Chapter XV: The Culture of the Civilized Tribes.1 (2)

A word as to the real power of the Mexicans. Their strength lay
more in their defensive position than any thing else. As we have
just stated, the entire forces of the confederacy were unable to
subject the Tlascaltecans, the Tarasca of Michhuacan were fully
their equal in wealth and power. The most disastrous defeat that
ever befell the forces of the confederacy was on the occasion of
their attack upon this last-named people in 1479. They fled from
the battle-field in consternation, and never cared to renew the
attempt. As to the actual population of the Pueblo of Mexico, the
accounts are very much at variance. Mr. Morgan, after taking
account of their barbarous condition of life—without flocks and
herds, and without field agriculture, but also considering the
amount of tribute received from other tribes—considers that an
estimate of two hundred and fifty thousand inhabitants in the
entire valley would be an excessive number. Of these he would
assign thirty thousand to the Pueblo of Mexico.30

This is but an estimate. In this connection we are informed,
that, when the forces of the confederacy marched against
Michhuacan, as just stated, they counted their forces, and found
them to be twenty-four thousand men. This includes the forces of
the three confederate tribes, and their allies in the valley, and
would indicate a population below Mr. Morgan’s estimate. The
Spanish writers have left statements as to the population of
Mexico which are, evidently, gross exaggerations. The most
moderate estimate is sixty thousand inhabitants; but the majority
of the writers increase this number to three hundred thousand.

The main occupation of the Aztecs, then, was to enforce the
payment of tribute. From the limited expanse of territory at the
disposal of the Mexicans, and the unusually large number of
inhabitants for an aboriginal settlement, as well as the natural
inclination of the Mexicans, they were obliged to draw their main
supplies from tributary tribes. It is human for the strong to
compel the weak to serve them. The inhabitants of North America
were not behind in this respect.31 This is especially true of the
civilized tribes of Mexico and Central America. The confederacy
of the three most powerful tribes of Mexico was but a
copartnership for the avowed purpose of compelling tribute from
the surrounding tribes, and they were cruel and merciless in
exacting the same.

Our information in regard to this tribute is derived almost
entirely from a collection of picture writings, known as the
Mendoza collection, which will be described more particularly
when we describe their picture writings. The confederacy was
never at a loss for an excuse to pounce upon a tribe and reduce
them to tribute. Sometimes the tribe marked out for a prey,
knowing their case to be hopeless, submitted at once when the
demand was made; but, whether they yielded with or without a
struggle, the result was the same—that is, a certain amount of
tribute was imposed on them. This tribute consisted of articles
which the tribe either manufactured, or was in situation to
acquire by means of trade or war; but, in addition to this, it
also included the products of their limited agriculture.

The same distribution of land obtained among all the civilized
tribes that we have already sketched among the Mexicans. So, a
portion of the territory of each conquered tribe would be set
aside to be cultivated for the use of the confederacy. But, as
the tribe did not have any land of its own, except for some
official purpose, this implies that each gens would have to set
aside a small part of its territory for such purpose. Such lots
Mr. Bandelier calls tribute lots. These were worked by the gentes
for the benefit of the Mexicans. It is to be noticed right here,
that the Mexicans did not claim to own or control the land; this
right remained in the gentes of the conquered tribe.

The miscellaneous articles demanded were generally such that they
bore some relation to the natural resources of the pueblo. For
instance: pueblos along the coast, in the warm region of country,
had to furnish cotton cloth, many thousand bundles of fine
feathers, sacks of cocoa, tiger-skins, etc. In other, and
favorable locations for such products, the pueblos had to furnish
such articles as sacks of lime, reeds for building purposes,
smaller reeds for the manufacture of darts.

Tribute Sheet

These facts are ascertained in the Mendoza collection. We are
given there the pictorial symbol, or coat-of-arms, of various
pueblos; also, a pictorial representation of the tribute they
wore expected to pay. The plate is a specimen of their tribute
rolls. The pueblos paying it are not, however, shown.
Considerable can be learned from a study of this collection
—such, for instance, as that the Pueblo of Chala had to pay a
tribute of forty little bells, and eighty copper ax blades.32
And, in another place, we learn that the Pueblo of Yzamatitan was
tributary to eight thousand reams of paper. The articles are here
pictured forth; the number is indicated by the flags, feathers,
etc. The tribute of provisions consisted of such articles as
corn, beans, cocoa, red-pepper, honey, and salt—amounting in all,
according to this collection33 to about six hundred thousand
bushels. Still it will not do to place too great a reliance on
picture records. The number of tributary pueblos must have been
constantly changing. The quantity of articles intended for
clothing was certainly very great. A moderate quantity of gold
was also collected from a few pueblos, where this was obtainable.

The collection of this tribute was one of the most important
branches of government among the Mexicans. The vanquished stood
in peril of their lives if they failed to keep their part of the
contract. In the first place, the Mexicans took from each subject
tribe hostages for the punctual payment of tribute. These
hostages were taken to the Pueblo of Mexico, and held there as
slaves; their lives were forfeited if the tribute was refused.34
But special officers were also assigned to the subject tribes,
whose duty it was to see that the tribute was properly gathered
and transmitted to Mexico. These stewards or tribute gatherers,
are the officers that the early writers mistook for governors.
Their sole business, however, had to do with the collection of
the tribute, and they did not interfere at all in the internal
affairs of the tribe.

