Chapter XX: Part IV: Linguistic (6)

Tiger, as totemic animal, 114, 128.

Time, idea of, absent, 404.

Time-wheel, Mexican, 160, 161.

Timuquana tribe, 75.

Tin, use of, 86.

Tinné language, 35, 394, 400.

Tiribi language, the, 375 _sq._

Titicaca, Lake, ruins near, 26.

Tlacopan, State of, 23, 299.

Tlalocan, the Aztec Paradise, 144.

Tlalocs, Aztec rain-gods, 144.

Tlamapa, hieroglyph of, 225.

Tla-pallan, the place of colors, 87.

Tlapan, hieroglyph of, 224.

Tobacco, its origin and extension, 33.

Tollan, 93.

Tollanatl, the, 86, 96.

Toltecs, supposed mound-builders, 67;
their fabulous history, 24, 83–100;
their mythical home, 145.

Tomahawk, word for, 183.

Tomaka, a town, 77.

Tonacatecutli, an Aztec god, 96.

Tonalan, the sunny place, 93.

Topiltzin, king of Tula, 84.

Totem marks, as autographs, 234.

Totemic deities, 88, 113, 114;
divisions of Lenâpé, 189.

Tradition, permanence of, in savages, 22.

Transitions in verbs, 370.

Tree of Life, in Maya and Mexican art, 161.

Trenton gravels, objects discovered in, 32, 53.

Trepanned skulls from Peru, 188.

Trephining, among the Lenâpé, 188.

Tribute rolls of ancient Mexicans, 231.

Triplicate constitution of things, 154.

Triple division of the human race, 57.

Triquetrum, as a symbol, 149 _sqq._

Triskeles, a sacred symbol, 149 _sqq._

Tucurrique, tribes at, 375.

Tula, the story of, 83–100;
derivation, 93.

Tupi, the language, 323, 343, 380 _sq._, 400;
love words in, 428.

Turanian languages, 58.

Turtle totem of Lenâpé, 189.

Twins, the divine, 125.

Twelve, as sacred number, 187.

Tzendal dialect, 126.

Tzontemoc, Aztec deity, 146.

Tzontemoc mictlan tecutli, 278–9.

Tzutuhil dialect, the, 104, 434.

Ua ua pach, a Maya god, 176.

Ucita, a town in Florida, 75.

Underworld, the, in Quiche myth, 125;
in other tribes, 128.

Uniter, the Great, 150.

Unwritten languages, study of, 305.

Ural-Altaic languages, 58.

Ursua, General, expedition of, 239.

Usumasinta, river, 126.

Ute language, the, 323.

Utlatlan, a Quiche city, 124.

Vaku, a Quiche god, 123.

Valladolid, in Yucatan, 236.

Vancouver’s Island, tribes on, 22;
black slate from, 32.

Vara, Spanish, length of, 436, 446.

Verb, the American, 347, 405.

Verb, in Algonkin grammar, 190.

Vineland, its position, 22, note.

Virginia, antiquities of, 70.

Virginia, West, Cherokees in, 82.

Virgin-mother, the myths of, 95, 96, 124, 125.

Visuaires, primitive men were, 408.

Vizeitas, tribe, 375.

Vowels, permutable, 398;
significance of, 394.

Vuch, the opossum, etc., 111.

Vukub-came, a Quiche god, 124.

Vukub-hun-ahpu, a Quiche god, 124.

Wampum, use among Lenapé, 188.

Warraus, height of, 39.

War clubs, 183.

War Songs of Aztecs, 299 _sq._

War-whoop, name for, 184.

Way cot, a Maya imp, 178.

Weighing, unknown in America, 434, 449.

West, as abode of souls, 141–144.

West Indies, no palæoliths in, 42, 55;
native tribes of, 310.

Wetucks, a hero-god, 131.

Wheels, of Mayas, for computing time, 264.

Wheel-cross, the, 158.

White, as sacred color, 113, 132, 166, 186, 188.

Wigwams of Lenâpé, 185.

Winds, the gods of, 123, 175.

Winter-counts, of Dakotas, 139.

Wisakketjâk, a Cree hero, 131, 132.

Wives, buying, 424.

Wooden utensils of Lenâpé, 185.

Woods, the Man of the, 176.

Words, number of in American tongues, 325.

Writing, different methods of, 213, 230.

Xbalanque, the Quiche hero-god, 123–129.

X bolon thoroch, a Maya imp, 178.

X’Kanleox, a Maya goddess, 166.

Xibalba, the Quiche Hades, 84, 123–129.

Xipacoyan, a river, 86.

Xmucane, a Quiche goddess, 118, 119, 122, 124.

Xocotitlan, a place name, 93.

Xochicalco, hieroglyph of, 282.

Xpiyacoc, a Quiche deity, 118, 119, 124.

Xquiq, the Virgin mother, 124.

X tabai, a Maya sprite, 178.

X Thoh Chaltun, a Maya sprite, 178.

Yancopek, a Maya imp, 178.

Yasous, tribe, 77.

Ycasqui, a province, 74.

Year counts, of natives, 159, 160.

Yellow, symbolism of, 166, 167.

Yin and Yang, 151.

Yucatan, ancient, 302;
folk-lore of, 163;
dialects in, 104;
civilization of, 84;
ruins in, 26;
legendary peopling of, 24.

Yum cim-il, a Maya divinity, 169.

Yurari, the language, 329.

Zaki-nim-ak, name of a god, 113.

Zaki-nima-tzyiz, 113.

Zapote, superstition concerning, 169.

Zapotecs, a Mexican tribe, 228.

Zaztun, the, of Mayas, 165.

Zohol chich, a phantom bird, 179.

Zuñis, the, 108.

-----

Footnote 1:

Prof. H. W. Haynes, in _The Narrative and Critical History of
America_, p. 329. Edited by Justin Winsor. Boston, 1889.

Footnote 2:

This paper was my address as vice-president of the American
Association for the Advancement of Science, before the Section of
Anthropology, at the meeting in 1887. I have added the foot notes, and
revised the text.

Footnote 3:

_Vues des Cordillières, et Monumens des Peuples Indigènes de
l’Amérique._ Introduction.

Footnote 4:

See F. Michel, _Dix-huit Ans chez les Sauvages. Voyages et Missions de
Mgr. Henry Faraud_ (Paris, 1866), and Emile Petitot, _Monographie des
Dènè-Dindjié_? (Paris, 1876).

Footnote 5:

Professor Gustav Storm has rendered it probable that the Vineland of
the Northmen was not further south than Nova Scotia. See his _Studies
on the Vineland Voyages_, in _Mems. de la Société Royale des
Antiquaires du Nord._, 1888.

Footnote 6:

Such was the opinion of the late José Fernando Ramirez, one of the
most acute and learned of Mexican antiquaries. See his words in Orozco
y Berra’s Introduction to the _Cronica_ of Tezozomoc, p. 213 (Mexico,
1878).

Footnote 7:

_Die Spuren der Aztekischen Sprache in Nördlichen Mexiko_, etc.
(Berlin, 1859.)

Footnote 8:

I would refer the reader who cares to pursue this branch of the
subject to my analysis of these stories in _The Myths of the New
World_ (second ed., New York, 1876), and _American Hero-Myths_
(Philadelphia, 1882).

Footnote 9:

The results of the recent “Hemenway South-western Exploring
Expedition” do not in the least invalidate this statement.

Footnote 10:

A brief but most interesting description of these monuments is
preserved in a letter to the Emperor Charles V. by the Friar Lorenzo
de Bienvenida, written from Yucatan in 1548.

Footnote 11:

_Las Ruinas de Tiahuanaco._ Por Bartolomé Mitre. (Buenos Ayres, 1879.)

