Chapter XLI: Appendix: I (14)

[1094] It is the development of a paper given at the Nancy session of the Congrès des Américanistes (1875). Landa’s alphabet with the variations make 262 of the 700 signs which Rosny catalogues. He printed his “Nouvelles Recherches pour l’interpretation des caractères de l’Amérique Centrale” in the _Archives_, etc., iii. 118. There is a paper on Rosny’s studies by De la Rada in the Compte-rendu of the Copenhagen session (p. 355) of the Congrès des Américanistes. Rosny’s _Documents écrits de l’antiquité Américaine_ (Paris, 1882), from the _Mémoires de la Société d’Ethnographie_ (1881), covers his researches in Spain and Portugal for material illustrative of the pre-Columbian history of America. Cf. also his “Les sources de l’histoire anté columbienne du nouveau monde,” in the _Mémoires de la Soc. d’Ethnographie_ (1877). For the titles in full of Rosny’s linguistic studies, see Pilling’s _Proof-sheets_, p. 663.

[1095] _Anthropol. Review_, May, 1864; _Memoirs of the Anthropol. Soc._, i.

[1096] _Memoirs_, etc., ii. 298.

[1097] _Memoirs_, etc., 1870, iii. 288; _Trans. Anthrop. Inst. Gt. Britain_.

[1098] Introd. to Cyrus Thomas’s _MS. Troano_.

[1099] _Am. Antiq. Soc. Proc._, _n. s._, i. 250.

[1100] _Actes de la Soc. philologique_, March, 1870. Cf. _Revue de Philologie_, i. 380; _Recherches sur le Codex Troano_ (Paris, 1876); _Actes_, etc., March, 1878; Baldwin’s _Anc. America_, App.

[1101] Cf. _Sabin’s Amer. Bibliopolist_, ii. 143.

[1102] _Contributions to N. A. Ethnology, Powell’s Survey_, vol. v. Cf. also his _Phonetic elements in the graphic system of the Mayas and Mexicans_ in the _Amer. Antiquarian_ (Nov., 1886), and separately (Chicago, 1886), and his _Ikonomic method of phonetic writing_ (Phila., 1886). Thomas in _The Amer. Antiquarian_ (March, 1886) points out the course of his own studies in this direction.

[1103] Cf. Short, p. 425. Dr. Harrison Allen in 1875, in the _Amer. Philosophical Society’s Transactions_, made an analysis of Landa’s alphabet and the published codices. Rau, in his _Palenqué Tablet of the U. S. Nat. Museum_ (ch. 5), examines what had been done up to 1879. In the same year Dr. Carl Schultz-Sellack wrote on “Die Amerikanischen Götter der vier Weltgegenden und ihre Tempel in Palenqué,” touching also the question of interpretation (_Zeitschrift für Ethnologie_, vol. xi.); and in 1880 Dr. Förstemann examined the matter in his introduction to his reproduction of the Dresden Codex.

[1104] _Studies in Central American picture-writing_ (Washington, 1881), extracted from the _First Report of the Bureau of Ethnology_. His method is epitomized in _The Century_, Dec., 1881. He finds Stephens’s drawings the most trustworthy of all, Waldeck’s being beautiful, but they embody “singular liberties.” His examination was confined to the 1500 separate hieroglyphs in Stephens’s _Central America_. Some of Holden’s conclusions are worth noting: “The Maya manuscripts do not possess to me the same interest as the stones, and I think it may be certainly said that all of them are younger than the Palenqué tablets, far younger than the inscriptions at Copan.” “I distrust the methods of Brasseur and others who start from the misleading and unlucky alphabet handed down by Landa,” by forming variants, which are made “to satisfy the necessities of the interpreter in carrying out some preconceived idea.” He finds a rigid adherence to the standard form of a character prevailing throughout the same inscription. At Palenqué the inscriptions read as an English inscription would read, beginning at the left and proceeding line by line downward. “The system employed at Palenqué and Copan was the same in its general character, and almost identical even in details.” He deciphers three proper names: “all of them have been pure picture-writing, except in so far as their rebus character may make them in a sense phonetic.” Referring to Valentini’s _Landa Alphabet a Spanish Fabrication_, he agrees in that critic’s conclusions. “While my own,” he adds, “were reached by a study of the stones and in the course of a general examination, Dr. Valentini has addressed himself successfully to the solution of a special problem.” Holden thinks his own solution of the three proper names points of departure for subsequent decipherers. The Maya method was “pure picture-writing. At Copan this is found in its earliest state; at Palenqué it was already highly conventionalized.”

[1105] See references in Bancroft’s _Nat. Races_, ii. 576.

[1106] Cogulludo’s _Hist. de Yucatan_, 3d ed., i. 604.

[1107] Prescott, i. 104, and references.

[1108] Dec. iv., lib. 8.

[1109] Brasseur de Bourbourg’s _Troano MS._, i. 9. Cf. on the Aztec books Kirk’s Prescott, i. 103; Brinton’s _Myths_, 10; his _Aborig. Amer. Authors_, 17; and on the Mexican Paper, Valentini in _Amer. Antiq. Soc. Proc._, 2d s., i. 58.

[1110] Cf. Icazbalceta’s _Don Fray Juan de Zumárraga, primer Obispo y Arzobispo de México (1529-48)_. _Estudio biográfico y bibligráfico. Con un apéndice de documentos inéditos ó raros_ (Mexico, 1881). A part of this work was also printed separately (fifty copies) under the title of _De la destruction de antigüedades méxicanas atribuida á los misioneros en general, y particularmente al Illmo. Sr. D. Fr. Juan de Zumárraga, primer Obispo y Arzobispo de México_ (Mexico, 1881). In this he exhausts pretty much all that has been said on the subject by the bishop himself, by Pedro de Gante, Motolinía, Sahagún, Duran, Acosta, Davila Padilla, Herrera, Torquemada, Ixtlilxochitl, Robertson, Clavigero, Humboldt, Bustamante, Ternaux, Prescott, Alaman, etc. Brasseur (_Nat. Civil._, ii. 4) says of Landa that we must not forget that he was oftener the agent of the council for the Indies than of the Church. Helps (iii. 374) is inclined to be charitable towards a man in a skeptical age, so intensely believing as Zumárraga was. Sahagún relates that earlier than Zumárraga, the fourth ruler of his race, Itzcohuatl, had caused a large destruction of native writings, in order to remove souvenirs of the national humiliation.

[1111] Humboldt was one of the earliest to describe some of these manuscripts in connection with his _Atlas_, pl. xiii.

[1112] Cf. _Catal. of the Phillipps Coll._, no. 404. An original colored copy of the _Antiquities of Mexico_, given by Kingsborough to Phillipps, was offered of late years by Quaritch at £70-£100; it was published at £175. The usual colored copies sell now for about £40-£60; the uncolored for about £30-£35. It is usually stated that two copies were printed on vellum (British Museum, Bodleian), and ten on large paper, which were given to crowned heads, except one, which was given to Obadiah Rich. Squier, in the _London Athenæum_, Dec. 13, 1856 (Allibone, p. 1033), drew attention to the omission of the last signature of the _Hist. Chichimeca_ in vol. ix.