Where the forces of the confederacy had conquered a tribe, but
one steward was required to tend to the tribute, but each of the
confederate tribes sent their representative to such pueblos as
had become their own prey, and as sometimes occurred, one pueblo
paid tribute to each of the confederate tribes, it had to submit
to the presence among them of three separate stewards.

We can easily enough see that it required men of ability to fill
this position. They were to hold their residence in the midst of
a tribe who were conquered, but held in subjection only by fear.
To these people they were the constant reminder of defeat and
disgrace. They were expected to watch them closely and report to
the home tribe suspicious movements or utterances that might come
to their notice. We need not wonder that these stewards were the
tokens of chiefs. It was a part of their duty to superintend the
removal of the tribute from the place where gathered to the
Pueblo of Mexico. The tribe paying tribute were expected to
deliver it at Mexico, but under the supervision of the steward.
Arrived at Mexico the tribute was received, not by the so-called
king, the Chief-of-men, but by the Snake-woman, or an officer to
whom this personage delegated his authority. This officer was the
chief steward, and made the final division of the tribute. We are
not informed as to details of this division. A large part of it
was reserved for the use of the tribal government. It was upon
this store that the Chief-of-men could draw when supplies were
needed for tribal hospitality or for any special purpose. The
stores required for the temple, its priests and keepers were
gathered from this source. The larger division must have gone
direct to the stewards of the gentes, who would set some aside
for their official uses, some for religion or medicine, but the
larger part would be divided among the members of the gentes.

In our review of the social system of the Mexicans we have
repeatedly seen how the organization of gentes influenced and
even controled all the departments of their social and political
system. One of the cardinal principles, we must remember, is that
all the members of a gens stand on an equal footing. In keeping
with this we have seen that all were trained as warriors; yet the
great principle of the division of labor was at work. Some filled
in their leisure during times of peace by acting as traders;
others became proficient in some branch of work, such as feather
work, or making gold and silver ornaments. Yet under a gentile
system of society, persons practising such callings could never
become very rich or proficient, simply because, being members of
different gentes, there could not be that cooperation and united
efforts among workmen in these various trades and callings that
is necessary to advance them to the highest proficiency. It
required the breaking up of the gentes and substituting for that
group a smaller one, our modern family, as the unit of social
organization, before great progress could be made.

From what we have just said it follows that it is not at all
likely that there was any great extremes in the condition of the
people. No very wealthy or extremely poor classes. This brings us
to consider the condition of trade and commerce among them. They
had properly no such a thing as money, so their commerce must
have consisted of barter or trade and exchange. Some authorities
assert quite positively that they had money, and mention as
articles used for such purposes grains of cacao, “T” shaped
pieces of tin or copper, and quills of gold dust.35 But Mr.
Bandelier has shown that the word barter properly designates the
transactions where such articles passed. But this absence of
money shows us at once that the merchants of Mexico were simply
traders who made their living by gathering articles from a
distance to exchange for home commodities.

We are given some very entertaining accounts of the wealth and
magnificence of the “merchant princes of Mexico.”36 It needs but
a moment’s consideration of the state of society to show how
little foundation there is for such accounts. Mr. Bancroft also
tells us that “throughout the Nahua dominions commerce was in the
hands of a distinct class, educated for their calling, and
everywhere honored by the people and by kings. In many regions
the highest nobles thought it not disgraceful to engage in
commercial pursuits.”

Though we do not believe there is any foundation for this
statement, yet trading is an important proceeding among sedentary
tribes. “The native is carried over vast distances, from which he
returns with a store of knowledge, which is made a part of his
mythology and rites, while his personal adventures become a part
of the folk lore.”37 It was their principal way of learning of
the outside world. It was held in equally high esteem among the
Mexicans. Such an expedition was not in reality a private, but a
tribal undertaking. Its members not only carried into distant
countries articles of barter, but they also had to observe the
customs, manners, and resources of the people whom they visited.
Clothed with diplomatic attributes, they were often less traders
than spies. Thus they cautiously felt their way from tribe to
tribe, from Indian fair to Indian fair, exchanging their stuff
for articles not produced at home, all the while carefully noting
what might be important to their own tribe. It was a highly
dangerous mission; frequently they never returned, being waylaid
or treacherously butchered even while enjoying the hospitality of
a pueblo in which they had been bartering.

We may be sure the setting out of such an expedition would be
celebrated in a formal manner.38 The safe return was also an
important and joyful event. The reception was almost equal to
that afforded to a victorious war-party. After going to the
temple to adore the idol, they were taken before the council to
acquaint them with whatever they had learned of importance on
their trip. In addition to this, their own gens would give them
appropriate receptions. From the nature of things but little
profit remained to the trader. They had no beasts of burden, and
they must bring back their goods by means of carriers; and the
number of such men were limited. Then their customs demanded that
the most highly prized articles should be offered up for
religious purposes; besides, the tribe and the gens each came in
for a share. But the honors given were almost as great as those
won in war.

