Mounds and Earthworks in North and Central America. —
Migrations of the Toltecs and Aztecs. — The Quichés. —
Aboriginal races. — Palenque. — Hieroglyphs. — Temples. —
Desertion of the Temples and stone buildings in Yucatan. —
Conquest of Yucatan by the Aztecs. — Antiquity of Palenque and
Uxmal. — Aztec custom of imprisoning captives in cages and
sacrificing them to the gods. — Civilisation of the Toltecs. —
Note upon the symbol or Totem of the Serpent.
In the following chapters I propose to bring together the various notes
upon the Indians and their temples and earthworks which were made when
traversing Central America, and to add to them the conclusions which
have been formed subsequently.
There are certain problems which particularly require to be examined.
With respect to the antiquity of the stone buildings and pyramids,
it would be difficult to attempt to do more than endeavour to form
reasonable deductions from the evidence afforded by the state of those
ruins, and the information given about them by the Indians at the time
of the conquest. The conquerors, after they had settled in Yucatan and
Guatemala, were accompanied by Spanish missionaries of great ability.
We possess in the writings of Bishop Las Casas and Bishop Landa works
of the greatest value, for both those prelates when they were engaged
in their duties of converting the natives, were acquainted with the
language of the tribes amongst whom they worked.
In the prosecution of researches into subjects which relate to Central
America, it is desirable as a preliminary step to consider the
comparative civilisation of the Indians, as far as that is brought
into evidence by what has been discovered with respect to mounds and
earthworks, not only in that region, but also throughout the valley of
the Mississippi. A distinction must also be made between earthworks
which are unquestionably of great antiquity, and those that possibly
may have been raised since the date of the arrival of European
settlers. Therefore the geometrically planned inclosures in Ohio should
be excluded from this inquiry. It is otherwise with great ramparts such
as those inclosing Fort Ancient on the steep promontory in the valley
of the Little Miami, which are of special importance on account of the
parallelisms with the similar fortifications made by the Quichés and
Kachiquels in Guatemala.
There are exceptional circumstances connected with the mounds in North
America. It has to be remembered that they were not always burial
places. When De Soto arrived with his fleet in Florida, the chief
cacique of the tribe dwelling near the landing place, was living on the
top of a mound about fifty feet high. This mound was pointed out to me
when I was at Tampa. It appeared to be made for the purpose of placing
huts upon its summit. The platform was sufficiently large to give room
for several dwellings. There are also mounds near the western bank of
the Mississippi, between Natchez and the mouth of the Arkansas. One of
them resembled that at Tampa, and had a wide level space on the summit.
When the earliest Spanish expedition passed through that part of the
country, it was observed that the Indians frequently placed their
houses upon artificial earthworks raised sufficiently high to be above
the inundations. At Natchez the tribe, which, from their peculiar
customs, have been called the sun worshippers, raised mounds primarily
for the residence of their chiefs, who differed from other Indians of
that rank, in being invested with special attributes in connection with
ceremonies performed before the rising sun. But there were customs with
respect to them which require to be noticed. It was stated by Father le
Petit, who was for many years a missionary amongst the Natchez, that
when their principal chief died his hut was demolished and a new mound
was raised, upon which was built the wooden cabin of his successor in
that dignity. It can be understood that where a large tribe having
this custom dwelt for a long time in one place, it might happen that
a series of connected platform mounds, forming an inclosure, would
probably have a rectangular shape.
Higher up the Mississippi, above the junction of the Ohio, are the
Cahokia earthworks. There were also several mounds placed on high
ground near the east bank of the river, not far from the borders of
Illinois and Wisconsin. One of these, which was about forty feet
high, was opened ten years before I went to St. Paul’s. A vault was
discovered beneath the level of the ground, which contained several
skeletons sitting in a circle. The earth of which it was composed was
a kind of loam, not occurring in the vicinity, and it was supposed
that it must have been brought from a considerable distance by Indians
who wished to show their respect for the burial place of their chiefs,
by bringing tributes of earth taken from the ground near their
encampments. The high mounds placed around the edge of the promontory,
now called Dayton’s Bluff, and which are the most northern group in the
valley of the Mississippi, have been described in a preceding chapter.