Footnote 12:

This assertion was attacked by Dr. C. C. Abbott, in an address before
the American Association in 1888 (_Proceedings_, Vol. XXXVII, p. 308).
But if we assume the mediæval period of European history to have begun
with the fall of the Western Empire, I do not retire from my position.

Footnote 13:

D. G. Brinton, _The Floridian Peninsula, its Literary History, Indian
Tribes and Antiquities_, p. 177–181 (Philadelphia, 1859). The
shell-heaps along the Tennessee River I described in the _Annual
Report of the Smithsonian Institution_, for 1866, p. 356.

Footnote 14:

His accounts were principally in the Fourth and Seventh _Reports of
the Peabody Museum_.

Footnote 15:

See the _Verhandlungen der Berliner Gesellschaft für Anthropologie_,
1886, 1887, 1888.

Footnote 16:

I have brought out the distinction between the epoch of simple
implements and that of compound implements in an article which is
reprinted in this collection. The expressions “early” and “late”
applied to these epochs do not refer to absolute periods of time, but
are relative to the progress of individual civilizations.

Footnote 17:

Exceptions are some of the Floridian shell-heaps and a limited number
elsewhere.

Footnote 18:

Florentine Ameghino, _La Antiguedad del Hombre en el Plata_, Tomo II,
p. 434, _et al._ (Buenos Ayres, 1881.) The bow and arrow, being a
compound implement, nowhere belonged to the earliest stage of human
culture. See also H. W. Haynes’ article, “The Bow and Arrow unknown to
Palæolithic Man,” in _Proceedings of Boston Soc. Nat. History_, Vol.
XXIII.

Footnote 19:

Dr. C. C. Abbott, the discoverer and principal explorer of these
gravels, reported his discoveries in numerous papers, and especially
in his work _Primitive Industry_, chap. xxxii.

Footnote 20:

_Expedition durch Central-Brasilien_, pp. 310–314 (Leipzig, 1886).

Footnote 21:

The reference is to Mr. Horatio Hale’s Address “On the Origin of
Language and the Antiquity of Speaking Man.” See _Proc. of the Am.
Assoc. for the Adv. of Science_, vol. xxxv., p. 239, sq.

Footnote 22:

_Ethnographie der Republik Guatemala_, p. 157 (Zurich, 1884).

Footnote 23:

See Howse, _Grammar of the Cree Language_, p. 143, sqq.

Footnote 24:

This question is discussed in more detail in the next essay.

Footnote 25:

_L’Homme Americain_, Tome I, p. 126. The tribe is the Guarayos, an
offshoot of the Guaranis.

Footnote 26:

_Zeitschrift für Ethnologie_, 1884, p. 181.

Footnote 27:

Since this address was delivered Mr. H. T. Cresson has reported the
finding of chipped implements made of argillite in a deposit of
mid-glacial age on the banks of the Delaware River—_Proc. Boston Soc.
Nat. Hist._ vol. xxiv; and portions of two skeletons completely
converted into limonite have been exhibited at the Academy of Natural
Sciences, Philadelphia, from a deposit in Florida, _below_ one
containing the remains of the extinct giant bison.

Footnote 28:

I have discussed this fully in a paper in the _Proceedings_ of the
Amer. Philosoph. Soc. for 1887, entitled “On an Ancient Human
Footprint from Nicaragua.”

Footnote 29:

Man must have descended from the catarrhine division of the
anthropoids, none of which occur in the New World. See Darwin, _The
Descent of Man_, p. 153.

Footnote 30:

Address at the British Association for the Adv. of Science, 1887.

Footnote 31:

His article, which was first printed in the _North American Review_,
1870, may be found in Beach’s _Indian Miscellany_, p. 158 (Albany,
1877).

Footnote 32:

The subject of an address before the American Association for the
Advancement of Science in 1888, with revision.

Footnote 33:

The earliest publication I made on this subject was in an article on
Pre-historic Archæology, contributed to _The Iconographic
Encyclopædia_ (Vol. II, p. 28, Philadelphia, 1886).

Footnote 34:

A possible exception may have been along the line of the Mississippi
River, where a palæolithic workshop appears to have been discovered
above St. Paul, by Miss Babbitt.

Footnote 35:

This Paper was read before the American Association for the
Advancement of Science, at its meeting in Cleveland, 1888.

Footnote 36:

See Foley, _Des Trois Grandes Races Humaines_, Paris, 1881.

Footnote 37:

_Uralaltaische Völker und Sprachen_, p. 167. I do not think that the
verbal coincidences pointed out by Petitot in his _Monographie des
Déné Dindjé_, and by Platzmann in his _Amerikanisch-Asiatische
Etymologien_, merit serious consideration.

Footnote 38:

Brinton, in _Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society_, for
1885; Charencey, _Mélanges de Philologie et Palaéographie Américaine_,
p. 80 (Paris, 1883). See also a later Essay in this volume.

Footnote 39:

This example of misdirected erudition may be seen in the _Anales del
Museo Nacional de Mexico_. Tomo I.

Footnote 40:

Prof. Morse has also pointed out to me that the Mongolian
arrow-release—one of the most characteristic of all releases—has been
nowhere found on the American continent. This is an important fact,
proving that neither as hunters nor conquerors did any stray Mongols
leave a mark on American culture.

Footnote 41:

Hovelacque et Hervé, _Anthropologie_, pp. 231, 234, 236; and on the
Inca bone, see Dr. Washington Matthews in the _American
Anthropologist_, vol. II., p. 337.

Footnote 42:

In _Verhandlungen der Berliner Anthrop. Gesellschaft_, 1881–82.

Footnote 43:

Dr. Franz Boas, whose accurate studies of the Indians of the Northwest
coast are well known, informs me that he has rarely or never noted the
oblique eye among them. Yet precisely on that coast we should look for
it, if the Mongolian theory has any foundation. Dr. Ranke’s recent
studies have proved the oblique eye to be merely an arrest of
development.

Footnote 44:

_Elements d’ Anthropologie_, p. 1003.

Footnote 45:

When this paper appeared in _Science_ (September 14th, 1888), it led
to a reply from Dr. H. F. C. Ten Kate, of Leyden, who had published
various studies endeavoring to prove the Mongoloid character of the
American race. His arguments, however, were merely a repetition of
those which I believe I have refuted in the above article, and for
that reason I do not include the discussion.

Footnote 46:

_The North Americans of Antiquity_, p. 106, (1880.)

Footnote 47:

_The Mound-Builders_, chap. xii, (Cinn., 1879.)

Footnote 48:

_Pre-Historic Races of the United States of America_, pp. 388, 347,
(Chicago, 1873.)

Footnote 49:

_Transactions of the Anthropological Society of Washington, D. C._, p.
116, (1881.)

Footnote 50:

_History of the Five Nations_, Introduction, p. 16 (London, 1750).

Footnote 51:

_Meurs des Sauvages Américains comparés aux Meurs du Premiers Temps_,
chap. xiii.

Footnote 52:

_Journal Historique_, p. 377.

Footnote 53:

_Wanderings of an Artist among the Indians of North America_, p. 3
(London, 1859).

Footnote 54:

H. R. Schoolcraft, _Notes on the Iroquois_, pp. 162, 163, compare pp.
66, 67.

Footnote 55:

Squier and Davis, _Ancient Monuments of the Mississippi Valley_, p.
44.

Footnote 56:

_Aboriginal Monuments of the State of New York_, p. 11.

Footnote 57:

Mr. S. Taylor, _American Journal of Science_, vol. xliv, p. 22.

Footnote 58:

_History of Virginia_, book ii, chap. iii, ch. viii.

Footnote 59:

See a well-prepared article on this subject by Prof. Finch, in the
_American Journal of Science_, vol. vii, p. 153.

Footnote 60:

_History of Virginia_, bk. iii, chap. vii.