[1113] Rich, _Bibl. Amer. Nova_, ii. 233; _Gentleman’s Mag._, May, 1837, which varies in some particulars. Cf. for other details Sabin’s _Dictionary_, ix. 485; De Rosny in the _Rev. Orient et Amér._, xii. 387. R. A. Wilson (_New Conquest of Mexico_, p. 68) gives the violent skeptical view of the material.

[1114] Sabin, ix., no. 37,800.

[1115] Léon de Rosny (_Doc. écrits de l’Antiq. Amér._, p. 71) speaks of those in the Museo Archæológico at Madrid.

[1116] _Hist. Nueva España._

[1117] _Pilgrimes_, vol. iii. (1625). It is also included in Thevenot’s _Coll. de Voyages_ (1696), vol. ii., in a translation. Clavigero (i. 23) calls this copy faulty. See also Kircher’s _Œdipus Ægypticus_; Humboldt’s plates, xiii., lviii., lix., with his text, in which he quotes Du Palin’s _Study of Hieroglyphics_, vol. i. See the account in Bancroft, ii. 241.

[1118] Prescott, i. 106. He thinks that a copy mentioned in Spineto’s _Lectures on the Elements of Hieroglyphics_, and then in the Escurial, may perhaps be the original. Humboldt calls it a copy.

[1119] Humboldt placed some tribute-rolls in the Berlin library, and gave an account of them. See his pl. xxxvi.

[1120] Cf. references in Bancroft’s _Native Races_, ii. 529. The “Explicacion” of the MS. is given in Kingsborough’s volume v., and an “interpretation” in vol. vi.

[1121] Kingsborough’s “explicacion” and “explanation” are given in his vols. v. and vi. Rosny has given an “explication avec notes par Brasseur de Bourbourg” in his _Archives paléographiques_ (Paris, 1870-71), p. 190, with an atlas of plates. Cf. references in Bancroft, ii. 530; and in another place (iii. 191) this same writer cautions the reader against the translation in Kingsborough, and says that it has every error that can vitiate a translation. Humboldt thinks his own plates, lv. and lvi., of the codex carefully made.

[1122] Prescott says (i. 108) of this that it bears evident marks of recent origin, when “the hieroglyphics were read with the eye of faith rather than of reason.” Cf. Bancroft, _Nat. Races_, ii. 527.

[1123] Portions of it are also reproduced in the _Archives de la Soc. Amér. de France_; in Rosny’s _Essai sur le déchiffrement de l’Ecriture Hiératique_; and in Powell’s _Third Rept. Bur. of Ethnology_, p. 56. Cf. also Humboldt’s _Atlas_, pl. xiii.; and H. M. Williams’s translation of his _Aues_, i. 145.

[1124] It is known to have been given in 1665 by the Marquis de Caspi by Count Valerio Zani. There is a copy in the museum of Cardinal Borgia at Veletri.

[1125] Known to have been given in 1677 by the Duke of Saxe-Eisenach to the Emperor Leopold. Some parts are reproduced in Robertson’s _America_, Lond., 1777, ii. 482.

[1126] Humboldt, _Vues des Cordillères_, p. 89; pl. 15, 27, 37; Prescott, i. 106. There is a single leaf of it reproduced in Powell’s _Third Rept. Bur. of Eth._, p. 33.

[1127] Cf. his _Denkwürdigkeiten der Dresdener Bibliothek_ (1744), p. 4.

[1128] Stephens (_Central America_, ii. 342, 453; _Yucatan_, ii. 292, 453) was in the same way at a loss respecting the conditions of the knowledge of such things in his time. Cf. also Orozco y Berra, _Geografia de las Lenguas de México_, p. 101.

[1129] _Die Mayahandschrift der königlichen öffentlichen Bibliothek zu Dresden; herausgegeben von E. Förstemann_ (Leipzig, 1880). Only thirty copies were offered for sale at two hundred marks. There is a copy in Harvard College library. Parts of the manuscript are found figured in different publications: Humboldt’s _Vues des Cordillères_, ii. 268, and pl. 16 and 45; Wuttke’s _Gesch. der Schrift. Atlas_, pl. 22, 23 (Leipzig, 1872); _Archives de la Soc. Amér. de France_, n. s., vol. i. and ii.; Silvestre’s _Paléographie Universelle_; Rosny’s _Les Ecritures figuratives et hiéroglyphiques des peuples anciens et modernes_ (Paris, 1860, pl. v.), and in his _Essai sur le déchiffrement_, etc.; Ruge, _Zeitalter der Entdeckungen_, p. 559. Cf. also Le Noir in _Antiquités Méxicaines_, ii. introd.; Förstemann’s separate monographs, _Der Maya apparat in Dresden (Centralblatt für Bibliothekswesen_, 1885, p. 182), and _Erläuterungen zur Mayahandschrift der königlichen öffentlichen Bibliothek zu Dresden_ (Dresden, 1886); Schellhas’ _Die Maya-Handschrift zu Dresden_ (Berlin, 1886); C. Thomas on the numerical signs in _Arch. de la Soc. Am. de France_, n. s., iii. 207.

[1130] Cf. Powell’s _Third Rept. Eth. Bureau_, p. 32

[1131] Brinton’s _Maya Chronicles_, 66; Brasseur de Bourbourg’s _Troano_ (1868).

[1132] It constitutes vol. ii. and iii. of the series.

_Mission scientifique au Méxique et dans l’Amérique Centrale. Ouvrages publiés par ordre de l’Empereur et par les soins du Ministre de l’Instruction publique_ (Paris, 1868-70), under the distinctive title: _Linguistique, Manuscrit Troano. Etudes sur le système graphique et la langue des Mayas, par Brasseur de Bourbourg_ (1869-70).

Rosny, who compared Brasseur’s edition with the original, was satisfied with its exactness, except in the numbering of the leaves; and Brasseur (_Bibl. Mex.-Guat._, 1871) confessed that in his interpretation he had read the MS. backwards. The work was reissued in Paris in 1872, without the plates, under the following title: _Dictionnaire, Grammaire et Chrestomathie de la langue maya, précédés d’une étude sur les système graphique des indigènes du Yucatan (Méxique)_ (Paris, 1872).

Brasseur’s _Rapport, addressé à son Excellence M. Duruy_, included in the work, gives briefly the abbé’s exposition of the MS. Professor Cyrus Thomas and Dr. D. G. Brinton, having printed some expositions in the _American Naturalist_ (vol. xv.) united in an essay making vol. v. of the _Contributions to North American Ethnology_ (Powell’s survey) under the title: _A Study of the Manuscript Troano by Cyrus Thomas, with an introduction by D. G. Brinton_ (Washington, 1882), which gives facsimiles of some of the plates. Thomas calls it a kind of religious calendar, giving dates of religious festivals through a long period, intermixed with illustrations of the habits and employments of the people, their houses, dress, utensils. He calls the characters in a measure phonetic, and not syllabic. Cf. Rosny in the _Archives de la Soc. Am. de France_, n. s., ii. 28; his _Essai sur le déchiffrement_, etc. (1876); Powell’s _Third Rept. Bur. of Eth._, xvi.; Bancroft’s _Nat. Races_, ii. 774; and Brinton’s _Notes on the Codex Troano and Maya Chronology_ (Salem, 1881).