When I was in Chiapas, the Presbitero Macal told me that he was present
when two mounds were examined in 1860, near San Cristobal. They were
each ten feet high and covered vaults made of large flat slabs of
stone. Within these tombs were two skulls, but nothing else was found.
There were no weapons or fragments of pottery. In the vault under the
mound in Illinois there were several large pieces of pottery, and on
the surface, immediately above the tomb, were ashes and other evidences
of fire.
But before proceeding farther with this subject, it is necessary to
bring under consideration the progress of archæological knowledge in
North America, since the date of my visit to the ancient mounds and
earthworks in Ohio. Great advances have been made in the classification
of the discoveries that have taken place in the burial mounds that
exist throughout the United States. Deductions can consequently be
established with regard to the civilisation of the Indians, and it has
become possible to establish, upon a scientific basis, their position
as a race. A long series of investigations have been completed, and a
summary of the results published, under the auspices of the Smithsonian
Institution, by Professor Cyrus Thomas.[97]
“It seems desirable at the present time,” he observes, “to make a
statement explaining the plans and describing the work of the mound
exploring division of the Bureau of Ethnology.”... “The questions
relating to prehistoric America are to be determined not alone by
the study of its ancient monuments, but by the study also of the
languages, customs, art, beliefs, and folk-lore of the aborigines.
Only by such a comprehensive study can the exact relations of the
ancient archæological remains to the historic Indian tribes be made
apparent. Major J. W. Powell, the Director of the Bureau, taking this
comprehensive and scientific view of the subject, saw at the outset the
necessity of deciding as soon as possible the question ‘Were the mound
builders Indians?’”
The work was carried on for several years, and Professor Thomas states
that “Over two thousand mounds have been explored, including almost
every known type as to form.... Nothing trustworthy has been discovered
to justify the theory that the mound builders belonged to a highly
civilised race, or that they were a people who had attained a higher
culture status than the Indians. It is true that works and papers
on American archæology are full of statements to the contrary, which
are generally based on the theory that the mound builders belonged to
a race of much higher culture than the Indians. Yet when the facts
on which this opinion is based are examined with sober, scientific
care, the splendid fabric which has been built upon them by that
great workman, imagination, fades from sight.” Professor Thomas also
observes—“That the links discovered directly connecting the Indians and
mound builders are so numerous and well established that there should
be no longer any hesitancy in accepting the theory that the two are one
and the same people.”
The origin and nature of the American mounds, and the customs of the
Indians who raised them, have also been investigated by Professor
Lucien Carr. He claims “that the mounds and inclosures of Ohio, like
those in New York and the Gulf States, were the work of the red Indians
of historic times, or of their immediate ancestors.”[98]
With reference to this much debated question of the formation of these
inclosures, a re-survey of several of them was made. The measurements
of Professor Thomas and his assistants appear to have established the
fact of the geometrical accuracy of the octagonal, square and circular
works near Newark.[99] In the introduction to the memoir upon the
Ohio mounds, Professor Thomas observes that “The constantly recurring
question ‘Who constructed these works?’ has brought before the public
a number of widely different theories, though the one which has been
most generally accepted is that they originated with a people long
since extinct or driven from the country, who had attained a culture
status much in advance of that reached by the aborigines inhabiting
the country at the time of its discovery by Europeans. The opinions
advanced in this paper, in support of which evidence will be presented,
is that the ancient works of the State are due to Indians of several
different tribes, and that some at least of the typical works, were
built by the ancestors of the modern Cherokees.”[100]
As a consequence of the examination of the Indian mounds throughout
the United States, the majority of the modern American archæologists
consider that the aboriginal inhabitants were never in a higher
state of civilisation than they were when they first became known to
Europeans. It is not however the questions of the burial mounds, and
the importance of what has been found in them which have chiefly to
be considered here. Attention should be principally directed to the
difficult problem respecting the great fortified ramparts of Fort
Ancient.
The traditions of the Delawares,[101] which affirmed that the defensive
earthworks of Ohio were built by the Tallegwi, have generally been
accepted as being well founded. They were stated to have been a
powerful tribe who built fortifications and entrenchments. Finally
they abandoned their lands and went southwards, down the valley of the
Mississippi and never returned. It may be conjectured, after observing
the similar works and methods of selecting their defensive positions
in Guatemala, that the Tallegwi were the same race who were afterwards
known as Toltecs. The probability of this assumption being reasonable,
becomes more evident when the group of platform and circular mounds on
the plains near Mixco are observed to be similar to those raised on the
plains of Cahokia near the banks of the Mississippi.
