle, ii., 375.
Tlacamihtzin (Tlacamilitzin, Tlacamitzin), a Toltec prince, v.,
211, 220, 243.
Tlacapantzin (Tiacapantzin, Tiacapapantzin), an Aztec princess,
v., 329.
Tlacatecatl (Tacatecatl, Tlacateccatl), Nahua judge, ii., 436.
Tlacatecololotl, Nahua evil spirit, iii., 184.
Tlacateotzin, Acolhua prince, v., 332, 334; Chimalpanec chief,
v., 338; King of Tlatelulco, v., 364-86.
Tlacatlaolli, a dish of human flesh, ii., 309.
Tlacatecco, a temple in Mexico, v., 441.
Tlacavepan, name for Tezcatlipoca, iii., 241, 246.
Tlacaxipehualiztli, Nahua month, ii., 306, 308-12, 509; iii.,
309, 420.
Tlacepoallitlaxcalli, corn cake, ii., 355.
Tlachcala, i., 676, see Tlascala.
Tlachco, a play-ground, ii., 297; town, Guerrero, v., 412.
Tlachiach, Nahua title, v., 264, 486.
Tlachicatzin, a Toltec city, v., 211.
Tlachielonique, Nahua sceptre, iii., 408.
Tlachihualtepec, locality, Puebla, v., 230.
Tlachinotzin, v., 250, see Ixtlilcuechahuac.
Tlachmalacac, town, Mexico, i., 677; v., 412.
Tlachpanquizqui, Huexotzinca chief, v., 477.
Tlachquauhyo, court dress, ii., 403.
Tlachquiauhco, city, Oajaca, v., 416, 461.
Tlachtli (Tlachtl, Tlaxtli), Nahua ball-game, ii., 297; iii.,
254; v., 467.
Tlaciuaantin, Nahua mistress, ii., 265.
Tlaciuantli, Nahua mistress, ii., 265.
Tlaclquani, iii., 380, see Tlazolteotl.
Tlaco, iii., 380, see Tlazolteotl.
Tlacochcalcatl, ii., 138, see Tlacohecalcatl.
Tlacochtli, a javelin, ii., 410.
Tlacoculaquilo, cradle ceremony, ii., 276.
Tlacohecalcatl (Tlacochcalcatl), Nahua title, ii., 137-8, 201.
Tlacolula, locality, Oajaca, i., 790; antiq., iv., 375.
Tlacomihua, a Toltec chief, v., 243, 253; Ocotelulco ruler, v.,
497.
Tlacopan (Tacuba), city, Mexico, i., 674; ii., 92, 134-6; iv.,
503; v., 396-9.
Tlacoteo, Tezcucan seminary, ii., 246.
Tlacotepec, town, Vera Cruz, i., 677; antiq., iv., 445-6.
Tlacotin, a Tepanec prince, v., 355.
Tlacotlan, town, Jalisco, i., 672.
Tlacotzontli, Nahua god, ii., 389.
Tlacuihuallan, station, Aztec migration, v., 324.
Tlagga Sillas, tribe of Koniagas, i., 69-87; location, i., 140.
Tlahuac (Cuitlahuac), Mexico, antiq., iv., 498-9.
Tlahuicas, Nahua nation, i., 617-44; ii., 133-629; location and
name, ii., 109, 130; special mention, i., 622; lang., iii.,
725; hist., v., 307-10.
Tlahuicol (Tlalhuicol), a Tlascaltec general, iii., 415; v.,
477-8, 505, 525.
Tlahuililpan, Mexico, antiq., iv., 549.
Tlahuil Tecuhtli, a Xochimilco chief, v., 309.
Tlahuitoltzin, a Chichimec prince, v., 475.
Tlahuitzin, mythic person, iii., 379-80.
Tlailotlacan, a ward of Tezcuco city, v., 404.
Tlaitlanililoni, name for Napatecutli, iii., 417.
Tlaixnexia, Nahua feast, ii., 395.
Tlaixpan, locality, Mexico, i., 673.
Tlajomulco, town, Jalisco, i., 672.
Tlalamoztoc, station, Chichimec migration, v., 294.
Tlalchihualtepec, name for Cholula, iv., 473.
Tlalchinoltzin, v., 250, see Ixtlilcuechahuac.
Tlalchitonatiuh, Nahua period of time, ii., 504.
Tlalchiuhtlanelzin, v., 245, see Chalchiuh Tlatonac.
Tlalcocomocco, locality, Mexico, ii., 559; v., 339.
Tlalhuicol, v., 477, see Tlahuicol.
Tlaliac, a mineral substance, ii., 487.
Tlallamanac, Nahua god, v., 193.
Tlalliquamallas, tribe of Apaches, i., 473-520; location, i.,
599.
Tlalmanalco, Mexico, antiq., iv., 501; hist., v., 200.
Tlaloc, Nahua god, ii., 305, 308, 334-7, 582-4; iii., 67, 118,
120, 134, 324-48.
Tlalocan, Nahua mythic region, iii., 533; v., 197, 527.
Tlalocan Mountain, v., 489.
Tlalocateuchtli, name for Tlaloc, iii., 324.
Tlalpepexic, ravine, Tlascala, v., 507.
Tlalpilli, Nahua period of time, ii., 505.
Tlalquimiloltecuhtli, an order of priests, iii., 434.
Tlaltecatl, v., 250, see Ixtlilcuechahuac.
Tlaltecatl Huetzin, v., 250, see Ixtlilcuechahuac.
Tlaltecatzin, name for Quinantzin, v., 347; lord of
Quauhchinanco, v., 349.
Tlaltetecui, a Nahua prophet, v., 190.
Tlaltecuin, name for Yxtliton, iii., 409.
Tlaltecutli, Nahua god, iii., 207.
Tlalticpaque, name for Tonacateotle, iii., 191.
Tlamacatoton, boy priests, iii., 335.
Tlamacatzin, Chichimec king, v., 220, 290.
Tlamacaxqui, (Tlamacazqui), an order of priests, ii., 203-4;
iii., 436.
Tlamacazcatlotl, an order of priests, ii., 203.
Tlamacazcayiaque, an order of priests, iii., 335.
Tlamacazcayotl, an order of priests, ii., 204.
Tlamacazquecuicanime, an order of priests, iii., 335.
Tlamacaztequioagues, an order of priests, iii., 335.
Tlamacaztezcahoan, an order of priests, iii., 335.
Tlamaitl, tenants, ii., 231.
Tlamalhuilili, musical instrument, Mexico, antiq., iv., 504.
Tlamama, Nahua carriers, ii., 386.
Tlamaths (Tlamatl), i., 444, see Klamaths.
Tlamatzincatl, name for Tezcatlipoca, iii., 199, 405.
Tlamaxcacayotl, a religious order, iii., 436.
Tlami, Tezcucan title, ii., 189; v., 350.
Tlanatzi, Tarasco mantle, ii., 368.
Tlanchinolticpac, locality, Mexico, i., 675.
Tlanemiliani, Nahua solicitors, ii., 444.
Tlanempopoloa, name for Napatecutli, iii., 417.
Tlanotlac (Tlaylotlac, Tlaylotlat), Nahua judge, ii., 436.
Tlanquacemilhiyme (Tlanquacemilhuique), Quetzalcoatl adherents,
iii., 241, 255.
Tlaolli (Tlaulli), dried corn, ii., 347.
Tlaominqui, inventor of bow and arrow, ii., 343.
Tlaoquatch, i., 295, see Clayoquots.
Tlapala, Vera Cruz, antiq., iv., 445.
Tlapalcatepéc, locality, Nicaragua, i., 790.
Tlapalhuitz (Tlapalhuiz), a Nahua chief, v., 243.
Tlapalizquixochitl, a South Mexican plant, v., 461.
Tlapalla (Tlapallan), an ancient South Mexican kingdom, iii.,
253-4, 257; v., 211, 214, 284-5, 558.
Tlapallanconco (Tlapallantonco, Tlapallanzinco, Tlappallanzingo),
station, Toltec migration, v., 211, 215, 221.
Tlapallan de Cortes, a region in Honduras, v., 215.
Tlapallantonco, v., 211, see Tlapallanconco.
Tlapallantzinco, v., 211, see Tlapallanconco.
Tlapalmetzin, a Toltec prince, v., 213.
Tlapalmetzotzin, a Nahua chief, v., 243.
Tlapanecs (Chinquimes, Chochona, Chochontes, Chochos, Chuchones,
Coviscas, Jopes, Pinomes, Pinotl-Chochons, Popolocas,
Popolucas, Tecos, Tecoxines, Tenimes, Yopes, Yopimes, Yopis,
Yoppi), Nahua nation, i., 617-44; ii., 133-629; location and
name, i., 677; ii., 109, 130; special mention, i., 651-2,
665-6; lang., iii., 752, 783; hist., v., 207, 523-4.
Tlapatl, a medicinal plant, ii., 599.
Tlapitzahuacan, name for Quiahuiztlan, v., 497.
Tlapitzcatzin, an order of priests, ii., 203; iii., 434.
Tlappallanzingo, v., 211, see Tlapallanconco.
Tlaquaquallo, a mantle, ii., 321.
Tlaquechiuhcan, a quarter of Mexico city, ii., 563.
Tlaquihua, Nahua title, ii., 187.
Tlaquillaughs, Okanagan sorcerers, i., 287.
Tlaquilxochitl, princess of Zumpango, v., 329.
Tlaquimilloli, sacred relics, ii., 202; iii., 62.
Tlaquimilol-Tecuhtli, an order of priests, ii., 202.
Tlascala (Texcalla, Texcalticpac, Tlachcala, Tlaxcala,
Tlaxcallan), tribes described, i., 617-44; civilized nations,
ii., 133-629; location and name, i., 674, 676, 791; ii., 112,
130; myth., iii., 111, 195, 437, 443, 506, 512; v., 20; lang.,
iii., 725; antiq., iv., 477-80; hist., v., 262-3, 403, 458-60,
476, 493-507.
Tlascaltecs, Nahua nation, i., 617-44; ii., 133-629; location and
name, i., 676, 791; ii., 130; special mention, i., 622; ii.,
141-2, 215, 225-6, 229, 271, 277, 331, 336-7, 354, 371, 405-6,
411-12, 416-17, 423-31, 446, 568, 609, 628-9; myth., iii., 111,
195, 437, 443, 506, 512; v., 20; lang., iii., 725; hist., v.,
307-10, 388, 417-18, 458-60, 476, 493-507.
Tlaltecaiooa, Nahua god, iii., 418.
Tlatecuinxochicaoaca, inventor of medicine, ii., 597.
Tlatelulcas, Nahua nation, i., 617-44; ii., 133-629; special
mention, ii., 380-1, 565; hist., v., 325-6, 356-482.
Tlatelulco (Xaltelulco), city, Mexico, ii., 380-1, 565; iii.,
298; hist., v., 357-99, 411, 421, 429-31.
Tlatlauhquicenteotl, name for Centeotl, iii., 350.
Tlatluìcas, Central Mexican tribe, i., 617-44; location and name,
i., 675.
Tlatoani, Nahua title, ii., 186-7; v., 248.
Tlatopilzintli, Nahua title, ii., 186.
Tlatoque, Nahua title, ii., 186.
Tlatsaps, i., 304, see Clatsops.
Tlatskanais, tribe of Chinooks, i., 222-50; location, i., 307;
lang., iii., 592.
Tlatzalan, v., 295, see Tlazalan.
Tlauhquechol, a mythic bird, iii., 241.
Tlauhquecholtzontli, a feather dress, ii., 376.
Tlaulli, ii., 347, see Tlaolli.
Tlavitezqui (Tlavitecqui), a festival character, iii., 354.
Tlaxcallan, v., 491, see Tlascala.
Tlaxcalli, a kind of cake, ii., 354.
Tlaxcalpacholli, a kind of cake, ii., 355.
Tlaxcaltotopochtli, a kind of cake, ii., 425.
Tlaxiaco, Miztec dialect, iii., 749.
Tlaxicoluican (Tlaxi Coliuhcan), a region of Mexico, v., 211,
218.
Tlaximaloyan, town, Michoacan, i., 677, see Tangimaroa.
Tlaxochimaco, Nahua month, ii., 327-8, 389, 510, 618.
Tlaxomultecs, Central Mexican tribe, i., 617-44; location, i.,
672; lang., iii., 719.
Tlaxtli, ii., 297, see Tlachtli.
Tlaylotlac, ii., 436, see Tlanotlac.
Tlaylotlat, ii., 436, see Tlanotlac.
Tlazalan (Tlatzalan), locality, Mexico, v., 295, 297.
Tlazoaloyan, Chiapas, antiq., iv., 354.
Tlazolteotl (Teicu, Tiacapan, Tlaclquani, Tlaco, Tlazolyòhua),
Nahua goddess, ii., 336-7, 516; iii., 377-84.
Tlazolyòhua, ii., 516, see Tlazolteotl.
Tlehuexolotl, lord of Tepeticpac, v., 503.
Tlemaco, station, Aztec migration, v., 324.
Tlemaitl, a censer, ii., 323.
Tletl, calendar sign, ii., 516-17.
Tlexictli, a brazier, ii., 323.
Tlilcoatzin, Toltec king, v., 266.
Tlilcuetzpalin, an Otomí chief, v., 433-4.
Tlillan, name of a temple in Mexico, v., 441.
Tlillancalcatl, an order of priests, ii., 202.
Tlillancalqui, Nahua title, ii., 138.
Tlilquechahuac, v., 250, see Ixtlilcuechahuac.
Tlilque Chaocatlahinoltzin, v., 250, see Ixtlilcuechahuac.
Tliltepec, locality, Mexico, v., 443.
Thlingcha-dinneh (Dog-ribs), tribe of Tinneh, i., 114-37;
location, i., 144.
Tlolpintzin, iii., 279, see Topiltzin.
Tloquatch, i., 297, see Clayoquots.
Tloque, name for Tonacateotle, iii., 191.
Tloque, Maya-Quiché dialect, iii., 760.