[1133] Cf. _Science_, iii. 458.

[1134] _Codex Cortesianus. Manuscrit hiératique des anciens Indiens de l’Amérique centrale conservé au Musée archéologique de Madrid. Photographié et publié pour la première fois, avec une introduction, et un vocabulaire de l’écriture hiératique yucatéque par Léon de Rosny_ (Paris, 1883). At the end is a list of works by De Rosny on American archæology and paleography.

[1135] _Archives de la Soc. Am. de France_, n. s., ii. 25.

[1136] _Bib. Mex.-Guat._, p. 95.

[1137] Cf. Rosny in _Archives paléographiques_ (Paris, 1869-71), pl. 117, etc.; and his _Essai sur le dé chiffrement_, etc., pl. viii., xvi.

[1138] [Mr. Markham made a special study of this point in the _Journal of the Roy. Geog. Soc_. (1871), xli. p. 281, collating its authorities. Cf. the views of Marcoy in _Travels in South America_, tr. by Rich, London, 1875.—ED.]

[1139] Except those portions which Garcilasso de la Vega has embodied in his _Commentaries_.

[1140] It is, of course, necessary to consider the weight to be attached to the statements of different authors; but the most convenient method of placing the subject before the reader will be to deal in the present chapter with general conclusions, and to discuss the comparative merits of the authorities in the Critical Essay on the sources of information.

[1141] For special study, see Paz Soldan’s _Geografía del Peru_; Menendez’ _Manual de Geografía del Peru_; and Wiener’s _L’Empire des Incas_, ch. i.—ED.

[1142] “Jusqu’à present on n’a pas retrouvé le maïs, d’une manière certaine, a l’état sauvage” (De Candolle’s _Géographie botanique raisonnée_, p. 951).

[1143] De Candolle, p. 983.

[1144] There is a wild variety in Mexico, the size of a nut, and attempts have been made to increase its size under cultivation during many years, without any result. This seems to show that a great length of time must have elapsed before the ancient Peruvians could have brought the cultivation of the potato to such a high state of perfection as they undoubtedly did.

[1145] Some years ago a priest named Cabrera, the cura of a village called Macusani, in the province of Caravaya, succeeded in breeding a cross between the wild vicuña and the tame alpaca. He had a flock of these beautiful animals, which yielded long, silken, white wool; but they required extreme care, and died out when the sustaining hand of Cabrera was no longer available. There is also a cross between a llama and an alpaca, called _guariso_, as large as the llama, but with much more wool. The guanaco and llama have also been known to form a cross; but there is no instance of a cross between the two wild varieties,—the guanaco and vicuña. The extremely artificial life of the alpaca, which renders that curious and valuable animal so absolutely dependent on the ministrations of its human master, and the complete domestication of the llama, certainly indicate the lapse of many centuries before such a change could have been effected.

[1146] [Cf. remarks of Daniel Wilson in his _Prehistoric Man_, i. 243.—ED.]

[1147] The name is of later date. One story is that, when an Inca was encamped there, a messenger reached him with unusual celerity, whose speed was compared with that of the “_huanaco_.” The Inca said, “_Tia_” (sit or rest), “_O! huanaco_.”

[1148] Basadre’s measurement is 32 inches by 21.

[1149] Quoted by Garcilasso de la Vega, Pte. I. lib. III. cap. 1.

[1150] Basadre mentions a carved stone brought from the department of Ancachs, in Peru, which had some resemblances to the stones at Tiahuanacu. A copy of it is in possession of Señor Raimondi.

[1151] [Cf. plans and views in Squier’s _Peru_, ch. 24.—ED.]

[1152] Cap. 94.

[1153] See page 238.

[1154] The name of the place where these remains are situated is Concacha, from the Quichua word “_Cuncachay_,”—the act of holding down a victim for sacrifice; literally, “to take by the neck.”

[1155] The names of this god were _Con-Illa-Tici-Uira-cocha_, and he was the _Pachayachachic_, or Teacher of the World. _Pacha_ is “time,” or “place;” also “the universe.” “_Yachachic_,” a teacher, from “_Yachachini_,” “I teach.” _Con_ is said to signify the creating Deity (_Betanzos, Garcia_). According to Gomara, Con was a creative deity who came from the north, afterwards expelled by Pachacamac, and a modern authority (Lopez, p. 235) suggests that _Con_ represented the “cult of the setting sun,” because _Cunti_ means the west. _Tici_ means a founder or foundation, and _Illa_ is light, from _Illani_, “I shine:” “The Origin of Light” (_Montesinos. Anonymous Jesuit._ Lopez suggests “_Ati_,” an evil omen,—the Moon God); or, according to one authority, “Light Eternal” (_The anonymous Jesuit_). _Vira_ is a corruption of _Pirua_, which is said by some authorities to be the name of the first settler, or the founder of a dynasty; and by others to mean a “depository,” a “place of abode;” hence a “dweller,” or “abider.” _Cocha_ means “ocean,” “abyss,” “profundity,” “space.” _Uira-cocha_, “the Dweller in Space.” So that the whole would signify “God: the Creator of Light:” “the Dweller in Space: the Teacher of the World.”

Some authors gave the meaning of _Uira-cocha_ to be “foam of the sea:” from _Uira_ (_Huira_), “grease,” or “foam,” and _Cocha_, “ocean,” “sea,” “lake.” Garcilasso de la Vega pointed out the error. In compound words of a nominative and genitive, the genitive is invariably placed first in Quichua; so that the meaning would be “a sea of grease,” not “grease of the sea.” Hence he concludes that _Uira-cocha_ is not a compound word, but simply a name, the derivation of which he does not attempt to explain. Blas Valera says that it means “the will and power of God;” not that this is the signification of the word, but that such were the godlike attributes of the being who was known by it. Acosta says that to _Ticsi Uira-cocha_ they assigned the chief power and command over all things. The anonymous Jesuit tells us that _Illa Ticsi_ was the original name, and that _Uira-cocha_ was added later.

Of these names, _Illa Ticci_ appears to have been the most ancient.

[1156] Cieza de Leon and Salcamayhua.

[1157] Montesinos calls the ancient people, who were peaceful and industrious, _Hatu-runa_, or “Great men.” See also Matienza (MS. Brit. Mus.).

[1158] _The anonymous Jesuit_, p. 178. A work referred to by Oliva as having been written by Blas Valera also mentions some of the early kings by name. (See Saldamando, _Jesuitas del Peru_, p. 22.)

[1159] _Cachi_ (“salt”) was the Inca’s instruction in rational life, _Uchu_ (“pepper”) was the delight the people derived from this teaching, and _Sauca_ (“joy”) means the happiness afterward experienced.