The question of the condition of intelligence amongst the North
American Indians, has a direct bearing upon the problem of the origin
of the civilisation of the Toltecs and Aztecs, and it is satisfactory
to know that there are sound reasons for supposing that the Indians
who constructed the fortified camps in Ohio were not more advanced in
knowledge than the tribes who were dwelling in that region at the time
of the discovery of America by Columbus.
Several years after the conquest of Mexico, the Spaniards sent
expeditions into the southern parts of Central America, and conquered
the Quichés and the surrounding country, in which were situated
the ramparts defending Utatlan and Patinamit. It was subsequently
considered desirable that investigations should be made into the
ancient systems by which the aboriginal inhabitants had been governed
by their caciques, and orders were given to this effect by the Emperor
Charles the Fifth and by his successor Philip the Second. In the
reports of the officers who conducted these inquiries, it was stated
that an extraordinarily rigid line of caste was maintained amongst the
Quichés. There was an absolute distinction between the ruling families
descended from the caciques, and the great mass of the races who were
under their control. It was also evident, judging from the language of
several appeals made by Indian chiefs to obtain justice and to have
their rank and authority acknowledged, that they considered the working
classes of Indians as their absolute slaves.
“There was no instance,” states the historian Juarros, “of any person
being appointed to a public office, high or low, who was not selected
from the nobility; for which reason, great anxiety was felt by them
to keep the purity of their lineage unsullied. To preserve this rank
untainted in blood, it was decreed by the law, that if any cacique
or noble should marry a woman who was not of noble family, he should
be degraded to the caste of mazegual or plebeian, assume the name of
his wife, and be subject to all the duties and services imposed upon
plebeians.” These services generally consisted of works performed
by forced labour. The lands belonging to the ruling families were
cultivated in this manner, and, in fact, the Indians of the native
and working class were entirely at the disposal of their masters. One
of the Spanish bishops, whose diocese was in Mexico, mentions that he
had ascertained that these mazeguales could be sold or killed by their
owners. There were marked differences in the dress of the people. The
mazeguales wore, as a rule, nothing but the loin cloth, or sometimes,
as is the case now with the Lacandones, a long cotton shirt, reaching
nearly to the feet. It was a matter of observation amongst the
conquerors that the inferior classes of Indians were submissive, but
that their rulers were intractable, harsh and warlike.
It is inexpedient to pursue this particular subject to any great
extent, for it is made clear by the reports of the Spanish authorities
that the relations of the governing class of the Quichés to the
other Indians under their rule were those of a race of conquerors
to a race of slaves, and the victors treated those whom they had
conquered in a manner in accordance with the habits of a savage and
barbarous tribe of North American Indians. This much may be admitted
from the consideration of the circumstances of the laws and customs
of the Quichés at the time of the arrival of the Spaniards. But if a
due estimation is also given to the evidence afforded by the strange
and otherwise inexplicable similarities in the methods of choosing
fortified positions and raising ramparts with those in Ohio, it becomes
reasonable to infer that the Quiché chiefs originally migrated from
that part of North America.
It is however necessary to note that, at whatever period their
migration may have taken place, it cannot be granted or inferred that
the Ohio tribes brought with them any knowledge of architecture, or
of any form of civilisation, for had it been otherwise, they would
have left behind them some vestiges of that civilisation or mechanical
skill. It is especially remarkable that throughout the length and
breadth of North America there is not the smallest fragment of any
hewn stone building, or of any carved stone hieroglyphic characters.