Tloque-Nahuaque (Ipalnemoaloni, Ipalnemoan, Ipalnemohualoni),
Nahua god, iii., 56, 182-6, 195; v., 252.
Tlotli, Nahua divine messenger, iii., 58.
Tlotlitecuhtli, a Teo-Chichimec chief, v., 490.
Tlotzin Pochotl, Chichimec king, v., 314-20, 330-3.
Tnaina Ttynai, i., 116, see Kenai.
Toads, i., 539, 706, 763; ii., 721.
Toandos, i., 302, see Toankooch.
Toankooch (Toandos, Toanhooch, Tuanoh, Tuanooch) tribe of Sound
Indians, i., 208-22; location, i., 302.
Toape, village, Sonora, i., 607.
Tobacco, various uses, i., 68, 76, 133, 199, 219, 282, 354, 394,
430, 517, 550, 568, 580, 652, 667, 706, 739, 775-6; ii., 287-8,
601, 795; iii., 80.
Tobacco Plains, i., 311.
Tobet, name for Chinigchinich, iii., 166.
Tobeyo, v., 271, see Toveyo.
Tobohar, first man, Los Angeles tribes, iii., 84.
Tobosos, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 610-12;
special mention, i., 576; lang., iii., 714.
Tobreytrota, tribe of Isthmians, i., 747-85; location, i., 796;
lang., iii., 794.
Tocas, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 612.
Tocaxequal, Cakchiquel month, ii., 766.
Toccy, iii., 350, see Teteionan.
Tochintecuhtli (Tochin Tecuhtli, Tochintzin), a Tepanec chief,
v., 317; Acolhua prince and lord of Huexotla, v., 332-3, 335.
Tochintzin, a Mexican prince, v., 374; see also Tochintecuhtli.
Tochmilco, town, Puebla, i., 671.
Tochos, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 610.
Tochpanecatl, lord of Zumpango, v., 329.
Tochtepec (Turlitepeque), locality, Vera Cruz, v., 214, 416.
Tochtla, town, Chiapas, i., 681.
Tochtli, Nahua day and year, ii., 505, 511-12, 516-17; iii., 57.
Toci, iii., 350, see Teteionan.
Tocina, Pueblo dance, i., 554.
Tocitzin, iii., 350, see Teteionan.
Tocivitl, a military dress, ii., 405.
Tocolco, station, Aztec migration, v., 324.
Tocontin, Guatemalan dance, i., 705.
Tocoy, locality, Guatemala, v., 559.
Tocpacxochitzin, princess of Quahuatlapal, v., 314.
Toh, Quiché-Cakchiquel day, ii., 767.
Tohil, Quiché god, ii., 648, 794; iii., 49-50, 267, 476; v.,
181-2, 547, 549-51, 554, 556-7, 562, 582, 594.
Tohohil Mountain, name for Hacavitz Mountain, v., 564.
Tohuéyo, v., 271, see Toveyo.
Tokalis, i., 115, 145, see Tacullies.
Toker Point, i., 52.
Tolenos, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
363, 452.
Tolewahs (Tahlewahs, Talawas, Tolawas, Tolewas, Tolowas), North
Californian tribe, i., 326-61; location, i., 327, 445; special
mention, i., 348, 357, 361; myth., iii., 524; lang., iii., 593.
Tollan (Tula, Tulan, Tulha, Tulla, Tullan), city, Mexico, i.,
673; ii., 98-9; antiq., iv., 547; hist., v., 21, 181-2, 186-7,
191-2, 208, 213, 219, 243-86, 293, 323, 329, 473, 553-6, 561,
565, 623.
Tollancingo (Tollantzinco), v., 191, 213, see Tulancingo.
Tolnahuac, Nahua temple, iii., 402.
Tolocan, i., 677, see Toluca.
Tolokh-eis, name for Casa del Adivino, Uxmal, antiq., iv., 192.
Tololotlan, town, Jalisco, i., 672; antiq., iv., 575.
Tololotlan River, Michoacan, v., 508.
Tolonchantepeuj, name for Holon-Chan-Tepeuh, v., 624.
Tolowas, i., 361, see Tolewahs.
Tolpetlac, v., 323, see Tultepetlac.
Tolqom, a Guatemalan chief, v., 569.
Toltecat, iv., 529, see Teotihuacan.
Toltecatltecuhtli, Teo-Chichimec chief, v., 490.
Toltecs, Nahua nation, i., 617-44; ii., 133-629; name, i., 670;
ii., 131-2; special mention, i., 24; ii., 98-101, 140, 173-4,
213-14, 265-6, 343, 379, 407, 478, 506, 554, 597, 604, 609,
613; iii., 270-1; myth., iii., 55-6; lang., iii., 724; v.,
510; origin, v., 19-21; hist., v., 208-18, 237-399, 509, 527-8,
541-3, 546, 557-8, 561, 564-7, 604, 611-19.
Toluca (Tolocan), city, Mexico, i., 676-7; lang., iii., 747-8;
v., 433, 523.
Tomahawks, i., 188, 235, 268, 341, 378, 493-4.
Tomales (Tamales, Tamallos, Tamalanos), Central Californian
tribe, i., 361-401; location, i., 452.
Tomallan, station, Chichimec migration, v., 242, 487.
Tomaoteot, Nicaragua god, iii., 492.
Tomasiú, village, Guatemala, i., 788.
Tomatoes (Tomatl), Mexican food, i., 624, 653; ii., 356.
Tomazolapan, city, Mexico, v., 412.
Tombs, antiq., iv., 17-18, 26-30, 372-88, 412, 419, 422, 428-30,
447-51, 465, 474, 495, 516-17, 593, 692.
Tomiyauh, Otomí princess, v., 319.
Tomoy, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i., 454.
Tompiras, tribe of Pueblos, i., 526-56; location, i., 600.
Tona, a guardian spirit, i., 661-2.
Tonacacigua, name for Chicomecoatl, iii., 352.
Tonacajohua, name for Centeotl, iii., 350.
Tonacatecotli, iii., 272, see Tonacateotl.
Tonacatecuhtli (Tonacatecutli), name for Tonatiuh Itzacual, iv.,
535.
Tonacateotl (Citinatonali, Tonacatecotli, Tonacateotle,
Tonacatlecotle), Nahua god, iii., 191, 268, 272, 352.
Tonacatepetl, Nahua mythic locality, v., 193-4.
Tonalá, Chiapas, antiq., iv., 354.
Tonala, town, Jalisco, i., 630; antiq., iv., 572; hist., v.,
508-9.
Tonalamatl, Nahua divining book, iii., 381.
Tonalan, station, Aztec migration, v., 323.
Tonalpouhqui, Nahua sorcerer, ii., 271, 391, 500.
Tonaltut, a Pipile lord, v., 609.
Tonantzin, name for Chicomecoatl, iii., 350, 352.
Tonatacinga, name for Chicomecoatl, iii., 352.
Tonatiuh, Nahua god, iii., 109, 183.
Tonatiuh Itzacual, temple, Mexico, antiq., iv., 535-6.
Tongarses (Tongas), i., 143, see Tungass.
Tonglas, Honduras, lang., iii., 783.
Tongue Point, i., 306-7.
Toniche, i., 606, see Tonitzi.
Tonila, name for Ococingo, iv., 347.
Tonitzi, town, Sonora, i., 606.
Tontos, tribe of Apaches, i., 473-526; location, i., 474, 595;
special mention, i., 494-5, 511, 516.
Tonvel's Bay, i., 293.
Tookarikkahs, tribe of Shoshones, i., 422-42; location, i., 463.
Toomedocs, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location and
name, i., 456.
Toomuns, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location and
name, i., 456.
Toonglas, tribe of Mosquitos, i., 711-47; location, i., 713, 793;
special mention, i., 714, 718, 746; lang., iii., 783.
Toopek, i., 54, see Topek.
Too-pote, i., 54, see Topek.
Toos, tribe of Haidahs, i., 155-74; location, i., 292.
Tootooch, thunder-bird, Aht myth., iii., 96, 152.
Tootooton, i., 327, 443, see Rogue River Indians.
Topek (Tie-poo-eet, Toopek, Toopote, Topak, Tuppek), Eskimo tent,
i., 54.
Topia, province, North Mexico, i., 607, 613-14; lang., iii.,
718-19.
Topila Creek, Tamaulipas, antiq., iv., 596-7.
Topila Hills, Tamaulipas, antiq., iv., 595.
Topilli, constables, ii., 437.
Topiltzin (Tlolpintzin, Topil), an order of priests, ii., 201,
307; iii., 279, 434; v., 248; Toltec imperial title, ii., 609;
v., 256, 260, 276, 299; see also Acxitl.
Topiltzin Quetzalcoatl, name for Quetzalcoatl, v., 25.
Tepopochuiliztli, iii., 422, see Toxcatl.
Toquaht (Toquart, Toquatux), tribe of Nootkas, i., 174-208;
location, i., 295-7.
Toquetzal, Teo-Chichimec chief, v., 490.
Toquimas, tribe of Shoshones, i., 422-42; location, i., 468.
Toral, Spanish bishop in Yucatan, v., 627, 629.
Torches, use of, i., 185-6, 213, 338, 719; ii., 491, 573, 618,
621-3; iii., 375.
Torin, village, Sonora, i., 608.
Tornilla, Apache food, i., 488.
Tóro, village, Sonora, i., 608.
Torom raqui, Opata festival, i., 586.
Torose, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
453.
Torresques, tribe of Isthmians, i., 747-85; location, i., 748.
Tortilla, a species of cake, i., 489, 540, 577, 626, 653, 694,
721; ii., 347, 354-5, 722; iii., 360.
Tortoise, symbols, v., 73-4.
Tortoise-shell, various uses of, i., 393, 705, 717, 725-6, 768;
ii., 285, 406, 713.
Tortuga Island, i., 605.
Torture, of captives, i., 164, 269, 433, 581; ii., 656, 746.
Tosawees (Shoshoteas, Tosawitches, Tosawwitches, Tosiwitches,
White Knives), tribe of Shoshones, i., 422-42; location, i.,
469; special mention, i., 440.
Tosemiteiz, i., 452, see Yosemites.
Tosiwitches, i., 461, see Tosawees.
Toste (Teotost), Nicaragua god, iii., 492.
Totanquitlaxcallitlaquelpacholli, a species of cake, ii., 175,
355.
Totec, iii., 411, see Xipe.
Totepeuh Nonohualcatl (Totepauh, Totepeuhque), Toltec king, v.,
250, 252-5.
Totepeuh II., Toltec king, v., 266.
Totokónula, Californian mythic person, iii., 124-6.
Totola, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
453.
Totolapan, province, Mexico, v., 346, 412.
Totollan, locality, Puebla, v., 490.
Totolohuitzil, Chichimec-Toltec chief, v., 485.
Totoloque, Nahua game, ii., 301.
Totoltepec (Tototepec), city, North-east Mexico, v., 297-8, 335,
472.
Totomalotecuhtli, Teo-Chichimec chief, v., 490.
Totomihuacan (Totomiuacan), town, Puebla, i., 670-1; v., 490,
495.
Totonacapan, province, Vera Cruz, i., 675; v., 413, 415.
Totonacs (Totonaques), Nahua nation, i., 617-44; ii., 133-629;
location and name i., 675; ii., 113-14, 132; special mention,
i., 635; ii., 278, 554; myth., ii., 214; iii., 350-1, 433, 437,
445; lang., iii., 759, 776-9; v., 204; hist., v., 203-5, 239,
441-2, 476.
Totonicapan, town, Guatemala, i., 787-8; v., 577, 586, 602.
Totonquiatolli, a kind of gruel, ii., 355.
Totoposte (Totoposti), a corn cake, i., 653-4, 695.
Totoquihuatzin, king of Tlacopan, v., 396, 399, 410, 426.
Totoquihuatzin II., king of Tlacopan, v., 440-1.
Totorames, i., 672, see Thorames.
Tototecti, sacrificial victims, ii., 309.
Tototen (Tototin, Tototutna, Totutime, Totutunes), see Rogue
River Indians, i., 327, 442-3.
Tototlan, locality, Mexico, v., 416.
Totten's Inlet, i., 301.
Totzapan, station, Toltec migration, v., 213.
Totzapantzin, a Toltec prince, v., 213.
Touchon-ta-Kutchin, tribe of Tinneh, i., 114-37; location, i.,
146.
Touserlemnies, i., 450, see Tawalemnes.
Toustchipas, Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91; location, i.,
319.
Toutouni, i., 327, see Rogue River Indians.
Tovares, i., 609, see Tubares.
Toveyo (Tobeyo, Tohuéyo), name for Tezcatlipoca, iii., 243-6; v.,
271-3.
Towers, ii., 556-7, 571, 744, 792-3; antiq., iv., 134-5, 187-8,
250, 254, 260, 315, 445-6, 552, 580, 723-9, 804.
Towkas, tribe of Mosquitos, i., 711-47; location, i., 712, 793;
special mention, i., 714, 725, 732, 736, 746; lang., iii., 783.
Towns, see Dwellings.
Tox, Tzendal day, ii., 767; Chiapanec hero, v., 605.
Toxas, tribe of Isthmians, i., 747-85; location, i., 748.
Toxcachocholoa, Nahua dance, ii., 323.
Toxcatl (Tepopochuiliztli), Nahua month, ii., 509; iii., 422-8.
Toxilmolpilia, Nahua cycle feast, ii., 274; iii., 393-6.
Toxpalatl, name of a fountain, ii., 587.
Toxpan (Tuxpan), station, Toltec migration, v., 212, 216.
Toxpilli, an Acolhua chief, v., 378.
Toybipet, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 460.
Toyon, Aleutian title for chief, i., 92.
Toy Pi Utes, tribe of Shoshones, i., 422-42; location, i., 467.
Tozantla, town, Michoacan, i., 677.
Tozcuecuex, an Aztec prince, v., 329.
Tozi, iii., 309, see Teteionan.
Tozoztli, Nahua month, iii., 70.
Tozoztontli (Tozcotzintli), Nahua month, ii., 315, 509; iii.,
420-1.
Tozquentzin, name for Atototzin, v., 372.