Footnote 61:

_Travels_, p. 367 (Dublin, 1793).

Footnote 62:

_History of the North American Indians_, p. 184. See note at end of
this Essay.

Footnote 63:

_Relatione que fece Alvaro Nurez, detto Capo di Vacca_, Ramusio,
_Viaggi_, tom. iii, fol. 317, 323 (Venice, 1556.)

Footnote 64:

La Vega, _Historia de la Florida_, Lib. ii, cap. xxii.

Footnote 65:

Ibid, Lib. vi, cap. vi. See for other examples from this work: Lib.
ii, cap. xxx, Lib. iv, cap. xi, Lib. v, cap. iii, etc.

Footnote 66:

_Relation de ce qui arriva pendant le Voyage du Capitaine Soto_, p. 88
(Ed. Ternaux Compans).

Footnote 67:

_Proceedings_ of the American Philosophical Society, 1879–1880.

Footnote 68:

_Histoire Notable de la Floride_, pp. 138, 164, etc.

Footnote 69:

_Brevis Narratio_, in De Bry, _Peregrinationes in Americam_, Pars. ii,
Tab. xl, (1591.)

Footnote 70:

Alcazar, _Chrono-Historia de la Compania de Jesus en la Provincia de
Toledo_, Tom. ii, Dec. iii, cap. vi, (Madrid, 1710.)

Footnote 71:

_The Present State of His Majestie’s Isles and Territories in
America_, p. 156, (London, 1667.)

Footnote 72:

_The Floridian Peninsula_, p. 95, sqq. (Phila. 1859.)

Footnote 73:

Bartram MSS., in the Library of the Pennsylvania Historical Society.

Footnote 74:

_Narrative of Occola Nikkanoche, Prince of Econchatti_, by his
Guardian, pp. 71–2, (London, 1841.)

Footnote 75:

_Annals_, in Louisiana _Hist. Colls._, p. 196.

Footnote 76:

_Memoires Historiques de la Louisiane_, Tome ii, p. 109.

Footnote 77:

_Letters Edifiantes et Curieuses_, Tome. i, p. 261.

Footnote 78:

_History of Louisiana_, vol. ii, p. 188, (Eng. Trans., London, 1763.)

Footnote 79:

Adair, _History of the North American Indians_, pp. 184, 185:—William
Bartram, _Travels_, p. 561: Dumont, _Memoires Historiques de la
Louisiane_, Tome i, pp. 246, 264, et al.: Bernard Romans, _Natural and
Civil History of Florida_, pp. 88–90, (a good account.)

The _Relations des Jesuits_ describe the custom among the Northern
Indians.

Footnote 80:

_Antiquities of the Southern Indians_, particularly the Georgian
Tribes, p. 135, (New York, 1873.)

Footnote 81:

For particulars of this see my _Myths of the New World_, pp. 241–2,
(New York, 1876.)

Footnote 82:

C. C. Jones, _Monumental Remains of Georgia_, p. 32.

Footnote 83:

Ibid., _Antiquities of the Southern Indians_, p. 169.

Footnote 84:

Squier & Davis, _Ancient Monuments of the Mississippi Valley_, p. 29.

Footnote 85:

_Origin of the Big Mound of St. Louis, a paper read before the St.
Louis Academy of Science._

Footnote 86:

Thomas E. Pickett, _The Testimony of the Mounds: Considered with
especial reference to the Pre-historic Archæology of Kentucky and the
Adjoining States_, pp. 9, 28, (Maysville, 1876.)

Footnote 87:

_Myths of the New World._ By D. G. Brinton, chap. vi. _passim_.

Footnote 88:

Especially in _American Hero Myths, a study in the Native Religions of
the Western Continent_, pp. 35, 64, 82, etc. (Philadelphia, 1882.)

Footnote 89:

M. Charnay, in his essay, _La Civilisation Toltèque_, published in the
_Revue d’ Ethnographie_, T. iv., p. 281, 1885, states his thesis as
follows: “Je veux prouver l’existence du Toltèque que certains ont
niée; je veux prouver que les civilisations Américaines ne sont qu’une
seule et même civilisation; enfin, je veux prouver que cette
civilisation est toltèque.” I consider each of these statements an
utter error. In his _Anciennes Villes du Nouveau Monde_, M. Charnay
has gone so far as to give a map showing the migrations of the ancient
Toltecs. As a translation of this work, with this map, has recently
been published in this country, it appears to me the more needful that
the baseless character of the Toltec legend be distinctly stated.

Footnote 90:

Ixtlilxochitl, in his _Relaciones Historicas_ (in Lord Kingsborough’s
_Antiquities of Mexico_, Vol. ix., p. 333), says that during the reign
of Topiltzin, last king of Tula, the Toltec sovereignty extended a
thousand leagues from north to south and eight hundred from east to
west; and in the wars that attended its downfall five million six
hundred thousand persons were slain!!

Footnote 91:

Sahagun (_Hist. de la Nueva España_, Lib. viii, cap. 5) places the
destruction of Tula in the year 319 B. C.; Ixtlilxochitl (_Historia
Chichimeca_, iii, cap. 4) brings it down to 969 A. D.; the _Codex
Ramirez_ (p. 25) to 1168; and so on. There is an equal variation about
the date of founding the city.

Footnote 92:

Since writing the above I have received from the Comte de Charencey a
reprint of his article on _Xibalba_, in which he sets forth the theory
of the late M. L. Angrand, that all ancient American civilization was
due to two “currents” of Toltecs, the western, straight-headed
Toltecs, who entered Anahuac by land from the north-west, and the
eastern, flat-headed Toltecs, who came by sea from Florida. It is to
criticise such vague theorizing that I have written this paper.

Footnote 93:

Motolinia, in his _Historia de los Indios de Nueva España_, p. 5,
calls the locality “el puerto llamado Tollan,” the pass or gate called
Tollan. Through it, he states, passed first the Colhua and later the
Mexica, though he adds that some maintain these were the same people.
In fact, Colhua is a form of a word which means “ancestors:” _colli_,
forefather; _no-col-huan_, my forefathers; _Colhuacan_, “the place of
the forefathers,” where they lived. In Aztec picture-writing this is
represented by a hill with a bent top, on the “ikonomatic” system, the
verb _coloa_, meaning to bend, to stoop. Those Mexica who said the
Colhua proceeded them at Tula, simply meant that their own ancestors
dwelt there. The _Anales de Cuauhtitlan_ (pp. 29, 33) distinctly
states that what Toltecs survived the wars which drove them southward
became merged in the Colhuas. As these wars largely arose from civil
dissensions, the account no doubt is correct which states that others
settled in Acolhuacan, on the eastern shore of the principal lake in
the Valley of Mexico. The name means “Colhuacan by the water,” and was
the State of which the capital was Tezcoco.

Footnote 94:

This description is taken from the map of the location in M. Charnay’s
_Anciennes Villes du Nouveau Monde_, p. 83. The measurements I have
made from the map do not agree with those stated in the text of the
book, but are, I take it, more accurate.

Footnote 95:

Sometimes called the _Rio de Montezuma_, and also the _Tollanatl_,
water of Tula. This stream plays a conspicuous part in the
Quetzalcoatl myths. It appears to be the same as the river _Atoyac_ (=
flowing or spreading water, _alt_, _toyaua_), or _Xipacoyan_ (= where
precious stones are washed, from _xiuitl_, _paca_, _yan_), referred to
by Sahagun, _Hist. de la Nueva España_, Lib. ix., cap. 29. In it were
the celebrated “Baths of Quetzalcoatl,” called _Atecpanamochco_, “the
water in the tin palace,” probably from being adorned with this metal
(_Anales de Cuauhtitlan_).