Thus the theory of migratory tribes of Indians bringing with them from
the North into Mexico, a comparatively advanced knowledge of arts
and sciences is opposed to all evidence. It is almost certain that
the state of civilisation that at one time existed in the regions of
Chiapas and Yucatan, was introduced into the country at some period
subsequent to the arrival of the invading tribe, unless it can be
established that the aboriginal races already possessed a competent
intelligence, and an architectural capacity. A proposition of this
character cannot be reasonably maintained, for it is known that in
the fifteenth century the Indians in Cuba and Haiti, the Caribs on
the coasts south of Yucatan, and the aborigines in the interior were
savages, existing in a low state of human intelligence. This subject
respecting the Indian migrations and the state of civilisation that was
existing, or had existed, in Central America, can be more definitely
considered after attention has been directed to the question of the
antiquity and purpose of the buildings at Palenque and Uxmal. It is
much to be regretted that Palenque was not known to the Spaniards when
Cortes marched within a few leagues of it in 1524. Possibly, at that
time it had not been long abandoned, and perhaps some of the caciques
dwelling in that part of the valley of the Usamacinta might have been
able to explain the meaning of the hieroglyphs. Unfortunately the
ruins were not discovered until more than two centuries had elapsed,
and nothing could be ascertained from the Indians which gave the
slightest clue to their signification. It has been surmised—and there
are good reasons for thinking that the surmise may be correct—that the
characters relate to the migrations of the tribes. But in consequence
of the incomplete knowledge of these Indian hieroglyphs, it would be
impossible to attempt to form any satisfactory conjectures regarding
their meaning.
There exists, however, graven on the tablet of the cross, two figures
which, if I am correct in my opinion with regard to them, are of the
greatest importance in establishing certain facts with regard to the
builders of Palenque. Upon referring to the illustration of the altar
tablet that was placed within the temple of the cross, it will be
noticed that the two standing figures offering sacrifice to the quetzal
or sacred bird of Quiché, are evidently intended to represent persons
actually living at the time that the altar was designed, for there is
nothing fantastic in the costume that is worn by them. If a careful
examination is made into the details of their dress it will, I think,
be concluded that these men were the chief caciques of the Quichés.
“The nobles,” observes Juarros, “wore a dress of white cotton dyed or
stained with different colours, the use of which was prohibited to the
other ranks. This vestment consisted of a shirt and white breeches,
decorated with fringes; over these was drawn another pair of breeches,
reaching to the knees and ornamented with a species of embroidery;
the legs were bare; the feet protected by sandals, fastened over the
instep and at the heel by thongs of leather; the sleeves of the shirt
were looped above the elbow, with a blue or red band; the hair was
worn long, and tressed behind with a cord of the colour used upon the
sleeves, and terminating in a tassel, which was a distinction peculiar
to the great captains; the waist was girded with a piece of cloth of
various colours, fastened in a knot before; over the shoulders was
thrown a white mantle, ornamented with figures of birds, lions and
other decorations of cord and fringe. The ears and lower lip were
pierced, to receive star-shaped pendants of gold or silver.”
Upon an examination of the figures it will be observed that, although
their dress corresponds with what is described as being worn by the
Quiché caciques, neither of them are wearing sandals. But, on the
altar of the temple placed on an adjacent mound, the same figures are
again offering sacrifices, and the tallest of them is wearing sandals
precisely as described above. It was the custom among the Quichés
to associate with the principal cacique another chief, to whom was
intrusted the control and management of the troops and the conduct of
all hostilities, and it is stated that sometimes this chief was the
eldest son of the cacique. As the second temple appears to have been
dedicated to the god of war, it may be assumed that the shorter figure
was intended to represent a war chief. He is dressed in accordance
with that rank and wears a mantle and a heavy tassel. In this temple
the chief is drawn as standing upon a kneeling captive, but in that
dedicated to Quetzalcoatl he is placed upon a block of stone, upon
which is a hieroglyph. To Quetzalcoatl the offering appears to have
been in conformity with the attributes assigned to him, of religion
and education. Possibly the child, held in the hands of the tallest
cacique, was dedicated to serve in the temple after having been trained
for the priesthood in the monastery.
[Illustration: PART OF THE ALTAR-PIECE IN A TEMPLE AT PALENQUE.]
It is satisfactory to be able to establish the conclusion that the
figures are caciques of the Quichés, for it thereby becomes possible to
advance a few steps towards the solution of a problem which presents
many difficulties with regard to the period of the construction of
Palenque, and state of civilization of the builders. In a manuscript
left in a Franciscan convent by one of the descendants of the Quichés,
an account was given of the migrations of that tribe before they
settled near Utatlan. It was stated that they reached that country
after a long journey from Mexico, and adopted the name of Quiché in
memory of one of their leaders; but before that time the people were
called Toltecs.