T'quaquamish, tribe of Sound Indians, i., 208-22; location, i.,
301.
Trade, see Commerce.
Traditions, ii., 367-8, 427, 559-60, 716-17; iv., 104, 730-1; v.,
137-40; see also history.
Trak Pocoma, Guatemala, antiq., iv., 131.
Tran-jik-koo-chin, Kutchin dialect, iii., 586.
Traps, i., 91, 123, 187, 336-9, 344, 652; ii., 720.
Tratsè-Kutshi, i., 147, see Tathzey-Kutshi.
Treason, punishment of, ii., 459, 645, 659, 746.
Treaties, i., 164, 189, 269-70, 433-4, 500, 580, 628, 636-7, 723;
ii., 747; v., 363, 391-2, 397-9, 414, 445.
Trees, i., 173, 205-6, 220, 288, 757; ii., 329-30, 557, 616, 619;
iii., 385-9, 400, 459.
Trench Bar, California, antiq., iv., 707.
Tribute, see Taxes.
Trile Kalets, tribe of Chinooks, i., 222-50; location, i., 366.
Trincheras, see Cerro de las Trincheras.
Trinidad, Vera Cruz, antiq., iv., 463.
Trinidad Bay Indians, North Californian tribe, i., 326-61;
special mention, i., 329-30, 332, 348, 351.
Trinity, myth., ii., 648; iii., 462, 476-7, 492; v., 87, 547.
Trinity County, California, antiq., iv., 707.
Trinity River Indians, North Californian tribe, i., 325-61;
location, i., 445; special mention, i., 327-9, 334, 348, 361;
myth., iii., 175-6; lang., iii., 592, 642.
Tripas Blancas, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i.,
612.
Tripoli, native place of Votan, v., 71.
Troano MS., ii., 771-4.
Troe, Sinaloa dialect, iii., 707.
Trophies, war, i., 164, 344, 380, 433-4, 581, 629; ii., 306, 316,
329, 429, 746.
Truckee River, i., 466.
Truckee Valley, California, antiq., iv., 707.
Trumpets, i., 765; ii., 292, 713.
Truxillo, town, Honduras, i., 793; iii., 496.
Tsakaitsitlin, Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91; location, i.,
312.
Tsamak, Sacramento Valley dialect, iii., 649-50.
Tsatsnotin, Tinneh tribe, i., 114-37; location, i., 145.
Tschageljuk River, i., 148.
Tschernow-skojes, tribe of Aleuts, i., 87-94; location, i., 141.
Tschigmit, i., 149, see Chigmit.
Tschilsolomis, Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91; location, i.,
314.
Tschnagmjuten (Tschnagmüten), i., 141, see Chnagmutes.
Tschugatschen (Tchugatchih, Tchutski, Tschgatzi, Tschugatsches,
Tschugatschi, Tschugatsi, Tschugazzi, Tschuktchi, Tschuktschi),
i., 70, 72, 139, see Chugatsches.
Tschugatsk, i., 139, see Chugachuik.
Tsclallum, i., 170, see Clallams.
Tshikátstat, tribe of Sound Indians, i., 208-22; location, i.,
299.
Tshinuk, i., 304, see Chinook.
Tsihailish, i., 303, see Chehalis.
Tsilkotin, i., 145, see Chilkotin.
Tsillanes, Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91; location, i., 312.
Tsillawdawhoots, tribe of Tinneh, i., 114-37; location, i., 145.
Tsimsheeans, i., 293, see Chimsyans.
Tsoi-gah, name for Nez Percés, i., 253.
Tsomass, tribe of Nootkas, i., 174-208; location, i., 295.
Ttattah-Akbal, Cakchiquel king, v., 584.
Ttynai, i., 148, see Tinneh.
Tuanoh (Tuanooch), i., 302, see Toankooch.
Tubanamá, province and tribe of Isthmians, i., 747-85; location,
i., 796.
Tubares (Tovares), North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i.,
572, 609; lang., iii., 715-16.
Tubes, various uses, i., 170, 627, 705, 709, 723, 760-3; ii.,
351; iv., 316, 375, 451.
Tubisuste, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
453.
Tuca, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i., 453.
Tucannon (Tukanon) River, i., 317.
Tucapacha, Tarasco god, iii., 445.
Tuchiquetzal, name for Chicomecoatl, iii., 352.
Tucumcari Creek, i., 591.
Tucumu, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 458.
Tucurú, village, and tribe, Guatemala, i., 788; v., 561.
Tuerto, tribe of Pueblos, i., 526-56; location, i., 600.
Tuhalha, Guatemalan tribe, hist., v., 546, 561.
Tuhecayan, abode of Aztec Venus, iii., 377.
Tuira, Isthmian god, iii., 500.
Tuitlan, name for Quemada, iv., 580.
Tukanon, i., 319, see Tucannon.
Tuk-Kuth, Kutchin dialect, iii., 586.
Tukuches, Guatemalan tribe, hist., v., 561, 596-7.
Tula (Tulan, Tulha, Tulla, Tullan), ancient city, Mexico, i.,
673; antiq., iv., 547-9; station, Aztec migration, v., 323;
ancient home of Quichés, v., 21; ancient city, Central America,
v., 159, 181-2, 185-7, 191-2, 233, 553-7, 561, 619, 623; see
also Tollan.
Tula, California, antiq., iv., 690.
Tulancingo (Tollancingo, Tollantzinco, Tulantzinco), city and
province Mexico, antiq., iv., 544; hist., v., 213, 260, 320,
335, 411, 489.
Tulan-zuiva (Tulanzu, Seven Caves, Zuina), ancient home of
Quichés, iii., 49; hist., v., 181, 188, 191, 197, 203, 219-21,
223, 228, 325, 422-4, 527, 547, 561, 565, 580, 624.
Tulapan, ancient home of Tutul Xius, v., 227-8, 624.
Tulares (Tulareños), Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401;
location, i., 452, 456; lang., iii., 650-1.
Tulare Lake, i., 363, 455, 457.
Tulare Valley, i., 460; California, antiq., iv., 690.
Tula River, v., 243, see Montezuma river.
Tule, term for rushes, i., 336, 367, 384, 466; ii., 357.
Tules, tribe of Isthmians, i., 747-85; lang., iii., 794-5.
Tule River, i., 456.
Tulhá, city, Chiapas, ii., 633; antiq., iv., 346-7.
Tulija River, iv., 297, 343.
Tuliks, tribe of Aleuts, i., 87-94; location, i., 141.
Tulkays, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
363, 452.
Tulla (Tullan), iii., 240-1, 288; v., 243, see Tollan.
Tullanatl River, v., 243, see Montezuma River.
Tulomos, i., 363, see Tuolomos.
Tuloom, city, Yucatan, ii., 744-5; antiq., iv., 254-9, 268, 277.
Tultecatl, Nahua god, iii., 418; a Huexotzinca general, v., 452,
500-1.
Tultepetlac (Tolpetlac, Tulpetlac), station, Aztec migration, v.,
323-4.
Tultitlan, city, Mexico, v., 284, 295, 369, 405.
Tuluraios, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; special
mention, i., 365.
Tulyahualco, Mexico, antiq., iv., 500.
Tumalehnias, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location,
i., 449.
Tumapacanes, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 613.
Tunac-eel, name for Hunac Eel, v., 625-6.
Tuñe Cha Valley, i., 596.
Tungass (Tongarses, Tongas, Tun Ghaase, Tunghase), tribe of
Thlinkeets, i., 96-114; location, i., 96, 143; lang., iii.,
579.
Tungass Island, i., 143.
Tunkul, musical instrument, i., 656, 664; ii., 712; v., 632.
Tuolomos (Tulomos), Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401;
location, i., 363, 453.
Tuolumne County, i., 455; lang., iii., 650; antiq., iv., 698-703.
Tuolumne River, i., 455-6; lang., iii., 651.
Tuparan, Pericui evil spirit, iii., 529.
Tupátaro, Guanajuato, antiq., iv., 577.
Tupes, i., 592, see Jupes.
Tupocuyos, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 607.
Tuppek, i., 54, see Topek.
Tuppkak, Maya feast, ii., 691-2.
Tupuic, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
453.
Tupuinte, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
453.
Tupuxanchuen, locality, Michoacan, v., 523.
Tuquesa River, i., 796.
Turami, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
454.
Turbo, locality, Darien, i., 797.
Turealemnes, i., 450, see Tawalemnes.
Turialba Valley, Costa Rica, antiq., iv., 21.
Turkeys, i., 723; ii., 703, 721.
Turlitepeque, v., 214, see Tochtepec.
Turquoise, i., 545, 583; ii., 173, 376-7, 606.
Turrets, see Towers.
Turtle, i., 551, 563, 576-7, 655, 694, 720, 725-6, 759; ii., 721.
Tusanes, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 612.
Tusapan, Vera Cruz, antiq., iv., 456-8.
Tusayan, New Mexico, antiq., iv., 674.
Tushepaws (Tusshepaws), Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91;
location, i., 311-12; special mention, i., 259, 274.
Tuski, i., 139, see Chugatsches.
Tusquin, Apache kettle, i., 489.
Tutachro, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 458.
Tutahaco, Pueblo province, i., 527.
Tutchone Kutchin (Gens de Foux), tribe of Tinneh, i., 114-37;
location, i., 115, 147; lang., iii., 587.
Tutecotzemit, Pipile king, v., 608-9.
Tutoten, i., 443, see Rogue River Indians.
Tutul Xius, Maya nation, ii., 630-803; special mention, ii.,
118-20, 132, 633, 649, 720; hist., v., 227-8, 621-34.
Tutunahs (Coquins), North Californian tribe, i., 326-61;
location, i., 443.
Tututamy, i., 327, see Rogue River Indians.
Tututepec, city, Oajaca, i., 678; antiq., iv., 374; hist., v.,
462, 472-3, 531.
Tuvares, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 572, 607.
Tuwanahs, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
449.
Tuxpan, v., 216, see Toxpan.
Tuxpan River, Vera Cruz, antiq., iv., 458.
Tuxtepec, Oajaca, antiq., iv., 421.
Tuxtla, Vera Cruz, antiq., iv., 426-7.
Tuzamapa, Vera Cruz, antiq., iv., 439.
Tuzsint, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
453.
Twaka River, i., 793.
Twigs, various uses, i., 190, 217, 575; iii., 383.
Twocan, name for San Miguel Island, i., 402.
Tyee (Tays), Nootka title of chief, i., 194.
Tyichs (Tyicks), Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91; location,
i., 316, 320.
Tyich Valley, i., 320.
Tykothee-dinneh, name for Kutchins, i., 115.
Typoxi, iii., 650, see Siyante.
Tyugas, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
362, 451.
Tzacatcatl (Tzacatecatl), v., 250, see Ixtlilcuechahuac.
Tzacatl, Nahua chief, v., 243.
Tzacua, a Mexican bird, iii., 374.
Tzaputlatena, Nahua goddess, iii., 409.
Tzatzapaltamale, amaranth cakes, ii., 316.
Tzatzitepetl Mountain, Mexico, iii., 241.
Tzauhtli, a species of tree, ii., 487, 489.
Tzayaquecas, Central Mexican tribe, i., 617-44; location, i.,
672.
Tzec (Zeec), Maya month, ii., 757.
Tzeetzaiak (Tzeet-tzaiak), Hailtzuk sorcerer, i., 170, 204.
Tzelep Kin, afternoon, ii., 755.
Tzendales (Celtales, Zeldales), Maya nation, i., 644-70; ii.,
630-803; location, i., 645, 681; ii., 120; special mention, i.,
652; lang., ii., 120; iii., 760-3; hist., iii., 452-3; v., 593,
603-4, 619.
Tzenticpac, i., 672, see Zentipac.
Tzequil, town, Central America, v., 69-70, 161.
Tzequiles, companions of Votan, iii., 452; v., 163, 187.
Tze Yaxkin, ii., 757, see Yaxkin.
Tziauhcohuac, province, Vera Cruz, v., 420.
Tzibe Pop, Quiché month, ii., 766.
Tzichu Mountains, v., 510.
Tzihuacohuatl (Tezihuaccoahuatl, Tzihuac-Cohuatl, Tziuhcoatl),
Nahua chief, v., 243.
Tzihuanga, v., 525, see Zwanga.
Tziminchac, Itza god, iii., 483.
Tzinacantepec, a city of Matlaltzinco, v., 433.
Tzinacantla (Tzinacantlan, Tzinacantan), town, Chiapas, i., 681;
v., 561, 605.
Tzincanoztoc, locality, Mexico, v., 378.
Tzinteotl (Tzinteutl), iii., 350, 354, see Centeotl.
Tzintzuntzan, city, Michoacan, ii., 107; antiq., iv., 569-70; v.,
508, 515-18, 524-5.
Tziquin, Quiché-Cakchiquel day, ii., 767; Chiapanec hero, v.,
605.
Tziquinaha, Quiché palace, ii., 644; Guatemalan tribe, hist., v.,
547, 549, 553.
Tziquin Gih, Quiché-Cakchiquel month, ii., 766.
Tzitzimitles, Nahua evil spirits, iii., 394.
Tzitzol, tribe of Guatemalans, i., 686-711; location, i., 787.
Tziuhcoatl, v., 243, see Tzihuacoatl.
Tziuhtecatl, Culhua king, v., 257, 330-1.
Tzizi Lagan, Quiché month, ii., 766.
Tzoalli (Tzoali), dough mixed with honey, ii., 321, 396; iii.,
323.
Tzocoyotl, cakes of flour and honey, ii., 279.
Tzolohche, ancient city, Guatemala, v., 587.
Tzolola, a Guatemalan lordship, v., 597.
Tzomes, Yucatan dogs, ii., 721.
Tzompahuacan, locality, Michoacan, i., 677; v., 412.
Tzompanco (Tzompan), locality, Mexico, ii., 473; v., 323-4, 329,
see Zumpango.
Tzompane, a Tlascaltec chief, v., 497-8.
Tzompantli, place of skulls, Mexico, ii., 320, 329, 585; v., 463.
Tzontecoma, an Acolhua chief, v., 303, 310-11.