Footnote 96:

See the _Codez Ramirez_, p. 24. Why called Snake-Hill the legend says
not. I need not recall how prominent an object is the serpent in Aztec
mythology. The name is a compound of _coatl_, snake, and _tepetl_,
hill or mountain, but which may also may mean town or city, as such
were usually built on elevations. The form _Coatepec_ is this word
with the postposition _c_, and means “at the snake-hill,” or, perhaps,
“at Snake-town.”

Footnote 97:

Or to one of them. The name is preserved by Ixtlilxochitl, _Relaciones
Historicas_, in Kingsborough, _Mexico_, Vol. ix., p. 326. Its
derivation is from _palli_, a color (root _pa_), and the postposition
_pan_. It is noteworthy that this legend states that Quetzalcoatl in
his avatar as _Ce Acatl_ was born in the Palpan, “House of Colors;”
while the usual story was that he came from Tla-pallan, the place of
colors. This indicates that the two accounts are versions of the same
myth.

Footnote 98:

There are two ancient Codices extant, giving in picture-writing the
migrations of the Mexi. They have been repeatedly published in part or
in whole, with varying degrees of accuracy. Orozco y Berra gives their
bibliography in his _Historia Antigua de Mexico_, Tom. iii. p. 61,
note. These Codices differ widely, and seem contradictory, but Orozco
y Berra has reconciled them by the happy suggestion that they refer to
sequent and not synchronous events. There is, however, yet much to do
before their full meaning is ascertained.

Footnote 99:

The name Aztlan is that of a place and Mexitl that of a person, and
from these are derived _Aztecatl_, plural, _Azteca_, and _Mexicatl_,
pl. _Mexica_. The Azteca are said to have left Aztlan under the
guidance of Mexitl (_Codex Ramirez_). The radicals of both words have
now become somewhat obscured in the Nahuatl. My own opinion is that
Father Duran (_Hist. de Nueva España_, Tom. i, p. 19) was right in
translating Aztlan as “the place of whiteness,” _el lugar de
blancura_, from the radical _iztac_, white. This may refer to the
East, as the place of the dawn; but there is also a temptation to look
upon Aztlan as a syncope of _a-izta-tlan_, = “by the salt water.”

Mexicatl is a _nomen gentile_ derived from _Mexitl_, which was another
name for the tribal god or early leader Huitzilopochtli, as is
positively stated by Torquemada (_Monarquia Indiana_, Lib. viii, cap.
xi). Sahagun explains Mexitl as a compound of _metl_, the maguey, and
_citli_, which means “hare” and “grandmother” (_Hist. de Nueva
España_, Lib. x. cap. 29). It is noteworthy that one of the names of
Quetzalcoatl is _Meconetzin_, son of the maguey (Ixtlilxochitl, _Rel.
Hist._, in Kingsborough, Vol. ix, p. 238). These two gods were
originally brothers, though each had divers mythical ancestors.

Footnote 100:

Orozco y Berra, _Historia Antigua de Mexico_, Tom. iii, cap. 4. But
Albert Gallatin was the first to place Aztlan no further west than
Michoacan (_Trans. American Ethnolog. Society_, Vol. ii, p. 202).
Orozco thinks Aztlan was the small island called Mexcalla in Lake
Chapallan, apparently because he thinks this name means “houses of the
Mexi;” but it may also signify “where there is abundance of maguey
leaves,” this delicacy being called _mexcalli_ in Nahuatl, and the
terminal _a_ signifying location or abundance. (See Sahagun, _Historia
de Nueva España_, Lib. vii, cap. 9.) At present, one of the smaller
species of maguey is called _mexcalli_.

Footnote 101:

It is quite likely that the stone image figured by Charnay, _Anciennes
Villes du Nouveau Monde_, p. 72, and the stone ring used in the
_tlachtli_, ball play, which he figures, p. 73, are those referred to
in the historic legend.

Footnote 102:

The _Codex Ramirez_, p. 24, a most excellent authority, is quite
clear. The picture-writing—which is really phonetic, or, as I have
termed it, _ikonomatic_—represents the Coatepetl by the sign of a hill
(_tepetl_) inclosing a serpent (_coatl_). Tezozomoc, in his _Cronica
Mexicana_, cap. 2, presents a more detailed but more confused account.
Duran, _Historia de las Indias de Nueva España_, cap. 3, is worthy of
comparison. The artificial inundation of the plain to which the
accounts refer probably means that a ditch or moat was constructed to
protect the foot of the hill. Herrera says: “Cercaron de agua el cerro
llamado Coatepec.” _Decadas de Indias_, Dec. iii, Lib. ii, cap. 11.

Footnote 103:

The _Annals of Cuauhtitlan_, a chronicle written in the Nahuatl
language, gives 309 years from the founding to the destruction of
Tula, but names a dynasty of only four rulers. Veitia puts the
founding of Tula in the year 713 A. D. (_Historia de Nueva España_,
cap. 23.) Let us suppose, with the laborious and critical Orozco y
Berra (notes to the _Codex Ramirez_, p. 210) that the Mexi left Aztlan
A. D. 648. These three dates would fit into a rational chronology,
remembering that there is an acknowledged hiatus of a number of years
about the eleventh and twelfth centuries in the Aztec records (Orozco
y Berra, notes to _Codex Ramirez_, p. 213). The _Anales de
Cuauhtitlan_ dates the founding of Tula _after_ that of Tlaxcallan,
Huexotzinco and Cuauhtitlan (p. 29).

Footnote 104:

As usual, Ixtlilxochitl contradicts himself in his lists of rulers.
Those given in his _Historia Chichimeca_ are by no means the same as
those enumerated in his _Relaciones Historicas_ (Kingsborough,
_Mexico_, Vol. ix, contains all of Ixtlilxochitl’s writings). Entirely
different from both is the list in the _Anales de Cuauhtitlan_. How
completely euhemeristic Ixtlilxochitl is in his interpretations of
Mexican mythology is shown by his speaking of the two leading Nahuatl
divinities Tezcatlipoca and Huitzilopochtli as “certain bold warriors”
(“ciertos caballeros muy valerosos.” _Relaciones Historicas_, in
Kingsborough, Vol. ix, p. 326).

Footnote 105:

See the note to page 84. But it is not at all likely that Tula was
absolutely deserted. On the contrary, Herrera asserts that _after_ the
foundation of Mexico and the adjacent cities (despues de la fundacion
de Mexico i de toda la tierra) it reached its greatest celebrity for
skilled workmen. _Decadas de Indias_, Dec. iii, Lib. ii, cap. 11. The
general statement is that the sites on the Coatepetl and the adjacent
meadows were unoccupied for a few years—the _Anales de Cuauhtitlan_
says nine years—after the civil strife and massacre, and then were
settled again. The _Historia de los Mexicanos por sus Pinturas_, cap.
11, says, “y ansi fueron muertos todos los de Tula, que no quedó
ninguno.”

Footnote 106:

See Buschmann, _Ueber die Aztekischen Ortsnamen_, ss. 682, 788. Orozco
y Berra, _Geografia de las Lenguas de Mejico_, pp. 248, 255.

Footnote 107:

_Historia de las Indias Occidentales_, Dec. iii, Lib. ii, cap. II.

Footnote 108:

_Relaciones Historicas_, in Kingsborough’s _Mexico_, Vol. ix, p. 392.
Compare his _Historia Chichimeca_.

Footnote 109:

Buschmann, _Ueber die Aztekischen Ortsnamen_, ss. 682, 797.