Before endeavouring to establish conclusions with regard to Palenque,
attention should be directed to the temples and other stone buildings
in the adjacent regions. With respect to the numerous groups of
ruins in Yucatan, we possess the testimony of the Spanish priests who
dwelt in their parishes in that country at a period when many of the
governing class of Indians were of the same generation as those who
inhabited the land when it was conquered. One of these missionaries
was Father Landa, who was not only zealous in the performance of his
duties, but also studied the language and civilisation of the race
amongst whom he dwelt. He was present in Tihoo soon after the capture
of that Indian settlement, which was afterwards chosen for the site of
the city of Merida.
He states that in that place there were several stone edifices. He made
a plan of the largest of them from which it is evident that they were
of the same character as those at Uxmal. Tihoo was occupied by the
Spanish forces in 1541, and the terraces, upon which were placed the
principal buildings, were given to the Franciscans as a site for their
convent. The friars began their work in 1547. Thus only six years had
elapsed since the Indians had left their town. Landa’s descriptions
of the state and condition of the ancient ruins are therefore of the
greatest assistance in forming conclusions with regard to them.
The principal edifice was placed upon the highest of three terraces,
each of which was surrounded or faced by thick walls, and approached
by steps. There was a large interior quadrangle having ranges of
rooms or cells occupying the four sides. These were similar to those
in the “House of the Nuns” at Uxmal. In the vicinity there were
several pyramids which had small temples on their summits. It was
observed that all these structures appeared to have been disused for a
considerable period. The Franciscans found that the Indian structures
were covered with thick brushwood. This was cleared away. The buildings
were destroyed and the materials supplied the stone required for their
church and convent.[102]
The fact that the desertion of the temples had occurred before the
arrival of the Spaniards is important. It explains many of the
circumstances then existing in Yucatan which otherwise would be
unintelligible. When the conquerors settled in that land they were
surprised to find numerous stone buildings in various parts of the
country, all of which were unoccupied. They were informed that they had
not been abandoned in consequence of their conquest. They found that
it was impracticable to obtain from the natives any explanation of the
nature of the events which had happened and had caused this change.
Thus the problem regarding the purposes of these extensive buildings,
and the architectural skill of the constructors was as obscure to them
at that time as it is now to the present inhabitants.
At Izamal, about thirty-five miles east of Tihoo, there were also
numerous temples, and it was noticed by Landa that there were evidences
of there having been a paved road between the two places. A Franciscan
convent was established at Izamal, and a brief account of its temples
was written in 1663 by Father Lizana, in which he states, with respect
to the ruins in Yucatan, that the deserted edifices appeared to
have been of one style of architecture, and that some of them were
so perfect that it might be said that twenty years had not elapsed
since they were built. These edifices were however, he observes, not
inhabited by the Indians when the Spaniards arrived. The natives lived
scattered in huts amongst the woods, but they used them as temples or
sanctuaries, and occasionally performed religious ceremonies and fasts
there.[103]
The Franciscan missionaries were not able to obtain from the natives
an intelligible explanation of the events that had occurred which had
caused the temples to be abandoned. But they were informed that an
invasion had taken place about two hundred years before their arrival,
and many of the caciques and ruling families had been driven out of the
land. The invaders did not occupy the sacred buildings, and allowed
them to fall into ruin, but they were visited occasionally by those who
still had faith in the ancient gods and wished to offer sacrifices to
them. It was ascertained that the greater part of Yucatan had become
subject to the control of chiefs belonging to the Aztec race, and that
several of them paid tribute to Montezuma.
The question of the antiquity of the temples of Palenque, Uxmal and
other structures of that character must therefore, in a great degree,
be decided by the evidence upon which are based the traditions of the
migrations of the Toltecs who preceded the Aztecs, and were the first
of the hordes who conquered the aboriginal races of Central America.