Tzonpanco, v., 323-4, see Zumpango.
Tzontemoc, name for Mictlantecutli, iii., 396, 401; v., 90, 193.
Tzotziha Chamalcan, name for Chamalcan, v., 549.
Tzotziles, i., 681, see Zotziles.
Tzotzolan, city, Oajaca, v., 461.
Tzotzomatzin, lord of Coyuhuacan, v., 453.
Tzotzopaztli, a knife used in weaving, iii., 347.
Tzoz (Zoc, Zotz), Maya month, ii., 699, 757.
Tzumpanco, v., 323, see Zumpango.
Tzun, name of month, Chiapas, ii., 766.
Tzuntecum, Mayapan lord, v., 626.
Tzununiha (Tzununi-ha), Quiché third created woman, iii., 48; a
tribe of Ilocab, v., 555.
Tzuruya, Guatemala, antiq., iv., 131.
Tzutuha, a Guatemalan sacred stone, v., 559.
Tzutum, Guatemala, antiq., iv., 131.
Tzy, Quiché-Cakchiquel day, ii., 767.
U
U, Maya month, ii., 756.
Uallik River, i., 140.
Uayab, Maya intercalary days, ii., 759.
Ubakheas, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
451.
Ubus, i., 450, see Yulus.
U Cab Ligin Ga, Quiché month, ii., 766.
U Cab Mam, Quiché month, ii., 766.
U Cab Pach, Quiché month, ii., 766.
U Cab Tzih, Quiché month, ii., 766.
Ucaltas, i., 296, see Ucletas.
Ucas, i., 447, see Yukas.
Uchabaha, Guatemalan tribe, hist., v., 546, 561.
Uchidie, iii., 687, see Uchitis.
Uchitis (Uchidie, Uchitas, Uchíti, Uchities, Utschitas, Utschiti,
Vchities, Vehítis), Lower Californian tribe, i., 556-71;
location, i., 603-4; lang., iii., 687-93.
Uchium, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
453.
Uchuch Camha, Quiché title, ii., 644.
Uchulta, i., 296, see Ucleta.
Uchum, Cakchiquel month, ii., 766.
Uclenus, tribe of Nootkas, i., 174-208; location, i., 296.
Ucletas (Ucaltas, Uchulta, Ucletahs, Ucultas, Yongletas,
Yougletats, Yucletahs, Yukletas), tribe of Nootkas, i.,
174-208; location, i., 175, 295-6; special mention, i., 208.
Ucurganti River, i., 796.
Ugalachmiuti, i., 96, see Ugalenzes.
Ugalenzes (Ugalachmiuti, Ugalenzi, Ugaljachmjuten, Ugalukmutes,
Ugalyachmutzi), tribe of Thlinkeets, i., 94-114; location, i.,
96, 142.
Ugaljachmjuten (Ugalukmutes, Ugalyachmutzi), i., 96, see
Ugalenzes.
Ugnasiks, tribe of Aleuts, i., 87-94; location, i., 141.
Uhde Collection, of Mexican antiq., iv., 555.
Uinal, Maya month, ii., 756.
Uintahs (Uinta Utes, Uinta Yutas, Uwintys), i., 464, 469, see
Ewintes.
Uintah (Uinta) Valley, i., 464, 469.
Uitzes, Maya nation, hist., v., 626, 629, 633.
Ukas, i., 447, see Yukas.
Ukiah, town, Central California, i., 362.
Ukiahs (Ukias, Yokias, Yukai), Central Californian tribe, i.,
361-401; location, i., 362, 448; myth., iii., 524; lang., iii.,
643-4.
Ulahaïl, locality, Guatemala, v., 583.
Ulháipa, Chinook demons, iii., 95.
Ulil, king of Izamal, v., 626.
Ullaa, Fox Island dwellings, i., 89.
Ulli, see India-rubber.
Ullulatas, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
363, 452.
Ulmecatl, Nahua chief, v., 223.
Ulmecs, iii., 724, see Olmecs.
Ulmil, Itza king, v., 626, 631.
Ulol, name of month, Chiapas, ii., 766.
Ulseahs, i., 307, see Alseas.
Ulteteu, India-rubber idols, iii., 340.
Ulua, Central America, lang., iii., 760.
Ulucas (Uluka), Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location,
i., 363, 452; lang., iii., 650.
Ululato, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
453.
Ulung, Mosquito drink, i., 739.
U Luumil Cutz, U Luumil Ceb (Ulumil Cuz, Ethel Ceh), ancient name
of Yucatan, v., 614.
Umatilla (Umatallow) River, i., 319.
Umatillas (Utillas), Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91;
location, i., 319; special mention, i., 255, 260, 267.
Umetechtecomaiotilmatli, a court mantle, ii., 374.
Umiak, i., 60-1, see Oomiak.
Umkwas, i., 249, see Umpquas.
Umnak Island, i., 141; lang., iii., 579.
Umpin, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i., 453.
Umpqua Mountains, i., 222, 308.
Umpqua River, i., 150, 307-8, 442; lang., iii., 592.
Umpquas (Umkwas), tribe of Chinooks, i., 222-50; location, i.,
223, 307-8, 442; special mention, i., 234, 249, 344; lang.,
iii., 584, 592.
U na haab, Maya intercalary days, ii., 759.
Unakatanas (Yunakakhotanas), tribe of Tinneh, i., 114-37;
location, i., 133, 147; special mention, i., 133.
Unalaklik River, i., 141.
Unalaschkaer, i., 141, see Unalaskans.
Unalaska Island (Nagun-alayeksa, Oonalashka, Oonalaska,
Ounalaska, Unalaschka, Unalashka), i., 37, 141.
Unalaskans (Unalaschkaer), tribe of Aleuts, i., 87-94; location,
i., 87, 141; special mention, i., 61, 90; lang., iii., 577-9.
Unalga Island, i., 141.
Unalgas, tribe of Aleuts, i., 87-94; location, i., 141.
Undameo, city, Michoacan, v., 523.
Unga Island, i., 141.
Ungoweah Mountains, i., 468.
Unimak Island, i., 141.
Unjigah River, name for Peace River, i., 145.
Unkribikun, Mosquito eye-disease, i., 742.
Uo (Voo, Woo), Maya month, ii., 696, 757.
Upanguaymas, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 605.
Upantzin, Otomí king, v., 319.
Upar, province, Darien, i., 796.
Upatsesatuch (Upatse Satuch), tribe of Nootkas, i., 174-208;
location, i., 295, 298.
Uplegohs, North Californian tribe, i., 326-61; location, i., 445.
Uqluxlatuch, tribe of Nootkas, i., 174-208; location, i., 295.
Uquincat, city, Guatemala, i., 789; v., 555, 573.
Uquitinac, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
453.
Urabá, province and tribe of Isthmians, i., 747-85; location, i.,
795, 797; special mention, i., 761, 765, 785.
Urabá Gulf, i., 797.
Urari, i., 763, see Curari.
Urebure, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
453.
Ures, village and river, Sonora, i., 601, 605-6.
Urine, uses of, i., 49, 83, 235, 559; ii., 599.
Urns, see Vases.
Urran, locality, Guatemala, i., 788.
Usal Creek, i., 362, 448.
Usals, i., 448, see Camalèl Pomos.
Usap, a poisonous herb, i., 541.
Uscapemes, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 613.
Uskeemi, i., 41, see Eskimos.
Uspantan, Guatemala, antiq., iv., 131.
Usquemows, i., 116, see Eskimos.
Ussete, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
453.
Ustus, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i., 450.
Usumasinta (Usumacinta) River, i., 683, 786; v., 168-9, 186, 230.
Utah, tribes described, i., 422-42; location, i., 460-70; antiq.,
iv., 714-18, 729-34.
Utah Lake, i., 423, 464.
Utah Mountains, i., 465.
Utahs (Eutahs, Eutaws, Utaws, Utes, Youtas, Yutahs, Yutas), tribe
of Shoshones, i., 422-42; location, i., 422, 463-5; special
mention, i., 423-4, 430-2, 434, 440-1; myth., iii., 170; lang.,
iii., 660-2, 670-2.
Utalla River, i., 319.
Utalliam, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
454.
Utatl, a merchant's staff, iii., 416.
Utatlan (Gumarcaah), city, Guatemala, ii., 121, 637, 744, 788-9;
antiq., iv., 124-8; hist., v., 180, 186, 541, 544, 560, 563-7,
573, 576, 579-84, 587-96, 599, 601-2.
Utaws, i., 464, see Utahs.
Utensils, see Implements.
Uthlecan, i., 214, see Eulachon.
Utillas, i., 319, see Umatillas.
Utïu, a mythic personage, v., 182-4.
Utletecas, i., 788, see Quichés.
Utschim, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
453.
Utschitas (Utshiti), iii., 687, see Uchitis.
Uturpe, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
453.
U tuz kin, Maya intercalary days, ii., 759.
Utzam-Achih, Quiché title, v., 589.
Uwintys, i., 464, see Ewintes.
Uxab, name for Pokomams, i., 788.
Uxmal, city, Yucatan, ii., 633; antiq., iv., 149-200, 267-77,
285; hist., v., 59, 630-4.
U yail haab, Maya intercalary days, ii., 759.
U yail kin, Maya intercalary days, ii., 759.
Uzilopuchtli, iii., 57, 195, see Huitzilopochtli.
Uzpanteca, Guatemala, lang., iii., 760.
V
Vacoregues, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 608;
lang., iii., 707.
Vagerpe, Central Californian tribe, i., 301-401; location, i.,
453.
Vahxaki-Caam, Quiché king, v., 566, 594.
Vairubi, Sinaloan first man, iii., 83; v., 20.
Valdes Island, i., 181, 184, 206, 298.
Valientes, tribe of Isthmians, i., 747-85; location, i., 748,
794-5; special mention, i., 784; lang., iii., 783, 793.
Vallecito, California, antiq., iv., 704.
Valle de San Bartholome, Chihuahua, i., 610.
Valle de las Viejas, South California, i., 458.
Valley of Taos, New Mexico, i., 597.
Valum Votan, locality connected with Votan, v., 69.
Valverde, New Mexico, antiq., iv., 663.
Vanáceos, v., 511, see Wanacaces.
Vancoh, tribe of Guatemalans, i., 686-711; location, i., 789.
Vancouver Island, tribes described, i., 174-208; names and
location of tribes, i., 151, 292, 295-8; special mention, i.,
175, 178, 182, 184; myth., iii., 130; lang., iii., 607-12, 631;
antiq., iv., 737.
Vandalism, see Iconoclasm.
Van Dusen's Fork, locality, Central California, i., 446.
Vanquech, a Californian temple, i., 405; iii., 166-7.
Vanta-Kutchin (Vantah-koo-chin, Vanta-Kutshi), tribe of Tinneh,
i., 114-37; location, i., 115, 146; lang., iii., 586.
Vaqueros, tribe of Apaches, i., 473-526; location, i., 474.
Varogios, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 609;
lang., iii., 707, 710-11.
Vasapalles, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 611.
Vases, ii., 573, 750-1, 787; iii., 352; antiq., iv., 25-7, 60,
72, 129-33, 236-9, 344-5, 372, 428-647 passim, 786, 793-6.
Vashon's (Vaston's) Island, i., 301.
Vaults, see Burial.
Vauquitamalqualiztli, Nahua feast, iii., 391.
Vchities, i., 604, see Uchitis.
Vebetlateca, Central America, lang., iii., 760.
Véctaca, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
453.
Vecula, Nahua dance, ii., 338.
Veeards, North Californian tribe, i., 326-61; location, i., 446;
special mention, i., 336-7, 342, 345, 352.
Vegetables, i., 162, 214, 234, 430, 487-9, 577-8, 624-5, 652-3,
658; ii., 347, 719.
Veh, name of month, Chiapas, ii., 766.
Vehítis, i., 558, see Uchitis.
Veitioacan, name for Teotihuacan, iv., 529.
Veitozoztli, iii., 421, see Hueytozoztli.
Venado, see Cerro del Venado.
Venados, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 613.
Venereal Disease, i., 86, 204, 246, 354, 394, 419, 439, 521, 554,
568, 588, 638, 778; ii., 594, 599, 794-5.
Venison, see Deer.
Venus, Nahua worship of, ii., 585; iii., 113.
Vera Cruz, tribes described, i., 617-44; ii., 133-629; location
and names, i., 674-6; ii., 112; special mention, i., 618, 624,
631, 635, 643; ii., 629; lang., iii., 737, 759, 776; v., 207;
antiq., iv., 425-63; hist., v., 203, 207-8, 239, 442, 621.
Veragua, province, Darien, i., 756-7, 769, 784, 796; antiq., iv.,
15, 17, 19.
Vera Paz, province, Guatemala, i., 682-3, 710, 786-8; ii., 651,
655-6, 674-7; lang., iii., 760; antiq., iv., 130-2; hist., v.,
349, 472-3, 544, 556-8, 561-2, 612.
Vermin, i., 188, 377, 576, 654, 721, 743; ii., 234-5.
Vesnacks (Veshanacks), Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401;
location, i., 450.
Vestals, ii., 245, 647; iii., 473.
Vetzinco, iii., 248, see Chapultepecuitlapilco.
Veutelolotli, dough offerings, iii., 336.
Vevequauhtitlan, locality, Mexico, iii., 252.
Vevetl, a kettledrum, iii., 63.
Viceitas, tribe of Isthmians, i., 747-85; location, i., 795.
Vichilopuchitl, iii., 323, see Huitzilopochtli.
Vicilapan, locality, Puebla, i., 671.
Victoria, town, British Columbia, i., 167, 297.
Villages, see Dwellings.
Vinak-Bam, Quiché prince, v., 567.
Vinland, name for North-east America, v., 107-8.
Vinni ettinenne, Apache tribal name, i., 474; iii., 594.
Vipilli, i., 650, see Huipil.
Viracocha (Ticeuiracocha, Ticeviracocha), Peruvian god, v., 23.
Virgen River, i., 464, 468.
Virginia city, Nevada, i., 469.