The Mexicans had regular markets. This, as we have already
stated, was on territory that belonged to the tribe; not to any
one gens alone. Hence the tribal officers were the ones to
maintain order. The chiefs of the four phratries were charged
with this duty. The market was open every day, but every fifth
was a larger market.39 They do not seem to have had weights, but
counted or measured their articles. In these markets, or fairs,
which would be attended by traders from other tribes, who, on
such occasions, were the guests of the Mexicans, and lodged in
the official house, would be found the various articles of native
manufacture: cloth, ornaments, elaborate featherwork, pottery,
copper implements and ornaments, and a great variety of articles
not necessary to enumerate.

We must now briefly consider their arts and manufactures. Stone
was the material principally used for their weapons and
implements. They were essentially in their Stone Age. Their
knives, razors, lancets, spear and arrowheads were simply flakes
of obsidian. These implements could be produced very cheaply, but
the edge was quickly spoiled. Axes of different varieties of
flint were made. They also used flint to carve the sculptured
stones which we have described in the preceding chapter. They
also had some way of working these big blocks of stone used in
building. But they were not unacquainted with metals—the
ornamental working of gold and silver had been carried to quite a
high pitch. Were we to believe all the accounts given us of their
skill in that direction, we would have to acknowledge they were
the most expert jewelers known. How they cast or moulded their
gold ornaments is unknown. They were also acquainted with other
metals, such as copper, tin, and lead. But we can not learn for
what purpose they used lead or tin, or where they obtained it.40

Cortez, in one of his letters, speaks of the use of small pieces
of tin as money. But we have already seen that the natives had
not risen to the conception of money. They certainly had copper
tools, and bronze ones. It seems, however, that their bronze was
a natural production and not an artificial one—that is to say,
the ores of copper found in Mexico contain more or less gold,
silver, and tin. So, if melted, just as nature left them, the
result would be the production of bronze.41 They were then
ignorant of the knowledge of how to make bronze artificially.
This shows us that they had not attained to a true Bronze Age;
and yet the discovery could not have been long delayed. Sooner or
later they would have found out that tin and copper melted
together would produce the light copper that experience had
taught them was the most valuable.

Yucatan Axes

The most important tool they made of copper was the ax. The ax,
in both Mexico and Yucatan, was made as represented in this
illustration. From their shape and mode of hafting them, we see
at once they are simply models of the stone ax; and this recalls
what we learned of the Bronze Age in Europe. At first they
contented themselves with copying the forms in stone.

Carpenter’s Axe Mexican CarpenterCopper Tool

Nature, everywhere, conducts her children by the same means to
the same ends. This form of ax is a representation of a
carpenter’s hatchet. The next cut is from the Mendoza collection,
and represents a carpenter at work. He holds one of these
hatchets in his hand, and is shaping a stick of timber. The other
cut represents a form of copper tool found in Oaxaca, where they
were once used in abundance. The supposition is that this
implement was used for agricultural purposes—probably as a hoe.
The pieces of T-shaped copper said to have been used as money,
are diminutive forms of this same tool. The statement is
sometimes made that they had a way of hardening copper. “This,”
says Mr. Valentine, “is a hypothesis, often noted and spoken of,
but which ranges under the efforts made for explaining what we
have no positive means to verify or to ascertain.” The presence
of metals necessarily implies some skill in mining; but their
ability to mine was certainly very limited. Gold and silver were
collected by washing the sands. We do not know how copper was
mined; the probabilities are that this was done in a very
superficial way. Whenever, by chance, they discovered a vein of
copper, they probably worked it to an easy depth, and then
abandoned it. M. Charney speaks of one such locality, discovered
in 1873. In this case they had made an opening eleven feet long,
five feet wide, and three feet deep. To judge from appearances,
they first heated the rock, and then perhaps sprinkled it with
water, and thus caused it to split up.42 This is about all we can
discover of their Metallic Age. It falls very far short of the
knowledge of metallurgy enjoyed by the Europeans of the Bronze
Age; and, with the exception of working gold and silver, it was
not greatly in advance of the powers of the North American
aborigines.43 Certainly no trace of mining has been discovered at
all on the scale of the ancient mines in Michigan.