Footnote 110:

_Cronica Mexicana_, cap. 1, “Partieron de alli y vinieron á la parte
que llaman Coatepec, términos de Tonalan, lugar del sol.” In Nahuatl
_tonallan_ usually means summer, sun-time. It is syncopated from
_tonalli_ and _tlan_; the latter is the locative termination;
_tonalli_ means warmth, _sunniness_, akin to _tonatiuh_, sun; but it
also means soul, spirit, especially when combined with the possessive
pronouns, as _totonal_, our soul, our immaterial essence. By a further
syncope _tonallan_ was reduced to _Tollan_ or _Tullan_, and by the
elision of the terminal semi-vowel, this again became Tula. This name
may therefore mean “the place of souls,” an accessory signification
which doubtless had its influence on the growth of the myths
concerning the locality.

It may be of some importance to note that Tula or Tollan was not at
first the name of the town, but of the locality—that is, of the warm
and fertile meadow-lands at the foot of the Coatepetl. The town was at
first called Xocotitlan, the place of fruit, from _xocotl_, fruit,
_ti_, connective, and _tlan_, locative ending. (See Sahagun, _Historia
de Nueva España_, Lib. x, cap. 29, secs. 1 and 12.) This name was also
applied to one of the quarters of the city of Mexico when conquered by
Cortes, as we learn from the same authority.

Footnote 111:

Buschmann, _Ueber die Aztekischen Ortsnamen_, ss. 794, 797, (Berlin,
1852.)

Footnote 112:

The verbal radical is _tona_, to warm (hazer calor, Molina,
_Vocabulario de la Lengua Mexicana_, s. v.); from this root come many
words signifying warmth, fertility, abundance, the sun, the east, the
summer, the day, and others expressing the soul, the vital principle,
etc. Siméon, _Dict. de la Langue Nahuatl_, s. v. _tonalli_. As in the
Algonkin dialects the words for cold, night and death are from the
same root, so in Nahuatl are those for warmth, day and life. (Comp.
Duponceau, _Mémoire sur les Langues de l’Amérique du Nord_, p. 327,
Paris, 1836.)

Footnote 113:

_Coatlan, to-nan_, from _coatl_, serpent; _tlan_, among; _to-nan_, our
mother. She was the goddess of flowers, and the florists paid her
especial devotion (Sahagun, _Historia_, Lib. ii, cap. 22). A precinct
of the city of Mexico was named after her, and also one of the
edifices in the great temple of the city. Here captives were
sacrificed to her and to the Huitznahua. (Ibid., Lib. ii. Appendix.
See also Torquemada, _Monarquia Indiana_, Lib. x. cap. 12.)

Footnote 114:

_Centzon Huitznahua_, “the Four Hundred Diviners with Thorns.” Four
hundred, however, in Nahuatl means any indeterminate large number, and
hence is properly translated myriad, legion. _Nahuatl_ means wise,
skillful, a diviner, but is also the proper name of the
Nahuatl-speaking tribes; and as the Nahuas derived their word for
south from _huitzli_, a thorn, the Huitznahua may mean “the southern
Nahuas.” Sahagun had this in his mind when he said the Huitznahua were
goddesses who dwelt in the south (_Historia de Nueva España_, Lib.
vii, cap. 5). The word is taken by Father Duran as the proper name of
an individual, as we shall see in a later note.

Footnote 115:

_Huitzilopochtli_, from _huitzilin_, humming-bird, _opochtli_, the
left side or hand. This is the usual derivation; but I am quite sure
that it is an error arising from the ikonomatic representation of the
name. The name of his brother, Huitznahua, indicates strongly that the
prefix of both names is identical. This, I doubt not, is from
_huitz-tlan_, the south; _ilo_, is from _iloa_, to turn; this gives us
the meaning “the left hand turned toward the south.” Orozco y Berra
has pointed out that the Mexica regarded left-handed warriors as the
more formidable (_Historia Antigua de Mexico_, Tom. i, p. 125). Along
with this let it be remembered that the legend states that
Huitzilopochtli was born in Tula, and insisted on leading the Mexica
toward the south, the opposition to which by his brother led to the
massacre and to the destruction of the town.

Footnote 116:

This myth is recorded by Sahagun, _Historia de Nueva España_, Lib.
iii, cap. 1, “On the Origin of the Gods.” It is preserved with some
curious variations in the _Historia de los Mexicanos por sus
Pinturas_, cap. 11. When the gods created the sun they also formed
four hundred men and five women for him to eat. At the death of the
women their robes were preserved, and when the people carried these to
the Coatepec, the five women came again into being. One of these was
Coatlicue, an untouched virgin, who after four years of fasting placed
a bunch of white feathers in her bosom, and forthwith became pregnant.
She brought forth Huitzilopochtli completely armed, who at once
destroyed the Huitznahua. Father Duran translates all of this into
plain history. His account is that when the Aztecs had occupied Tollan
for some time, and had fortified the hill and cultivated the plain, a
dissension arose. One party, followers of Huitzilopochtli, desired to
move on; the other, headed by a chieftain, Huitznahua, insisted on
remaining. The former attacked the latter at night, massacred them,
destroyed the water-dams and buildings, and marched away (_Historia de
las Indias de Nueva España_, Tom. i, pp. 25, 26). According to several
accounts, Huitznahua was the brother of Huitzilopochtli. See my
_American Hero Myths_, p. 81.

Footnote 117:

I have discussed both these accounts in my _American Hero Myths_,
chap. iii., and need not repeat the authorities here.

Footnote 118:

The most highly-colored descriptions of the mythical Tula are to be
found in the third and tenth book of Sahagun’s _Historia de Nueva
España_, in the _Anales de Cuauhtitlan_, and in the various writings
of Ixtlilxochitl. Later authors, such as Veitia, Torquemada, etc.,
have copied from these. Ixtlilxochitl speaks of the “legions of
fables” about Tulan and Quetzalcoatl which even in his day were still
current (“otras trescientas fabulas que aun todavia corren.”
_Relaciones Historicas_, in Kingsborough, _Mexico_, Vol. ix, p. 332).

Footnote 119:

In the collection of _Ancient Nahuatl Poems_, which forms the seventh
volume of my _Library of Aboriginal American Literature_, p. 104, I
have printed the original text of one of the old songs recalling the
glories of Tula, with its “house of beams,” _huapalcalli_, and its
“house of plumed serpents,” _coatlaquetzalli_, attributed to
Quetzalcoatl.

Footnote 120:

_Les Anciennes Villes du Nouveau Monde_, p. 84 (Paris, 1885).

Footnote 121:

_Historia de Nueva España_, Lib. viii, cap. 5.

Footnote 122:

Father Duran relates, “Even to this day, when I ask the Indians, ‘Who
created this pass in the mountains? Who opened this spring? Who
discovered this cave? or, Who built this edifice?’ they reply, ‘The
Toltecs, the disciples of Papa.’” _Historia de las Indias de Nueva
España_, cap. 79. _Papa_, from _papachtic_, the bushy-haired was one
of the names of Quetzalcoatl. But the earlier missionary, Father
Motilinia, distinctly states that the Mexica invented their own arts,
and owed nothing to any imaginary teachers, Toltecs or others. “Hay
entre todos los Indios muchos oficios, y de todos dicen _que fueron
inventores los Mexicanos_.” _Historia de los Indios de la Nueva
España_, Tratado iii, cap. viii.

Footnote 123:

Quetzalcoatl announced that his return should take place 5012 years
after his final departure, as is mentioned by Ixtlilxochitl (in
Kingsborough, _Mexico_, Vol. ix, p. 332). This number has probably
some mystic relation to the calendar.

Footnote 124:

_American Hero Myths_, p. 35. The only writer on ancient American
history before me who has wholly rejected the Toltecs is, I believe,
Albert Gallatin. In his able and critical study of the origin of
American civilization (_Transactions of the American Ethnological
Society_, Vol. i, p. 203) he dismissed them entirely from historical
consideration with the words: “The tradition respecting the Toltecs
ascends to so remote a date, and is so obscure and intermixed with
mythological fables, that it is impossible to designate either the
locality of their primitive abodes, the time when they first appeared
in the vicinity of the Valley of Mexico, or whether they were preceded
by nations speaking the same or different languages.” Had this
well-grounded skepticism gained the ears of writers since 1845, when
it was published, we should have been saved a vast amount of rubbish
which has been heaped up under the name of history.