Virginity, marriage, i., 632; ii., 260-1, 670.
Viriseva, Sinaloan goddess, iii., 83; v., 20.
Visits, of ceremony, i., 68, 84, 169, 519, 708.
Vitalata, town, Guerrero, i., 677.
Vitziliputzli (Vitzilopuchtli), ii., 603; iii., 288, see
Huitzilopochtli.
Vixachtlan (Huixachtla), locality, Mexico, iii., 393.
Vixtocioatl, Nahua goddess, iii., 369.
Vixtoti, Central Mexican tribe, i., 617-44; location, i., 671.
Vizilipuztli, iii., 192, see Huitzilopochtli.
Vizliputzli, iii., 306, see Huitzilopochtli.
Voc, messenger of Hurakan, v., 174, 177.
Vocarros, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 612.
Volvon (Bolbon, Bulbon), Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401;
location, i., 453.
Voo, ii., 757, see Uo.
Votan, Maya god, ii., 117, 631-2, 638, 647, 716, 770; iii.,
450-4; v., 27-8, 69-70, 159-65, 225, 231, 604-5, 618-9.
Votan, Tzendal day, ii., 767.
Vows, Nahuas, ii., 309, 431-2.
Voyages, to America by Phœnicians, v., 65-8; by Northmen, v.,
102-15; by Welshmen, v., 116-8; see also Exploration.
Vucubatz, Cakchiquel king, v., 592-3.
Vucub-Noh, v., 595, 599, see Vukub-Noh.
Vukab Hun Ahpu (Vucub Hunahpu, Vukub Hunahpu), Quiché god, iii.,
478-80; v., 174-80, 544.
Vukub-Ah, Quiché prince, v., 567.
Vukub Cakix, Quiché god and Xibalban king, iii., 480; v., 172,
184, 187.
Vukub Came, Xibalban king, v., 175-80, 184.
Vukub-Noh (Vucub-Noh), Quiché king, v., 566, 595, 599.
Vule Puyas, i., 310, see Calapooyas.
Vulture, myth., iii., 67, 129.
W
Waadda, i., 302, see Neah Bay.
Waakiacums (Waakicums), i., 304, 307, see Wakiakums.
Wabi, i., 680, see Huaves.
Wac, name for Tuparan, iii., 169.
Wacalamus, tribe of Chinooks, i., 222-50; location, i., 304;
lang., iii., 626.
Waches Notoowthas, i., 456, see Watches.
Wacomeapps, tribe of Chinooks, i., 222-50; location, i., 309.
Wahclellahs, tribe of Chinooks, i., 222-50; location, i., 306.
Wahkiacums (Wahkiakume, Wahkyekum), i., 304, 307, see Wakiakums.
Wahoma, village, South California, i., 460.
Wahowpums, Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91; location, i., 319;
special mention, i., 281.
Wahsatch Mountains, i., 323.
Wahsherrs, North Californian tribe, i., 326-61; location, i.,
444.
Waicuros, iii., 687, see Guaicuris.
Waiilatpus (Waiilaptus, Willetpoos), Inland Columbian tribe, i.,
250-91; location, i., 316, 319; lang., iii., 625.
Waiknas, tribe of Mosquitos, i., 712-47; location, i., 713.
Waikur, iii., 687, see Guaicuri.
Waisko-dusa, Mosquito Harpoon, i., 719.
Wajuomnes, i., 450, see Wapoomnes.
Wakâlla, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
455.
Wakalumy, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
455.
Wakalumytoh, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location,
i., 456.
Wakamass, tribe of Chinooks, i., 222-50; location, i., 306.
Wakiakums (Waakiacum, Waakicum, Wahkiacum, Wahkiakume, Wahkyekum,
Wakáiakum, Wakaikum, Wakaikam), tribe of Chinooks, i., 222-50;
location, i., 223, 304, 307; lang., iii., 626.
Walagumnes (Walacumnies), Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401;
location, i., 450; lang., iii., 649.
Walawaltz, i., 318, see Walla Wallas.
Walckhe, grave at San Luis Obispo, California, antiq., iv., 692.
Walhalla, i., 362, see Gualala.
Walhamette, i., 305, see Willamette.
Walker Lake, i., 466.
Walker River, i., 464, 466.
Wallalla, i., 449, see Gualala.
Wallamat (Wallamette), i., 224, 309, see Willamette.
Wallanmai, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
454.
Wallas, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
455; special mention, i., 393, 398.
Wallalshimmez, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location,
i., 455.
Wallaumut, i., 309, see Willamette.
Walla Wallas (Oualla-Ouallas, Walawaltz, Wallah Wallahs,
Walla-wallahs, Walla Wallapums, Walla Walle, Wollaolla,
Wollawalla, Wollaw Wollahs), Inland Columbian tribe, i.,
250-91; location, i., 253, 318-19; special mention, i., 255-8,
260, 262, 266, 271-4, 278-81, 287-9; myth., iii., 95, 156;
lang., iii., 620-4.
Walla Walla River, i., 253, 318-19.
Walla Walla Valley, i., 319.
Walla Walloo, i., 327, 446, see Weeyots.
Wallies (Wallas), North Californian tribe, i., 326-61; location,
i., 327, 446, 455; special mention, i., 328, 343.
Wallpays, i., 478, see Hualapais.
Walrus, i., 50, 59.
Wanacaces (Vanáceos), Chichimec invaders of Michoacan, hist., v.,
511-16.
Wankanaga, Shoshone god, iii., 94.
Wankees, tribe of Mosquitos, i., 711-47; special mention, i.,
726.
Wanks (Wanx) River, i., 793-4.
Wanlish, tribe of Nootkas, i., 174-208; location, i., 296.
Wanuswegock, evil spirit, Trinity River tribes, iii., 176.
Wanwanwis, name for Des Chutes, i., 319.
Wanx, i., 794, see Wanks.
Wapato, root used as food, i., 234.
Wapeani, a Chichimec Wanacace ruler, v., 515, 518-22.
Wapoomnes (Wajuomnes), Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401;
location, i., 450.
Wapos, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i., 362,
452; lang., iii., 648.
Wappeckquemow, god of Trinity River tribes, iii., 175-6.
Wapticacoes River, i., 317.
War, Hyperboreans, i., 91, 105-6, 113, 129-30; Columbians,
i., 160, 164, 180-1, 188-90, 194, 215, 235-6, 268-70, 275;
Californians, i., 343-4, 381, 407, 433-4; New Mexicans, i.,
496-500, 542-3, 562-3, 579-82, 586; Mexicans, i., 628-9, 655;
ii., 399-432, 616-18; iii., 206-10, 364, 399, 532-3; v., 250,
263, 279-84, 290-4, 302-535 passim; Central Americans, i.,
696-7, 723, 763-5; ii., 645, 654, 662, 707-8, 734, 739-47;
iii., 53; v., 551-613 passim.
Wararereeks, tribe of Shoshones, i., 422-42; special mention, i.,
431.
Wasakshes, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
456.
Wascopam, name of Wasco country, i., 319.
Wascos (Wascopams), Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91; location
and name, i., 254, 319-20; special mention, i., 258, 271, 287,
289, 291.
Washakeeks, tribe of Shoshones, i., 422-42; location, i., 463.
Washington County, Mississippi Valley, antiq., iv., 770.
Washington Territory, tribes described, i., 208-91; location, i.,
298-321; myth., iii., 94-8, 153-7, 519-20; lang., iii., 615-34;
antiq., iv., 735-6.
Washoe, city, Nevada, i., 469.
Washoes, tribe of Shoshones, i., 422-42; location, i., 422,
468-9; special mention, i., 440-1; lang., iii., 661.
Wasoricuare, Michoacan god, v., 512.
Wasps, as allies of Quichés, v., 551.
Watarecha, Tarasco priests, iii., 447.
Watches (Waches Notoowthas), Central Californian tribe, i.,
361-401; location, i., 455-6.
Water, various uses, etc., i., 103, 172, 188, 190, 204, 216, 708;
ii., 601, 604, 611, 614; iii., 80, 101-3, 119-20, 129, 171,
367-76.
Water-fowl, see Wild-fowl.
Watlalas, tribe of Chinooks, i., 222-50; location, i., 223,
304-5.
Watsahewahs (Watsahewas), North Californian tribe, i., 326-61;
location, i., 447; lang., iii., 642.
Wattokes, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
455.
Wauhtecq, village, North California, i., 444.
Wawa River, i., 794.
Wayameo, capital of Chichimec Wanacaces, v., 514.
Wayleeway River, i., 317, 319.
Wayyampas, Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91; location, i., 317.
Wealth, see Property.
Weapons, Hyperboreans, i., 58-9, 79, 86, 90, 104-5, 119;
Columbians, i., 164, 188, 235, 268; Californians, i., 341-3,
377-9, 407, 431-3; New Mexicans, i., 493-6, 541-2, 562, 578-9;
iii., 180; Mexicans, i., 627-8, 655; ii., 406-11, 475, 618,
622; iii., 404; iv., 372; Central Americans, i., 696, 722-3,
760-3; ii., 741-3; iv., 18-20, 58-60, 127, 278; Mississippi
Valley, antiq., iv., 781.
Weaving, i., 165, 502-4, 657, 698-9, 724, 766-7; ii., 245, 484-5,
752.
Weber Utes, tribe of Shoshones, i., 422-42; location, i., 469;
special mention, i., 441.
Weber Valley, i., 469.
Wechummies, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
455.
Wedding, see Marriage.
Wedges, i., 182, 184, 189, 211, 270, 434.
Weekemoch, tribe of Haidahs, i., 155-74; location, i., 294.
Weetletoch, i., 294, see Weitletoch.
Weeyots (Walla-Walloos, Weyots), North Californian tribe, i.,
326-61; location, i., 327, 446; special mention, i., 329-30,
351; lang., iii., 642.
Weht'lquas, North Californian tribe, i., 326-61; location, i.,
444.
Weights, Nahua commerce, ii., 382-3.
Weirs, for fishing, i., 129, 162, 168, 262, 337-9, 429, 720.
Weitletochs (Weetletochs), tribe of Haidahs, i., 155-74;
location, i., 294.
Weitspeks (Witspuks), North Californian tribe, i., 326-61;
location, i., 444-5; lang., iii., 642.
Wells, see Reservoirs.
Welsh, language traces, iii., 705; American origin traces, v.,
116-21.
Wemenuche (Weminuche) Utes, i., 470, see Wimmenuches.
Wenass River, i., 320.
Weohows, i., 446, see Shastas.
Wesselowskojes, tribe of Aleuts, i., 87-94; location, i., 141.
Wewarkka, tribe of Nootkas, i., 174-208; location, i., 295.
Wewarkkum, tribe of Nootkas, i., 174-208; location, i., 295.
Weyehhoos, Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91; location, i., 321.
Weyots, i., 446, see Weeyots.
Whaillahay, Navajo god, iii., 171.
Whales, various uses, etc., i., 49, 51, 54-5, 60-2, 73-6, 79, 90,
103, 166, 179-81, 185-8, 213-14, 233, 376, 405.
Whale's Head, locality, North California, i., 443.
Wharhoots, tribe of Chinooks, i., 222-50; location, i., 305.
Whatcom Lake, i., 299.
Wheat, i., 538, 586, 652.
Wheelcuttas, North Californian tribe, i., 326-61; location, i.,
446; lang., iii., 643.
Wheelpo, i., 313, see Chaudières.
Whidbey Island, i., 208, 212, 299, see Whitby's Island.
Whinegas, tribe of Thlinkeets, i., 94-114; location, i., 142.
Whiskers, see Beard.
Whisky, i., 169, 188.
Whiskkahs, tribe of Sound Indians, i., 208-22; location, i., 303.
Whistles, i., 393, 774; ii., 292, 713, 787; iv., 19.
Whitby's (Whidbey) Island, i., 208, 212, 296, 299.
White Knives, i., 469, see Tosawees.
White Man's Island, iii., 153, see Samahtumiwhoolah.
White Mountains, i., 464, 593.
White River, i., 300, 464.
Whulwhypums, i., 321, see Kliketats.
Whyelkine, food of Inland Columbian tribes, i., 265.
Wicananish, i., 295, see Wickinninish.
Wichaana, Zapotec god, iii., 449.
Wickanninish, i., 296, see Wickinninish.
Wickinninish (Wicananish, Wickanninish), tribe of Nootkas, i.,
174-208; location, i., 297; special mention, i., 178.
Wickinninish Islands, i., 296.
Widows, i., 125-6, 169, 173, 277-8, 357, 385, 515, 555, 730-1,
744, 781-3; ii., 251, 466, 668, 671; iii., 154.
Wihinashts, tribe of Shoshones, i., 422-42; location, i., 462;
lang., iii., 660-3, 672.
Wihwin, Mosquito evil spirit, iii., 497.
Wikachumnis, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location,
i., 456.
Wi-Lackees (Wye Lakees, Wylaks), Central Californian tribe, i.,
361-401; location, i., 442, 451.
Wilapah (Whilapah) River, i., 303, 305.
Wilapahs (Whilapahs, Willopahs), tribe of Sound Indians, i.,
208-22; location, i., 303, 305.
Wild-fowl, i., 56, 233-4, 264, 367, 375, 406.
Willamette River (Walhamette, Wallamat, Wallamette, Wallaumut,
Willamettee), i., 223, 227, 231, 309-10; lang., iii., 630.
Willamette Valley, i., 223, 225-6, 232, 240, 308-9, 320.
Willetpoos, i., 319, see Waiilatpus.
Willewah River, i., 319.
Willewahs, Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91; location, i., 319.
William Lake, iii., 613.
Willopahs, i., 305, see Wilapahs.
Willow, various uses, i., 51, 79, 130, 215, 259-60, 270, 337,
371, 382, 429, 434, 481, 494, 517, 533, 541, 543, 589; ii.,
145.
Wimmenuches (Wemenuche, Weminuche Utes, Womenunche), tribe of
Shoshones, i., 422-42; location, i., 469-70.
Winnas, tribe of Shoshones, i., 422-42; location, i., 463.
Wintoons, North Californian tribe, i., 326-61; location and
lang., iii., 640-1.