A few words as to some of their other arts, and we will pass on
to other topics. In manufacturing native pottery, they are spoken
of as having great skill. The sedentary Indians everywhere were
well up in that sort of work.44 They knew how to manufacture
cotton cloth, as well as cloth from other articles. We have
stated that paper furnished an important article of tribute. They
made several kinds of paper. One author states that they made
paper from the membrane of trees—from the substance that grows
beneath the upper bark.45 But they also used for this purpose a
plant, called the maguey plant. This was a very valuable plant to
the aborigines, since we are told that the natives managed to
extract nearly as great a variety of useful articles from it as
does an inhabitant of the East Indies from his cocoa palm.
Amongst other articles, they made paper. For this paper, we are
told, “the leaves were soaked, putrefied, and the fibers washed,
smoothed, and extended for the manufacture of thin as well as
thick paper.”46

They used feathers for plumes, fans, and trimmings for clothing.
The articles the Spaniards are most enthusiastic in praising is
that variety of work known as feather mosaic. They took very
great pains with this sort of work. The workman first took a
piece of cloth, stretched it, and painted on it, in brilliant
colors, the object he wished to reproduce. Then, with his bunch
of feathers before him, he carefully took feather after feather,
arranging them according to size, color, and other details, and
glued each feather to the cloth. The Spanish writers assert that
sometimes a whole day was consumed in properly choosing and
adjusting one delicate feather, the artist patiently
experimenting until the hue and position of the feather, viewed
from different points, and under different lights, became
satisfactory to his eye.47

This disregard of time is a thoroughly Indian trait of character.
Years would be spent in the manufacture of a choice weapon. The
impression is given that these feather-workers formed a craft, or
order, and that they lived by themselves. But this would be such
an innovation on the workings of the gens that there is probably
no foundation for it.

We will now consider the subject of religion. We can never judge
of the real state of culture of a people by their advance in the
arts of government and of living alone. Constituted as men are,
they can not help evolving, in the course of time, religious
conceptions, and the result is that almost all the races and
tribes of men have some system of belief, or, at any rate, some
manner of accounting for the present condition of affairs, and
some theory as to a future state. It is true that these theories
and beliefs are often very foolish and childish, still they are
not on that account devoid of interest. From our present
standpoint, we can clearly see that the religions belief of a
people is a very good index of their culture. At first such
conceptions are necessarily rude, but as the people advanced in
culture, they become clearer.

Fearing that we will be misunderstood in the last statement, we
will state to whom it applies. The Christian world hold that God
revealed himself to his chosen people, and that we draw from his
Word what is permitted mortals to know of his government and the
future world. We make no question but that this is true. But long
before there was a Hebrew people there was a Paleolithic race,
who doubtless had some vague, shadowy, ill defined idea of
supernatural power, and sought, in some infantile way, to appease
the same. Afterwards, but long before the glories of Solomon, a
Neolithic people were living in Palestine, and the same culture
was wide-spread over the world. To this day a large part of the
world’s inhabitants have never so much as heard of the Christian
religion. It is to such people that we especially refer.

The religious beliefs of the Indians have not been fully studied
as yet; but, until that is done, it is scarcely possible to
understand and fully weigh what is said as to the religious
beliefs of the Mexicans. What we can discern of the religion of
the Nahua and Maya tribes shows us that it is not at all probable
they had reached a stage of development in which they had any
idea of One Supreme, Over-ruling Power. But our scholars differ
on that point, many contending that the Mexicans distinctly
affirmed the existence of such a God.48 To form such conceptions
implies a power of reasoning on abstract topics that is vain to
expect of a people in their state of development. We think,
therefore, that the idea that they had such a belief, arises from
a misconception. Let us see if we can discover how that was.

Nearly all of the North American tribes had some word to express
supernatural power. The Iroquois used for this purpose the words
“oki” and “otkon.”49 The first meaning of these words is “above.”
As used by these Indians, however, they expressed the working of
any unseen, mysterious, and, therefore, to them, supernatural
power. There was, however, no idea of personality or of unity
about it. Other Indian tribes had words to express the same
meaning. The English and French explorers translated these words
into their languages in various ways. The most common is the
rather absurd one of “medicine,” which has passed into common
use. Thus, to mention one in very frequent use, we have the
expression “Medicine-men”—meaning their priests and conjurers.
The same custom prevailed among the higher class of sedentary
Indians of Mexico and Central America. The Aztecs used the word
“teotl” to express the name meaning; the Mayas, the word “ku;”
the Peruvians, “huaca.” But the word used, in each case, meant
not so much a personal supreme-being as it did an ill-defined
sense of supernatural, mysterious power. This point not being
clearly understood, it was quite natural that the early writers
understood by these various expressions their name of the First
Cause.

In the present state of our knowledge, it is certainly very hard
to give an intelligent statement of the religious conceptions of
the Maya and Nahua tribes. Among the Nahuas, their conception of
creative power was that of a pair—a man and wife. These were not
the active agents, however—they engendered four sons, who were
the creators. This seems to be a widely extended form of
tradition. Two authors, writing about fifty years after the
conquest, speak of the four principal deities and statues. They
had a great many idols besides—but four were the principal ones.