Dr. Otto Stoll (_Guatemala; Reisen und Schilderungen_, ss, 408, 409,
Leipzig, 1886) has joined in rejecting the ethnic existence of the
Toltecs. As in later Nahuatl the word _toltecatl_ meant not only
“resident of Tollan,” but also “artificer” and “trader,” Dr. Stoll
thinks that the Central American legends which speak of “Toltecs”
should be interpreted merely as referring to foreign mechanics or
pedlers, and not to any particular nationality. I quite agree with
this view.

Footnote 125:

Andrew Lang, _Custom and Myth_, p. 28.

Footnote 126:

Revised extracts from an article read before the American
Philosophical Society in 1881.

Footnote 127:

_Las Historias del Origen de los Indios de esta Provincia de
Guatemala_. Por el R. P. F. Francisco Ximenez.

Footnote 128:

See Dr. Otto Stoll, _Ethnographie der Republik Guatemala_, p. 118. I
regret to differ from this able writer, whose studies of the Quiche
und Cakchiquel are the most thorough yet made, and from whose version
the above translation of the opening lines of the _Popol Vuh_ is
taken.

Footnote 129:

In his _MS. Dictionary_ is the following entry:

“PODER: _vtziniçabal_, vel _vtzintaçibal_; deste nombre usa la
_Cartilla_ en el Credo para decir por obra vel poder del Spirito
Santo. Al poder que tienen los Sacerdotes de perdonar pecados y dar
sacramentos, se llaman, o an llamado, _puz_, _naual_. Asi el Ph. Varea
en su _Diccionario_ y el Sancto Vico en la _Theologia Indorum_ usa en
muchas partes destos vocablos en este sentido. Ya no estan tan en uso,
pues entienden por el nombre _poder y vtzintaçibal_; y son vocablos
que antiguamente aplicaban a sus idolos, y oy se procura que vayan
olbidando todo aquello con que se les puede hacer memoria dellos.”

Footnote 130:

Coto says, “_Vugh_; nota que esta mesmo nombre tiene un genero de
baile en que con los pies dan bueltas a un palo; tambien signfica el
temblor de cuerpo que da con la terciana, o la misma cission;
significa asi mesmo quando quiere ya amanescer aquel ponerse escuro el
cielo; tambien quando suele estar el agua del rio o laguna, por
antiparastassis, caliente, al tal calorsillo llaman _Vugh_.”

Footnote 131:

I have traced the growth of this myth in detail in _The Myths of the
New World, a Treatise on the Symbolism and Mythology of the Red Race
of America_, chap. vi, (New York, 1876.) Dr. Otto Stoll in his most
recent discussion of the myth of Hunahpu does not urge the meaning
“opossum hunter,” and remarks that in the Pokonchi dialect _henahpo_
means “moon-man,” and “month,” referring therefore to a night-god.
_Ethnologie der Indianer Stämme von Guatemala_, p. 32, (Leyden, 1889.)

Footnote 132:

_Popol Vuh_, p. 40.

Footnote 133:

_Ibid._ pp. 225, 249.

Footnote 134:

_Ibid._ p. 314.

Footnote 135:

_Die Indianer von Santa Catalina Istlavacan; ein Beitrag zur
Culturgeschichte der Urbewohner Central Amerikas._ Von Dr. Karl
Scherzer, p. 9 (Wien, 1856).

Footnote 136:

_Ibid._, p. 11.

Footnote 137:

_Escolios à las Historias del Origen de los Indios_, p. 157.

Footnote 138:

To quote his words:

“BUBAS: _galel_ vel _tepex_. * * Quando an pasado dicen _xin colah
ahauarem_, id est, ya an dejado su señoria, porque el que las tiene se
esta sentado, sin hacer cosa, como si fuese señor ó señora.

“SEÑORA: _xogohau_; Señoria, _xogohauarem_. * * Deste nombre _xogohau_
vsan metaphoricamente para decir que una muger moza tiene bubas;
porque se esta sin hacer cosa, mano sobre mano, * * y quando a anado
de la enfermedad, dicen, si es varón: _xucolah rahauarem achi rumal
tepex. Tepex_ es la enfermedad de bubas.”

Footnote 139:

Sahagun, _Historia de Nueva España_, Lib. vii, cap. 2. He translates
_Nanahuatzih_, “el buboso,” Comp. Boturini, _Idea de una Nueua
Historia de la America_, pp. 37, 38.

Footnote 140:

The MS. Dictionary of Coto says, s. v. Corazon: “Attribuenle todos los
affectos de las potencias, memoria y entendimiento y voluntad, * *
unde _ahgux_, el cuidadoso, entendido, memorioso * *; toman este
nombre _gux_ por el alma de la persona, y por el spirito vital de todo
viviente, v. g. _xel ru gux Pedro_, murió Pedro, vel, salio el alma de
Pedro, * * deste nombre _gux_ se forma el verbo _tin gux lah_, por
pensar, cuidar, imaginar.”

Footnote 141:

“De adonde,” remarks Granados y Galvez, “viene que mis Otomites, de
una misma manera llaman à la alma que al corazon, aplicandoles à
entrambos la voz _muy_.” _Tardes Americanas_, Tarde iv, p. 101.
(Mexico, 1778.)

Footnote 142:

Ximenez, _Gramatica de la Lengua Quiche_, p. 17.

Footnote 143:

_Popol Vuh_, pp. 18, 20, 23, 69, etc.

Footnote 144:

“Cosa que esta encubierta ó enterrada.” The _Diccionario de Motul_ is
the most complete dictionary of the Maya ever made. It dates from
about 1590 and has its name from the town of Motul, Yucatan, where it
was written. The author is unknown. Only two copies of it are in
existence, one, very carefully made, with numerous notes, by Dr.
Berendt, is in my possession. It is a thick 4to of 1500 pages.

Footnote 145:

_Relacion de las Cosas de Yucatan_, § XXXIII.

Footnote 146:

“R’atit zih, r’atit zak,” _Popol Vuh_, pp. 18, 20.

Footnote 147:

Especially the _membrum virile_, Pio Perez, _Diccionario de la Lengua
Maya_, s. v.

Footnote 148:

“Entrar, juntarse el macho con la hembra.” Brasseur, _Vocabulaire Maya
vancais_, s. v.

Footnote 149:

_Popol Vuh_, pp. 8, 14.

Footnote 150:

I take the following entries from Coto’s _MSS._:

“LARGA COSA: Lo ordinario es poner _rakan_ para significar la largura
de palo, cordel, etc.

“GIGANTE: _hu rapah rakan chi vinak, hu chogah rakan chi vanak_; este
nombre se usa de todo animal que en su specie es mas alto que los
otros. Meo. P^e Saz, serm. de circumsciss, dice del Gigante Golias:
_tugotic rogoric rakan chiachi_ Gigante _Golias_.”

Ignorant, apparently, of this meaning, Dr. Stoll continues in his
latest work to interpret Hurakan “with one foot.” _Die Ethnologie der
Indianer Stämme von Guatemala_, p. 31, (Leiden, 1889.) The chapter on
mythology is the least satisfactory in this important work.

Footnote 151:

De la Borde, _Relation de l’origine, etc., des Caraibes_, p. 7.
(Paris, 1674.)

Footnote 152:

Las Casas, _Historia Apologetica de las Indias Occidentales_, cap.
cxxiv (Madrid edition): P. F. Alonzo Fernandez, _Historia
Ecclesiastica de Nuestros Tiempos_, p. 137 (Toledo, 1611).