Wiriu Quarampejo, forest, Michoacan, v., 511.
Wisconsin, Mississippi Valley, antiq., iv., 770.
Wishhams (Wisswhams), Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91;
location, i., 320.
Wishosk, North Californian tribe, i., 326-61; location and name,
i., 327, 446; lang., iii., 642.
Wishtenatins (Wishtanatans), North Californian tribe, i., 326-61;
location, i., 442-3.
Wisscopams, Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91; location, i.,
317.
Wisswhams, i., 317, see Wishhams.
Witches, see Sorcerers.
Witchita Mountains, i., 592.
Witnesses, government, ii., 443-5, 464-5, 656.
Witspuks, i., 445, see Weitspeks.
Wives, see Marriage and Women.
Wixepecocha (Wixipecocha), Zapotec apostle, ii., 209-10; iii.,
455; iv., 372; v., 23, 528-9.
Wiyana, order of priests, ii., 212.
Wiyatao (Huijatoo), Zapotec pontiff, ii., 143, 209; v., 529.
Wizaechi, order of priests, ii., 212.
Wizards, see Sorcerers.
Wocus, an aquatic plant, i., 340.
Wolves, i., 109, 182, 258, 284, 330, 424; iii., 80.
Wollaolla (Wollawalla, Wollaw Wollah), i., 318, see Walla-Wallas.
Women, Hyperboreans, i., 65-6, 81-3, 92, 109-11, 117-18, 121,
123, 131-3; Columbians, i., 163, 167-9, 177-8, 181-3, 186, 189,
195-8, 218-19, 241-3, 277-9; Californians, i., 328-9, 343, 347,
349-51, 355, 385, 388-93, 436-7; iii., 159; New Mexicans, i.,
511-15, 547-9, 565-6, 584-6; iii., 78; Mexicans, i., 632-5,
661-4; ii., 245-7, 266-81, 354, 460-1, 616; iii., 59-60, 63,
359, 362-7, 394, 435-6, 533; Central Americans, i., 702-4,
729-34, 772-4; ii., 635, 664-86, 711-13, 728-30, 733, 737,
802-3; iii., 48, 74.
Womenunches, i., 466, see Wimmenuches.
Wonagan, i., 292, see Houaguan.
Woo, ii., 757, see Uo.
Wood, various uses of, i., 52, 88, 91, 106, 333, 368-9, 631, 649,
717, 722, 766; ii., 407-8, 482, 742, 750-1; iv., 269-70.
Woodpecker, i., 331, 347, 368.
Wood's Creek, California, antiq., iv., 701.
Wookaok, Ah-Tziquinihayi ruler, v., 596, 598-9.
Wool, various uses, i., 100, 107, 191, 502-4, 544, 620-1, 630,
648.
Woolsaw, iii., 497, see Wulasha.
Woolwas, tribe of Mosquitos, i., 711-47; location, i., 712;
special mention, i., 714-15, 722, 731-2, 737, 741, 745; lang.,
iii., 783.
Woorali, Isthmian poison, i., 763.
Woowells, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
363, 455.
Worms, use of, i., 374, 488, 560-1, 576, 638, 742; ii., 600, 795.
Wounds, cure of, i., 521, 588-9, 638; ii., 599-600, 795.
Wright Lake, i., 444.
Writing, see Hieroglyphics.
Wulasha (Oulasser, Woolsaw), Mosquito evil spirit, i., 740; iii.,
497.
Wyampams, tribe of Chinooks, i., 222-50; location, i., 306.
Wyatch River, i., 303.
Wychus Creek, Oregon, antiq., iv., 734.
Wyeilats, i., 254, see Cayuse.
Wynooches, tribe of Sound Indians, i., 208-22; location, i., 303.
X
Xacxam, a species of palm, ii., 722.
Xagua, a dye plant, ii., 371.
Xalanaj, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 459.
Xalatlauhco, city, Matlaltzinco, i., 677; v., 433.
Xalisco, station, Toltec migration, v., 212; see also Jalisco.
Xalliteuctli, a Chichimec leader, v., 280.
Xalou, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 459.
Xalpan, locality, Vera Cruz, v., 492.
Xalpan y Pontepec, Totonac dialect, iii., 777.
Xaltaianquizco, locality, Mexico, v., 472.
Xaltelulco, v., 357, see Tlatelulco.
Xaltemoc, lord of Quauhtitlan, v., 369, 372.
Xaltepec, Miztec dialect, iii., 749; Mije city, v., 532.
Xaltepetlapan, locality, Puebla, v., 490.
Xaltepozauhcan, station, Aztec migration, v., 324.
Xaltocan, city, Mexico, ii., 104; v., 284, 294, 311, 320, 323,
331, 334, 347-8.
Xampon, Yucatan, antiq., iv., 211-12.
Xan, a mythical animal, v., 178.
Xanambres, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 572.
Xaoalquauhiotilmatlitenisio, a court mantle, ii., 374.
Xaracuero, island, Michoacan, v., 519, 522.
Xaratanga, Tarasco goddess, iii., 445-6; v., 517.
Xaseum, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
454.
Xayacamachan (Xayacamachantzompane), a Tlascaltec noble, v.,
497-8.
Xbakiyalo, Quiché goddess, iii., 479; v., 174.
Xbalanque, Quiché god, iii., 479; v., 172-80, 184-7, 544-6, 560.
Xcanchakan, Yucatan, antiq., iv., 240.
Xchanibalvinquil, name of month, Chiapas, ii., 766.
Xchibalvinquil, name of month, Chiapas, ii., 766.
Xchmel, Guatemalan god, iii., 74.
Xcoch, pyramid, Yucatan, antiq., iv., 201.
Xco=c=poop, ruins at Kabah, Yucatan, antiq., iv., 206.
Xebalax, ancient city, Guatemala, v., 589.
Xecamac, ancient city, Guatemala, v., 589.
Xecotcovach, Quiché mythic bird, iii., 47.
Xelahuh, ancient city, Guatemala, antiq., iv., 124; v., 585, 587,
591, 602.
Xelhua, a legendary giant and Nahua chief, iii., 67-8; v., 200,
223, 484.
Xelitla, locality, Mexico, i., 675.
Xeocok (Xokoc), Guatemala, antiq., iv., 131.
Xerez de Choluteca, locality, Guatemala, lang., iii., 760.
Xet, an Ahquehayi chief, v., 564.
Xetaco, a Chichimec Wanacace prince, v., 522.
Xexulpituc, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i.,
459.
Xhembobel-Moyos, name for Palenque, iv., 295.
Xibalba, Maya evil spirit, iii., 467; Quiché hell, iii., 542;
ancient Central American empire, iii., 478-9; iv., 295; hist.,
v., 174-88, 231, 539, 543-7, 555, 560-2, 581-2, 618-19, 621,
623.
Xicalancas, Nahua nation, i., 617-71, ii., 133-629; location and
name, i., 671; ii., 112, 132; special mention, ii., 343, 379;
lang., iii., 724; hist., v., 195-202, 239, 488, 527, 616, 621,
632.
Xicalancatl, Xicalanco ruler, v., 196, 223.
Xicalanco, town, Vera Cruz, i., 671; antiq., iv., 434; v., 196.
Xicales (Xicalli), cups or vessels made of gourds, ii., 177, 484.
Xicapoya (Xipacoya, Xiuhpacoya), locality, Mexico, iii., 241,
256.
Xicaques, tribe of Mosquitos, i., 711-47; location, i., 712,
792-3; special mention, i., 715, 720, 722, 728, 746.
Xicarillas (Jicarillas, Jicorillas), tribe of Apaches, i.,
473-526; location, i., 594-5; special mention, i., 490, 504-5,
511.
Xicayan, town, Oajaca, i., 677.
Xico Island, Lake Chalco, Mexico, antiq., iv., 500; hist., v.,
284.
Xicochimalco, v., 492, see Xochimilco.
Xicocoges, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 611.
Xicolli, priest's badge, ii., 207; iii., 335.
Xicotencatl, a Tlascaltec noble, v., 414-15, 498, 503.
Xicotepec, locality, Puebla, ii., 441; antiq., iv., 479.
Xicuintla, Vera Cruz, antiq., iv., 445.
Xihuilpopoca, lord of Zacatlan, v., 349.
Xihuiltemoc, Culhua king, v., 330-1, 338-9; lord of Xochimilco,
v., 432.
Xihuitl, Mexican year, ii., 504-5, 510.
Xijames, i., 611, see Xiximes.
Xila, i., 601, see Gila.
Xileños, iii., 685, see Gileños.
Xilomanaliztli, Nahua month, ii., 509; iii., 419-20.
Xilonen, name for Centeotl, ii., 326; iii., 350, 359.
Xiloquetzin, a Chimalpanec chief, v., 338.
Xilotepec (Xilotepeque), i., 673, 787, see Jiloltepec.
Xilotl, an ear of corn, ii., 326.
Xilotzin, a Toltec prince, v., 285.
Xiloxuchitla, locality, Tlascala, i., 671; v., 504.
Xipacoya, iii., 241, see Xicapoya.
Xipe (Totec, Xipetotec), Nahua god, ii., 306-12, 457, 478; iii.,
411-15.
Xipeme, flayed sacrificial victims, ii., 309.
Xipetotec, iii., 411, see Xipe.
Xiquipilas, Chiapas, antiq., iv., 353.
Xiquipilco (Xiquilpo), a city of Matlaltzinco, i., 673-4; hist.,
v., 433.
Xiquipilli, term to express 8000, ii., 382, 425.
Xiquitzal, a Cakchiquel king, v., 590.
Xiripa, village, Sonora, i., 606.
Xitayul-Hax, name for Iztayul II., v., 583.
Xitzin (Ecitin), a Toltec chief, v., 297.
Xiuchtimatl, v., 299, see Xiuhtemoc.
Xiuhguzaltzin, a Tlascaltec noble, v., 497.
Xiuhmolpilli (Xiuhmolpia, Xiuhtlalpilli), Nahua cycle, ii., 140,
341, 505-7; iii., 393.
Xiuhnel, Toltec king, v., 242, 249.
Xiuhnenetl, baptismal name, ii., 275.
Xiuhpacoya, iii., 256, see Xicapoya.
Xiuhpopoca, a Toltec prince, v., 297.
Xiuhquentzin, v., 265, see Xiuhtlaltzin.
Xiuhquetzaltzin, an Acolhua prince, v., 332, 496.
Xiuhquilitl (Xiuhquilipitzahuac), a dye plant, ii., 370, 486.
Xiuhtecutli (Huehueteotl, Xiuhteucyòhua), Nahua god, ii., 285,
329-30, 338, 516; iii., 114, 385-91.
Xiuhtemal (Jiuhtemal, Jiutemal), Quiché king, v., 566, 577-9.
Xiuhtemoc (Xiuchtimatl, Xiuhthemal), a Toltec noble, v., 286,
299-300; king of Culhuacan, v., 344, 496.
Xiuhtemoctzin, Toltec king, v., 257, 331.
Xiuhtenancaltzin (Xiuhtenan), a Toltec noble, v., 272, 277.
Xiuhtepec, city, Mexico, v., 406.
Xiuhthemal, v., 299, see Xiuhtemoc.
Xiuhtilmatli, a court mantle, ii., 374.
Xiuhtlalpilli, girdles, ii., 396.
Xiuhtlaltzin (Xiuhquentzin, Xiuhtzaltzin, Xiuhzaltzin,
Xiuliquentzin), Toltec queen, v., 265.
Xiuhtlapohualli, year circle, ii., 508.
Xiuhtlehui, Huexotzinco prince, v., 492.
Xiuhtomoltetl, a medicinal stone, ii., 600.
Xiuhtototl, a mythic bird, iii., 241.
Xiuhtzaltzin (Xiuhzaltzin), v., 265, see Xiuhtlaltzin.
Xiuliquentzin, v., 265, see Xiuhtlaltzin.
Xiximes (Xijames), North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i.,
572, 614; lang., iii., 718.
Xixiquipilihui, name for Chalchihuitlicue, iii., 367.
Xma Kaba Kin, Maya intercalary days, ii., 759.
Xmucane, Quiché goddess, ii., 717, 723; iii., 474; v., 170,
174-80.
Xocen, Yucatan, antiq., iv., 236.
Xochetecatl, sacrifice to Tlaloc, iii., 345.
Xochicalco, Mexico, antiq., iv., 483-94; v., 265.
Xochilhuitl, flower festival, iii., 407.
Xochimanqui (Sochimanque, Xochimanques), flower dealers, ii.,
315; iii., 420.
Xochimilcas (Suchimilcos), Nahua nation, i., 617-44; ii.,
133-629; location, i., 675; name, ii., 132; lang., iii., 725;
hist., v., 307-9, 341-2, 405-6, 492.
Xochimilco (Xicochimalco), Mexico, antiq., iv., 497-9; hist., v.,
307-9, 341-2, 405-6, 492.
Xochiocotzotl, liquid amber, ii., 287.
Xochipalli, a dye plant, ii., 487.
Xochipantzin (Texochipantzin), a Toltec princess, v., 301.
Xochiquetzal, Tlascalan goddess; ii., 336-7; iii., 66-8, 377; v.,
13; a Chichimec prince, v., 450-1.
Xochitecatl, Tlascalan goddess, ii., 336-7; antiq., iv., 477.
Xochitl, Nahua day, ii., 512, 516-17; a Mexican general, v., 476.
Xochitl (Quetzalxochitzin), a Toltec princess, v., 269-70, 283-4.
Xochitla, locality, Mexico, iii., 248.
Xochitlalpan, town, Mexico, v., 284.
Xochitlycacan, abode of Aztec Venus, iii., 377.
Xochitzin, a Toltec princess, v., 250.
Xocok, iv., 131, see Xeocok.
Xoconochco, i., 680, see Soconusco.
Xocotamalli, small pies, iii., 360.
Xocotitlan (Xocotlan), suburb of Mexico city, i., 676; ii., 560;
early Toltec settlement, v., 243.
Xocotl, a festival tree, iii., 386.