It would be very satisfactory could we frame some theory to
account for this state of things. If we could only be sure that
each god was symbolic of some of the elements—or, if we could
only say that this was but another instance of the use of the
number “four”—and thus connect them with the cardinal points, it
would be very satisfactory to many. The amount of study that has
been bestowed on this question is very great, and it is very far
from being settled. Each of these four was the principal, or
guardian, deity of a particular tribe.50 All of these appear in
native traditions as historical personages, as well as deities.
It is for this reason that Mr. Bandelier concludes that the “four
principal gods were deified men, whose lives and actions became
mixed up with the vague ideas of natural forces and phenomena.”51

As prominent a figure as any in Central American Mythology is
Quetzalcohuatl; and we can form a good idea of the force of the
preceding remarks by considering this case. The name is a
compound of two words, “quetzal-cohuatl”—and is, says Mr.
Bandelier, a fair specimen of an Indian personal name. He tells
us that the meaning is “bright,” or “shining snake.” Others have
translated it, “feathered serpent.” We have referred to the
attempt to show that the tablet of the cross, at Palenque, had
reference to him. Those who think he was the nature-god of the
Nahuas find a great deal of significance in the name.52 Mr.
Bandelier, after carefully considering all reference to him by
the early writers, shows that it is quite as likely that
Quetzalcohuatl “was a man of note, whose memory was afterward
connected with dim cosmological notions.” It is plain that our
idea of the culture of the Mexicans will vary according as we
consider the base of this myth to be a man, or the forces in
nature producing the fertilizing summer rain.53

The worship of Quetzalcohuatl was very widely extended; but it
was mostly confined to the Nahua tribes. But there are somewhat
similar traditions among the Maya tribes; and this is one of
those few points which, like the similarity of their calendar
systems, seems to point to a close connection in early times. The
Quiches have a very similar myth. Briefly, it is to the effect
that four principal gods created the world. One of these was
named Gucumatz—meaning, also, shining, or brilliant snake. Some
think that this is the same personage as Quetzalcohuatl, and from
this fact show how true it is that the operations of the forces
of nature everywhere affect the minds of men in a similar
manner.54 Others will not, however, go as far as this, and will
only say there is a similarity between the two characters. The
tribes in Yucatan also have a tradition of Cuculcan, whose name
means the same as the two already mentioned. The authority who
refers to him speaks of him only as a man. The Quiche legend,
already referred to, speaks of Gucumatz only as a god. The Nahua
traditions of Quetzalcohuatl, as we have seen, are confused
accounts of a man and a god.

The traditions having reference to the earthly career of
Quetzalcohuatl represent him as having considerable to do with
Tulla and Cholula. At Tulla he appears in the light of a great
medicine-man, or priest; at Cholula, as a sachem. Still other
traditions represent him as a great and successful warrior. None
of these characters are incompatible with the others, from an
Indian point of view. These traditions are so hopelessly
confused, that it is doubtful if any thing of historical value
can be gained from them. As a deity, he was worshiped as god of
the air or wind. Why he should be so considered is answered in
various ways. If, reasoning from his name, we choose to believe
he is a nature-god—as such standing for the thunder-storm, clouds
of summer—then, as the winds “sweep the path for the
rain-clouds,” he would be considered their god. Also, following
out this line of thought, we can see how, as the god which brings
the fertilizing summer rain, he would be considered the god of
wealth, and the patron deity of traders.

We must not lose sight of the fact that all these traditions are
most woefully mixed; that, since the conquest, many ideas from
other than native sources have been engrafted on them; and,
furthermore, that other explanations that are worth considering
can be presented. The horticultural tribe located at Cholula had
Quetzalcohuatl for their tutelar deity. Their crops depend upon
the timely descent of the rain. What more natural than that they
should regard such rains as sent by him? This pueblo was also
famous for its fairs. “By its geographical position, its natural
products, and the industry of its people,” it became a great
trading market. Near it was raised cochineal dye, in large
quantities. This was eagerly sought after by traders from a
distance. Cholula was also famous for its pottery. The
Tlaxcaltecos told Cortez that the inhabitants of Cholula were a
tribe of traders; what more natural, then, than that their
tutelar deity should become, in the eyes of foreign tribes, the
god of traders.55

Quetzalcohuatl was but one of the four principal gods. The
tutelar deity of the Mexicans was Huitzilopochtli. His altars
were almost daily wet with the blood of sacrificed victims. No
important war was undertaken, except with many ceremonies he was
duly honored. If time were so short that proper care could not be
bestowed on the ceremonies, then there was a kind of deputy god
that could be served in a hurried manner that would suffice.56
After a successful battle, the captives were conducted at once to
his temple, and made to prostrate themselves before his image. In
times of great public danger, the great drum in his temple was
beaten. The Spaniards, by dire experience, knew well the meaning
of that awful sound.

Huitzilopochtli.

The plate represents what was probably the idol of
Huitzilopochtli. “It was brought to light in grading the Plaza
Mayor in the City of Mexico in August, 1790. It was near the
place where the great Teocalli stood, and where the principal
monuments of Mexico were. They were thrown down at the time of
the conquest and buried from sight. It is an immense block of
bluish-gray porphyry, about ten feet high and six feet wide and
thick, sculptured on front, rear, top and bottom, into a most
complicated and horrible combination of animal, human, and ideal
forms.”57 This idol is generally stated to be that of the goddess
of death. But Mr. Bandelier, after carefully reviewing all the
authorities, concludes that it represents the well-known war-god
of the Mexican tribe.58