[1160] G. de la Vega.

[1161] Molina, p. 7.

[1162] Pirua?

[1163] Cieza de Leon; Herrera.

[1164] Salcamayhua.

[1165] Blas Valera allows a period of 600 years for the existence of the Inca dynasty, which throws its origin back to the days of Alfred the Great. Garcilasso allows 400 years, which would make its rise to be contemporary with Henry II of England. But twelve generations, allowing twenty-five years for each, would only occupy 300 years.

[1166] Erroneously called _Aymaras_ by the Spaniards. The name, which really belongs to a branch of the Quichua tribe, was first misapplied to the Colla language by the Jesuits at Juli, and afterwards to the whole Colla race.

[1167] Don Modesto Basadre tells us that he sent an Indian messenger, named Alejo Vilca, from Puno to Tacna, a distance of 84 leagues, who did it in 62 hours, his only sustenance being a little dried maize and coca,—over four miles an hour for 152 miles.

[1168] Fray Ludovico Geronimo de Oré, a native of Guamanga, in Peru, was the author of _Rituale seu Manuale ac brevem formam administrandi sacramenta juxta ordinem S. Ecclesiæ Romanœ, cum translationibus in linguas provinciarum Peruanorum_, published at Naples in 1607.

[1169] Cf. Note 1, following this chapter.

[1170] _Chucu_ means a head-dress; _Huaman_, a falcon; _Huacra_, a horn.

[1171] [Ramusio’s plan of Cuzco is given in Vol. II. p. 554, with references (p. 556) to other plans and descriptions; to which may be added an archæological examination by Wiener, in the _Bull. de la Soc. de Géog. de Paris_, Oct., 1879, and in his _Pérou et Bolivie_, with an enlarged plan of the town, showing the regions of different architecture; accounts in Marcoy’s _Voyage à travers l’Amérique du Sud_ (Paris, 1869; or Eng. transl. i. 174), and in Nadaillac’s _L’Amérique préhistorique_, and by Squier in his Peru, and in his _Remarques sur la Géographie du Pérou_, p. 20.—ED.]

[1172] It is related by Betanzos that one day this Inca appeared before his people with a very joyful countenance. When they asked him the cause of his joy, he replied that Uira-cocha Pachayachachic had spoken to him in a dream that night. Then all the people rose up and saluted him as Viracocha Inca, which is as much as to say,—“King and God.” From that time he was so called. Garcilasso gives a different version of the same tradition, in which he confuses Viracocha with his son.

[1173] Cieza de Leon, ii. 138-44.

[1174] Salcamayhua, 91.

[1175] Blas Valera says 42, Balboa 33, years.

[1176] [The ruins of Atahualpa’s palace are figured in Wiener’s _Pérou et Bolivie_, and in Cte. de Gabriac’s _Promenade à travers l’Amérique du Sud_ (Paris, 1868), p. 196.—ED.]

[1177] The meanings of the names of these Incas are significant. Manco and Rocca appear to be proper names without any clear etymology. The rest refer to mental attributes, or else to some personal peculiarity. Sinchi means “strong.” Lloque is “left-handed.” Yupanqui is the second person of the future tense of a verb, and signifies “you will count.” Garcilasso interprets it as one who will count as wise, virtuous, and powerful. Ccapac is rich; that is, rich in all virtues and attributes of a prince. Mayta is an adverb, “where;” and Salcamayhua says that the constant cry and prayer of this Inca was, “Where art thou, O God?” because he was constantly seeking his Creator. Yahuar-huaccac means “weeping blood,” probably in allusion to some malady from which he suffered. Pachacutec has already been explained. Tupac is a word signifying royal splendor, and Huayna means “youth.” Huascar is “a chain,” in allusion to a golden chain said to have been made in his honor, and held by the dancers at the festival of his birth. The meaning of Atahualpa has been much disputed. _Hualpa_ certainly means any large game fowl. _Hualpani_ is to create. _Atau_ is “chance,” or “the fortune of war.” Garcilasso, who is always opposed to derivations, maintains that Atahualpa was a proper name without special meaning, and that Hualpa, as a word for a fowl, is derived from it, because the boys in the streets, when imitating cock-crowing, used the word Atahualpa. But Hualpa formed part of the name of many scions of the Inca family long before the time of Atahualpa.

[1178] All authorities agree that Manco Ccapac was the first Inca, although Montesinos places him far back at the head of the Pirhua dynasty, and all agree respecting the second, Sinchi Rocca. Lloque Yupanqui, with various spellings, has the unanimous vote of all authorities except Acosta, who calls him “Iaguarhuarque.” But Acosta’s list is incomplete. Respecting Mayta Ccapac and Ccapac Yupanqui, all are agreed except Betanzos, who transposes them by an evident slip of memory. Touching Inca Rocca all are agreed, though Montesinos has Sinchi for Inca, and all agree as to Yahuar-huaccac. It is true that Cieza de Leon and Herrera call him Inca Yupanqui, but this is explained by Salcamayhua when he gives the full name,—Yahuar-huaccac Inca Yupanqui. All agree as to Uira-cocha. As to his successor, Betanzos, Cieza de Leon, Fernandez, Herrera, Salcamayhua, and Balboa mention the short reign of the deposed Urco. Cieza de Leon and Betanzos give Yupanqui as the name of Urco’s brother; all other authorities have Pachacutec. The discrepancy is explained by his names having been Yupanqui Pachacutec. This also accounts for Garcilasso de la Vega and Santillan having made Pachacutec and Yupanqui into two Incas, father and son. Betanzos also interpolates a Yamque Yupanqui. All are agreed with regard to Tupac Inca Yupanqui, Huayna Ccapac, Huascar, and Atahualpa. [There is another comparison of the different lists in Wiener, _L’Empire des Incas_, p. 53.—ED.]

[1179] [See an early cut of this sun-worship in Vol. II. p. 551.—ED.]

[1180] At Pachacamac there was a temple to the coast deity, called locally Pachacamac, and another to the sun; but none to the supreme Creator, one of whose epithets was Pachacamac.

[1181] Spanish authors mention a being called _Supay_, which they say was the devil. _Supay_, as an evil spirit, also occurs in the drama of Ollantay. It may have been some local _huaca_, but no devil as such, entered into the religious belief of the Incas.

[1182] Acosta, Polo de Ondegardo, Garcilasso de la Vega.

[1183] The mummies were those of Incas Uira-cocha, Tupac Yupanqui, and Huayna Ccapac; of Mama Runtu (wife of Uira-cocha) and Mama Ocllo (wife of Tupac Yupanqui).

[1184] Mentioned by Calancha (471) and Arriaga as an oracle at the village of Tauca, in Conchucos. Brinton has built up a myth which he credits to the whole Peruvian people, on the strength of a meaning applied to the word _Catequilla_, which is erroneous. It is exactly the same grammatical error that those etymologists fell into who thought that _Uira-cocha_ signified “foam of the sea.” (_Myths of the New World_, 154.)

[1185] A very interesting account of it, with a sketch, is given by Squier, p. 524.