Xocotlhuetzin, Nahua month, ii., 329, 510, 618; iii., 508-9.
Xocotlvetzi, Nahua religious feast, iii., 386.
Xocotoc (Cojo, Cojotoc), South Californian tribe, i., 402-22;
location, i., 458.
Xocuauhtli (Xoquauchtli), a festival character, iii., 354.
Xohualatonac, v., 331, see Yohuallatonac.
Xolabah, i., 789, see Xoyabah.
Xolacul, Guatemala, antiq., iv., 131.
Xoloc (Xolotl), city, Mexico, v., 294.
Xolotl, Nahua god, iii., 59, 61; Chichimec king, v., 219, 289-96;
see also Xoloc.
Xolotl II., Chichimec king, v., 296-319.
Xolotlan, locality, Nicaragua, i., 792.
Xomocuil, Nahua god, iii., 416.
Xonacatepec, Mexico, antiq., iv., 495.
Xongopavi, i., 601, see Xougopavi.
Xoquauchtli, iii., 354, see Xocuauhtli.
Xougopavi (Jongoapi, Shungopawe, Xongopavi), Moqui village, i.,
600-1.
Xoyabah (Xolabah) Mountains, i., 789.
Xozintun, Guatemala, antiq., iv., 131.
Xpiyacoc, Quiché god, iii., 474; v., 170, 174.
Xpuch, a Guatemalan princess, v., 550-1.
Xquiq, Quiché princess, iii., 478-9; v., 175-6, 545.
Xtah, a Guatemalan princess, v., 550-1.
Xtayub, Quiché king, v., 566.
Xtmana, Guatemalan princess, iii., 74.
Xttamer-Zaquentol, Cakchiquel king, v., 583.
Xubabal, Guatemala, antiq., iv., 131.
Xubiltenam, city, Guatemala, i., 787.
Xuchicalli, Nahua bath, ii., 268.
Xuchicaltzin, Nahua god, ii., 268.
Xuchicaoaca, a Nahua prophet, v., 190.
Xuchiltepec, province, Guatemala, v., 447.
Xuchiltepecs, Guatemalan tribe, hist., v., 606-7, 612.
Xuchipilas, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; lang., iii.,
719.
Xuchipiltepetl, Jalisco, antiq., iv., 575.
Xuchitepec, town, Mexico, v., 429, 471.
Xuchu-Cuet (Xuch-ucuet), a Mayapan lord, v., 626.
Xucotsi, name for Tlazolteotl, iii., 380.
Xucu (Shucu), South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i.,
458.
Xul, Maya month, ii., 699, 757.
Xul, village, Yucatan, antiq., iv., 218-19.
Xulos, Nicaraguan dogs, ii., 721.
Xulpiti, locality, South-east Mexico, v., 562.
Xulu, Quiché god, v., 179.
Xumiltepec, ancient Toltec capital, v., 190.
Y
Yaat, an herb used to allay hunger, ii., 722, 745.
Yabacoh, tribe of Guatemalans, i., 687-711; location, i., 789.
Yabalan (Yahalan), Chiapanec god, iii., 458.
Yabipais, i., 475, see Yampais.
Yacacoliuhqui, iii., 416, see Iyacatecuhtli.
Yacahualiuqui, Nahua breech-cloth, ii., 375.
Yacanex (Ixcazozolot, Yacatzotzoloc, Yacazozolotl, Yanex), a
Chichimec noble, v., 317-18.
Yacapichtla, city, South-west Mexico, v., 412.
Yacapitzaoac, Nahua god, iii., 416.
Yacatecutli, ii., 338, see Iyacatecuhtli.
Yacatzotzoloc, v., 317, see Yacanex.
Yacazozolotl, v., 317, see Yacanex.
Yachá, iv., 134, see Yaxhaa.
Yachachumnes (Yachichumnes), Central Californian tribe, i.,
361-401; location, i., 363, 450, 452.
Yachimeses, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
452.
Yackamans, i., 320, see Yakimas.
Yacmui (Yacomui), Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401;
location, i., 453.
Yacol Atam, Quiché title, ii., 644.
Yacomui, i., 453, see Yacmui.
Yaesumnes, i., 450, see Yosumnis.
Yagualica, i., 672, 675, see Yahualica.
Yaguarato, Michoacan, antiq., iv., 570.
Yahalan, iii., 458, see Yabalan.
Yahau Kuna, Maya temple, iii., 467.
Yahshutes (Yah Shutes), North Californian tribe, i., 326-61;
location, i., 442-3.
Yahualica (Yagualica, Yahualiuhcan), locality, Mexico, i., 672,
675; ii., 617; antiq., iv., 495.
Yajumui, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
453.
Yakamas, i., 253, 316, see Yakimas.
Yakatzib, Yucatan, antiq., iv., 253.
Yakimas (E'yackimahs, Eyakemas, Yackamans, Yakamas, Yookoomans),
Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91; location and name, i.,
253-4, 317-20; special mention, i., 227, 264, 272-4, 280,
287-90; myth., iii., 97-8; lang., iii., 620-4.
Yakima River, i., 320; antiq., iv., 736.
Yakima Valley (Eyakema, Yakimaw), i., 254, 280, 320.
Yakones (Jakons, Youicones, Youkones), tribe of Chinooks, i.,
222-50; location, i., 307; lang., iii., 640.
Yakutats, tribe of Thlinkeets, i., 94-114; location, i., 96, 142;
special mention, i., 100, 103.
Yalahao, Yucatan, antiq., iv., 261.
Yalchedunes (Jalchedunes, Talchedunes), tribe of Apaches, i.,
473-526; location, i., 475, 598; lang., iii., 684.
Yale, town, British Columbia, i., 298; lang., iii., 613.
Yalesumnes (Yaleyumnes, Yuleyumnes), Central Californian tribe,
i., 361-401; location, i., 450; lang., iii., 649-50.
Yalisco, i., 618, see Jalisco.
Yamajabs (Cosninas, Cuesninas, Cuismer, Culisnisnas, Culisnurs,
Jamajabs, Tamajabs), tribe of Apaches, i., 473-526; location,
i., 475, 598; special mention, i., 525; lang., iii., 684-6.
Yamkallies, tribe of Chinooks, i., 222-50; location, i., 309;
lang., iii., 630.
Yamlocklocks, i., 450, see Tamlocklocks.
Yam Pah Utes (Ampayouts), tribe of Shoshones, i., 422-42;
location, i., 469; special mention, i., 441.
Yampais (Yabipais, Yampaos, Yavipais), tribe of Apaches, i.,
473-526; location, i., 475, 598; special mention, i., 478, 504,
519; lang., iii., 684-6.
Yampai Valley, i., 597.
Yampapas, tribe of Shoshones, i., 422-42; location, i., 463.
Yamparacks (Yamparicas, Yampaxicas), tribe of Apaches, i.,
473-526; location, i., 473.
Yampas, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
454.
Yampatickara, tribe of Shoshones, i., 422-42; location, i., 461.
Yampaxicas, i., 592, see Yamparacks.
Yampuk, Guatemalan lordship, v., 597.
Yanabopos, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 611.
Yancuitlalpan, locality, Puebla, v., 487.
Yanex, v., 317, see Yacanex.
Yanguitlan, valley, Michoacan, v., 528.
Yanguitlan (Yanguistlan), town, Oajaca, lang., iii., 749-51;
antiq., iv., 422-3.
Yangna, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 460.
Yanostas, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
454.
Yantuckets (Yatuckets), North Californian tribe, i., 326-61;
location, i., 442, 445.
Yanuati, a child's collar, iii., 436.
Yáotl, a Nahua mythic person, iii., 378-80.
Yaotlalli, Nahua war lands, ii., 225.
Yapainés, tribe of Apaches, i., 473-526; location, i., 592.
Yaparehcas, tribe of Apaches, i., 473-526; location, i., 592.
Yapico, Nahua temple, iii., 421.
Yáppan, a Nahua mythic person, iii., 378-80.
Yaqui River, i., 601, 608.
Yaquis (Hiaquis), North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location,
i., 572, 608; special mention, i., 574-8, 582-4, 587, 589-91;
lang., iii., 667, 707-10; Quiché name for Mexicans, v., 187-8,
547, 597.
Yarumela, Honduras, antiq., iv., 71-2.
Yasja, iv., 134, see Yaxhaa.
Yasumnes, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
450; lang., iii., 649.
Yatuckets, i., 442, see Yantuckets.
Yauhtepec, town, South-west Mexico, v., 412.
Yauhtlalli (Jaotlalli, Quiahtlale), locality reserved for battle,
ii., 425.
Yauhtli, a medicine, ii., 601.
Yauterrhs, North Californian tribe, i., 326-61; location, i.,
444.
Yautl, name for Tezcatlipoca, iii., 199.
Yautlnecociautlmonenequi, name for Tezcatlipoca, iii., 206.
Yavipais, iii., 684, see Yampais.
Yavisa, town, Darien, i., 796.
Yax (Yaax), Maya month, ii., 690, 757-8.
Yaxcocahmut, name for Zamná, iii., 462.
Yaxhaa Lake (Yachá, Yasja), Guatemala, antiq., iv., 134-5.
Yaxkin (Dze-Yaxkin, Tze Yaxkin), Maya month, ii., 700, 757.
Yaxquin, name of month in Chiapas, ii., 766.
Yaxtaxitaxitanne, Apache god, iii., 170.
Ycaiut, Acagchemem god, iii., 165.
Ychal-Amollac, Akahale ruler, v., 596.
Ycuexoan, Nahua devotees, iii., 357.
Yeeaths, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
448.
Yehahs, Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91; location, i., 317.
Yehl (Yethl), Thlinkeet god, iii., 98-103, 145-6, 149.
Yej-ak-ouns, Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91; location, i.,
314.
Yek, Thlinkeet spirits, iii., 148.
Yekas, i., 447, see Yrekas.
Yelamú, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
453.
Yeletpoo, Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91; location, i., 317.
Yellow-cum, Makah chief, i., 217.
Yemé, Tamaulipas, lang., iii., 744.
Yenghies River, i., 317.
Yerba Buena, locality, Central California, i., 363.
Yetan (Yetas), i., 592; iii., 660, see Comanches.
Yethl, iii., 149, see Yehl.
Yetl, tobacco, ii., 287.
Yeunaba, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
454.
Yeunata, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
454.
Yeunator, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
454.
Yew, bows, etc. made of, i., 188, 214, 341, 494.
Ygh, ii., 767, see Igh.
Yhuixoch, v., 299, see Ixmixuch.
Yhyozochtl, v., 299, see Ixmixuch.
Yiacatecutli, iii., 416, see Iyacatecuhtli.
Yiauhqueme Mountain, a place of sacrifice, Mexico, iii., 333.
Yiauhtli, an herb, ii., 330; iii., 339, 387.
Yiaulatecatl, Nahua god, iii., 418.
Yinkaceous, Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91; location, i.,
314.
Yiuhtas, i., 592, see Noconi.
Yiz (Itz), Quiché-Cakchiquel day, ii., 767.
Ylackas (Ylakas), North Californian tribe, i., 326-61; location,
i., 442, 447.
Ymitches, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
456.
Ymix, Maya day, ii., 756, 760.
Ymunacam, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
455.
Ynyaomaxaliuhqui, a breech-cloth, ii., 375.
Yoalliehecatl, name for Tezcatlipoca, iii., 267, 381.
Yoaltecatl, a place of sacrifice, Mexico, iii., 333.
Yoaltecutli, Nahua god, ii., 275.
Yoalticitl, Nahua goddess, ii., 268-9; iii., 363.
Yobaa, iv., 389, see Liobaa.
Yocolles, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
456.
Yocut, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i., 457;
lang., iii., 651-2.
Yohuallatonac (Xohualatonac), Culhua king, v., 254, 257, 261,
263, 331; Teo-Chichimec chief, v., 490.
Yohuatl Chichimecatzin, lord of Coatepec, v., 349.
Yoiontzin, a Chichimec prince, v., 475.
Yoke, sacrificial, iii., 413; iv., 436.
Yokias, i., 362, see Ukiahs.
Yolanchas, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
456.
Yolays, i., 362, See Yolos.
Yolcuat, name for Quetzalcoatl, iii., 267.
Yolcuat Quitzalcuat, name for Tohil, v., 182, 188.
Yolhios, i., 452, see Petalumas.
Yolo County, California, i., 450.
Yolos (Yolays), Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location
and name, i., 362, 450.
Yolqui, Tezcucan title, ii., 189; v., 350.
Yongletats, i., 298, see Ucletas.
Yonio, Central California, lang., iii., 643-4.
Yonsal Pomos, Central California tribe, i., 361-401; location,
i., 448.
Yookoomans, i., 320, see Yakimas.
Yopaa, iv., 389; v., 528, see Liobaa.
Yopes (Yopimes, Yopis), i., 677, see Tlapanecs.
Yopicatl Atonal, king of Zacatollan, v., 448.
Yopitzincas, tribe of Nahuas, hist., v., 471.
Yopitzinco, locality, Guerrero, v., 471.
Yoro, locality, Honduras, i., 790, 793.
Yosemites (Tosemiteiz), Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401;
location, i., 452.
Yosemite Valley, i., 452.
Yosumnis (Yaesumnes, Yusumnes), Central Californian tribe, i.,
361-401; location, i., 450.
Youahnoe, tribe of Haidahs, i., 155-74; location, i., 292.
Youclulaht, tribe of Nootkas, i., 174-208; location, i., 295.
Youcoolumnies (Youcoulumnes), Central Californian tribe, i.,
361-401; location, i., 450.
Yougletats, i., 298, see Ucletas.
Youicones, i., 307, see Yakones.
Youitts, tribe of Chinooks, i., 222-50; location, i., 307.
Youkones, i., 307, see Yakones.
Youmatallas, Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91; location, i.,
317.
Young's River, i., 305.
Yourt (Yurt), Eskimo dwelling, i., 54.
Youruk, Klamath name, i., 327, 445.
Youtas, i., 464, see Utahs.
Yoxibalvinquil, name of month, Chiapas, ii., 766.
Yoyontzin, name for Nezahualcoyotl, v., 372.
