Chapter XIII: The Nahua Tribes (2)

The most celebrated ruin in Oaxaca is Mitla. These are the first
ruins we have met that, by their strange architecture and
peculiar ornamentation, suggest some different race as their
builders. The present surroundings are of the gloomiest
character. The country is barren and desert. The valley in which
the ruins are located is high and narrow, but surrounded by bleak
hills. The soil is dry and sandy, and almost devoid of
vegetation. The cold winds, blowing almost constantly, sweep
before them great clouds of sand. A small stream flows through
this dreary waste, which, during the rainy season, is a raging
torrent. “No birds sing, or flowers bloom,” around these old
ruins. Appropriately enough, tradition speaks of this as the
“Place of Sadness,” or “Dwelling of the Dead.” As to the extent
of territory covered by the ruins, we have not been able to learn
further than the general statement that at the time of the
conquest they covered an immense area.42

Wall at Mitla. Mr. Bandelier found, besides two artificial hills,
traces of thirty-nine distinct edifices, and, as he thinks these
are all the buildings that ever stood there, it is manifest that
this was not a city in our sense of the word. Two or three of the
buildings were constructed of adobe, plastered, and painted red.
The others were built of stone. Of these latter the greater part
stands upon the ground, but a few are built upon elevated
terraces, composed of stone and earth heaped together and faced
with stone. In one group of four buildings the terraced
foundation contained a basement—in one case, at least—in the form
of a cross. The purpose of this cellar or basement left in the
artificial foundation is unknown. Some think they were used for
burial purposes but it is more likely they were general
store-rooms. The arrangement of these buildings was the same as
elsewhere. That is, so placed as to inclose a court. This
illustration shows us the method of constructing the walls of the
building. We notice two distinct parts. The inner part is built
of broken stones laid in tolerably regular courses in clay. There
was no mortar used. This inner core is much the same sort of work
as the masonry in the pueblos of Arizona. A facing was put on
over this inner core, which served both for ornament and for
strength. This illustration is a corner of one of these
buildings, and gives us in excellent idea of the peculiar
ornamentation employed at Mitla. Mr. Bancroft gives us a clear
idea of how this facing was put on: “First, a double tier of very
large blocks are placed as a base along the surface of the
supporting mound, projecting two or three feet from the line of
the wall, the stones of the upper tier sloping inward. On this
base is erected a kind of framework of large, hewn blocks with
perfectly plain, unsculptured fronts, which divide the surface of
the wall into oblong panels of different dimensions.”43

Ornamentation at Mitla.

It would, then, seem as if the panels were thickly coated with
clay. Into this clay was then driven small, smoothed blocks of
wedge-shaped stones, in such a way as to cover them with
geometrical ornamentations, which, though not absolutely
symmetrical, present a striking and agreeable appearance. Each
section of the wall presents a different pattern, but this
difference is so slight that the general effect is harmonious.44
This mosaic ornamentation is found in some of the inner facings
of the walls as well. In general, however, the walls on the
inside were covered with mortar and painted.

Hall at Mitla.

Some of the blocks of stone forming the basement, the framework
of the panels, and the lintels of the door are of great size, and
the lintels were in some cases sculptured. One of the largest
rooms at Mitla is represented in the preceding cut. The peculiar
feature about it is the range of columns seen in the drawing. The
inner plastering has fallen, exposing the rough wall. The columns
are simple stone pillars, having neither chapter nor base. It is
generally supposed that these pillars supported the roof. As in
the pueblo buildings to the north, as well as the Toltec house at
Tulla, the roof was probably formed of the trunks of small-sized
trees laid close together and covered with clay and cement.