To properly conduct the services in honor of these various gods,
required established rites and a priesthood. What we call
“Medicine men” wizards, and names of similar import among the
northern tribes, were more correctly priests. There was no tribe
of Indians so poor but what they had these priests. But we would
expect this office to increase more in power and importance among
the southern Indians. Among the Iroquois, we are told each gens
elected certain “keepers of the faith.” These included persons
both male and female. Their principal duty was to see that the
feast days were properly celebrated. From what we know of the
gens we feel confident that they would be perfectly, independent
in religious matters as well as in other respects. Consequently
it is not probable that there was even in Mexico any hereditary
caste of priests.59

However set aside, or chosen, or elected, we have every reason to
believe that the organization of the priesthood was systematic.
The aspirant for the office had to acquaint himself with the
songs and prayers used in public worship, the national
traditions, their principles of astrology, so as to tell the
lucky and unlucky days. When admitted to the priesthood, their
rank was doubtless determined by meritorious actions. Successes
in war would contribute to this result as well as sanctity, a
priest who had captured several prisoners ranking higher than one
who had captured but one, and this last higher than the
unfortunate who had taken none.60 We must not forget that war was
the duty of all among the Mexicans. The priests were not in all
cases exempt; part of their duties may have been to care for the
wounded. It is not likely that the priests of any one god ranked
any higher than the priests of others, or had any authority over
them.

This body of priests of whom we have just treated concerned
themselves a great deal with the social life of the Mexicans, and
their power was doubtless great. Their duties commenced with the
birth of the child, and continued through life. No important
event of any kind was undertaken without duly consulting the
priests to see if the day selected was a lucky one. The Nahuas
were, like all Indians, very superstitious, so there was plenty
of work cut out for the priests. Into their hands was committed
the art of explaining dreams, fortune-telling, astrology, and the
explanation of omens and signs. Such as the flight and songs of
birds, the sudden appearance of wild animals; in short, any
unexpected or unusual event, was deemed of sufficient importance
to require in its explanation priestly learning. In addition
there was the regular routine of feasts.61 We have seen what a
multitude of gods the Nahuas worshiped. Like all Indian people,
they were very fond of feasts and gatherings of that character;
therefore feast days in honor of some one of the numerous deities
were almost constantly in order, and every month or two were
feasts of unusual importance. The most acceptable sacrifice to
these gods, and without which no feast of any importance was
complete, was human life.

This introduces us to the most cruel trait of their character. It
was not alone true of the Mexicans, but of all the Nahua tribes
and of the Mayas, though in a less degree. On every occasion of
the least importance victims were sacrificed. Any unusual event
was celebrated in a similar manner. Before the departure of a
warlike expedition, the favor of Huitzilopochtli was sought by
the sacrifice of human life; on the return of the same, similar
scenes were enacted. On all such occasions the more victims the
better. These victims were mostly captives taken in war, and wars
were often entered into for the express purpose of procuring such
victims. They were even made a subject of tribute. Devout people
sometimes offered themselves or their children for the sacrifice.
The number of victims, of course, varied from year to year, but
it is possible that it counted up into the thousands every year.

What we are able to gather from the religious beliefs of the
civilized nations sustains the conclusions we have already
arrived at in reference to their culture. We can but believe this
had been greatly overrated. It is the religion of barbarians, not
of a cultivated and enlightened people the historians would have
us believe in. It is a religion in keeping with the character of
the people who had confederated together for the purpose of
compelling unwilling tribute from weaker tribes. It is in keeping
with what we would expect of a people still in the Stone Age, who
still practised communism in living, and whose political and
social organization was founded on the gens as a unit.

It will not be out of place to devote some space to a
consideration of their advance in learning; and first of all let
us see about their system of counting or numeration. This
knowledge, as Mr. Gallatin remarks, must necessarily have
preceded any knowledge of astronomy, or any effort to compute
time. They must have known how to count the days of a year before
they knew how many days it contained. We all know how natural it
is for a child to count by means of his fingers. This was
undoubtedly the first method employed by primitive man. Proof of
this is found in the wide extended use of the decimal system.
Among the civilized nations, traces of this early custom are
still preserved in the meaning of the words used to express the
numbers.

To express the numbers up to twenty, small dots or circles were
used—one for each unit. For the number twenty they painted a
little flag, for the number four hundred, a feather; and for
eight thousand, a purse or pouch. The following table represents
the method of enumeration employed by the Mexicans. But it is
necessary to remark they used different terminations for
different objects.62

Mexican System of Numeration.

Substantially the same system of numeration prevailed among all
the Nahua tribes and the Mayas. It will be seen from this table
that the only numbers having simple names are one, two, three,
four, five, ten, fifteen, twenty, four hundred, and eight
thousand. The other names are compounds of these simple names. It
is also easy to understand their method of pictorial
representation. In reference to the flag, the feather, and the
purse, we must remark that, when these were divided into four
parts, only the colored parts were counted. The collective
number, used among them much as we use the word dozen, was always
twenty; but queerly enough their word for twenty varied according
to the object to be counted. The regular word given in the table
was “pohualli.” In counting thin objects that could be arranged
one above the other, the word twenty was “pilli.” Objects that
were round and plump and thus resembling a stone, were counted
with “tetl” for twenty, and other words for different objects.63

The division of time or their calendar system, is one that was
thought to show great advance in astronomical learning, but of
late years it has been shown that this also was overrated. This
question of how to keep a record of time was a difficult one for
primitive man to solve; that is, when he began to think about it
at all. A long while must have elapsed, and considerable advance
in other respects been made before the necessity of such a thing
occurred to them. The increase and decrease of the moon would
form a natural starting point. It is well known that this is
about as far as the knowledge of the Indians extended. The Maya
word for month means also moon, showing this was their earliest
system of reckoning time.64

Table of Days.