The historians who have investigated those traditions concur in
considering that the arrival of the Toltecs within Mexican territory
happened in the seventh century. After remaining some time in the
northern part of the country, they migrated southwards to Cholula,
Palenque and Yucatan.[104] If the historic evidence is accepted as
being trustworthy, it follows that all the stone edifices in these
regions must have been erected later than that date. The Aztecs arrived
at the close of the twelfth century. Therefore it may be concluded that
Palenque was built later than the eighth century, and was deserted
before the fourteenth century. Uxmal is evidently more modern than
Palenque, and it may be assumed that it was constructed after the tenth
century, and abandoned not much earlier than a hundred years before
the Spaniards landed upon the shores of the New World.
The Aztec chiefs introduced into Yucatan one of their barbarous
customs which was similar to what was practised by them elsewhere.
It was found by the conquerors, that in Mexico they kept slaves and
prisoners in cages, where these victims were fattened and prepared for
sacrifice.[105] After having been killed and offered as propitiations
to the gods their bodies were eaten. In 1511, it happened that a
Spanish vessel was wrecked upon some shoals fifteen leagues south of
the island of Jamaica. The crew after having been thirteen days in
an open boat, landed upon the north-eastern shores of Yucatan near
Cape Catoche, and were made captives by the cacique of the district.
Valdivia, who was in command, together with four of his men, were at
once sacrificed and eaten, others were put in cages, but several of
these men escaped. When the fleet under the command of Cortes anchored
off Cozumel, in 1519, one of the captives, named Aguilar, went on board
the flagship.
Bernal Diaz, who was with the expedition and saw this man when he
arrived, relates that when Aguilar came before the presence of Cortes
he cowered down according to the manner of Indian slaves. Aguilar
stated that only he and another Spaniard named Gonzalo Guerrero, were
then alive. Most of his companions had been sacrificed to the gods,
but some had died, and two women who were with them had perished from
misery and the severity of the labour of grinding maize. Guerrero had
married an Indian woman and followed the native customs. He had been
tattoed, his ears were pierced and his lips were turned down.[106]
Aguilar had become acquainted with the Maya language, and was
afterwards employed by Cortes as an interpreter. Guerrero remained in
Yucatan with the Indians.
Upon a review of the facts ascertained by the conquerors in the
sixteenth century in Mexico and Guatemala, and by the Franciscan and
Dominican missionaries in Yucatan and Chiapas, together with the
researches made since that time by archæologists and explorers, it
appears to be possible to form certain conclusions. The architectural
and mechanical knowledge, and the advance towards writing characters,
forming calendars and reckoning time by astronomical observations must
have been reached within a period of less than four centuries. It is
therefore probable that the priests of the Toltecs became acquainted
with their arts and sciences not long after they had left North America
and had migrated to the regions around Téotihuacan in the direction
of the shores of the Gulf of Mexico. In what manner and under what
circumstances their knowledge was obtained, is a problem which requires
to be given a careful investigation.
• • • • •
In an Aztec or Toltec manuscript which forms part of the
collection of ancient Mexican codices placed in the library of
the Vatican, there is a representation of a cacique making an
offering to a rattlesnake.
The manner of propitiation resembles the methods of sacrificing
to this Manito which were followed by the Dakotas (see p. 170).
The head dress of the cacique which consists of plumed feathers
is similar to that worn by the chiefs of that race, and is
placed in the same position as the feathers of Rocky Bear
(illustration, chapter viii).
The rattlesnake appears to have been the Totem of the Toltecs
and is the chief emblem at Uxmal and Chichen Itza.
It is thought that a serpent is represented upon the central
stone of the tablet of the cross at Palenque and as the
god to whom the temple is dedicated was named Bird-Serpent
(Quetzal-Coatl), it is probable that the sculptors delineated
the symbol in a manner that was intelligible to the Quichés.
Upon an examination of the illustration of the centre tablet,
which is an exact reproduction from a photograph of the
original stone (see frontispiece), these symbols may perhaps
be traced. I may here venture to express the opinion that the
Toltecs may have been the tribe that once dwelt in that part of
Ohio to the west of the river Scioto, where is still to be seen
the Totem of the serpent.
The illustration of the propitiation to the serpent is taken
from a part of the Mexican manuscript represented in Humboldt’s
“Vues des Cordilléres.”
[Illustration: MEXICAN CACIQUE (?) MAKING AN OFFERING TO A
RATTLESNAKE.
(FROM AN ANCIENT TOLTEC OR AZTEC MANUSCRIPT.)]