We have as yet not seen any thing in these ruins sufficiently
striking to justify the somewhat extravagant assertion made about
them. The ornamentation is indeed peculiar and tasteful, but
aside from that, we see no reason to speak of them as magnificent
structures. The buildings are low and narrow; the rooms are
small, dark, and illy ventilated. “Light could only have been
admitted from one side, and the apertures for this purpose were
neither lofty nor broad.” Mr. Bandelier fittingly characterizes
the ruins as the “barbaric effort of a barbarous people.” Those
scholars who think we have in Mexico the ruins of a highly
civilized, powerful empire, regard these ruins as in some way set
aside for mourning purposes of the royal family. “According to
tradition,” says Mayer, “They were . . . intended as the places
of sepulture for their princes. At the death of members of the
royal family, their bodies were entombed in the vaults beneath;
and the sovereign and his relatives retired to mourn over the
departed scion in the chambers above these solemn abodes,
screened by dark and silent groves from the public eye.” Another
tradition devotes the edifices to a sect of priests, whose duty
it was to live in perfect seclusion, and offer expiatory
sacrifices for the royal dead who reposed in the vaults
beneath.45

With all due respect to traditions, we think a much more
reasonable explanation can be given. One reason why Mitla has
been regarded as such an important place, is because it has been
assumed that there were no other ruins like it, especially in
Mexico. This, according to Mr. Bandelier, is a mistake. He
examined one or two quite similar ruins in the near vicinity, and
at another place he found a group of ruins in every way worthy of
being compared to Mitla, but he was not able to examine them. So
we must either decide there were a number of these “Sepulchral
Palaces,” or else adopt some simpler explanation. But still
stronger is the fact, that at the time of the conquest, Mitla was
an inhabited pueblo. We have the account of a monk who visited it
in 1533. He mentions in particular the ornamentation of the
walls, the huge doorways, and the hall with the pillars. It is
extremely probable that if it was devoted to any such purpose,
some mention would have been made of it. We think Mr. Bandelier
is right when he concludes that these structures are communal
buildings, but little different from others.

As for the other ruins in Oaxaca, we will not stop longer to
examine them. At Guingola, in the southern part of the State, was
found a ruined settlement. The principal ruins were located on
the summit of a fortified hill, which, from a brief description,
must have been much like those we have already described.

We will now turn our attention to the Gulf-coast. The whole coast
region abounds in great numbers of ruins. It is in this section,
however, that tribes of people belonging to a different family
than the Nahua tribes, were living at no very distant time in the
past. So it is not doubted but that many of these ruined
structures, perhaps the majority of them, were the works of their
hand. When Cortez landed on the coast, in the neighborhood of
Vera Cruz, he was received by the Totonacas. These were a Nahua
tribe, but both to the north and south of them were Maya
tribes.46 We will, however, describe the ruins in the present
State of Vera Cruz under one head.

We notice, on the coast, the Gulf of Tampico, into which pours
the river Panuco. From an antiquarian point of view, this is a
most interesting locality. It was here that a feeble remnant of
De Soto’s disastrous expedition found a refuge in 1543. And it
was here that, at a far earlier period, according to the dim,
uncertain light of tradition, the ancestors of some of the
civilized nations of Mexico made their first appearance; of this,
more hereafter. Certain it is that, commencing at this river, we
find ourselves in a land of ruins.

It is to be regretted, however, that our information is not
definite in regard to them. We are told, in general terms, of a
great field of ruins, but in the absence of cuts, can scarcely
give a clear description of them. On the northern bank of the
Panuco, Mr. Norman found at one place the ground “strewn with
hewn blocks of stone and fragments of pottery and obsidian.”47
They were found over an area of several square miles. Many of the
blocks of stone were ornamented with sculpture. They imply the
presence, in former times, of some kind of buildings. We can not
form an opinion as to the number, style, etc. Mr. Norman regards
them as the ruins of a great city, the site of which is now
covered with a heavy forest.

Amongst these ruins are about twenty mounds, both circular and
square, from six to twenty-five feet in height. Some authorities
think that the Mound Builders went by water from near the mouth
of the Mississippi to this region. To such as place any real
reliance on this theory, these mounds are full of interest. But
some details of construction would seem to indicate a different
people as their builders than those who reared mounds in the Gulf
States of the Mississippi Valley. The main body of the mound is
earth, but they are faced with hewn blocks of sandstone, eighteen
inches square and six inches thick. Although one of the mounds is
quite large, covering two acres, yet in but one instance was a
terraced arrangement noticed. As a general thing, the facing of
stone had fallen to the ground, and some of the smaller mounds
had caved in; showing, perhaps, that they were used as burial
mounds. In other cases the mounds had entirely disappeared,
leaving the stone facing on the surface. This may account for
some of the stones scattered over the surface. A few miles away
there is another group of circular mounds.