[1186] _Huatana_ means a halter, from _huatani_, to seize; hence the tying up or encircling of the sun.

[1187] Authorities differ respecting the names of the months, and probably some months had more than one name. But the most accurate list, and that which is most in agreement with all the others, is the one adopted by the first Council of Lima, and given by Calancha. It is as follows:—

1. _Yntip Raymi_ (22 June-22 July), Festival of the Winter Solstice, or _Raymi_.

2. Chahuarquiz (22 July-22 Aug.), Season of ploughing.

3. Yapa-quiz (22 Aug.-22 Sept.), Season of sowing.

4. _Ccoya Raymi_ (22 Sept.-22 Oct.), Festival of the Spring Equinox. _Situa._

5. Uma Raymi (22 Oct.-22 Nov.), Season of brewing.

6. Ayamarca (22 Nov.-22 Dec.), Commemoration of the dead.

* * * * *

7. _Ccapac Raymi_ (22 Dec.-22 Jan.), Festival of the Summer Solstice. _Huaraca._

8. Camay (22 Jan.-22 Feb.), Season of exercises.

9. Hatun-poccoy (22 Feb.-22 March), Season of ripening.

* * * * *

10. _Pacha-poccoy_ (22 March-22 April), Festival of Autumn Equinox. _Mosoc Nina._

11. Ayrihua (22 April-22 May), Beginning of harvest.

12. Aymuray (22 May-22 June), Harvesting month. in Google’s copy

[1188] Judges xii. 39; 2 Kings iii. 27.

[1189] The sacrifices were called _runa_, _yuyac_, and _huahua_. The Spaniards thought that _runa_ and _yuyac_ signified men, and _huahua_ children. This was not the case when speaking of sacrificial victims. _Runa_ was applied to a male sacrifice, _huahua_ to the lambs, and _yuyac_ signified an adult or full-grown animal. The sacrificial animals were also called after the names of those who offered them, which was another cause of erroneous assumptions by Spanish writers. There was a law strictly prohibiting human sacrifices among the conquered tribes; and the statement that servants were sacrificed at the obsequies of their masters is disproved by the fact, mentioned by the anonymous Jesuit, that in none of the burial-places opened by the Spaniards in search of treasure were any human bones found, except those of the buried lord himself.

[1190] Prescott (I. p. 98, note) accepted the statement that human sacrifices were offered by the Incas, because six authorities, Sarmiento, Cieza de Leon, Montesinos, Balboa, Ondegardo, and Acosta—outnumbered the single authority on the other side, Garcilasso de la Vega, who, moreover, was believed to be prejudiced owing to his relationship to the Incas. Sarmiento and Cieza de Leon are one and the same, so that the number of authorities for human sacrifices is reduced to five. Cieza de Leon, Montesinos, and Balboa adopted the belief that human sacrifices were offered up, through a misunderstanding of the words _yuyac_ and _huahua_. Acosta had little or no acquaintance with the language, as is proved by the numerous linguistic blunders in his work. Ondegardo wrote at a time when he scarcely knew the language, and had no interpreters; for it was in 1554, when he was judge at Cuzco. At that time all the annalists and old men had fled into the forests, because of the insurrection of Francisco Hernandez Giron.

The authorities who deny the practice are numerous and important. These are Francisco de Chaves, one of the best and most able of the original conquerors; Juan de Oliva; the Licentiate Alvarez; Fray Marcos Jofre; the Licentiate Falcon, in his _Apologia pro Indis_; Melchior Hernandez, in his dictionary, under the words _harpay_ and _huahua_; the anonymous Jesuit in his most valuable narrative; and Garcilasso de la Vega. These eight authorities outweigh the five quoted by Prescott, both as regards number and importance. So that the evidence against human sacrifices is conclusive. The _Quipus_, as the anonymous Jesuit tells us, also prove that there was a law prohibiting human sacrifices.

The assertion that 200 children and 1,000 men were sacrificed at the coronation of Huayua Ccapac was made; but these “_huahuas_” were not children of men, but young lambs, which are called children; and the “_yuyac_” and “_runa_” were not men, but adult llamas. [Mr. Markham has elsewhere collated the authorities on this point (_Royal Commentaries_, i. 139). Cf. Bollaert’s _Antiq. Researches_, p. 124; and Alphonse Castaing on “Les Fêtes, Offrandes et Sacrifices dans l’Antiquité Peruvienne,” in the _Archives de la Société Américaine de France_, n. s. iii. 239.—ED.]

[1191] The sacrificial llamas bore the names of the youths who presented them. Hence the Spanish writers, with little or no knowledge of the language, assumed that the youths themselves were the victims. (See _ante_, p. 237.)

[1192] _Ñusta_, princess; _calli_, valorous; _sapa_, alone, unrivalled.

[1193] Of the first class were the _Tarpuntay_, or sacrificing priests, and the _Nacac_, who cut up the victims and provided the offerings, whether _harpay_ or bloody sacrifices, _haspay_ or bloodless sacrifices of flesh, or _cocuy_, oblations of corn, fruit, or coca. Molina mentions a custom called _Ccapac-cocha_ or _Cacha-huaca_, being the distribution of sacrifices. An enormous tribute came to Cuzco annually for sacrificial purposes, and was thence distributed by the Inca, for the worship of every huaca in the empire. The different sacrifices were sent from Cuzco in all directions for delivery to the priests of the numerous _huacas_. The ministering priests were called _Huacap Uillac_ when they had charge of a special idol, _Huacap Rimachi_ or _Huatuc_ when they received utterances from a deity while in a state of ecstatic frenzy called _utirayay_, and _Ychurichuc_ when they received confessions and ministered in private families. The soothsayers were a very numerous class. The _Hamurpa_ examined the entrails of sacrifices, and divined by the flight of birds. The _Llayca_, _Achacuc_, _Huatuc_, and _Uira-piricuc_ were soothsayers of various grades. The _Socyac_ divined by maize heaps, the _Pacchacuc_ by the feet of a large hairy spider, the _Llaychunca_ by odds and evens. The recluses were not only _Aclla-cuna_, or virgins congregated in temples under the charge of matrons called _Mama-cuna_. There were also hermits who meditated in solitary places, and appear to have been under a rule, with an abbot called _Tucricac_, and younger men serving a novitiate called _Huamac_. These _Huancaquilli_, or hermits, took vows of chastity (_titu_), obedience (_Huñicui_), poverty (_uscacuy_), and penance (_villullery_).

[1194] [The general works on the Inca civilization necessarily touch these points of their religious customs, and Mr. Markham’s volume on the _Rites and Laws of the Incas_ is a prime source of information. Hawk’s translation of Rivero and Von Tschudi (p. 151) gives references; but special mention may be made of Müller’s _Geschichte der Amerikanischen Urreligionen_; Castaing’s _Les Système religieux dans l’Antiquité peruvienne_, in the _Archives de la Soc. Amér. de France_, n. s., iii. 86, 145; Tylor’s _Primitive Culture_; Brinton’s _Myths of the New World_; and Albert Réville’s _Lectures on the origin and growth of religion as illustrated by the native religions of Mexico and Peru. Delivered at Oxford and London, in April and May, 1884. Translated by Philip H. Wicksteed_ (London, 1884. Hibbart lectures).—ED.]