The various Nahua and Maya tribes of Mexico and Central America
had reached about the same stage of development. But their
calendar system is so similar that it affords a strong argument
of the original unity of these people.65 All of the civilized
tribes had months of twenty days each, and each of these days had
a separate name, which was the same for every month of the year.
This period of twenty days was properly their unit of time
reckoning. It is true they had smaller divisions,66 but for all
practical purposes, they were ignored. As none of these tribes
possessed the art of writing, they had to represent these days by
means of hieroglyphics. The following table shows the Mexican and
Maya days, the meaning of each, and the pictorial sign by which
they were represented. We must notice that the Maya hieroglyphics
look more arbitrary, more conventional than the Mexican. This is
interesting, because some of our scholars now believe the Mayas
were the inventors of the calendar. Their hieroglyphics,
therefore, as being the older of the two, should appear more
conventional. In the Mexican hieroglyphics for the days, we can
still trace a resemblance to the natural objects they represent;
in the Maya hieroglyphics, this resemblance has disappeared.

It is not out of place to theorize as to the facts already
mentioned. The first thing that strikes us is that they should
have chosen twenty days for a unit of time. There must have been
some reason lying back of this selection. It would have been more
natural for them to have chosen a number of days (say thirty)
more nearly corresponding to the time from one new moon to
another. Whether we shall ever learn the reason for choosing this
number of days is doubtful; but Mr. Bandelier has given us some
thoughts on this subject, which, though he is careful to state
are not results, but mere suggestions, seem to us to have some
germs of truth, the more so as it is fully in keeping with Indian
customs.

He points out that many of the names for these days mean the same
as the names of the gens in the more northern Indian tribes. Thus
seven of the days have the same meaning as the names of seven of
the nine gens of the Moqui tribe in Arizona. He, therefore,
suggests that the names of these twenty days are the names of the
twenty gens of the aboriginal people from whom have descended the
various civilized tribes under consideration. Indeed, this is
expressly stated to be the method of naming the days adopted by
the Chiapanecs, one of the tribes in question.57

As soon as the people commenced to take any observation at all,
they would perceive that it took just about eighteen of these
periods of twenty days to make a year. So the next step appears
to have been the division of the year into eighteen months. These
months received each a name, and were of course designated by a
hieroglyphic. The names of the Mexican months seem to have been
determined by some of the feasts happening therein. There is
great diversity among the early writers both as to the names of
these months, and the order in which they occur, as well as by
the hieroglyphics by which they are represented.68 It does not
seem worth while to give their names and meaning. We give a plate
showing the name, order in which they occur, and hieroglyphic
symbol of the Maya months. In point of fact, the months were very
little used, as we shall soon see it was not necessary to name
the month to designate the day; but of that hereafter.

Maya Months.

But it would not take these people very long to discover that
they had not hit on the length of a year. Eighteen months, of
twenty days each, make only three hundred and sixty days; so the
next step would be to add on five days to their former year. As
these days do not make a month, they were called the nameless
days. They were considered as being unlucky—no important
undertaking could be commenced on one of them. The child born
therein was to be pitied. But we will see that the expression,
“nameless days” was hardly the case among the Mayas, though it
was among the Mexicans.

Perhaps this will be as good a place as any to inquire whether
they had exact knowledge of the length of the year. As every one
knows, the length of the year is three hundred and sixty-five and
one quarter days, or very nearly; and for this reason we add an
extra day to every fourth year. We would not expect to find this
knowledge among tribes no farther advanced than we have found
these to be. If, as our scholars suspect, the Maya be the one
from which the others were derived, they would be apt to possess
this knowledge, if known. Perez, however, could find no trace of
it among them.69 Many authors have asserted that the Mexicans
knew all about it. Some say they added a day every four years;
others, that they waited fifty-two years, and then added thirteen
days; and some, even, give them credit for still closer
knowledge, and say they added twelve and one-half days every
fifty-two years.70 Prof. Valentine, who has made their calendar
system a special study, concludes that they knew nothing at all
about the matter.71

The beginning of the year is variously stated. Among the Mexicans
it seems that, while the authors differ very much, all but one
places it on some day between the second day of February and the
tenth of April. As their word for year means “new green,” it is
probable they placed its commencement about the time new grass
appeared. The Mayas are said to have placed the commencement of
the year about the sixteenth of July. As this happens to be just
about the time that the sun is directly overhead in Yucatan, it
has been surmised that the natives took astronomical
observations, and tried to have their year commence at that time.
But it must be manifest that, if they did not possess a knowledge
of the true length of the year, and so make allowance for the
leap-year, in the course of a very few years they would have to
revise this date.