Across the river in Vera Cruz, from very slight mention, we
gather that, substantially, the same kind of ruins occur. At
Chacuaco the ruins are said to cover three square leagues—but we
have no further account of them than that. Small relics of
aboriginal art are said to be common, and mention is made of
mounds. The antiquities of Vera Cruz are a topic about which it
is very difficult to form correct ideas. It will be noticed that
it presents a long stretch of country to the Gulf. The land near
the coast is low, and very unhealthy. About thirty miles from the
coast we strike the slope of the mountains bounding the great
interior plateau. This section is fertile and healthy, and was,
evidently, thickly settled in early times. We must remember that
it is always in a mountainous section of country that a people
make their last stand against an invading foe. It was in these
mountain chains where the Maya tribes made their last stand
against the invading Nahua tribes, and even this line was pierced
through by the Tonacas.

It is not strange, then, to find abundant evidence of former
occupation in all this section of country. One thing in its favor
was the number of easily defended positions. The country is cut
up by deep ravines. The early inhabitants used all the land that
was at all available for agricultural purposes. On steep slopes
they ran terraces to prevent the soil from washing. In the
smaller ravines they located great numbers of water-tanks, from
which, in the dry season, they procured water to irrigate their
land. Of this section, we are told, “there is hardly a foot of
ground in the whole State of Vera Cruz in which, by excavation,
either a broken obsidian knife, or a broken piece of pottery, is
not found. The whole country is intersected with parallel lines
of stones, which were intended, during the heavy showers of the
rainy season, to keep the earth from washing away. The number of
these lines of stones shows clearly that even the poorest land,
which nobody in our day would cultivate, was put under
requisition by them.”48

Papantla.

They no less conclusively show that a considerable body of people
had here been pressed by foreign invasion into a small,
contracted space. It is useless to attempt a more particular
description of these ruins. In the absence of cuts, the
description would only prove tiresome. Pyramids, both with and
without buildings on their summits, are comparatively frequent.
As they would be noticed where other ruins would be overlooked,
we have some cuts of the more remarkable ones. The preceding cut
is the pyramid at Papantla.

The base is ninety feet square, and the pyramid has seven
stories, as seen in the engraving. Only the last one contains
apartments; with this exception, the pyramid is solid. Stairways
in front lead up to the top. Mr. Mayer says “there is no doubt,
from the mass of ruins spread over the plain, that the city was
more than a mile and a half in circuit.” But we have no further
description of them. Other localities with pyramids and ruins are
known. At Tusapan occurs this ruin, which may be taken as a type
of all the pyramids in this region. This was the only building
remaining standing at Tusapan; but, from the ruins lying about,
this is not supposed to have been the grandest structure there.

Tusapan.

This will complete what we have to say of the ruins in territory
occupied by the Nahua tribes. Other remains of their handiwork we
will examine when we treat of their customs and manners. We will
now turn our attention to the ruins in the territory of the
Mayas. As the culture of these two people is so similar, we will
devote but one chapter to the two. Comparison is the great means
we have of fixing in the mind points we wish to keep. We have to
admit that the treatment of the Nahua ruins is not very
satisfactory; but it is difficult to obtain accurate information
in regard to them. We think what resemblance can be traced, is
more in the direction of the Pueblo tribes than of the Mound
Builders. The first ruin found in Mexico, Casa Grandes, in
Chihuahua, is evidently but another station of Pueblo tribes.