[1195] The Quichua language was spoken over a vast area of the Andean region of South America. The dialects only differ slightly, and even the language of the Collas, called by the Spaniards Aymara, is identical as regards the grammatical structure, while a clear majority of the words are the same. The general language of Peru belongs to that American group of languages which has been called agglutinative by William von Humboldt. These languages form new words by a process of junction which is much more developed in them than in any of the forms of speech in the Old World. They also have exclusive and inclusive plurals, and transitional forms of the verb combined with pronominal suffixes which are peculiar to them. In these respects the Quichua is purely an American language, and in spite of the resemblances in the sounds of some words, which have been diligently collected by Lopez (_Les Races Aryennes du Pérou_, par Vicente F. Lopez, Paris, 1871) and Ellis (_Peruvia Scythica_, by Robert Ellis, B. D., London, 1875), no connection, either as regards grammar or vocabulary, has been satisfactorily established between the speech of the Incas and any language of the Old World. Quichua is a noble language, with a most extensive vocabulary, rich in forms of the plural number, which argue a very clear conception of the idea of plurality; rich in verbal conjugations; rich in the power of forming compound nouns; rich in varied expression to denote abstract ideas; rich in words for relationships which are wanting in the Old World idioms; and rich, above all, in synonyms: so that it was an efficient vehicle wherewith to clothe the thoughts and ideas of a people advanced in civilization.

[1196] Garcilasso, _Com. Real._, i. lib. i. cap. 24, and lib. vii. cap. 1.

[1197] Among several kinds of flutes were the _chayña_, made of cane, the _pincullu_, a small wooden flute, and the _pirutu_, of bone. They also had a stringed instrument called _tinya_, for accompanying their songs, a drum, and trumpets of several kinds, one made from a sea-shell.

[1198] Blas Valera wrote upon the subject of Inca drugs, and I have given a list of those usually found in the bags of the itinerant Calahuaya doctors, in a foot-note at page 186 in vol. i. of my translation of the first part of the _Royal Commentaries_ of Garcilasso de la Vega. An interesting account of the Calahuaya doctors is given by Don Modesto Basadre in his _Riquezas Peruanas_, p. 17 (Lima, 1884).

[1199] In the church of Santa Anna.

[1200] [See pictures of Atahualpa in Vol. II. pp. 515, 516. For a colored plate of “Lyoux d’or péruviens,” emblems of royalty, see _Archives de la Soc. Amér. de France_, n. s., i. pl. v.—ED.]

[1201] The truth of this use of gold by the Incas does not depend on the glowing descriptions of Garcilasso de la Vega. A golden breastplate and _topu_, a golden leaf with a long stalk, four specimens of golden fruit, and a girdle of gold were found near Cuzco in 1852, and sent to the late General Echenique, then President of Peru. The present writer had an opportunity of inspecting and making careful copies of them. His drawings of the breastplate and _topu_ were lithographed for Bollaert’s _Antiquarian Researches in Peru_, p. 146. The breastplate was 5-3/10 inches in diameter, and had four narrow slits for suspending it round the neck. The golden leaf was 12-7/10 inches long, including the stem; breadth of the base of the leaf, 3-1/10 inches. The models of fruit were 3 inches in diameter, and the girdle 18¼ inches long.

[1202] “The stones are of various sizes in different structures, ranging in length from one to eight feet, and in thickness from six inches to two feet. The larger stones are generally at the bottom, each course diminishing in thickness towards the top of the wall, thus giving a very pleasing effect of graduation. The joints are of a precision unknown in our architecture, and not rivalled in the remains of ancient art in Europe. The statement of the old writers, that the accuracy with which the stones of some structures were fitted together was such that it was impossible to introduce the thinnest knife-blade or finest needle between them, may be taken as strictly true. The world has nothing to show in the way of stone cutting and fitting to surpass the skill and accuracy displayed in the Inca structures of Cuzco.”

[1203] Place of serpents.

[1204] An unmarried prince of the blood royal; a nobleman. Father, in the Colla dialect.

[1205] A married prince of the blood royal.

[1206] A married princess; a lady of noble family.

[1207] An unmarried princess.

[1208] At the conquest there were 594, but a great number had been killed in the previous civil war.

[1209] Chiefs.

[1210] Principal chiefs.

[1211] Balboa, Montesinos, Santillana.

[1212] The male members of a _Chunca_ were divided into ten classes, with reference to age and consequent ability to work:—

1. _Mosoc-aparic_, “Newly begun.” A baby.

2. _Saya-huarma_, “Standing boy.” A child that could stand.

3. _Macta-puric_, “Walking child.” Child aged 2 to 8.

4. _Ttanta raquisic_, “Bread receiver.” Boy of 8.

5. _Puclacc huarma_, “Playing boy.” Boys from 8 to 16.

6. _Cuca pallac_, “Coca picker.” Age from 16 to 20. Light work.

7. _Yma huayna_, “As a youth.” Age 20 to 25.

8. _Puric ——_, “Able-bodied.” Head of a family; paying tribute.

9. _Chaupi-ruccu_, “Elderly.” Light service. Age 50 to 60.

10. _Puñuc ruccu_, “Dotage.” No work. Sixty and upwards.

A _Chunca_ consisted of ten _Purics_, with the other classes in proportion. The _Puric_ was married to one wife, and, while assisted by the young lads and the elderly men, he supported the children and the old people who could not work. The Peruvian laborer had many superstitions, but he was not devoid of higher religious feelings. This is shown by his practice when travelling. On reaching the summit of a pass he never forgot to throw a stone, or sometimes his beloved pellet of coca, on a heap by the roadside, as a thank-offering to God, exclaiming, _Apachicta muchani!_ “I worship or give thanks at this heap.” Festivals lightened his days of toil by their periodical recurrence, and certain family ceremonials were also recognized as occasions for holidays. There was a gathering at the cradling of a child, called _quirau_. When the child attained the age of one year, the _rutuchicu_ took place. Then he received the name he was to retain until he attained the age of puberty. The child was closely shorn, and the name was given by the eldest relation. With a girl the ceremony was called _quicuchica_, and there was a fast of two days imposed before the naming-day, when she assumed the dress called _aucalluasu_.

[1213] The _tupu_ was a measure of land sufficient to support one man and his wife. It was the unit of land measurement, and a _puric_ received _tupus_ according to the number of those dependent on him. In parts of Peru, especially on the road from Tarma to Xauxa, these small square fields, or _tupus_, may still be seen in great numbers, divided by low stone walls.

[1214] The shares for the _Inca_ and _Huaca_ varied according to the requirements of the state. If needful, the _Inca_ share was increased at the expense of the _Huaca_, but never at the expense of the people’s share.

[1215] From _Taripani_, I examine.