Refer once more to the Maya table of days. Suppose the first day
of the year to commence with the day Kan. As there are twenty
days in a month, we see that the second month would also commence
with Kan. In like manner, Kan would be the first day of every
month of that year. When the eighteen months were past, there
would still remain the five days to complete the year. Now,
although they were said to be nameless days, the Mayas gave them
names. The first day was Kan, the second day Chichan, the third
day Quimij, the fourth day Manik, the fifth day Lamat. The
regular order of days we see. They were now ready to commence a
new year.

The next day in the list is Muluc. This becomes the first day of
the first month of the new year. But, being the first day of the
first month, it was the first day of every month of that year. At
the end of the eighteen months of that year, the five days would
have to be named in their order again, which would carry us down
to Gix, the first day of the first month of the third year. It
would also be the first day of every month of that year.
Similarly we see that Cavac would be the first day of every month
of the fourth year. The fifth year would commence again with Kan.
So we see that four of these twenty days became of more
importance than the others. The years were named after them. The
year in which the month commenced with Kan was also called Kan.
The same way with the other days. So the name of the year was
either Kan, Muluc, Gix, or Cavac. These four days were called
“carriers of the year;” because they not only gave the name to
the year, but because the name of the year was also the name of
the first day of every month of that year.

The foregoing will help us to understand the Mexican method. Let
us refer now to the list of Mexican days. The first day of the
first month was Cipac. For the same reason as above set forth,
this would be the first day of every month of the year. The five
extra days either were not named at all, or at any rate they were
not counted off in the table of days. The consequence was that
Cipac was the first day of every month; for we have just seen
that it was the first day of every month of the first year. At
the end of the eighteen months the five nameless days would come
in; but, as they did not form part of a month, were not named.
The first day of the first month of the next year would be named
as if they had not occurred.72 But, when they came to name the
years, we find they proceeded on exactly the same principle as
the Mayas. Thus four of the twenty days, occurring just five days
apart, were taken to name the years. These days were Tecpatl,
Calli, Tochtli, and Acatl.73

Mr. Bandelier, who made the valuable suggestion in regard to the
origin of the names of the days, has also suggested that,
inasmuch as there are four of the days more prominent than the
others, they may signify four original gentes, from which the
others have come. It seem to us, however, when we notice they are
just five days apart, that the system pursued by the Mayas in
naming their years explains the whole matter.

Before we mention the longer periods of time in use among them we
must refer to another mode of reckoning time, and trace the
influence of this second method on the one already named. The
method already explained seems to have been a perfectly natural
one—the second method is founded on superstition. A large part of
the duties of the priests, we remember, was to determine lucky
and unlucky days, and in soothsaying. For this purpose they made
a peculiar division of time, which we will now try and explain.

For some cause or other, thirteen was a number continually
recurring in their calendar. We can perceive no reason why it
should have been chosen. It has been suggested that it was just
about the time from the appearance of a new moon to its full. Be
that as it may, the number of days thirteen comes very near to
what we would call a week. Among the Mexicans, and probably among
the Mayas, these thirteen days were divided into lucky, unlucky,
and indifferent days, and were supposed to be under the guidance
of different gods. The priests had regularly painted lists of
them, with the deities which governed them. These lists were used
in fortune telling.

We must now inquire as to how they kept track of the years. The
Mayas named their next longer period of time an ahau. There is
some dispute as to what number of years it meant. Most of the
early writers decide that it was twenty years;74 but Perez, whose
work we have already referred to, contends that it was
twenty-four years. And this conclusion seems to be confirmed by a
careful study of some of their old manuscripts.75 Thirteen of
these ahaus embraced their longest period of time, known as an
ahau-katun. It had a length of either two hundred and sixty or
three hundred and twelve years, according as we reckon either
twenty or twenty-four years to an ahau. It may be that the length
of an ahau varied among the different tribes of the Mayas.

The Mexicans also had this week of thirteen days. Twenty of these
weeks, or two hundred and sixty days, formed that part of the
year they called the moon-reckoning; the remainder of the year
was the sun-reckoning. Their longer period of time was also based
on this number. A period of thirteen years they called a
tlapilli; four of these constituted a cycle equal to fifty-two
years. The end of this cycle was anxiously awaited by the
Mexicans. They supposed the world was to come to an end on one of
these occasions. As the time drew near, the furniture was broken,
the household gods were thrown into the water, the houses were
cleaned, and finally, all the fires were extinguished. As the
last day of the cycle drew to a close, the priests formed a
procession, and set out for a mountain about six miles from
Mexico. There an altar was built. At midnight a captive, the
bravest and finest of their prisoners, was laid on it. A piece of
wood was laid on his breast, and on this fire was built by
twirling a stick. As soon as fire was produced, the prisoner was
killed as a sacrifice. The production of new fire was proof that
the gods had granted them a new period of fifty-two years.