The fortified hill at Quemada is apparently but a further
development of the clustering houses with the little inclosures
noticed on the Gila. Mounds are, indeed, mentioned in a number of
localities, but they seem to be more nearly related to the
terraced foundation of buildings observed in Arizona than to the
mounds of the Mississippi Valley. Surely as striking a ruin as
any is at Mitla, but Mr. Bandelier does not hesitate to compare
it with some in the Pueblo country. Now, it is very unsafe and
very unsatisfactory to trace resemblances of this kind, and we do
not assign any especial value to them. But it only shows that, so
far as this method is of use, it points to a closer connection
with the Pueblo tribes than with the Mound Builders.

REFERENCES

Gregory’s “History of Mexico,” p. 19.

Bancroft’s “Native Races,” Vol. II, p. 92.

The _Tierra Caliente._

Ober’s “Mexican Resources,” p. 2.

“Mexico As It Was,” p. 221.

“Six Months in Mexico,” p. 386.

Mayer: “Mexico As It Was,” p. 234.

Thompson’s “Mexico,” p. 144.

Bancroft: “Native Races,” Vol. IV, p. 526.

“Rambles in Mexico,” p. 140.

“Gratacap, in _American Antiquarian,_ October, 1883, p. 310.

“Native Races,” Vol. II, pp. 168-173.

As to this hill, Mr. Bandelier remarks: “As a salient and
striking object, and on account of the freshwater springs,
Chapultepec was worshiped, but I find no trace among older
authors of any settlement there—still less of a Summer palace—
at the time of the conquest.” “Report of an Archæological Tour
in Mexico,” p. 73.

Charney in _North American Review,_ September, 1880, p. 190.

“Recollections of Mexico,” p. 140.

We have several times remarked that it is not safe to judge
prehistoric population by the amount of ruins. “Indians never
rebuild on ruins or repair them.”

Bancroft: “Native Races,” Vol. IV., p. 537.

Bancroft: “Native Races,” Vol. IV, p. 547.

The ceilings in the pueblos of Arizona were often made of poles
covered with cement. See Chapter XI.

Bancroft’s “Native Races,” Vol. IV, p. 550.

Bandelier: “Fifth Annual Report Arch. Inst.,” p. 86.

Bancroft’s “Native Faces,” Vol. IV, p. 610.

Bancroft’s “Native Races,” Vol. IV, p. 613.

“Fifth Annual Report,” p. 86.

Bancroft’s “Native Races,” Vol. IV, p. 581. These dimensions
are different in different accounts, as may be seen by
consulting Mr. Bancroft’s work.

_Lyons’s Journal._ From Mayer’s “Mexico As It Was,” p. 243.

There is something of a similarity between these ruins and
those of the coast tribes of Peru.

Another authority states that it is thirty feet square and
thirty feet high. Bancroft: “Native Races,” Vol. IV, p. 587,
note.

As seen in the Drawing. Mr. Lyons states there are seven
stories.

This was Clavigaro. Mayer’s “Mexico As It Was,” p. 245.

Thompson’s “Recollections of Mexico,” p. 29.

“An Archæological Tour in Mexico,” p. 163.

The altitude varies according to the side where the measurement
is taken. The average height is about one hundred and seventy
feet.

To be described hereafter.

See Chapter XI.

Different explorers give different figures.

Taylor’s “Anahuac,” p. 184.

“Mexico As It Was,” p. 180.

Mayer: “Mexico As It Was,” p. 184.

This is in strict keeping with what we have seen to be true of
their pueblo sites. This is the conclusion of Mr. Bandelier,
who discusses this subject in his essay on “Art of War Among
the Mexicans.” Peabody Museum Reports, Vol. II, p. 146, note
186.

Bancroft: “Native Races,” Vol. IV, p. 419.

Bancroft’s “Native Races,” 393, note.

Bancroft’s “Native Races,” Vol. IV, p. 395.

Bandelier: “An Archæological Tour in Mexico,” p. 295.

Mayer: “Mexico As It Was,” pp. 251-2.

Valentine, in “Proceedings Am. Antiq. Soc.,” Oct., 1882.

Bancroft’s “Native Races,” Vol. IV, p. 595.

“Smithsonian Report,” 1873, p. 373.