[1216] It should probably be _Apunaca_: _Apu_ is a chief, and _naca_ the plural suffix in the Colla dialect.

[1217] _Hatun_, great, and _uilca_, sacred. This official held a position equivalent to a Christian bishop.

[1218] [On the use of guano see Markham’s _Cieza de Leon_, p. 266, note.—ED.]

[1219] [Max Steffen, in his _Die Landwirtschaft bei den Altamerikanischen Kulturvölkern_ (Leipzig, 1883), gives a list of sources.—ED.]

[1220] [The llamas were used in ploughing. Cf. Humboldt’s _Views of Nature_, p. 125.—ED.]

[1221] A bronze instrument found at Sorata had the following composition, according to an analysis by David Forbes:—

Copper 88.05 Copper 94
Tin 11.42 Tin 6
Iron .36 ———
Silver .17 100
——————
100.00

Humboldt gave the composition of a bronze instrument found at Vilcabamba as follows:—

[1222] _Fifteenth Report of the Trustees of the Peabody Museum of Ethnology_, vol. iii. 2, p. 140 (Cambridge, 1882).

[1223] [Cf. the plates in the _Necropolis of Ancon_, and De la Rada’s _Les Vases Péruviens du Musée Archéologique de Madrid_, in the _Compte Rendu_ (p. 236) of the Copenhagen meeting of the Congrès des Américanistes.—ED.]

[1224] It is believed that some of the heads on the vases were intended as likenesses. One especially, in a collection at Cuzco, is intended, according to native tradition, for a portrait of Rumi-ñaui, a character in the drama of Ollantay.

[1225] _Prehistoric Man_, i. p. 110. A great number of specimens of Peruvian pottery are given in the works of Castelnau, Wiener, Squier, and in the atlas of the _Antigüedades Peruanas_. [Cf. also Marcoy’s _Voyage; Mémoires de la Soc. des Antiquaires du Nord_ (two plates); J. E. Price in the _Anthropological Journal_, iii. 100, and many of the books of Peruvian travel.—ED.]

[1226] [The narratives of the Spanish conquest necessarily throw much light, sometimes more than incidentally, upon the earlier history of the region. These sources are characterized in the critical essay appended to chapter viii. of Vol. II., and embrace bibliographical accounts of Herrera, Gomara, Oviedo, Andagoya, Xeres, Fernandez, Oliva, not to name others of less moment.—ED.]

[1227] See Note II. following this essay.

[1228] Vol. II. p. 573.

[1229] Cf. Vol. II. p. 546.

[1230] _Suma y narracion de los Incas, que los Indios llamaron Capaccuna que fueron señores de la ciudad del Cuzco y de todo lo á ella subjeto. Publícala M. Jiménez de la Espada_ (Madrid, 1880).

[1231] We learn from Leon Pinelo that one of the famous band of adventurers who crossed the line drawn by Pizarro on the sands of Gallo was an author (Antonio, ii. 645). But the _Relacion de la tierra que descubrió Don Francisco Pizarro_, by Diego de Truxillo, remained in manuscript and is lost to us. Francisco de Chaves, one of the most respected of the companions of Pizarro, who strove to save the life of Atahualpa, and was an intimate friend of the Inca’s brother, was also an author. Chaves is honorably distinguished for his moderation and humanity. He lost his own life in defending the staircase against the assassins of Pizarro. He left behind a copious narrative, and his intimate relations with the Indians make it likely that it contained much valuable information respecting Inca civilization. It was inherited by the author’s friend and relation, Luis Valera, but it was never printed, and the manuscript is now lost. The works of Palomino, a companion of Belalcazar, who wrote on the kingdom of Quito, are also lost, with the exception of a fragment preserved in the _Breve Informe_ of Las Casas. Other soldiers of the conquest, Tomas Vasquez, Francisco de Villacastin, Garcia de Melo, and Alonso de Mesa, are mentioned as men who had studied and were learned in all matters relating to Inca antiquities; but none of their writings have been preserved.

[1232] But not dedicated to the Conde de Nieva, as Prescott states, for that viceroy died in 1564.

[1233] B, 135.

[1234] Report by Polo de Ondegardo, translated by Clements R. Markham (Hakluyt Society, 1873).

[1235] [See Vol. II. p. 571.—ED.]

[1236] [See Vol. II. p. 567-8, for bibliography.—ED.]

[1237] [See Vol. II. p. 542.—ED.]

[1238] Additional MSS. 5469, British Museum, folio, p. 274. See Vol. II. p. 571.

[1239] See _ante_, p. 6.

[1240] National Library at Madrid, B, 135.

[1241] _The fables and rites of the Incas, by Christoval de Molina_, translated and edited by Clements R. Markham (Hakluyt Society, 1873).

[1242] [See. Vol. II. p. 576.—ED.]

[1243] For the bibliography of Acosta, see Vol. II. p. 420, 421.

[1244] Notices of the life and works of Acosta have been given in biographical dictionaries, and in histories of the Jesuits. An excellent biography will be found in a work entitled _Los Antiquos Jesuitas del Peru_, by Don Enrique Torres Saldamando, which was published at Lima in 1885. See also an introductory notice in Markham’s edition (1880).

[1245] Thus his lists of the Incas, of the names of months and of festivals, are very defective; and his list of names of stars, though copied from Balboa without acknowledgment, is incomplete.

[1246] Acosta was the chief source whence the civilized world of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, beyond the limits of Spain, derived a knowledge of Peruvian civilization. Purchas, in his _Pilgrimage_ (ed. of 1623, lib. v. p. 869; vi. p. 931), quotes largely from the learned Jesuit, and an abstract of his work is given in Harris’s _Voyages_ (lib. i. cap. xiii. pp. 751-799). He is much relied upon as an authority by Robertson, and is quoted 19 times in Prescott’s _Conquest of Peru_, thus taking the fourth place as an authority with regard to that work, since Garcilasso is quoted 89 times, Cieza de Leon 45, Ondegardo 41, Acosta 19.

[1247] Of whose parentage a pleasing story is told. He was a native of Truxillo, of French parents, his father being a metal-founder. When he was a small boy his father said to him, “Study, little Charles, study! and this bell that I am founding shall be rung for you when you are the bishop.” (“Estudiar, Carlete, estudiar! que con esta campana te han de repicar cuando seas obispo.”) Dr. Corni rose to be a prelate of great virtue and erudition, and an eloquent preacher. At last he became Bishop of Truxillo in 1620, and when he heard the chimes which were rung on his approach to the city, he said, “That bell which excels all the others was founded by my father.” (“Aquella campana que sobresale entre las demas le fundio mi padre.”)

[1248] _Papeles Varios de Indias._ MS. Brit. Mus.

[1249] This last work is devoted to the Spanish conquest.

[1250] In the series entitled _Coleccion de libros Españoles raros ó curiosos_, tom xvi. (Madrid, 1882.) [The original manuscript is in the library of the Real Academia de Historia at Madrid. Brasseur de Bourbourg had a copy (_Pinart Catalogue_, No. 638; _Bibl. Mex. Guat._, p. 103), which appeared also in the Del Monte sale (N. Y., June, 1888,—_Catalogue_, iii. no. 554). Cf. the present _History_, II. pp. 570, 577.—ED.]