Ypalnemoaloni, Nahua god, iii., 193.
Ypuc, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 459.
Yreka, California, antiq., iv., 707.
Yrekas (Hoteday, Yekas), North Californian tribe, i., 326-61;
location, i., 447; lang., iii., 640.
Ytsimpte, Yucatan, antiq., iv., 248-9.
Ytzahuazalmaxtlatl, a breech-cloth, ii., 375.
Ytzamná, iii., 462; v., 617-19, 621, see Zamná.
Ytzcuat, a Mayapan lord, v., 626.
Ytzmal, name for Izamal, v., 626.
Ytzteucyòhua, Nahua calendar sign, ii., 516.
Ytztlacoliuhqui, a priest's hood, iii., 356; Nahua mythic person,
v., 90.
Yuba River, i., 451; antiq., iv., 707.
Yubas (Yuvas), Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location,
i., 451; lang., iii., 648.
Yucals, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
451.
Yucatan, tribes described, i., 645-747; ii., 630-803; myth.,
iii., 461-73, 541-2; v., 87; lang., iii., 558, 571, 724,
759-62, 773-6; antiq., iii., 118; iv., 143-285, 355-9; v., 58;
name, v., 614-15, 626; hist., v., 223-30, 614-34.
Yucca, a plant used for food, i., 734, 759; ii., 357.
Yucletahs, i., 208, see Ucletas.
Yucuatl, name for Vancouver Island tribes, i., 296.
Yuê, Tamaulipas, lang., iii., 744.
Yukai, i., 448, see Ukiahs.
Yukas (Ucas, Ukas, Yukehs, Yuques), North Californian tribe, i.,
326-61; location, i., 447; special mention, i., 361, 390, 398;
lang., iii., 643, 648.
Yukletas, i., 295, see Ucletas.
Yukon River, i., 115, 146-8; lang., iii., 586-7.
Yukon Valley, i., 146.
Yukulmes, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
450.
Yukuth Kutchins, tribe of Tinneh, i., 114-37; location, i., 115.
Yukutneys, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
450.
Yuleyumnes, i., 450, see Yalesumnes.
Yulónees, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
456.
Yulus, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i., 450.
Yumagatocks, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location,
i., 450.
Yumas (Chirumas, Cuchans), tribe of Apaches, i., 473-526;
location and name, i., 475, 597-8; special mention, i., 477-8,
480, 487, 489, 494, 504-5, 510-11, 516, 519, 521-3; myth.,
iii., 527; lang., iii., 684-6.
Yunakakhotanas, i., 147, see Unakatanas.
Yuncemil, Maya god, iii., 467.
Yuquaches, North Californian tribe, i., 326-61; location, i.,
443.
Yuques, i., 447, see Yukas.
Yuque-Yunque, Pueblo province, i., 527.
Yurguimes, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 611.
Yurt, i., 54, see Yourt.
Yusumnes, i., 450, see Yosumnis.
Yutas, i., 440, see Utahs.
Yútahkah, name for Navajos, i., 475.
Yutajenne, Apache tribal name, i., 474.
Yuvas, i., 451, see Yubas.
Yx, Maya calendar sign, ii., 703.
Yxaulo, South Californian tribe, i., 402-22; location, i., 459.
Yxchebelyax, Maya goddess, ii., 752; iii., 467.
Yxcuina, name for Tlazolteotl, iii., 380.
Yxcum, Guatemala, antiq., iv., 138.
Yxillantonan, locality, Mexico, iii., 405.
Yxteucalli, Nahua vice-god, iii., 427.
Yxtliton (Ixtlilton), Nahua god, iii., 409.
Yxtutz, Guatemala, antiq., iv., 138.
Yzaes, i., 683, see Itzas.
Yzamná, ii., 691, see Zamná.
Yzcalli, Nahua month, iii., 390-3.
Yzpunteque, Nahua god, iii., 396.
Yzquitecatl, Nahua god, iii., 405, 418.
Yztaccaltzin, v., 267, see Huemac II.
Yztaccuixtli, a mythic bird, iii., 247.
Yztachuexucha, station, Toltec migration, v., 213.
Z
Zaachilla, Zapotec dialect, iii., 754-5.
Zaachilla I., Zapotec king, v., 532.
Zaachilla III., Zapotec king, v., 534.
Zaachilla Yoho, name for Teotzapotlan, v., 530.
Zabacilthan, Maya feast, ii., 694.
Zac (Zak), Maya month, ii., 691, 757-8.
Zaca, Itza drink, ii., 723; Nahua chief, v., 243.
Zacabaha, ancient city, Guatemala, v., 587.
Zacah, Maya incense, ii., 702.
Zacaha, Guatemalan tribe, hist., v., 547, 561.
Zacal Bacab, Maya god, iii., 466.
Zacapantzin, a Toltec hero, v., 213.
Zacapulas (Sacapulus), town, Guatemala, i., 788.
Zacatecas, antiq., iv., 578-93.
Zacatecos (Zacatecas, Zacatecs), North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91;
location, i., 614; special mention, i., 577; lang., iii., 719;
hist., v., 503, 537.
Zacatepec, i., 787, see Sacatepeque.
Zacapetec Mountain, Mexico, iii., 247.
Zacatlan, name for Chiapas, i., 681; station, Toltec migration,
v., 213; town, Puebla, v., 298, 314, 490.
Zacatollan, province, Guerrero, ii., 109, 473; hist., v., 448,
473, 508-9.
Zacatula, town, Guerrero, ii., 109.
Zacatula River, Puebla, antiq., iv., 467.
Zacatzontli, Nahua god, ii., 389.
Zachila, Oajaca, antiq., iv., 384-8.
Zactecauh, Cakchiquel chief, v., 562, 569-70.
Zactzuy, locality, Guatemala, i., 788; v., 564.
Zacualco, town, Jalisco, i., 622.
Zacualpa, city, Guatemala, v., 587.
Zacualpan, Mexico, antiq., iv., 480.
Zacualtipan, town, Mexico, i., 675; antiq., iv., 545.
Zacuapan, Vera Cruz, antiq., iv., 447.
Zak, ii., 766, see Zac.
Zakbim, a Guatemalan chief, v., 563.
Zakcab, Zutugil, city, v., 598.
Zakik, a Quiché noble family, ii., 648; v., 580, 582.
Zaki Nim Ak, Quiché god, v., 173.
Zaki Nima Tzyiz, Quiché goddess, v., 170, 173.
Zakiqahol, city, Guatemala, v., 584.
Zakiqoxol, Quiché mythical person, v., 569.
Zakitzunun, a Cakchiquel chief, v., 570.
Zaklohpakap, name for Mame lang., iii., 766.
Zakuléu (Socoléo), ancient city, Guatemala, i., 787; antiq., iv.,
128-30; hist., v., 587, 591.
Zalaias, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 612.
Zalzun, a magic crystal, i., 667.
Zamaneb (Zameneb), city, Guatemala, i., 789; antiq., iv., 131.
Zama River, i., 600.
Zamná (Ytzamná, Yzamná), Maya god, ii., 117, 127, 632, 647; iii.,
462-5; iv., 247; v., 23, 224-5, 617-19, 621-2, 630.
Zamorra, Nahua food, ii., 278.
Zancopinco, a suburb of Mexico City, ii., 560.
Zandia (Sandia), village and tribe of Pueblos, i., 526-56;
location, i., 600; lang., iii., 681.
Zapatepec, locality, Mexico, iii., 405.
Zapatero Island, Nicaragua, antiq., iv., 30, 39-47, 58-62.
Zape, Durango, antiq., iv., 600.
Zapotecapan, a Oajacan kingdom, v., 443-7, 526-36; see also
Zapotecs.
Zapotecs, Nahua nation, i., 644-70; ii., 133-629; location and
name, i., 645, 679; ii., 132; special mention, i., 646, 648,
651-3, 656-61, 667-9; ii., 109-10, 142-3, 228, 277-8, 368, 379,
410, 522, 624, 629; myth., ii., 209-3, 308; iii., 73-4, 268,
448-60, 541; lang., iii., 754-6; v., 527; hist., v., 206-7,
239, 443-7, 473, 526-36, 616.
Zapoteros, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 613.
Zapotitlan, locality, Guatemala, v., 586.
Zapotlan, Jalisco, antiq., iv., 574; hist., v., 416.
Zaquan, a mythic bird, iii., 241.
Zarahemla, name of Hebrew colony in America, v., 99.
Zayi, Yucatan, antiq., iv., 211-15, 270.
Zayollan, province, Mexico, v., 346.
Zeec, ii., 757, see Tzec.
Zeetopaa, city, Oajaca, v., 532.
Zeilusqua, Bellacoola baskets, i., 166.
Zèkà-thaka (Ziunka-kutshi), tribe of Tinneh, i., 114-37;
location, i., 147.
Zekilna, Yucatan, antiq., iv., 212.
Zeldales, i., 681, see Tzendales.
Zeldal-Quelen, Chiapas dialect, iii., 760.
Zemanahuaca Tlatoani, Mexican imperial title, v., 471.
Zentipac (Tzenticpac), town, Jalisco, i., 672; v., 509.
Zia, Pueblo village, i., 600.
Zibilnocac, Yucatan, antiq., iv., 252.
Zíbolos, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 611.
Zichajucuero, locality, Michoacan, v., 513.
Zichu, locality, Mexico, v., 524.
Zihil, Maya baptismal rite, ii., 682.
Zima, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 612.
Zingomenes, Inland Columbian tribe, i., 250-91; location, i.,
314.
Zintzicha, name for Tangaxoan, v., 516.
Zip (Cijp), Maya month, ii., 696, 757.
Zipacapan, town, Guatemala, i., 787.
Zipacna, Quiché god, v., 172-3; a pre-Toltec ruler, v., 184.
Zipattoval, iii., 491, see Cipattonal.
Ziranziran Camaro, Michoacan chief, v., 511.
Zirumbo, a Michoacan kingdom, v., 523.
Zitacuarencuaro, Matlaltzinca festival, iii., 446.
Zitzimitl, name for Mictlantecutli, iii., 396.
Ziuhcohuatl, a Toltec prince, v., 212-13.
Ziunka-kutshi, i., 147, see Zèkà-thaka.
Zivenaritzcatl, birth-place of Quetzalcoatl, iii., 271.
Ziyan-caan, name for Bacalar, v., 624.
Ziziz Pandacuare, Tarasco king, v., 524-5.
Zoc, ii., 757, see Tzoz.
Zococ Aztahua Tlacaztalli, a Tlascaltec chief, v., 498.
Zoes, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 609; lang.,
iii., 707.
Zoltepec, locality, Mexico, i., 677.
Zolton, a Toltec noble, v., 254.
Zomiomi, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
453.
Zonzonate, i., 790, see Sonsonate.
Zoological collection, Montezuma's, ii., 163-6.
Zoot, musical instrument, Yucatan, v., 632.
Zopilotes, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 611.
Zoques (Soques), South Mexican tribe, i., 645-70; location, i.,
682; special mention, i., 646-7, 649, 652, 657-8, 668; lang.,
iii., 760, 763; hist., v., 603-4, 606.
Zoquitlan, Mije town, v., 532.
Zotuta, province, Yucatan, v., 632.
Zotz, ii., 757, see Tzoz.
Zotziles (Tzotziles), South Mexican tribe, i., 644-70; location
and name, i., 645, 681; ii., 132; v., 561-2; lang., iii., 760,
764; hist., v., 547-8, 561, 570, 590, 593, 596, 603-4.
Zotzilhá, name for Tzinacantlan, i., 681.
Zotzilen-Tukuches, Guatemalan tribe, hist., v., 562, 569, 574-5,
590.
Zquina, locality, Guatemala, v., 559.
Ztayul, Nihaïb prince, v., 567.
Zuaques, North Mexican tribe, i., 571-91; location, i., 572, 608;
lang., iii., 707.
Zucigin, Central Californian tribe, i., 361-401; location, i.,
453.
Zugen (Zuyen), South Mexican mantle, i., 650; ii., 727.
Zuhuy Zipi, Maya god, ii., 698.
Zuina, v., 624, see Tulan Zuiva.
Zukli Island, i., 139.
Zumpango (Tzompan, Tzompanco, Tzonpanco, Tzumpanco, Zumpanco),
locality, Guatemala, i., 789; station, Aztec migration, v.,
323-4, 329, 476.
Zuñi, town, New Mexico, i., 527, 600; antiq., iv., 645-6, 663,
667, 674.
Zuñi River, i., 600; antiq., iv., 644-50.
Zuñis, tribe of Pueblos, i., 526-56; location, i., 600; special
mention, i., 545; myth., iii., 120-1, 132; lang., iii., 681-3.
Zutugilebpop, Zutugil king, v., 584-5.
Zutugils (Zutuhiles), Maya nation, i., 687-711; ii., 630-803;
location, i., 789; special mention, ii., 732; lang., iii.,
760, 762, 772; hist., v., 561, 566-7, 570-2, 575-8, 584-6, 593,
598-9, 602.
Zuyen, ii., 727, see Zugen.
Zwanga (Tzihuanga), Tarasco king, v., 516, 525.
END OF THE FIFTH VOLUME.
Supplementary Transcriber's Note:
The following primary index entries were not located in this or previous
volumes. (Missing secondary entries were assumed to be alternate spellings
and were ignored.)
Achcuhtzin
Ahacus
Ahcunal
Ahkin Xooc
Ah Witzil
Azacot
Balanicha
Caibil Balam
Chilam Calam
Calkimi
Cenial
Cenizos
Chuluc
Chutimal
Cuchumatanes
Cunai
Didues
Ewentoc
Holom
Hueytlato
Ichpaa
Itzmal Ul
Kak Upacat
Kyuquots
Lackquelibla
Lebassas
Manosaht
Olalti
Quilleliute
Swarrow
Terrace
Tootitlan
Ymitches
*** End of this LibraryBlog Digital Book "The Works of Hubert Howe Bancroft, Volume 5 - The Native Races, Volume 5, Primitive History" ***
Copyright 2023 LibraryBlog. All rights reserved.