Footnote 153:

_Dissertation sur les Mythes de l’Antiquité Americane_, § 8 (Paris,
1861); see also his note to the _Popol Vuh_, p. 70.

Footnote 154:

_Ch’u qux uleu_, “in its heart the earth.” (Coto, _Dicc._ s. v.)

Coto adds that the ancient meaning of the word was a ghost or vision
of a departed spirit—“antiguamente este nombre _Xibalbay_ significaba
el demonio, vel los diffuntos ô visiones que se les aperescian, y asi
decian, y aun algunos ay que lo dicen oy _xuqutzii xibalbay ri cetzam
chi nu vach_, se me apereció el diffunto.”

Footnote 155:

“El Demonio se llamaba _Xibilha_, que quiere decir el que se desparece
ó desbanece.” _Historia de Yucatan_, Lib. iv, cap. vii. Cogolludo had
lived in Yucatan twenty-one years when he was making the final
revision of his History, and was moderately well acquainted with the
Maya tongue.

Footnote 156:

The _Diccionario de Motul_, MS., gives:

“XIBIL, _xibi_, _xibic_: cundir como gota de aceita; esparcirse la
comida en la digestion, y deshacerse la sal, nieve ô yelo, humo ô
niebla. _Item:_ desparecerse una vision ô fantasma. _Item:_ temblar de
miedo y espantarse.”

Footnote 157:

_De Legibus_, Lib. ii, cap. 2.

Footnote 158:

“Les petits Tigres,” _Mythes de l’Antiquité Americane_, § viii, _Popol
Vuh_, p. 34, note.

Footnote 159:

_Compendio de Nombres en Lengua Cakchiquel, MS._

Footnote 160:

_Las Historias del Origen de los Indios_, p. 16.

Footnote 161:

Father Varea, in his _Calepino de la Lengua Cakchiquel. MS._, gives
the following entries:

“BALAM: el tigre, _zakbalam_, tigre pequeño de su naturelezo; _gana
balam_, el grande, tainbein sig^a un signo de los Indios. _Maceval gih
P^o balam_, ô _Maria xbalam_. _Balam_ se llama el echizero.”

“_Queh_: el venado. Sig^a un cierto dia; otras veces dos dias; otras
veces es signo de trece, otras veces cinco ó seis dias á la quenta de
los Indios: _xa hun queh vœ gih_, ô, _cay queh_, _voo queh_, _vahaki_,
ó, _oxlahuh queh_.”

Footnote 162:

Published in the _American Antiquarian_, for May, 1885.

Footnote 163:

_The Algonquin Legends of New England_, (Boston, 1884.)

Footnote 164:

The Micmac word _kĕlooskăbāwe_, means “he is a cheat,” probably one
who cheats by lying. See Rand, _Micmac Dictionary_, s. v. A cheat.

Footnote 165:

_Dictionnaire de la Langue des Cris_, sub. voce _Wisakketjâk_. “Homme
fabuleux des différentes tribus du Nord, auquel elles attribuent une
puissance surnaturelle, avec un grand nombre de ruses, de tours, et de
folies. Il est regardé comme le principal génie et le fondateur de ces
nations. Chez les Sauteux on l’appelle _Nenaboj_, chez les
Pieds-Noirs, _Nâpiw_. _Wisakkeljakow_, C’est un fourbe, un trompeur.”

Footnote 166:

Baraga, _Otchipwe Dictionary_.

Footnote 167:

_Key into the language of America_, p. 24.

Footnote 168:

_Lexique de la Langue Algonquine_, p. 443. (Montreal, 1886.)

Footnote 169:

See his article in _The American Review_, for 1848, entitled
“Manabozho and the Great Serpent, an Algonquin legend.”

Footnote 170:

_Algic Researches_, Vol. 1, p. 134.

Footnote 171:

An address delivered at the annual meeting of the Numismatic and
Antiquarian Society of Philadelphia, and published in its
_Proceedings_ for 1883.

Footnote 172:

This paper was read before the American Philosophical Society in
December, 1888, and was printed in its _Proceedings_.

Footnote 173:

Dr. E. T. Hamy, _An Interpretation of one of the Copan Monuments_, in
_Journal of the Anthropological Institute_, February 1887; also,
_Revue d’ Ethnographie_, 1886, p. 233; same author, _Le Svastika et la
Roue Solaire en Amérique_, _Revue d’ Ethnographie_, 1885, p. 22. E.
Beauvois, in _Annales de Philosophie Chretienne_, 1877, and in various
later publications. Ferraz de Macedo, _Essai Critique sur les Ages
Prehistorique de Bresil_, Lisbon, 1887, etc.

Footnote 174:

See his article, “Art in Shell of the Ancient Americans,” _Second
Annual Report of the Bureau of Ethnology_, p. 270.

Footnote 175:

See his article in _Zeitschrift für Ethnologie_, 1886, p. 223.

Footnote 176:

Von Luchan, in _Zeitschrift für Ethnologie_, 1886, p. 301.

Footnote 177:

See Dumoutier, _Le Svastika et la Roue Solaire en Chine_, in _Revue d’
Ethnologie_, 1885, pp. 333, _sq._

Footnote 178:

I am indebted for some of these explanations to Mr. K. Sungimoto, an
intelligent Japanese gentleman, well acquainted with Chinese, late
resident in Philadelphia.

Footnote 179:

George Copway, _Traditional History of the Ojibway Nation_, p. 134. It
will be noted that in the sign for sunrise the straight line meets the
curve at its _left_ extremity, and for sunset at its _right_. This
results from the superstitious preference of facing the south rather
than the north.

Footnote 180:

The triplicate constitution of things is a prominent feature of the
ancient Mexican philosophy, especially that of Tezcuco. The visible
world was divided into three parts, the earth below, the heavens
above, and man’s abode between them. The whole was represented by a
circle divided into three parts, the upper part painted blue, the
lower brown, the centre white (See Duran, _Historia_, Lam. 15^a, for
an example). Each of these three parts was subdivided into three
parts, so that when the Tezcucan king built a tower as a symbol of the
universe, he called it “The Tower of Nine Stories” (see my _Ancient
Nahuatl Poetry_, Introduction, p. 36).

Footnote 181:

Mallery, _Pictography of the North American Indians_, in _Fourth
Annual Report of the Bureau of Ethnology_, p. 239.

Footnote 182:

_Captivity and Adventures of John Tanner_, pp. 359, 360.

Footnote 183:

Dr. Ferraz de Macedo, _Essai Critique sur les Ages Prehistorique de
Bresil_, p. 38 (Lisbonne, 1887).

Footnote 184:

Op. cit., p. 38.

Footnote 185:

See Worsaae, _Danish Arts_, and Virchow, in various numbers of the
_Zeitschrift für Ethnologie_. The ring-cross is a common figure in
American symbolism and decorative art. It frequently occurs on the
shields depicted in the Bologna Codex, and the two codices of the
Vatican (Kingsborough’s _Antiquities of Mexico_, Vols. ii. and iii).
Dr. Ferraz de Macedo says that the most common decorative design on
both ancient and modern native Brazilian pottery is the ring-cross in
the form of a double spiral, as in Fig. 19 (_Essai Critique sur les
Ages Prehistorique de Bresil_, p. 40). A very similar form will be
found in the Bologna Codex, pl. xviii, in Kingsborough’s _Mexico_,
Vol. ii.

Footnote 186:

See Mallery, _Pictography of the North American Indians_, pp. 88, 89,
128, etc.

Footnote 187:

This name is given in Landa, _Relacion de las Cosas de Yucatan_, p.
313.

Footnote 188:

_Historia de la Nueva España_, Trat. III, cap. i.

Footnote 189:

Printed originally in _The Folk-Lore Journal_, London, 1883.