[1251] _Relacion de las costumbres antiquas de los naturales del Peru. Anónima._ The original is among the manuscript in the National Library at Madrid. It was published as part of a volume entitled _Tres Relaciones de Antigüedades Peruanas_. _Publícalas el Ministerio de Fomento_ (Madrid, 1879).

[1252] _Narrative of the errors, false gods, and other superstitions and diabolical rites in which the Indians of the province of Huarochiri lived in ancient times, collected by Dr. Francisco de Avila, 1608: translated and edited by Clements R. Markham_ (Hakluyt Society, 1872). [There was a copy of the Spanish MS. in the E. G. Squier sale, 1876, no. 726.—ED.]

[1253] _Tratado de las idolatrias de los Indios del Peru._ This work is mentioned by Leon Pinelo as “una obra grande y de mucha erudicion,” but it was never printed.

[1254] _Contra idolatriam_, MS.

[1255] _Extirpacion de la idolatria del Peru, por el Padre Pablo Joseph de Arriaga_ (Lima, 1621, pp. 137).

[1256] [See Vol. II. p. 570. The _Historiæ Pervanæ ordinis Eremitarum S. P. Augustini libri octodecim (1651-52)_ is mainly a translation of Calancha. Cf. Sabin, nos. 8760, 9870.—ED.]

[1257] _Historia de Copacabana y de su milagrosa imagen, escrita por el R. P. Fray Alonso Ramos Gavilan_ (1620). The work of Ramos was reprinted from an incomplete copy at La Paz in 1860, and edited by Fr. Rafael Sans.

[1258] _Origen de los Indios del Nuevo Mundo_ (1607), and in Barcia (1729).

[1259] _Monarquia de los Incas del Peru._ Antonio says of this work, “Tertium quod promiserat adhuc latet nempe.”

[1260] _Historia general del Peru, origen y descendencia de los Incas, pueblos y ciudades, por P. Fr. Martin de Múrua_ (1618). [Cf. Markham’s _Cieza’s Travels_, Second Part, p. 12.—ED.]

[1261] He was a cousin of the poet of the same name, and of the dukes of Feria.

[1262] See Vol. II. pp. 290, 575.

[1263] The _Commentarios Reales_ (Part I.) of Garcilassos de la Vega contain 21 quotations from Blas Valera, 30 from Cieza de Leon (first part), 27 from Acosta, 11 from Gomara, 9 from Zarate, 3 from the _Republica de las Indias Occidentales_ of Fray Geronimo Roman, 2 from Fernandez, 4 from the Inca’s schoolfellow Alcobasa, and 1 from Juan Botero Benes.

[1264] In a learned pamphlet on the word _Uirakocha_,—“_Lexicologia Keshua por Leonardo Villar_” (pp. 16, double columns. Lima, 1887).

[1265] [The common expression of distrust is such as is shown by Hutchinson in his _Two Years in Peru_, who finds little to commend amid a constant glorification of the Incas to the prejudice of the older peoples; and by Marcoy in his _Travels in South America_, who speaks of his “simple and audacious gasconades” (Eng. trans. i. p. 186).—ED.]

[1266] Cf. the bibliography of the book in Vol. II. pp. 569, 570, 575.—ED.

[1267] By Clements R. Markham, in 1872.

[1268] [Cf. bibliog. of Herrera in Vol. II. pp. 67, 68.—ED.]

[1269] _Informaciones acerca del Señorio y Gobierno de los Ingas hechas, por mandado de Don Francisco de Toledo Virey del Peru_ (1570-72). Edited by Don Márcos Jiménez de la Espada, in the _Coleccion de libros Españoles raros ó curiosos_, Tomo xvi. (Madrid, 1882).

[1270] We first hear of Sarmiento in a memorial dated at Cuzco on March 4, 1572, in which he says that he was the author of a history of the Incas, now lost. We further gather that, owing to having found out from the records of the Incas that Tupac Inca Yupanqui discovered two islands in the South Sea, called _Ahuachumpi_ and _Ninachumpi_, Sarmiento sailed on an expedition to discover them at some time previous to 1564. Balboa also mentions the tradition of the discovery of these islands by Tupac Yupanqui. Sarmiento seems to have discovered islands which he believed to be those of the Inca, and in 1567 he volunteered to command the expedition dispatched by Lope de Castro, then governor of Peru, to discover the Terra Australis. But Castro gave the command to his own relation, Mandana. We learn, however, from the memorial of Sarmiento, that he accompanied the expedition, and that the first land was discovered through shaping a course in accordance with his advice. Sarmiento submitted a full report of this first voyage of Mandana, which is now lost, to the Viceroy Toledo. In 1579, Sarmiento was sent to explore the Straits of Magellan. In 1586, on his way to Spain, he was captured by an English ship belonging to Raleigh, and was entertained hospitably by Sir Walter at Durham House until his ransom was collected. From the Spanish captive his host obtained much information respecting Peru and its Incas. He could have no higher authority. One of the journals of the survey of Magellan Straits by Sarmiento was published at Madrid in 1768: _Viage al estrecho de Magellanes: por el Capitan Pedro Sarmiento de Gamboa, en los años 1579 y 1580_. See Vol. II. p. 616.

[1271] [Cf. Vol. II. p. 571.]

[1272] _Historia del Reino de Quito, en la America Meridional, escrita por el Presbitero Don Juan de Velasco nativo de Mismo Reino, año de 1789._ A Spanish edition, _Quito, Imprenta del Gobierno_, 1844, 3 Tomos, was printed from the manuscript, _Histoire du Royaume de Quito, por Don Juan de Velasco_ (_inédite_,) vol. ix. _Voyages, &c., par H. Ternaux Compans_ (Paris, 1840). This version, however, covers only a part of the work, of which the second volume only relates to the ancient history. [Cf. Vol. II. p. 576.—ED.]

[1273] [Cf. Vol. II. p. 578.—ED.]

[1274] [Cf. Vol. II. p. 577; Sabin’s _Dictionary_, xv. p. 439. The opinions of Prescott can be got at through _Poole’s Index_, p. 993. H. H. Bancroft, _Chronicles_, 25, gives a characteristic estimate of Prescott’s archæological labors. Prescott’s catalogue of his own library, with his annotations, is in the Boston Public Library, no. 6334.27.—ED.]

[1275] Prescott quotes these four authorities 249 times, and all other early writers known to him (Herrera, Zarate, Betanzos, Balboa, Montesinos, Pedro Pizarro, Fernandez, Gomara, Levinus Apollonius, Velasco, and the MS. “Declaracion de la Audiencia”) 82 times.

[1276] Calancha and a MS. letter of Valverde. He also refers several times to the _Antigüedades Peruanas_ of Tschudi and Rivero.

[1277] _Spanish Conquest in America_, vol. iii. book xiii. chap. 3, pp. 468 to 513. [Cf. Vol. II. p. 578.]—ED.