Footnote 190:

_Informe del Señor Cura de Yaxcabà_, Don Bartolomé del Granado Baeza,
in the _Registro Yucateco_, tomo i, pp. 165 _et seq._

The Rev. Estanislao Carrillo was cura of Ticul, where he died in 1846.
He was a zealous archæologist, and is frequently mentioned by Mr.
Stephens in his travels in Yucatan. He is deservedly included in the
_Manual de Biografia Yucateca_ of Don Francisco de P. Sosa (Merida,
1866). His article on the subject of the text appeared in the
_Registro Yucateco_, tomo iv. p. 103.

Footnote 191:

“De idolatras paganos que eran, solo se ha conseguido que se
conviertan en idolatras cristianos.”—Apolinar Garcia y Garcia,
_Historia de la Guerra de Castas en Yucatan_, Prologo, p. xxiv
(Merida, 1865).

Footnote 192:

Landa, _Relacion de las Cosas de Yucatan_, pp. 208 _et seq._ The work
of Landa was first printed at Paris in 1864.

Footnote 193:

Charencey, _Des Couleurs considérées comme Symboles des Points de
l’Horizon chez les Peuples du Nouveau-Monde_, in the _Actes de la
Sociétè Philologique_, tome vi (Octobre 1876).

Footnote 194:

_Chrestomathie de Litérature Maya_, p. 101, in the second volume of
the _Etudes sur le Système Graphique et la Langue des Mayas_ (Paris,
1870).

Footnote 195:

“La fiesta de fuego, que hasta ahora en esta provincia se hacia.”—Fr.
Diego Lopez Cogolludo, _Historia de Yucatan_, tomo i, p. 483 (3d ed.
Merida, 1867).

Footnote 196:

Thomas Gage, _A New Survey of the West Indiès_, pp. 377 _et seq._
(London, 1699). The Abbé Brasseur is willing to consider these tales
fictitious, “supposé qu’ils n’eussent eu, en realité, aucune
communication avec les puissances du monde invisible,” about which,
however, he is evidently not altogether sure.—_Voyage sur l’Isthme de
Tehuantepec_, p. 175 (Paris, 1862).

Footnote 197:

_Popol Vuh, le Livre Sacré des Quiches_, p. 315 (Paris, 1864).

Footnote 198:

The derivation of this word is from _kat_, which in the _Diçcionario
Maya-Español del Convento de Motul_, MS. of about 1580, is defined as
“la tierra y barro de las olleras,” but which Perez in his modern Maya
dictionary translates “ollas ô figuras de barro”; _ob_, is the plural
termination; _lox_, is strong, or the strength of anything; _h’_ or
_ah_, as it is often written, is the rough breathing which in Maya
indicates the masculine gender.

Footnote 199:

From the _Journal of American Folk-lore_, 1888.

Footnote 200:

The form from which he derives it is _lenni-peu_.

Footnote 201:

Read before the Anthropological Section of the American Association
for the Advancement of Science, at Buffalo, August, 1886, and
published in the _American Antiquarian_ in November of the same year.

Footnote 202:

_Study or the MS. Troano_, p. 141.

Footnote 203:

_Erläuterungen der Maya Hand-schrift_, etc., p. 2. (Dresden, 1886.)

Footnote 204:

_Die Maya Hand-schrift der König._ _Bib. zu Dresden_, p. 77; (Berlin,
1886.)

Footnote 205:

_Die Maya Hand-schrift_, etc., p. 47.

Footnote 206:

_American Antiquarian_, March, 1886.

Footnote 207:

The first of M. Aubin’s Memoirs appeared in 1849, and was the result
of studies begun in 1830. A new and enlarged edition has lately been
edited by Dr. Hamy: _Mémoires sur la Peinture Didactique et l’Ecriture
Figurative des Anciens Mexicains_. Par. J. M. A. Aubin (Paris 1885.)
But Dr. Hamy has traveled very far beyond the limits of a sober
appreciation of M. Aubin’s results when he writes: “Les recherches de
M. Aubin ont réussi à resoudre presque toutes les difficultés que
presentait la lecture des hieroglyphes nahuas.” (Introduction, p.
viii.) He is also in error in supposing (in a note to same page) that
Aubin’s theory is not well-known to Americanists. Brasseur popularized
it in his introductions to his _Histoire du Mexique_. Aubin, in fact,
guided by the Spanish writers of the 16th century and the annotators
of the Codices, first clearly expressed the general principles of the
phonetic picture writing; but his rules and identifications are
entirely inadequate to its complete or even partial interpretation.

Footnote 208:

Orozco y Berra, _Historia Antigua de Mexico_, (Mexico, 1880). The
Atlas to this work contains a large number of proposed identifications
of hieroglyphics. See also by the same writer, _Ensayo de Descifracion
Geroglifica_ in the _Anales del Museo Nacional_, tom. II. Much of this
is founded on Ramirez’s studies, who, however, by his own admission,
knew little or nothing of the Nahuatl language (as he states in his
introduction to the _Codex Chimalpopoca_ or _Anales de Quauhtitlan_).
Dr. Peñafiel’s praiseworthy collection is entitled _Catalogo
Alfabetico de los nombres de Lugares pertenecientes al Idioma Nahuatl,
Estudio Jeroglifico_. (Mexico, 1885.)

Footnote 209:

This paper was originally read before the American Philosophical
Society in October, 1886, and was published in their _Proceedings_.

Footnote 210:

The following elements occur in the old Egyptian writing:

1. Ideographic.—(_a_) Pictures or ikonographs.
(_b_) Symbols.
(_c_) Determinatives.

2. Phonetic.—(_a_) Words.
(_b_) Syllables.
(_c_) Letters.

Footnote 211:

See M. A. Lower, _Curiosities of Heraldry_, Chap. vi (London, 1845).
An appropriate motto of one of these bearings was: “Non verbis sed
_rebus_ loquimur.”

Footnote 212:

_Tam_, near; _uch_, scorpion. _Diccionario Huasteca-Español_, MS., in
my possession. This and most of the other instances quoted are to be
found in Lord Kingsborough’s great work on Mexico, and also in Dr.
Peñafiel’s _Catàlogo Alfabetico de los Nombres de Lugares
pertenecientes al Idioma Nahuatl_ (Mexico, 1885).

Footnote 213:

It is given in the appendix to the _Ensayo sobre la Interpretacion de
la Escritura Hieratica de la America Central_, by De Rosny, translated
by D. Juan de Dios de la Rada y Delgada (Madrid, 1884).

Footnote 214:

Valentini’s Essay appeared in the _Proceedings of the American
Antiquarian Society_, April, 1880. Landa’s work was originally
published by the Abbé Brasseur (de Bourbourg) at Paris, 1864, and more
accurately at Madrid, 1884, under the supervision of Don Juan de Dios
de la Rada y Delgada.

Footnote 215:

Originally published as an introduction to Dr. Cyrus Thomas’ _Study of
the Manuscript Troano_, issued by the U. S. Geographical and
Geological Survey of the Rocky Mountain Region, Washington, 1882,
(revised with additions for the present volume).

Footnote 216:

Dr. Friedrich Müller, _Grundriss der Sprachwissenschaft_, Band i, pp.
151–156.

Footnote 217:

Aubin. _Mémoire sur la Peinture didactique et l’Écriture figurative
des anciens Mexicains_, in the introduction to Brasseur (de
Bourbourg)'s _Histoire des Nations civilisées du Mexique et de
l’Amérique Centrale_, tom. i; Manuel Orozco y Berra _Ensayo de
Descifracion geroglifica_, in the _Anales del Museo Nacional de
México_, tom. i, ii.

Footnote 218:

Peter Martyr, Decad. iv, cap. viii.

Footnote 219: