The next mask to be considered, on pl. XVII, is the only specimen known

from Central America, and with the pieces found recently in the Mexican

cave are the only major specimens found under archeological conditions.

This mask is 8½ inches high, and the three facial projections extend

4 inches from the face. It is in the Museum of the American Indian,

Heye Foundation. This interesting object was found some years ago in

a cave in the mountainous region of Honduras, in an arroyo on the

headwaters of a small stream flowing into the Rio Chamelecon, about 25

miles from the ruins of the ancient city of Naco. Hundreds of copper

bells of varying sizes and shapes were found at the same time. The mask

has been figured and described by A. H. Blackiston, whose description

follows:

First in interest in the writer’s collection is a large life-sized

mask of white cedar which was covered with mosaics of turquois and

other stones set in a thick gum or pitch with which it was coated.

Three greatly elongated straight projections answer for the nose and

the two lips. Holes were cut for the eyes and two small ones on the

sides for the thongs which bound it to the head. A large cavity in

the forehead was evidently the setting of the crowning stone of the

collection, though of what nature this was we unfortunately are unable

to surmise, as it evidently became loosened and dropped out years

before its discovery. Along the sides of the face are depressions in

the coating of gum for regularly shaped stones about half an inch long

by three-eighths of an inch in width, arranged in parallel rows--none

of which remain at present. The rest of the surface, as noted, was

covered with small turquois mosaics, a number of which are in place

today.[92]

_Skull Masks_

The two final masks to be described are the skull masks in the

Ethnographical Museum in Berlin, and in the British Museum, London. On

pl. XVIII is represented the Berlin example, which has been described

by Uhle and illustrated in colors, three-fourths natural size.[93]

Only the front of the skull has been used, and it was incrusted with

sky-blue to pale slabs of turquois. The mask is 6⅝ inches in height.

Our illustration is a photograph of the lithograph published by Uhle.

The skull mask in the British Museum (pl. XIX) has been illustrated

many times, and is one of the best-known pieces of Mexican mosaic.

It has also been repeatedly described, so that it is not necessary to

present a detailed description at this time. Suffice it to say that

the back of the skull has been cut away, and the front covered with

five broad transverse mosaic bands, alternating from the top downward,

of lignite (not obsidian, as all writers have described it, we are

informed by Joyce) and turquois. The inside is lined with leather, on

which traces of red paint still remain.

_Shields_

Richly decorated shields or chimallis played a prominent part in

certain phases of the life of the ancient Mexicans. Mrs. Nuttall, in

her interesting and instructive study, “On Old Mexican Shields,”[94]

has pointed out that “all authorities agree that the shields were

of two kinds. The first consisted of the military shields used

for protection in warfare by all grades of warriors; the second

comprised the shields carried, for display only, in religious dances

and festivals.” In this study Mrs. Nuttall has made the following

classification of shields, based on an extended examination of the

chronicles of early writers:

1. Plain, unadorned war-shields (_yaochimalli_) of several kinds, used

by the common soldiers.

2. Gala shields (_totopchimalli_), indicating the military rank and

achievement of chiefs. These seem to have been indiscriminately used

in warfare or feasts and dances. Their general structure seems to have

been alike in either case, though it is obvious that they may have

been more or less light and strong. Shields of this category sometimes

reproduced one or more features of the military costume, body-painting

and adornments pertaining to each grade. The shield in Museo Nacional

is an example of this kind. Others exhibited the emblematic device of

a militant god, Huitzilopochtli, Xipe, Yiacatecuhtli, etc., marking an

order of chivalry--and to this division the Stuttgart specimens belong.

3. Shields, presumably of the supreme war-chief, exhibiting in

picture-writing the name of his people or his personal appellation.

Nothing certain is known about this group, but its existence seems

vouched for by a series of indications.

4. Shields pictured in the codices with deities only exhibiting

their emblematic devices or reproducing features of their symbolic

attire. Such shields seem to have been carried, in religious dances

and festivals, by the living images of the deities in whose honor they

were held.

5. Shields of most precious materials, with strange and elaborate

designs, described in the Inventories. As they are not mentioned

elsewhere, it is not possible to state anything definite about them,

but it is obvious that they were intended for the use of individuals

of supreme rank. The beautiful shield at Castle Ambras belongs to

this group. It is, consequently, the sole forthcoming specimen with a

valid, though shadowy, right to the title of “Montezuma’s shield.”

[Illustration: PL. XXVI

SHIELD OF WOOD (FRAGMENT) WITH MOSAIC DECORATION

MUSEUM OF THE AMERICAN INDIAN HEYE FOUNDATION, NEW YORK]

In the inventories of the Cortés loot, 150 shields are enumerated,

mostly decorated with feathers, but 25 are specified as being

ornamented with turquois mosaic, while others were garnished with

gold. Of the feather-mosaic shields, one example is in Vienna (the

shield formerly in Castle Ambras), two are in Stuttgart, and one is in

the Museo Nacional, Mexico. Of the turquois mosaic shields, one is in

London, and one in Vienna; none exists in Mexico. To this number we

are now able to add eight specimens in New York, namely, one perfect

shield, two nearly complete ones, and five fragments, all from the cave

in the Mixteca.

We have already given numerous extracts from the early writers

concerning the use of mosaic shields as part of the paraphernalia

of the deities. In figs. 16-17 are two representations of the god

Paynal, holding in his right hand a mosaic shield. Fig. 16 is from the

Florentine manuscript of Sahagun (lamina 8), while fig. 17 is from the

Real Palacio manuscript of the same author. In the original the shield

is painted blue. These are the only examples we have been able to find

in the Mexican codices where the mosaic character of the shield is

unquestionably delineated.

[Illustration: FIG. 16]

[Illustration: FIG. 17]

We will now consider the two mosaic shields in Europe. On pl. XX is the

shield in the British Museum. Its early history is unknown, other than

that it was purchased in 1866 from a dealer who stated that it came

from Turin. Quite a little of the mosaic is missing, but not enough to

destroy the intricate and interesting designs. It has been described by

Read, accompanied with a drawing of the figures.[95] The shield is of

cedar, with a diameter of 12¼ inches. The material used for the mosaic

is turquois and shell. The center of the design consists of a circle in

relief, the edge of which is divided into four equal parts by angular

points in pink shell, and each quarter of the circumference has three

large but irregular pieces of shell at intervals. It is a _tonatiuh_,

or sun disc, and a figure of a serpent is disposed meander-fashion

vertically over the entire central portion. One edge of the snake is

bordered with imitation studs formed of brown gum, of which a few still

preserve a covering of very thin gold-leaf. The head is placed at the

upper left side, the tail ending in three feathers at the lower right

edge of the circle. On each side are two human figures, and at the

center, near the top, projecting from the body of the snake, is a

bifurcated design, probably a tree, upon which rests, in a pear-shaped

enclosure, a human figure on its back. Through the shield are many

irregular perforations, and twenty-five small holes are regularly

disposed around the edge, possibly for the suspension of feathers, or

bits of stone, gold, or gold-leaf, over gum, may have been inserted.

Two larger holes are near the upper margin.

[Illustration: PL. XXVII

SHIELD OF WOOD (FRAGMENT) WITH MOSAIC DECORATION

MUSEUM OF THE AMERICAN INDIAN HEYE FOUNDATION, NEW YORK]

On pl. XXI we reproduce the Vienna shield.[96] It is larger than the

London specimen, being 16½ inches in diameter, and the designs are not

so involved as in the London shield. Unfortunately the greater part

of the mosaic has fallen out, but the figures in most cases may be

traced by the impressions in the gum matrix. The designs consist of

two _tonatiuh_, or sun discs, placed one above the other. In the upper

_tonatiuh_ is a human figure. There are many examples of this motive

in Mexican sculptures and codices. Across the center of the shield,

between the two sun discs, is a procession of human figures, four each

on the right and the left, all facing the center. Between them is a

human figure, head-downward, in the act of falling or plunging from the

upper sun disc. Above this line of figures are four others, two on each

side of the sun disc, which they face. Below, facing the lower disc,

are three other figures on each side, and lower still are two more on

each side. The total number of human figures, so far as we are able

to determine, is twenty-four. This shield was formerly in the Castle

Ambras, near Innsbruck, and its history is traceable to 1596, it being

mentioned in an inventory of that date.

We cannot identify these two shields with those described in the Cortés

inventories, but there is no reason to doubt that they formed part of

that treasure. As examples of mosaic art, they are priceless, even in

their damaged condition.

The circumstances attending the discovery of the shields now in New

York have already been alluded to. Pl. I is an exact reproduction in

colors of one of these, the most important example of aboriginal

American mosaic art known. It is in an almost perfect state of

preservation, and is practically of the same size as the London

specimen, being 12¾ inches in diameter, with an average thickness of

three-eighths of an inch. The wood is probably cedar. In a highly

esthetic manner the mosaic incrustation has been set in a bed of gum,

with alternating massing of light and dark turquoises to produce bands

or zones of shading in light or dark bluish-green. It is estimated

that nearly 14,000 individual pieces enter into the composition of

this mosaic, the greater number being tiny circular bits. The design

represents a sun disc, with eight pointers in the outer rim. Inside of

the innermost of the two raised narrow encircling bands is a picture of

ceremonial or mythological character. We hesitate at an interpretation,

but the main features may quite certainly be recognized. We are of

the opinion that the scene portrayed perhaps relates to the worship

of the planet Venus. It is in the region where this shield was found

that Seler, after making exhaustive comparative studies of several

pre-Columbian codices, concludes:

We have to look for the home of the Codex Borgia group of

manuscripts.... It was a land inhabited by Aztec-speaking peoples;

it was conterminous with the Zapotec territory, and it lay on the

trade-route which led to the coast, and to the Maya-peopled district

of Tabasco.... Indeed we also know that in this very region astronomic

observation was highly developed, and the Morning Star (Venus) held in

special veneration.[97]

The upper horizontal band of the shield represents the celestial

region. It recalls, with its feather fringe at the top and dots hanging

from the lower section, the design around the so-called calendar

stone collected by Humboldt, now in the Berlin Museum, and the upper

encircling rim above the procession of figures of the so-called stone

of Tizoc, as well as some of the upper bands in the murals of Mitla.

If this is the celestial band, as we believe, it is quite appropriate

to find on it the _tonatiuh_, or sun, represented in the rosette in

the center. We find here two sets of four pointers each, radiating

from the central disc of feathers, which surrounds a lozenge-shaped

piece on which is a tiny pit below two horizontal lines. In the Real

Palacio manuscript of Sahagun (estampa XII) are pictures of various

symbols for heavenly bodies, one being a small disc with tiny dots,

explained by Sahagun as being the sign for Venus. We have endeavored to

identify this glyph with that of the symbol for turquois or jewel, or

the sign for chalchihuitl. There is a slight resemblance, but we hold

the opinion, as before stated, that it is the sign for the sun. We have

been unable to find the exact counterpart of this combination either in

the codices or in sculptures.

[Illustration: PL. XXVIII

SHIELD OF WOOD (FRAGMENT) WITH MOSAIC DECORATION

MUSEUM OF THE AMERICAN INDIAN HEYE FOUNDATION, NEW YORK]

We now come to a feature which is also found in the Vienna shield,

namely, a person falling or descending from the sun or celestial

regions. The injured condition of the Vienna specimen renders it

impossible to distinguish the sex of the figure, but in the New York

specimen a woman is represented, probably a goddess. On several pages

of the Codex Nuttall Zouche[98] (pp. 4, 19, 21) are representations

of human figures hanging from or plunging from the heavenly band.

Seler has connected these scenes with the Venus period of the Mexican

calendar. Attached to the band on our shield are five dots. Taken in

connection with the eight dots below, respectively four on each side of

the hieroglyph at the bottom, one recalls the suggestive fact that the

Mexicans were acquainted with the correspondence of eight solar years

to five Venus periods, and reckonings connected with the correction of

these two periods have been established by both Seler and Bowditch.[99]

In the Codex Selden is found an analogous picture, the band of the sky,

with a central _tonatiuh_, and a descending human figure attached,

below which are two figures. This scene has been interpreted by

Beyer[100] as representing the solar god accepting human sacrifice. In

our shield, the feature which follows in Codex Selden, depicting this

sacrifice, is absent.

In our shield, facing the plunging figure, are two human figures, one

on each side, holding something like a staff in each hand, similar

to those held in the hands of the goddess. From the mouth of each

of these figures protrudes an unknown object, perhaps a conch-shell

trumpet, but it is not supported by the hands.

[Illustration: FIG. 18]

Above a horizontal band just over the bottom of the inner encircling

rim is a hieroglyph. It is the well-known glyph for Culhuacan, or

Colhuacan, the name of an important town in the valley of Mexico in

ancient times. The form of the glyph, a mountain with a curved peak,

is derived from the tradition that the Nahuan people originated where

there was a mountain with a curved peak, called in the Nahuan language

_Culhuacan_. The sign is interwoven with the legendary history of the

ancient tribes in central Mexico, Teuculhuacan being the province far

to the north where were situated the Seven Caves of Chicomostoc, the

primeval home whence sallied the Seven Tribes. In the Codex Boturini I,

this legend is pictured. In fig. 18 are two forms of the glyph taken

from the Codex Telleriano Remensis. On each side of this glyph on the

shield are four dots, not to be confounded with the representations

of shells attached to the glyph. These eight dots should have a

calendric meaning, and we might stretch our imagination and consider

the glyph to be _Calli_, a day-sign and also year-bearer, represented

by the conventional figure of a house, which would give us the date

8 _Calli_, capable of being coordinated with either the year 1461 or

1513. The general character of the glyph, however, seems to be too well

established as Culhuacan to admit of such hypothesis.

[Illustration: PL. XXIX

SHIELD OF WOOD (FRAGMENT) WITH MOSAIC DECORATION

MUSEUM OF THE AMERICAN INDIAN HEYE FOUNDATION, NEW YORK]

In a letter to the writer Dr. H. J. Spinden advances an explanation

of the combination of the figures in this sun-disc shield. With his

permission we quote him verbatim:

I am inclined to believe that the design as a whole represents a sun

shield, the eight radiating bars being the rays, while the celestial

band, the three human figures, and the Colhuacan glyph replace the

parts of the sun’s face, namely, the head-band, the two eyes and nose

(the plunging figure in lieu of the nose), and the mouth. This may

seem pretty far-fetched at first glance, but it is quite in the spirit

of Aztec art. On the Calendar Stone, around the face of the sun god

and the _ollin_ symbol with the enclosed glyphs of the four ages,

is, first, a circle of the day signs, second, a circle of quincunx

figures, supposed to be the classical hieroglyphs or rather symbols

of turquoises, third, a frieze of eagles’ feathers. Multiple rays of

different sizes complete the picture. In the actual shield before us

we have the turquois mosaic, and the holes around the rim suggest that

eagles’ feathers may once have been attached. Compare the sun shield

or sun basket of the Pueblo Indians, and the various sun shields on

Mayan monuments. Now, the sun and turquois seem to be pretty closely

connected symbolically--both mean divine. The hieroglyph of the sun

is used for the _teo_, god, in place names, while the prefix _xiuh_

means divine in connection with various objects. Jade, on the other

hand, means precious. The sun in Aztec ritual is pretty closely

connected with riches and jewels, and the sun disc may easily have

been conceived of as a gem-studded object. I think it quite possible,

therefore, that the design on this shield was intended to symbolize

the face of the sun, and the fact that complete figures engaged in

some ritualistic function replaces the parts of a realistic face does

not detract from the theory.

The back of the shield is shown in pl. XXII. Through the two vertical

ridges are pairs of holes, evidently for the leather thongs for holding

the shield. The twenty-eight small holes around the edge of the shield

were probably for the insertion of feathers or other ornaments, as in

the British Museum shield.

In technique our shield is similar in all respects to the two mosaic

shields in Europe. In all three the incrustation is in a bed of gum

that has been spread over the wood.

We now come to the series of seven mosaic shields in New York, shown in

pls. XXIII-XXIX. In these we are dealing with a different technique,

and one which is new to us. For the matrix a kind of cement like fine

gritty brown sand was used in place of gum. They are unfortunately in a

considerably damaged state, but two are more or less complete. In these

examples the wood has been roughly shaped, and in all of them the marks

of the copper or stone adzes are clearly visible, for there was no

final smoothing of the wood as in the three specimens before described.

The probable reason for this is seen in the shield on pl. XXIII. On the

face of this specimen, on portions of the lower edge, especially at the

left, are traces of a coarse native paper made from the _amate_ tree,

which occurs as a band that had been glued to the wood. Traces of paper

also are found in the same place on the shield fragment illustrated

on pl. XXIV. It is impossible to state definitely if this paper once

extended from the edge to the raised body of the mosaic decoration.

On the fragmentary shield just referred to may be seen a faint black

line, made with some substance like graphite, running partly around the

circumference 1 to 1⅞ inches from the edge. It is probably the artist’s

line in arranging for some class of decoration, perhaps delimiting the

section to be covered with paper. On the first shield no such line is

found, but it seems certain that the rough wood between the narrow band

of paper and the mosaic must have been covered either with paper or

with some other material. There is no trace of cement, and we are led

to believe that the paper once extended over the entire plain surface

of the wood. Parchment or soft leather may also have been stretched

tightly over the outer zones of shields which show no traces of paper.

On this surface some type of decoration was undoubtedly placed. We

recall the quotation given above concerning the use of turquois

mosaic decoration on paper, in connection with the worship of the god

Huitzilopochtli. Feather-mosaics, so far as we know, were generally

made either on parchment or on paper. The codices were made either of

leather, parchment, or paper, often sized with stucco. In rare cases

the painting was applied directly on the paper. It is undoubtedly true

that one or the other of these processes of decoration completed the

ensemble of the shields we are now considering.

[Illustration: PL. XXX

EAR PLUG OF WOOD WITH MOSAIC DECORATION

MUSEUM OF THE AMERICAN INDIAN HEYE FOUNDATION, NEW YORK]

Another point of difference in this series of shields is the material

spread over the wood to receive the incrusted stones. It must have

solidified slowly to have allowed for the careful and laborious work

of fixing the pieces in the plastic matrix. In the case of the matrix

of gum, material could have been applied and would have hardened

immediately, for by tests, even after the lapse of centuries, we have

found it possible to loosen the bits by the application of heat to the

stone; but in the case of the cement matrix this is not possible. We do

not know what liquid was used to harden the cement, which is now quite

friable.

Relatively speaking, comparatively little turquois was used in this

class of mosaics. Different shades of a soft light-gray stone was

employed in the outer zones, while darker stones interspersed with

turquois of varying shades, some almost white, and bits of lignite and

obsidian, are found.

A final unique feature may be noted in the shields on pls. XXVII and

XXVIII. In the outer band will be observed the irregular inner edges of

the two lines of stones which form the border. In pl. XXVII the space

is filled in with a sprinkling of gritty, almost sand-like, bits of

faded whitish-blue bastard turquois. It appears to have been spattered

or sprinkled on while the matrix was very soft. In the case of the

shield on pl. XXVIII, the material is somewhat coarser, and consists of

rough bits of the same stone used in the broad light band within the

outer border.

These shields, so far as we are able to judge from the fragmentary

sections, contained no pictures or figures as in the other type. In

general execution they are inferior in workmanship, and less refined

and finished in appearance. In fact, they constitute a quite distinct

and, up to the present, unknown type of stone mosaic from Mexico.

The first shield of this series (pl. XXIII) is in two fragments, a

portion of one edge being missing. It has an average diameter of 15

inches, and a thickness of one-half to three-quarters of an inch, the

mosaic disc rising one-eighth of an inch above the wood. The mosaic

portion has a diameter of 10¼ inches. It appears to be a sun shield,

judging by the eight pointers which radiate from the band surrounding

the circular design in the center, which suggest a conventional

representation of the sun. In the center the darker bits are obsidian.

A portion of the matrix and of the mosaic incrustation has fallen off,

and on the matrix near the upper left is a greasy patch which may be

candle grease.

The shield on pl. XXIV is the same size as the preceding one, 15 inches

in diameter. It is also in two sections, and a larger section of the

side is missing. This likewise is probably a sun shield, but it has no

pointers. Where the outer band has fallen off toward the lower part

can be seen a faint incised line which the artist placed there as a

guide-line in following out the circular mosaic decoration. In the

center the black bits are lignite.

The next shield shown (pl. XXV) consists of a half section only. It

was slightly larger than any other shield in the collection, having a

diameter of 15¼ inches and a thickness of 1 inch. It was a sun shield,

and had four pointers identical with those on the famous calendar stone

of the Aztecs. There are traces of a paper band glued around the outer

edge; the black line has already been referred to. The central disc,

with the white lines made of very tiny bits, is similar to the central

part of the shield on pl. XXIII.

[Illustration: PL. XXXI

HEAD WITH HEAD-PIECE OF WOOD WITH MOSAIC DECORATION

NATIONAL MUSEUM, COPENHAGEN]

[Illustration: PL. XXXII

A

JAGUAR HEAD OF WOOD WITH MOSAIC DECORATION

ETHNOGRAPHICAL MUSEUM, BERLIN

B

ANIMAL HEAD OF WOOD WITH HUMAN FACE IN OPEN JAW

WITH MOSAIC DECORATION

NATIONAL MUSEUM, COPENHAGEN]

[Illustration: PL. XXXIII

A

ANIMAL HEAD OF WOOD WITH MOSAIC DECORATION

STATE NATURAL HISTORY MUSEUM, VIENNA

B

MONKEY HEAD OF WOOD WITH MOSAIC DECORATION

BRITISH MUSEUM, LONDON]

[Illustration: PL. XXXIV

A

TWO-HEADED JAGUAR FIGURE OF WOOD WITH MOSAIC DECORATION

ETHNOGRAPHICAL MUSEUM, BERLIN

B

BIRD HEAD OF WOOD WITH MOSAIC DECORATION

MUSEUM, GOTHA]

[Illustration: PL. XXXV

ANIMAL FIGURE OF WOOD WITH MOSAIC DECORATION

BRITISH MUSEUM, LONDON]

One of the most interesting specimens is reproduced in pl. XXVI, which

is 14⅞ inches in diameter. This is the only shield of the series

bearing a figure. It had four pointers, which suggest a sun disc,

but the symbol seems clearly to be a conventional cross-section of a

conch-shell, the well-known and often delineated symbol of Ehecatl,

god of the air, one of the various attributes of the god Quetzalcoatl.

In this example the light pieces of stone are larger than

in any other piece, but they are cut exceedingly thin. Around the

outer edge of the mosaic is a faint incised line, and three lines may

be seen projecting from the pointers, showing that the artist carried

his guide-lines beyond the zone finally used. The circular line is so

regular that there is no doubt that the workman used our methods, tying

a piece of cord to an awl and working from the exact center of the

shield.

The two fragments on pl. XXVII and XXVIII are the same size--15 inches

in diameter. They are similar in workmanship; the special feature,

the sprinkled outer band, has already been alluded to. In the first

specimen an irregular cavity on the upper face was apparently filled in

with cement, traces of which remain. The two holes in each shield are

modern, but the two specimens came to us joined with leather strings.

They are, however, sections of separate shields.

The last shield of the series (pl. XXIX) has a height of 14⅝ inches. It

comprises little more than a third of the original object, hence the

diameter must have been fully 15 inches or more. As in the others, we

find the encircling bands, but as no part of the center remains, we do

not know if it had a figure or was like the others of the series.

_Ear-plug_

With the deposit of masks and shields in the cave in the Mixteca,

now in the Museum of the American Indian, Heye Foundation, was the

unique wooden object shown on pl. XXX. It is spool-shaped, the bottom

flat, the upper part concave and covered with a mosaic of dark-green

turquois, with a central disc of dark rose-colored shell. It is 1½

inch high, with a diameter of 1¾ inch at the upper and lower rims.

There is no doubt that this specimen was an ear-plug. The sides of the

spool show the small gouges of the cutting instrument with which it was

fashioned, and the entire surface not covered with mosaic was painted

rose-red.

_Animal Figures_

The specimen in the National Museum in Copenhagen, shown on pl. XXXI,

has been described in detail by Lehmann,[101] and our illustration is

taken from his photograph. It is considerably damaged, much of the

mosaic incrustation having disappeared. The materials are turquois,

malachite, shell, and mother-of-pearl. In its original state it was one

of the imposing pieces of this art. The upper projecting part rising

from the top of the head probably simulated a plumed head-dress. Its

extreme height is about 10½ inches, and the diameter only 3¾ inches.

On pl. XXXII are illustrated two animal heads. The first (_a_), a

jaguar head, in the Ethnographical Museum in Berlin, has been described

in detail by Lehmann in his paper published in the _Proceedings of

the Fifteenth Congress of Americanists_, held at Quebec in 1906. It

is 5¾ inches high, and the mosaic is composed of turquois, malachite,

and shell. The other specimen (_b_) is in the National Museum at

Copenhagen.[102] It seems to represent a serpent’s head with a human

face in the open jaws. The mosaic is turquois, malachite, and reddish

shell. It has an extreme length of 13½ inches and is 8¼ inches high.

Much of the incrustation has fallen off.

The animal head shown on pl. XXXIII, _a_, is in the Vienna Museum, and

has been illustrated by Heger in three views.[103] Our drawing is the

side-view, after Heger. This object is 4⅝ inches long from front to

back. Much of the mosaic has fallen away, and the pieces of jadeite,

obsidian, and shell are larger and the work is generally coarser than

in any of the other examples in Europe. Heger’s photographs depict a

leather thong issuing from a hole at the back of the head.

[Illustration: PL. XXXVI

DOUBLE-HEADED SERPENT OF WOOD WITH MOSAIC DECORATION

BRITISH MUSEUM, LONDON]

[Illustration: PL. XXXVII

FIGURE OF WOOD WITH MOSAIC DECORATION, GOD XOLOTL

STATE MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY, VIENNA]

The other mosaic on this plate (_b_) is in the British Museum. It

represents a monkey-like head of white wood, with open mouth. The

mosaic coating is of turquois, malachite, and other stones. The back

has a hemispherical depression coated round the sides with a thick

layer of brown gum, smoothly finished, containing some woolen threads.

The turquoises are chiefly of the pale-greenish variety, but

above the sides of the mouth are two patches of bright-blue stones.

Each eye is set in the lower edge of a protuberance coated with

malachite, the eyes themselves being convex discs of highly polished

iron pyrites set in a ring of shell. Height 4 inches, width 2.7 inches.

An interesting piece is the two-headed jaguar figure in the

Ethnographical Museum in Berlin (pl. XXXIV, _a_).[104] It is covered

with bits of turquois and malachite, together with some obsidian,

shell, and mother-of-pearl. The eyes are of malachite. This specimen

measures 12⅝ inches in length, and the workmanship seems to be very

artistic.

An important and unique example of mosaic art is shown on pl. XXXIV,

_b_, which represents a bird’s head embellished with an incrustation of

turquois, malachite, obsidian, mother-of-pearl, red coral, and white

shell, but much of the mosaic has fallen out. This specimen is in the

Museum in Gotha.[105]

A much injured specimen in the British Museum is illustrated on pl.

XXXV, which represents an animal on his haunches, with open mouth and

protruding tongue. On its back is a circular, cup-like receptacle.

It is cut from a hard, pale-brown wood. Almost the entire surface

was originally covered with mosaic laid in a bed of black gum, the

component pieces being turquois, malachite, pink shell, pearl shell,

and fragments of iron pyrites. The cup-shaped receptacle on the back

of the animal is now covered with a transparent varnish, except in one

place where the black gum and bits of mosaic are still in place. The

varnish shows here and there fragments of gold-leaf, perhaps indicating

that the cup was once entirely gilded. The height is 6.8 inches.[106]

The gracefully modeled breast-ornament representing a two-headed

serpent (pl. XXXVI) is in the British Museum. The base is of

light-colored wood, hollowed at the back and painted red. The front of

the snake is covered with turquois mosaic; the teeth and fangs in each

open jaw of the snake are made of white shell, while the edges of the

gums are indicated with pink shell. Across each nose is a raised band

of turquois and red shell. The heads have mosaic-work on both sides,

and it is probable that the eye-sockets formerly contained discs of

iron pyrites. On the upper edges of the two loops of the bodies are

holes for suspension. Length 17⅛ inches, height 8 inches.

_God Figure_

The figure of the deity shown in pl. XXXVII is in the Vienna Museum.

It has been described by Dr. Heger, who has kindly sent me a number

of photographs of the object, and some details regarding it. This has

been identified by Dr. Seler as representing the god Xolotl, one of

the deities or guardians of the Tonalamatl.[107] The specimen does not

contain much mosaic decoration, being of highly polished wood. It is 3½

inches high and 2¾ inches broad. Dr. Heger has courteously sent me the

following notes concerning the specimen:

The posterior circular cavity (see side view) is partly filled with a

resin-like mass, by means of which the piece must have been fastened

to some other object. Vestiges of this resin-like substance are found

in all the hollowed places where today some of the inlay is missing,

as in each of the three rounded oval incurvations, of both lateral

walls, in which probably small heads [of mosaic?] were also incrusted.

The eyes and the six small teeth consist of milk-white shells; the

two hook-like canines consist of white mother-of-pearl-like shells.

The two large ear-lobes, as well as the inferior part of the nasal

septum, are perforated transversely. The pretty little human head at

the navel of the figure probably consists of pitch-black obsidian.

The ear-pendants are missing on the left side. The pupils of the eye

(right one missing) are enclosed in small rings of mother-of-pearl.

Projecting from the opened mouth, there is above the red tongue

another small white shell-plate with three sharp downward points

(teeth). The little head shows injury in several places.

[Illustration: PL. XXXVIII

STONE KNIFE WITH HANDLE OF WOOD WITH MOSAIC DECORATION

BRITISH MUSEUM, LONDON]

[Illustration: PL. XXXIX

A

B

KNIFE HANDLES OF WOOD WITH MOSAIC DECORATION

PREHISTORIC AND ETHNOGRAPHIC MUSEUM, ROME]

_Knife Handles_

The next group of objects to be noted consists of knife handles. The

beautiful specimen on pl. XXXVIII is in the British Museum. It

is a chipped leaf-shape bladed knife of honey-colored chalcedony.

The handle is of a soft, light-colored wood, carved in the form of a

crouching human figure. The actual socket in which the blade is fixed

proceeds from the chest of the figure, which grasps it with a hand on

each side, and rests his chin on the top. The socket is firmly bound

with cord. The figure and the socket up to the binding have been

covered with a mosaic, chiefly of turquois, varied with malachite and

white, pink, purple, and orange shell, as well as a few pieces of pearl

shell. Much of the mosaic has disappeared. The figure wears an eagle

mask, the face appearing in the open jaws. This knife, which measures

12½ inches in length, is one of the most artistic of mosaic specimens.

[Illustration: FIG. 19]

Belonging to this class are the two handles on pl. XXXIX, which

are in the Museum in Rome. They have been illustrated in colors by

Pigorini. Through the interest of Dr. Lothrop we are enabled to present

photographs of these two very interesting objects, together with some

additional observations concerning them. The first piece (pl. XXXIX,

_a_, and fig. 19 after Pigorini), is in the form of a crouching figure

with an animal head and wide-open mouth. It has been described as a

knife handle, like the other specimen (_b_), which is unquestionably

of that character, but Dr. Lothrop writes that the front of this piece

(_a_), where the knife blade should be inserted, is smoothly covered

with a kind of cement, while in the belly of the figure is a large

hole. From Dr. Lothrop’s examination of the specimen he was unable to

satisfy himself whether it was a knife handle or was intended to be

placed on the head of a staff. The materials used for the incrustation

are turquois, reddish shell, dull white shell, mother-of-pearl, and

small flakes of gold. In the Pigorini illustration, which represents

the side opposite that shown here, two flakes of gold are shown, one in

the eye, the other on the arm between elbow and shoulder.

The other piece (pl. XXXIX, _b_), unquestionably a knife handle, as

stated, of the same technique as the specimens in the British Museum,

represents a crouching human figure. The materials are turquois,

dark-green malachite, white shell, mother-of-pearl, and red shell.

Lothrop calls our attention to the tiny pieces of turquois set in shell

on the shoulder and in other places. He also states that a portion of a

broken chert (?) blade is still imbedded in the socket in front of the

figure.

_Human Femur Musical Instrument_

The last of the specimens of mosaic to be described is the musical

instrument (_omichicauaztli_) made from a left human femur, illustrated

on pl. XL. This unique example, which is in the Museum in Rome, has

been reproduced in colors by Pigorini. The mosaic seems to have been

confined to the head and neck, although the trochanter major may also

have been covered at one time. The incrustation at present consists

of gum in which are pinkish-orange bits of colored shell. A modern

copper chain is attached to the bone, from which hangs an oliva shell,

undoubtedly ancient.

[Illustration: PL. XL

HUMAN FEMUR MUSICAL INSTRUMENT WITH MOSAIC DECORATION

PREHISTORIC AND ETHNOGRAPHIC MUSEUM, ROME]

According to Dr. Lothrop, the oliva shell shows signs of wear, and was

probably the instrument used for rasping the bone, as the bone is

sound and produces a rather musical tone when scraped with the shell,

as if the bone were of china.

Notched human bones are not uncommon in ancient Mexico, and some have

been found elaborately engraved. In the course of excavations made in

1900 in the street back of the Cathedral in the City of Mexico, were

uncovered many small pottery models of musical instruments which had

been placed there undoubtedly when the foundations of the great Aztecan

_teocalli_ were laid. The writer secured for the American Museum of

Natural History examples of these interesting models. Among them was a

notched bone having attached to it a model of the handled instrument

with which it was rubbed or rasped.[108]

* * * * *

Finally, attention is called to three objects of wood, of Mexican

origin, in the Museo Borgiano, Rome. They have been described by

Colini, and two of the pieces illustrated, in the _Bollettino della

Società Geografica Italiana_.[109] The first is an idol representing

a human figure, 17¾ inches in height; the other two specimens, those

figured by Colini, are masks, and it is highly probable that all of

these pieces were once decorated, at least in part, with mosaic. One of

the masks is 6⅞ inches, and the other 7⅛ inches, in height.

CONCLUSION

In view of the considerable number of objects of stone mosaic that

were sent to Europe during the first years of the Spanish conquest

of Mexico, part of the loot obtained by Hernán Cortés, it is quite

possible that other examples are still hidden away either in Spain or

in Italy, which some day will be brought to light. Only twenty years

ago two wonderfully preserved carved ceremonial spear-throwers, or

atlatls, of wood, covered with delicate gold-leaf, were found in an

old leather-covered case in a house in Florence, and are now exhibited

in the Ethnological Museum of that city. It is not to be doubted that

they were sent from Mexico by Cortés himself, and remained stored away,

unknown to the world, until recent times. Bushnell, who figured and

described these atlatls, believes that they were formerly in the famous

collection of the Medicis, and that other objects of Mexican origin

may be hidden away in Italy, to be revealed from time to time.[110]

Again, in 1891, Mrs. Zelia Nuttall was the first to bring to our

notice the important mosaic shield, and the still more interesting

feather-mosaic shield in the Castle Ambras near Innsbruck, which were

shortly afterward transferred to the ethnographical section of the

State Natural History Museum in Vienna.[111]

We should call attention here to the possibilities of finding mosaics

in Mexico, emphasizing the fact that the collection in the Museum of

the American Indian, Heye Foundation, was found under archeological

conditions. Until now we have been somewhat sceptical in regard to the

possibility of wooden objects of such a fragile and perishable nature

being discovered either in tombs or in ruined buildings in Middle

America. As we have already written, the few traces of this mosaic art

found heretofore in excavations have been of a fragmentary character.

No specimens of wood covered with mosaic have been found previously

in Mexico, with the exception of the small rim of wood excavated by

Gamio in Zacatecas, and the four pieces from Chichen Itza. In the

tropical and temperate zones, where the most important ancient sites

are situated, artifacts of wood of any sort have rarely been unearthed.

It is true that in some of the remote villages carved wooden drums

(_teponaztli_) have been religiously guarded from the time of the

conquest, and are brought out and played at certain festivals during

the year. But these drums are kept in the cabildos, and are preserved

with zealous care.

We would again call attention to the statement of Sahagun regarding

the tradition of the abandonment of Tula, that Quetzalcoatl ordered

certain precious things to be buried in the neighboring hills and

ravines. This, of course, refers to times long anterior to the coming

of white men. After this unfortunate event, fatal indeed to the

Indian, the natives undoubtedly secreted a vast amount of material.

The circumstances concerning this have been told by Father Motolinia.

As this account is but little known, we have translated literally the

entire chapter, for it reveals to us the miserable state into which the

aborigines had fallen within twenty years after their subjugation.

_Of how there was an end of idols and of the feasts which the Indians

were wont to prepare, and of the vanity and the endeavor which the

Spaniards displayed in (their) search for idols._

The feasts which the Indians made, as is told in the first part

(of this book), with their ceremonies and pomp, all ended from the

beginning (of the time) that the Spaniards were making war (on them),

because the Indians had so much to think about in their tribulations

that they did not think of their gods, not even of themselves,

because they had so much sorrow that in order to remedy that, all the

principal (things in their lives) were stopped.

In every town they had an idol or demon whom they considered chiefly

as their mediator, and called him such, and they honored and adorned

him with jewels and garments, and the best they could find they

offered him, each town as it was (able to), and more so in the

capitals of provinces. These principal idols I mention, as soon as

the city of Mexico was taken by the Spaniards, with their jewels and

wealth the Indians hid in the most secret place they could find; a

large part of the gold that was on (or with) the idols and in the

temples they gave as tribute to the Spaniards under whose patronage

they belonged; for they could not do otherwise because in the

beginning the tributes were so excessive that all the Indians could

scrape together or search for, nor what the lords and chiefs had,

would suffice; besides, they were forced (to pay tributes) with such

iniquity that they also gave the gold they had in the temples of the

demons (idols), and even when this was exhausted they paid tribute in

slaves, and many times not having slaves in order to comply (with the

taxes), they gave free (Indians) as slaves.

These principal idols, with the insignia and ornaments or garments

belonging to the demons, the Indians hid, some in the earth, others in

caves, and still others in the woods. Later, when the Indians became

converted and were baptized, they unearthed many (of them), and they

brought them to the courtyards of the churches to burn them publicly.

Others rotted in the earth, because after the Indians had received

(or accepted) the Faith, they were ashamed to take out those they

had hidden, and would rather let them rot than that anyone should

know that they hid them. And when they were importuned to tell (talk)

about their principal idols and their vestments, they took them out,

all decayed, of which I am a witness, for I have seen it (done) many

times. The excuse they gave was good, for they said, “When we hid it,

we did not know God, and we thought the Spaniards would soon return to

their (own) country, and after we came to understand (about) God, we

left it to rot, because we were afraid and ashamed to take it out.”

In other towns these principal idols with their vestments were in the

care of the lords or of the principal priests of the demons, and those

kept them so secretly that hardly anyone knew about them except two or

three people who guarded them, and of these (idols) they also brought

a very large number to the monasteries to burn them. In many other

remote villages, far away from Mexico, when the monks went there to

preach, they told them in their sermons and before christening them

that the first thing they had to do was to bring all the idols they

had and all the insignias of the demons to burn (them): and in this

manner they also gave and brought a large quantity which was publicly

done in many parts (of the country): because wherever the doctrine

and the word of God has reached, not a thing has remained that they

knew or could tell about, for if from now on for a hundred years they

should dig in the courts of the temples of the ancient idols, they

would always find idols, because there were so many that they had

made: for it happened that when a child was born they made an idol,

and the following year (they made) one a little larger, and after

four years they made another one, and as the child grew up they went

on making idols, and of these (idols) the foundations and walls are

filled, and in the courts there are many of them. In the year (15)39

and in the year (15)40 several Spaniards, some with authority and

some without it, to show their zeal of the Faith, and thinking that

they were accomplishing something (worth while), began to dig and to

unearth the dead and to urge the Indians that they should give them

idols: and in some parts (of the country) this reached such a stage

that the Indians went to look for the idols that were decayed and

forgotten in the earth, and some of the Indians were even so sorely

tormented that, to tell the truth, they made new idols and gave them

(to the Spaniards) that they should cease maltreating them.

Mixed with the great zeal they (the Spaniards) showed in searching

for idols, (there was) not a little covetousness, and it was because

the Spaniards (would say), in such a village, or in such a parish,

there are (were) idols of gold, or of chalchihuitl which is a stone

of great value, and they imagined that there was an idol weighing ten

or fifteen arrobas: but in truth they came (too) late, because all

the gold and precious stones were spent and cashed in and safely in

the power (hands) of the Spaniards who first held those Indians under

their jurisdiction. They also thought of finding an idol of stone

which would be worth as much as a city, and certainly, although I

have seen many idols which were adored and held highly by the Indians

and (were) very (greatly) revered as chief gods, and some were of

chalchihuitl, the one which seemed to me to be worth most, I do not

think that in Spain they would give ten pesos of gold for it: for

this they upset and stir and scandalize the towns with their truly

indiscrete zeal, because if there really is still an idol in some

village, it is either rotten or so (completely) forgotten or (held or

kept) so secretly that in a town of ten thousand inhabitants there

are not even five who know it, and they hold them for what they are,

either for stones or for wood. Those who thus upset these Indians who

go their straight way, are like Laban who went to meet Jacob to look

for his property, and to upset his house in search of his idols,

because of this that I am telling here I have great experience and I

(can) see the deceit in which they go about and the way they have to

disturb and disfavor (hurt) these poor Indians who have forgotten so

absolutely their idols, as if it were a hundred years ago (that they

had had them).[112]

Hernándo Ruiz de Alarcon, in his treatise on the superstitions of the

natives of New Spain, relates that when they went to the hills or

other remote places where their idols were hidden away, or to certain

piles of stones where they often made offerings and sacrifices, they

carried there offerings which were sometimes copal incense wrapped in

_quauhamatl_, a kind of white paper made from the bark of a soft tree.

This work, written in 1620, is entitled, _Tratado de las Supersticiones

y Costumbres Gentilicas que oy viuen entre los Indios Naturales desta

Nueva España_, and was published for the first time in 1892 by the

Museo Nacional of Mexico. The present writer has noted such stone

piles, particularly in Yucatan.

It is probable that we have here an explanation of the existence of our

deposit of mosaic-incrusted wooden shields and masks, which leads us

to hope that still further discoveries of this character may be made.

The climatic conditions in certain parts of the highlands of Middle

America, where this deposit was found in a cave, favor this assumption.

There are great sections of comparatively dry, wind-swept, almost

desert plains, treeless hill-slopes, and ravines, where the chief

vegetation is cacti in the lower altitudes, while higher up pines and

oaks abound. Here wooden objects should be indefinitely preserved in

ancient tombs or in caves, protected by a covering of loose, dry earth,

the condition under which our collection was found.

The discovery of this remarkable collection of mosaics emphasizes the

fact that the investigation of the archeology of Mexico is hardly

commenced, in view of the vast amount of material hidden under the

ruins of thousands of ancient settlements and burial places, and

probably in countless caves, which still remain untouched by the

archeologist.

As revealed by the surprising results of Thompson’s dredging in the

sacred cenote in Yucatan, a wealth of archeological material also lies

buried in the mud under the waters of sacred wells and lakes. This is

notably so in the case of Lake Chapala, on the borders of Michoacan

and Jalisco in Mexico,[113] and of Lake Amatitlan in Guatemala, where

thousands of pottery vessels and other objects have been recovered from

the bottoms of the lakes by divers, and from the mud when the waters

have receded from the shores during times of extreme drought. These

objects had been thrown into the waters as offerings to the gods.

The recent results of the systematic exploration of the great mounds

at Teotihuacan have been quite surprising, and have shed new light on

the archeology of the central plateau of Mexico. Even more important is

the discovery of culture sequences in stratified deposits in the valley

of Mexico, the investigations showing three distinct culture layers

distinguished by the character of the pottery. Of great significance

are the discoveries recently made under the great lava flow called the

Pedregal, at the very edge of the City of Mexico, where the artifacts

correspond _in toto_ with those found in the bottom layer of the

stratified deposits.[114] These discoveries mark a great advance in

our knowledge of the history of ancient Mexico, but, as we have before

stated, they are only a beginning. Buried underground are the “books”

the student must study, if ever the tangled history of Middle America

is to become known and the story of the development of this exceedingly

interesting division of the human race is to be recorded.

NOTES

[1] See Saville, The Goldsmith’s Art in Ancient Mexico, _Museum of the

American Indian, Heye Foundation, Indian Notes and Monographs_, 1920.

[2] Gonzalo Fernández de Oviedo y Valdés, Historia General y Natural

de las Indias, edition of the Real Academia de la Historia, tomo I,

primera parte, lib. XVII, caps, VIII-XVIII, pp. 502-537, Madrid, 1851.

[3] The Itinerary of Grijalva, written by chaplain Juan Díaz, was

undoubtedly recorded in Spanish, but we know it only from the Italian

translation of 1520. It was translated into Spanish by Joaquin Garcia

Icazbalceta and published by him in his _Documentos para la Historia

de México_, tomo I, Mexico, 1858. A translation into English, with

translations of other accounts, relating to this voyage, will appear in

the _Publications of the Cortes Society_ under the title, The Voyage of

Juan de Grijalva to Yucatan and the Mexican Coast in 1518.

[4] We quote here from the edition of Bernal Díaz published by the

Hakluyt Society, bearing the title, The True Conquest of New Spain,

translated into English by Alfred Percival Maudslay. The citation is

from vol. I, pp. 48-49, London, 1908.

[5] Bernal Díaz, op. cit., vol. I, p. 53. In the work of Torquemada,

Monarchia Indiana, is an important statement bearing on this matter, of

which we give the following translation _in extenso_:

“And this present it was that Gomara and Antonio de Herrera make

confused mention as having been brought to Ferdinand Cortés by the

governors of Montezuma on his first landing, which they notice in

the following words: ‘Which present it is said was sent for Juan de

Grijalva, when he touched on those shores; but that, notwithstanding

the haste of those who carried it, they found that he was gone.’ The

fact was as they state; but I do not understand how those who drew

up the account of which Herrera availed himself, could have omitted

that which I say in this chapter, and many other particulars which

shall be observed in the sequel; since the circumstances which they

mention, and those which I relate, are intimately connected with each

other, and those who could have given an account of the former, could

likewise have done so of the latter; although I think that the error

lay in their seeking information only from the Spaniards, who at that

period returned from the Indies, without verifying facts by applying

to the Indians, who were mainly concerned in most of them, or I may

say in all, since they were the mark which all who have written on

the affairs of the conquest strove to hit, and were those who were

very well acquainted with them, and in the beginning recorded them

by means of figures and characters, and afterward, when some of the

most curious amongst them had learned how to write, wrote them down;

which histories are in my possession: and so high is the estimation

in which I hold them, on account of their language and the style of

their composition, that I should be glad to feel myself competent to

the task of translating them into Spanish with the same elegance and

grace as the Mexicans penned them in their own language; and since

these histories are true and authentic, I follow them to the letter;

but lest the accounts which they contain should appear strange to

those who read them, I affirm that they are merely a true relation of

what actually happened, but that other authors have not noticed them

before me, because the few that have written on the affairs of the

Indies were ignorant of the events which then occurred, nor had they

any one to give them the requisite information; neither should I have

mentioned these facts had I not found that they were verified by Father

Bernardino de Sahagun, a grave and pious ecclesiastic, who was of the

second number of those who undertook the conversion of the natives of

New Spain, but was the first of the investigators of the most secret

things of this land, of which he knew all the secrets, and employed

himself for more than sixty years in composing works in the Mexican

language and in incorporating into it all the information which he was

able to acquire.” Lib. IV, cap. XIII.

[6] This important work will be reprinted in facsimile, with a

translation into English, in the author’s proposed work on the voyage

of Grijalva, as mentioned in Note 3.

[7] This account will also be reprinted in facsimile, with a

translation into English, in the author’s account of the voyage of

Grijalva. The title is, Provinciæ Sive Regiones in India Occidentali

Noviter Repertæ in Vltima Navigatione. The known copies are in the John

Carter Brown Library, Providence, and the New York Public Library.

[8] I quote here from the translation made and edited by Francis A.

MacNutt, De Orbe Novo, vol. II, pp. 19-20, New York, 1912.

[9] The chapters relating to the voyage of Grijalva have been

translated into English by the writer and will appear in the proposed

work mentioned in Note 3.

[10] Francisco López de Gomara, edition of Don Enrique de Vedia,

Historiadores Primitivos de Indias, in _Biblioteca de Autores

Españoles_, tomo I, Madrid, 1877.

[11] Eduard Seler, Ein Kapitel aus dem Geschichtswerk des P. Sahagun,

p. 124, Berlin, 1890.

[12] Lehmann, in his Methods and Results in Mexican Research, Paris,

1909, writes: “Hardly less remarkable are the mosaics made of more or

less precious stones, shells, etc. No less than twenty-three pieces are

known in various museums, the finest being in London, Rome, and Berlin.

The stones when cut to shape are embedded in a peculiar substance

(_tzinacanquauhcuitlatl_) covering the whole surface of the object

to be decorated; the latter were chiefly of wood, rarely of bone or

stone. Two masks are skilfully prepared human skulls. The usual shapes

are shields, helmets, knife handles and trinkets. The small cup-shaped

heads and the double-jaguar in the Berlin Museum are of doubtful

meaning. Most of these objects apparently come from the Eastern

provinces, i. e., Tabasco. We know from other sources that it was only

under king Ahuizotl, with the conquest of the Tzapotec district, that

the Mexicans became acquainted with turkois-mosaics, shields, earrings,

etc.” This is a translation of his Ergebnisse und Aufgaben der

mexikanistischen Forschung, published in _Archiv für Anthropologie_,

Neue Folge, band VI, heft 2 u 3, Braunschweig, 1907.

[13] See Lehmann in our List of Works Describing Mexican Mosaics, under

1906.

[14] Juan de Torquemada, Monarchia Indiana, Barcia edition, Madrid,

1732, lib. II, cap. LXXIX, p. 215.

[15] See Antonio Peñafiel, Nomenclatura Geográfica y Etimológica de

México, Mexico, 1897.

[16] Clavigero, The History of Mexico, Cullen transl., vol. II, p. 232,

London, 1787.

[17] Saville, The Goldsmith’s Art in Ancient Mexico, op. cit.

[18] Peter Martyr, op. cit., vol. II, p. 46.

[19] Las Casas, Historia de las Indias, tomo IV, cap. CXXI, pp.

284-286, Madrid ed., 1876.

[20] Fr. Bernardino de Sahagun, Historia General de las Cosas de Nueva

España, Bustamante ed., lib. 12, caps, II-VI, pp. 5-12, Mexico, 1829.

Notes to Chapter III. The two places mentioned here, Naulitlantoztlan

and Mictlanquactle, are given by Torquemada (op. cit., lib. IV, cap.

XIII, p. 379) as four different towns. Nauhtla and Toztla, the first

two, are recognizable as being combined into one place-name by Sahagun.

This is also the case with Mictla and Quauhtla, the third and fourth

towns of Torquemada, the Mictlanquactle of Sahagun. Brasseur de

Bourbourg transforms them to Nauhtlan, Tochtlan, and Mictlan-Quauhtla,

in which he is followed by Orozco y Berra.

Vigil, the editor of Tezozomoc, states that the town of Mictlancuauhtla

has disappeared, but in a map or plan of Vera Cruz in the collection of

Icazbalceta, sent in 1580 to Philip II by the alcalde Alvaro Patiño,

the place is still mentioned, under a corrupted form of the name, as

Metlangutla.

The name of the five lords sent by Montezuma to receive Cortés,

conceived to be Quetzalcoatl, are spelled differently by Torquemada

(op. cit., P-379), and they more closely approach the orthography of

Molina’s dictionary. They are, Yohualychan, Tepuztecatl, Tizahua,

Huehuetecatl, and Hueycamecateca.

Notes to Chapter VI. This Xicalanco is not to be confused with the

Mexican colonial town of the same name near the Laguna de Términos,

Tabasco. A branch of the Nahuan Mexican people called Xicalancas from

the name of their first ruler, Xicalancatl, settled on the coast of

Vera Cruz in the region between the present city of Vera Cruz and the

Isthmus of Tehuantepec.

Torquemada relates that the messengers, on leaving the ship of Cortés,

“paddled rapidly away, and came to a little island called Xicalanco,

where they ate, and rested a little, and they left there and came to

a town on the seashore called Tecpantlayacac; from there they went to

Cuetlaxtla, which is some leagues in the interior, where they spent

the night; the lords and chief of the town begged them to remain there

that day and rest, but they replied that the need for speed for their

journey was great.”--Op. cit., lib. IV, cap. XIV, p. 384.

[21] Peter Martyr, op. cit., vol. II, pp. 196-197.

[22] Saville, Goldsmith’s Art in Ancient Mexico. The inventories of the

loot obtained by Cortés are given in English translation on pp. 56-102.

[23] This is quoted from the study of Dr. J. Cheston Morris on the

“Physical and Technographical Characteristics” of the leaves, in the

article, “The Tribute Roll of Montezuma,” edited by Dr. Daniel G.

Brinton, Henry Phillips, Jr., and Dr. J. Cheston Morris, published in

_Transactions of the American Philosophical Society_, vol. XVII, N. S.,

pt. II, art. IV, p. 61, Philadelphia, 1892.

[24] The very important Crónica Mexicana, written by Hernando Alvarado

Tezozomoc, was published by José M. Vigil in his _Biblioteca Mexicana,

Colección Metódica de Obras y Documentos Relativos a la Historia,

Geografía, Literatura, Estadística y Legislación de México_, 1881. The

quotation is from cap. LXXVI, pp. 543-544.

[25] Tezozomoc, op. cit., cap. LXXXIX, p. 600.

[26] Dr. George F. Kunz has kindly placed in our hands his publications

relating to precious stones. In this connection consult his Gems and

Precious Stones, New York, 1892; his important paper, New Observations

on the Occurrences of Precious Stones of Archæological Interest in

America (extrait des _Mémoires et Déliberations du XVᵉ Congrès des

Américanistes tenue à Québec du 10 au 15 Septembre 1906_, Quebec,

1907); and Gems and Precious Stones of Mexico, Mexico, 1907.

[27] The work of Rafael Aguilar y Santillan is entitled Bibliografía

Geológica y Minera de la República Mexicana completada hasta el año de

1904, _Boletín del Instituto Geológico de México_, núm. 17, Mexico,

1908.

[28] The interesting study of Luigi Pigorini describing the Mexican

mosaics in Rome is entitled Gli Antichi Oggetti Messicani Incrostati di

Mosaico esistenti nel Museo Preistorico ed Etnografico di Roma, _Reale

Accademia dei Lincei_, Rome, Anno CCLXXXII, 1884-85, 3ª serie, vol.

XII, pp. 1-9, I pl. with 5 colored illustrations.

[29] The important study by Joseph E. Pogue, The Turquois. A Study of

its History, Mineralogy, Geology, Ethnology, Archæology, Mythology,

Folklore, and Technology, appears as the third memoir of Vol. XII,

_Memoirs of the National Academy of Sciences_, Washington, 1915.

[30] Fray Bernardino de Sahagun, Historia General de las Cosas de

Nueva España que en Doce Libros y Dos Volúmenes Escribió el R. P.

Fr. Bernardino de Sahagun, published by Carlos María de Bustamante,

4 vols., Mexico, 1829. Also published by Lord Kingsborough. The

quotations are from the Bustamante edition, tomo III, lib. II, cap.

VII, p. 284, and cap. VIII, pp. 296-297.

[31] On this subject consult the paper by Dr. A. B. Meyer, Die

Nephritfrage, ein ethnologisches Problem, Berlin, 1883, of which

an abstract (“The Nephrite Question”) was published in _American

Anthropologist_, O. S., vol. I, no. 3, Washington, July, 1888.

[32] Saville, A Votive Adze of Jadeite from Mexico, _Monumental

Records_, New York, May, 1900.

[33] Sahagun, op. cit., tomo III, lib. 10, cap. XXIX, p. 107.

[34] Ibid., cap. vii, p. 19.

[35] The pictorial part of the section of the great work of Sahagun

in Florence was reproduced in facsimile by the late Mexican scholar,

Sr. D. Francisco del Paso y Troncoso, for the Mexican government. Only

recently has the work been received in Mexico, and we are under the

greatest obligations to Sr. D. Luis Castillo Ledon, Director of the

Museo Nacional, Mexico, for a copy which we have recently received,

and which has been of such great assistance in the preparation of

this study of Mexican mosaics. It is an Atlas, denominated Vol. V, of

158 estampas (plates). The plates relating to arts and crafts are to

illustrate Libro IX, and include pl. lv to lxxvi.

[36] We refer the student to the edition of Lord Kingsborough, vol. I.

[37] The Mappe Tlotzin once formed a part of the Boturini collection;

it was afterward acquired by Aubin, later by Goupil, and is now in the

National Library in Paris. It has been published in colors (pl. i-iii)

in Mémoires sur la Peinture Didactique et l’Écriture Figurative des

Anciens Méxicains, par J. M. A. Aubin, with an introduction by E. T.

Hamy, Paris, 1885. The pictures referred to are on pl. ii.

[38] Eduard Seler, L’Orfèverie des Anciens Mexicains et leur Art de

Travailler la Pierre et de Faire des Ornements en Plumes, _Compte rendu

de la VIIIᵉᵐᵉ Session du Congrès International des Américanistes_,

Paris, pp. 401-452. The chapter on the art of the lapidaries is on pp.

418-425. The article, with slight changes in the French translation of

the Nahuatl text, and some revision, is included in Seler’s Gesammelte

Abhandlungen zur Amerikanischen Sprach- und Alterthumskunde, Zweiter

Band, pp. 620-663, Berlin, 1904. The section on the lapidaries’ art is

on pp. 635-640.

[39] Sahagun, op. cit., tomo II, lib. 9, cap. XVII, pp. 389-391.

[40] The goddess is figured in the numerous examples of the tonalamatl

in the various codices, of which facsimiles are to be found in all

important libraries.

[41] The Tonalamatl of the Aubin Collection. An Old Mexican Picture

Manuscript in the Paris National Library. Published at the Expense of

his Excellency the Duke of Loubat. With Introduction and Explanatory

Text by Dr. Eduard Seler. Berlin and London, 1900-1901, p. 115.

[42] The Codex Borbonicus is in the National Library, Paris. It was

published in exact facsimile, with an introduction by Dr. E. T.

Hamy, Paris, 1899. The scene referred to is on p. 18 of the Paris

reproduction.

[43] The important Codex Telleriano Remensis was published in

facsimile, with an introduction by E. T. Hamy, by the Duke of Loubat,

Paris, 1899. The illustration referred to is on p. 22 verso, of the

plates.

[44] Seler, op. cit. (Note 41), p. 118.

[45] Kingsborough, vol. VI, p. 129.

[46] Sahagun, see reproduction of Troncoso, estampa x, fig. 34.

[47] Codex Borbonicus, p. 18.

[48] Tonalamatl Aubin, op. cit., pl. 18.

[49] Seler, op. cit., pp. 114-118.

[50] This quotation is from the Libro de Oro y Tesoro Indico, a

precious manuscript in the library of the late Joaquín García

Icazbalceta. Icazbalceta writes as follows about the author: “We do not

know who was Fr. Andrés de Alcobiz, who in the year 1543 collected in

Spain these laws of the Mexicans. It is published in _Nueva Colección

de Documentos para la Historia de México_, tomo III, p. 313, Mexico,

1891.

[51] Saville, Goldsmith’s Art in Ancient Mexico, p. 119.

[52] Anonymous Conqueror, translated by Marshall H. Saville,

publication of the Cortes Society, no. I, pp. 65-67, New York, 1917.

[53] Obras Históricas de Don Fernando de Alva Ixtlilxochitl, tomo I,

Historia Chichimeca, cap. XXXVI, p. 180, published in Mexico in 1892

under the editorship of Dr. Alfredo Chavero.

[54] We refer here to the labors of Mexican archeologists begun by

Leopoldo Batres, and continued by Dr. Manuel Gamio. An elaborate work,

edited by Gamio, treating of the exploration of this region, has just

been printed in Mexico.

[55] Sahagun, op. cit., tomo III, lib. 10, cap. XXIX, p. 107.

[56] Ibid., tomo I, lib. 3, cap. XII, p. 255.

[57] Saville, The Cruciform Structures of Mitla and Vicinity, _Putnam

Anniversary Volume_, p. 187, New York, 1909.

[58] Relación de Andrés de Tapia, published for the first time by

Icazbalceta in _Colección de Documentos para la Historia de México_,

tomo II, pp. 582-583, Mexico, 1866.

[59] The Relación de Texcoco was written by Juan Bautista Pomar, a

mestizo, and a grandson of the Texcocan king Nezahualpitzintli on his

mother’s side. It was composed for Philip II, and belongs to the class

of Relations like those of Yucatan, etc. It was first published by

Icazbalceta in his _Nueva Colección de Documentos para la Historia de

México_, tomo II. The quotation is from p. 10.

[60] Bernal Díaz, op. cit., vol. II, book VI, chap. xcii, p. 74.

[61] Ibid., chap. CIV, p. 138.

[62] Tezozomoc, op. cit., cap. LXXXVI, p. 592.

[63] Ibid., cap. LXXXVII, p. 593.

[64] Sahagun, op. cit., tomo I, lib. I, cap. XIII, p. 18.

[65] Pomar, op. cit., pp. 8-9.

[66] Seler, Altmexikanische Studien, Ein Kapitel aus dem Geschichtswerk

des P. Sahagun. _Sonderabzug der Veröffentlichungen aus dem Königlichen

Museum für Völkerkunde_, I, 4, p. 123, Berlin, 1890.

[67] Anonymous Conqueror, op. cit., p. 22.

[68] Sahagun, op. cit., tomo III, lib. 8, cap. IX, p. 289.

[69] Antonio Peñafiel, Indumentaria Antigua Vestidos Guerreros y

Civiles de los Mexicanos, pl. 149, Mexico, 1903.

[70] The Codex Coxcatzin has been published in part by Eugène Boban

in _Documents pour Servir à l’Histoire du Méxique_, Atlas, pl. 41-45,

Paris, 1891.

[71] Tezozomoc, op. cit., cap. LXI, p. 469; cap. LXIX, pp. 506-507.

[72] Diego Duran, Historia de las Indias de Nueva-España y Islas de

Tierra Firme, tomo I, cap. LI, p. 407, Mexico, 1867.

[73] Tezozomoc, op. cit., cap. CI, p. 659.

[74] Anonymous Conqueror, op. cit., p. 22.

[75] Thomas Unett Brocklehurst, Mexico To-day, pl. XXXIV, London, 1883.

[76] See Saville, Exploration of Zapotecan Tombs in Southern Mexico,

_American Anthropologist_, N. S., vol. I, pp. 350-362, April, 1899;

and Funeral Urns from Oaxaca, _American Museum Journal_, vol. IV, pp.

49-69, New York, 1904.

[77] Saville, Goldsmith’s Art in Ancient Mexico, pp. 151-163, pl. i,

viii.

[78] Manuel Gamio, Los Monumentos Arqueológicos de las Inmediaciones

de Chalchihuites, Zacatecas, sobretiro del tomo II de los _Anales del

Museo Nacional de Arqueología, Historia y Etnología_, pp. 467-492,

5 plans, 8 pl., Mexico, 1910. This is the first piece of work by

Gamio, and presents the results of the first important archeological

exploration undertaken in this part of Mexico.

[79] We have just received the first number (Jan.-Feb., 1922) of

tomo I, época 4ª, of the _Anales del Museo Nacional de Arqueología,

Historia y Etnografía_ of Mexico, which have long been interrupted. In

it is announced the forthcoming appearance of a paper relating to this

subject, “Máscara con Mosaicos de Turquesas.--Dictámenes Periciales.”

It is to be hoped that the authenticity of this object will be cleared

of all suspicion by the proposed study.

[80] On this subject consult Saville, Precolumbian Decoration of the

Teeth in Ecuador, etc., _American Anthropologist_, N. S., vol. 15,

1913; reprinted as _Contributions from the Heye Museum_, vol. I, no. 2,

1913.

[81] David Casares, A Notice of Yucatan with Some Remarks on its Water

Supply, _Proceedings of the American Antiquarian Society_, pp. 207-230,

Oct., 1905.

[82] Diego de Landa, Historia de las Cosas de Yucatan, edition of Juan

de Dios de la Rada y Delgado, p. 84, Madrid, 1881.

[83] Casares, op. cit., p. 226.

[84] William H. Holmes, Archeological Studies among the Ancient Cities

of Mexico, _Anthropological Series, Field Columbian Museum_, vol. I,

no. 1, Chicago, 1895. Part I, Monuments of Yucatan, Section on Chichen

Itza, p. 137.

[85] Seler, Codex Vaticanus No. 3773. Elucidation published at the

expense of the Duke of Loubat, Berlin and London, 1902-1903. In this

study Seler treats at length of the God Xipe Totec.

[86] Sahagun, op. cit., tomo I, lib. I, cap. XVIII, p. 28.

[87] The two mosaic masks on the sculptured wall at Chichen Itza

are taken from the drawings on pl. 46 and 47 of the great work of

Alfred P. Maudslay published as part of _Biologia Centrali-Americana:

or Contributions to the Knowledge of the Fauna and Flora of Mexico

and Central America_, edited by F. Ducane Godman and Osbert Salvin.

Archæology, vol. III (Plates). London, 1895-1902. The crowns are from

pl. 38, 49-59. The crown with the feathers is from the doorway column

of Temple A, of the Ball Court.

[88] The first extended study of Mexican turquois mosaics, based

especially on some of the specimens now in the British Museum, was made

by E. T. Stevens and published in his Flint Chips, pp. 324-328, London,

1870. Read’s paper did not appear until 1895.

[89] See Maudslay’s edition of Bernal Díaz, op. cit., vol. I, app.,

pp. 299-302. Maudslay gives photographs of the two wooden masks in the

British Museum, which he calls “Masks of Quetzalcoatl,” and of the

skull mask which he denominates “Mask of Tezcatlipoca.”

[90] See List of Works following.

[91] See translation in Saville, Goldsmith’s Art in Ancient Mexico, pp.

126-127.

[92] See List of Works following.

[93] See List of Works following. Our illustration is a photograph of

the colored lithographic plate of Uhle.

[94] Zelia Nuttall, On Ancient Mexican Shields, _Separat-Abdruck aus

Internationales Archiv für Ethnographie_, Bd. V, 21 pp., Leiden, 1892.

[95] Read, in his study, gives only a drawing of this shield. Our

illustration, a direct photograph, does not show the designs so clearly

as the drawing.

[96] Our illustration is a copy of the photograph published by Heger.

See List of Works following.

[97] Seler, Codex Fejérváry, An Old Mexican Picture Manuscript in

the Liverpool Free Public Museum, published at the Expense of His

Excellency the Duke of Loubat, p. 210, Berlin and London, 1901-1902.

[98] The Codex Nuttall or Zouche was published by the Peabody Museum,

Cambridge, in 1892. The original is now in the British Museum.

[99] On this subject consult the elucidations of Mexican codices by

Seler, published at the expense of the Duke of Loubat. Also, Mexican

and Central American Antiquities, Calendar Systems, and History,

being translations from the German of papers by Seler, Förstemann,

and others, published as _Bulletin 28, Bureau of American Ethnology_,

Washington, 1904. The studies of C. P. Bowditch will be found in his

Numeration, Calendar Systems and Astronomical Knowledge of the Mayas,

Cambridge, Mass., 1910.

[100] Hermann Beyer, El llamado “Calendario Azteca,” Mexico, 1921, an

important study of interpretation of the calendar stone of the Aztecs.

[101] This specimen was first illustrated by Lehmann in his paper, Die

altmexikanischen Mosaiken des Ethnographischen Museums in Kopenhagen,

_Globus_, 1907. Our illustration is a drawing from the photograph

reproduced in this study.

[102] See Note 101.

[103] See Heger, 1892, in List of Works.

[104] Our drawing is from the photograph published by Lehmann in his

paper in the _Proceedings of the Fifteenth International Congress of

Americanists_, Quebec, 1907.

[105] Our drawing of this specimen is made from the illustration

published by Oppel. See List of Works, 1896.

[106] Illustrations of this piece have just been published for the

first time by Lehmann in his Altmexikanische Kunstgeschichte: Ein

Entwurf in Umrissen, Berlin, 1922(?).

[107] See Seler’s remarks to Heger’s paper, List of Works, 1890.

[108] Consult Seler, Altmexikanische Knochenrasseln, _Gesammelte

Abhandlungen_, Zweiter Band, pp. 672-694, Berlin, 1904; also Lumholtz,

Unknown Mexico, vol. ii, pp. 428-430, New York, 1902.

[109] As Colini’s paper is not easily consulted, we append his

description of these three Mexican wooden objects:

“L’idolo, a guisa di figura umana, è alto m.o. 45 [17¾ inches high].

La testa è molto grande, senza alcuna proporzione con le altre

parti del corpo ed è sormontana da un ornamento. La faccia conserva

ancora traccie del rosso con cui era colorita, il naso è piccolo ma

largo e schiacciato, gli occhi sono incavature ovali ed hanno sotto

tre incisioni circolari, come se si fossero volute rappresentare

le occhiaje di persona vecchia o malata. Anche vicino agli angoli

della bocca, poco sopra, sono incise due linee oblique, riempite di

bianco, quasi a guisa di rughe. Tiene le braccia sollevate con le

mani sull’ornamento della testa, ma le altre parti del corpo non sono

affatto distinte. Posa sopra una base decorata con incisioni colorite

in bianco, di cui manca però una parte, cosicché non è possibile

comprendere pienamente la sua forma primitiva, la quale sembra che

fosse rettangolare. In ogni modo era troppo sottile per sostenere

l’idolo, e perciò dobbiamo credere che facesse parte di un apparecchio

più complicato.

“Delle maschere l’una (V. Tav. in fine, fig. 2) nel tipo e

nell’espressione somiglia a quella incrosta di mosaico, descritta da

Ulisse Aldrovandi la quale oggi si conserva nel Museo Etnografico

Nazionale di Roma [6⅞ inches high]. Il naso è lungo, sottile ed

arcuato; ma non essendo incavato nell’interno, la maschera non potrebbe

adattarsi faccia. Gli occhi consistono in rozze aperture ovali, sotto

le quali, a breve distanza, sono incisi due profondi solchi, a guisa

di semicerchi, come nell’idolo. Intorno la fronte, sopra la radice

del naso, corre una larga fascia in rilievo. Fra le labbra inferiore

allungate, esce la lingua, che si ripiega sul mento: della parte

inferiore non è possibile formarsi un concetto perchè è stata tagliata.

Conserva qua e là le traccie della tinta rossa, ma sono meno evidenti

che nell’idoli. Sulla fascia della fronte, nella lingua e sul naso

possono ancora notarsi delle linee incise, riempite di materia bianca.

“L’altra maschera (tav., fig. I) è lavorata con maggiore cura

[7⅛ inches high]: ha la faccia simmetrica nelle varie parti e

proporzionata. Le labbra sono piccole, ma, quello inferiore essendo

rotto, non è possibile indovinarne la forma. Ha il naso arcuato, e

largo alla base, ed è internamente incavato in modo che la maschera

potrebbe adattarsi alla faccia, e siccome la bocca, le narici e gli

occhi sono forati, cosi il portatore potrebbe benissimo vedere,

respirare e parlare. Nella parte inferiore delle occhiaje, agli

angoli, si notano due piccole incavature ad arco, la cui forma

farebbe supporre che vi fossero adattati pezzi di madreperla a guisa

di occhi, come in quelle del Museo Christy. In generale i lineamente

mostrano quella espressione placida e contemplativa, che, secondo il

Tylor, e caratteristica dei lavori aztechi e degli egiziani, tanto

se si riguardano le massiccie sculture in pietra, quanto le piccole

teste di terracotta. Ambedue queste maschere, nella parte superiore

corrispondente alla fronte, hanno fori nei quali forse s’immettevano

cordoncini per sospenderle: la prima ne ha due grandi agli angoli,

l’altra quattro più piccoli intorno.” (See note under List of Works,

1885.)

[110] D. I. Bushnell, Jr., Two Ancient Mexican Atlatls, _American

Anthropologist_, N. S., vol. 7, no. 2, 1905; also North American

Ethnographical Material in Italian Collections, _ibid._, vol. 8, 1906.

[111] See Note 94.

[112] Fr. Toribio Motolinia, Historia de los Indios de Nueva

España, Tratado Tercero, cap. XX, pp. 247-249, edition published by

Icazbalceta, _Colección de Documentos para la Historia de México_, tomo

1, Mexico, 1858.

[113] Consult Frederick Starr, The Little Pottery Objects of Lake

Chapala, Mexico, _Bulletin II, Department of Anthropology, University

of Chicago_, Chicago, 1897.

[114] An important summary of these discoveries has recently been

published by Gamio; see Las Excavaciones del Pedregal de San Angel y

la Cultura Arcaica del Valle de Mexico, _American Anthropologist_,

N. S., vol. 22, no. 2, 1920. Also the paper of Hermann Beyer, Sobre

Antigüedades del Pedregal de San Angel, _Memorias de la Sociedad

Científica “Antonio Alzate” de México_, tomo 37, núm. 8, Oct., 1917;

and Ramon Mena, El Hombre de “El Pedregal” de San Angel, _Escuela

Naciona, Preparatoria Curso de 1918_.

LIST OF WORKS DESCRIBING MEXICAN MOSAICS

1648

ALDROVANUS, ULYSSES. Musæum metallicum. Bologna.

In this work are a brief description (p. 550) and illustrations of two

of the specimens now in the Museum in Rome, namely, one of the knife

handles (our pl. XXXIX), and the mask (our pl. VIII). This book is vol.

XIII of the fourteen volumes of the _Opera Omnia_ of Aldrovanus, issued

in 1602-1668.

1861

TYLOR, E. B. Anahuac: or Mexico and the Mexicans, ancient and modern.

London.

See pp. 110, 235, 337-339, I fig. Dr. Tylor illustrates the knife with

handle in the figure on p. 101. In the appendix (pp. 337-339), article

V is a “Description of three very rare specimens of ancient Mexican

mosaic work (in the collection of Henry Christy, Esq.).” These objects

are now in the British Museum.

1866

BRASSEUR DE BOURBOURG, E., and WALDECK, F. Palenque et autres ruines de

l’ancienne civilisation du Mexique. Collection de vues, bas-reliefs,

morceaux d’architecture, coupes, vases, terre cuites, cartées et plans,

dessinés d’après nature et relevés par M. de Waldeck. Texte rédigé par

M. Brasseur de Bourbourg.... Ouvrage publié sous les auspices de S.

E. M. le Ministre de l’instruction publique. Paris. Arthur Bertrand,

Editeur. Plates. Monuments anciens du Mexique.

Describes (p. VIII) and illustrates in color (pl. XLIII, XLIV) the

mosaic-handled knife and mosaic skull mask formerly in the Hertz

collection, now in the British Museum.

1867

LÉOUZON LE DUC, L. Rapport sur les antiquités mexicaines conservées à

Copenhague. _Archives de la Commission Scientifique du Mexique_, Tome

III. Paris.

Two Mexican mosaics in the Copenhagen Museum are described (tome III,

pp. 157-158), as follows:

“Voici maintenant trois pièces qui, à mon avis, méritent une attention

toute particulière.

“D’abord, une tête d’alligator, de 19 centimètres de longueur. Cette

tête est sculptée en bois et creusée par derrière. La gueule de

l’alligator est largement ouverte et ses mâchoires encadrent une tête

humaine fixée au fond du palais.

“Ensuite, une tête d’idole, également sculptée en bois et évidée

intérieurement, avec une coiffure très-élevée et évasée au sommet,

d’une hauteur totale, y compris la tête, de 24 centimètres. La bouche

de l’idole est vaste, ses lèvres fortement tendues découvrent une

double rangée de longues dents; ses oreilles sont ornées de pendelogues.

“Ces deux pièces offrent cette singularité remarquable qu’elles sont

garnies en partie, et ont dû l’avoir été en entier, de petits fragments

d’os la plupart quadrangulaires, blanc ou teints en vert, en rouge et

en noir, fixés sur le bois à l’aide d’une espèce de résine, ce qui leur

donne l’aspect d’une mosaïque. Fort endommagées, elles n’ont guère

conservé d’intacts que les yeux, dont les prunelles sont formées d’os

blancs, noirs et rouges, et entourées d’un cordon d’os verts. L’état

du bois qui les compose suffrirait à lui seul pour établir leur haute

antiquité, si déjà leur caractère symbolique ne la rendait évidente.

L’une et l’autre out été achetées à Rome, où l’on suppose qu’elles

avaient été apportées de Mexico par un missionnaire.”

1869

SQUIER, E. G. Observations on a collection of chalchihuitls from

Central America. _Annals of the New York Lyceum of Natural History_,

vol. IX, August, article XIV, pp. 252-253, fig. I.

The mosaic skull in the British Museum is illustrated, after Waldeck.

1870

STEVENS, EDWARD T. Flint chips. A guide to prehistoric archæology,

as illustrated by the collection in the Blackmore Museum, Salisbury.

London.

Aztec mosaic work, pp. 324-328. Describes specimens in the Christy

collection.

1880

STEINHAUER, C. L. Das Königliche Ethnographische Museum zu Copenhagen.

Hand-catalog für die Besuchenden. Copenhagen.

Describes (p. 19) the two mosaics in the Copenhagen Museum. In the 1866

edition the description is on p. 22.

1883

BROCKLEHURST, THOMAS UNETT. Mexico to-day: a country with a great

future, and a glance at the prehistoric remains and antiquities of the

Montezumas. London.

Describes (p. 184) and reproduces in colors (pl. XXXIII) the

human-skull mask in the British Museum. Pl. XXXIV illustrates the

goddess Coatlicue, showing the turquois-mosaic in colors--the specimen

to which Peñafiel refers, vide 1903. See our pl. II.

1885

COLINI, G. A. Collezioni etnografiche del Museo Borgiano. _Bollettino

della Società Geografica Italiana_, Roma, Anno XIX, vol. XXII; serie

II, vol. X, pp. 316-325, 914-932.

In this article Colini (pp. 324-325) describes two masks and an idol

in the Museo Borgiano in Rome. Regarding these specimens he quotes

from Vitæ Synopsis Stephani Borgiæ, S. R. E. Cardinalis amplissimi,

S. Congr. de Propaganda Fide Præfecti, Roma, 1805, p. 44, “Classis

mexicana: multa lignea et testacea idolorum simulacra forma et figura

singulari, ac gente mexicanæ propia.” He describes the idol as being

made of wood in the form of a human figure, 45 cm. high. The two masks

of wood are described, and figured on the plate containing drawings

of other American antiquities. It is highly probable that these three

objects were formerly decorated with mosaic.

PIGORINI, LUIGI. Gli antichi oggetti Messicani incrostati di mosaico

esistenti nel Museo Preistorico ed Ethnografico di Roma. _Reale

Accademia dei Lincei_, Anno CCLXXXII, 1884-1885. 9 pp., I pl. with 5

colored figs.

BASTIAN, A. Zwei altmexikanische Mosaiken. _Verhandlungen der Berliner

Gesellschaft für Anthropologie_, p. 201.

1888

BASTIAN, A., and UHLE, MAX. Schädelmaske von Mexico und Analogien

aus der Südsee. _Veröffentlichungen aus dem Königlichen Museum für

Völkerkunde, Herausgegeben von der Verwaltung_, Berlin, Oct.

A description (pp. 2-3) and colored illustration (T. I., I) of the

mosaic-skull mask in the Berlin Museum.

ANDREE, RICHARD. Die altmexikanischen Mosaiken. _Beitrage zur

Ethnographie von Amerika aus dem Internationalen Archiv für

Ethnographie._ Leiden.

Brief notice (p. 8) of the specimen in Gotha.

1889

ANDREE, RICHARD. Ethnographische Parallelen und Vergleiche. Neue Folge.

Leipzig.

Description (pp. 127-130) of the mosaic specimen in Gotha.

1890

PEÑAFIEL, ANTONIO. Monumentos del arte Mexicano antiguo. Berlin.

Description (Text, p. 23) and illustration in colors (Atlas, pl. 123)

of the knife with mosaic handle in the British Museum.

ANDREE, RICHARD. Sur une ancienne mosaique mexicaine. _Congrès

International des Américanistes, Compte-rendu de la septième session_,

Berlin, 1888. Berlin.

Describes the Gotha specimen (pp. 146-148).

HEGER, FRANZ. Sur quelques objets archéologiques du Mexique et

de l’Amérique du Sud. _Congrès International des Américanistes,

Compte-rendu de la septième session_, Berlin, 1888, pp. 93-97.

The author describes (p. 94) one of the mosaic pieces in the Vienna

Museum. In the discussion of this paper, Seler (p. 104) identifies the

animal-like figure as representing the god Xolotl.

1892

PI Y MARGIL, FRANCISCO. Historia de la América antecolombiana. Tomo

primero, segunda parte. Barcelona.

Two colored illustrations (opposite p. 1214) of the mosaic-handled

knife in the British Museum.

HEGER, FRANZ. Altmexikanische Reliquien aus dem Schlosse Ambras in

Tirol. _Annalen des K. K. Naturhistorischen Hofmuseums_, B. VII, Heft

4, pp. 310-400, pl. XVIII, XXII. Vienna.

In this paper Dr. Heger describes and illustrates the shield and animal

head (three views) of turquois mosaic in the Vienna Museum.

1895

READ, CHARLES HERCULES. On an ancient Mexican head-piece coated with

mosaic. _Archæologia_, vol. LIV, 16 pp., pl. XXVIII, fig. 1-6, London.

Gives in colors and describes for the first time the mosaic head-piece,

and illustrates all but one of the eight other pieces, in the British

Museum.

1896

OPPEL, A. Die altmexikanischen Mosaiken. _Globus_, Bd. LXX, Nr. 1

(June), pp. 4-12, 15 fig., Braunschweig.

Figures seven mosaic pieces in the British Museum, five pieces in Rome,

one piece in Berlin, a piece in Gotha, and a section of the shield in

Vienna.

1903

PEÑAFIEL, ANTONIO. Indumentaria Antigua Mexicana. Vestidos Guerreros y

Civiles de los Mexicanos. Mexico.

Dr. Peñafiel, in chapter XXIII, under the heading “Incrustaciones

de Mosaico,” describes some of the mosaic pieces in Europe which he

states are the most important specimens. “Of this class of works the

Museo Nacional (Mexico) can count as having only one, in the statue

of Coatlicue coming from Tehuacan.” On pl. 26 are given the British

Museum knife, and the two knife-handles in Rome; on pl. 117 one of the

masks in Rome; on pl. 118(A) the skull mask in Berlin, and (B) the mask

in Rome; pl. 123 is the femur musical instrument in Rome; and pl. 168

restorations of the knife-handle specimens with blades, in Rome. These

illustrations are all in colors, excepting the last.

1906

BUSHNELL, DAVID I., Jr. North American ethnographical material

in Italian museums. _American Anthropologist_, N. S., vol. VIII,

Lancaster, Pa.

On pp. 245-246 the author briefly describes the five mosaic pieces in

Rome, and regarding one of the masks (our pl. VII, _a_) quotes from the

inventory of the Guardaroba Medicea, 1553, showing the specimen to have

been in the Medici collection.

LEHMANN, WALTER. Altmexikanische Mosaiken und die Geschenke König

Motecuzomas und Cortés. _Globus_, Bd. XV, Nr. 20, pp. 318-322,

Braunschweig, 29 Nov.

In this study Lehmann enumerates the twenty-three Mexican mosaic pieces

in European museums and gives considerable documentary material from

the early chroniclers.

1907

KUNZ, GEORGE FREDERICK. Gems and precious stones of Mexico. Mexico.

On pp. 7-10, Dr. Kunz discusses turquois and describes some of the

turquois mosaic specimens in European museums. On p. 52 he concludes

that “it must be considered as possible, at least, that other

localities containing turquois were once known, and may be hereafter

re-discovered.”

LEHMANN, WALTER. Altmexikanische Mosaiken in Kgl. Museum für

Völkerkunde zu Berlin. _Congrès International des Américanistes, XVᵉ

Session, tenue à Quebec en 1906_, tome II, pp. 339-349, 4 fig., Quebec.

Describes and illustrates two pieces of Mexican mosaics in the

Ethnographical Museum of Berlin, a double-jaguar figure, and a jaguar

head. The first came from the estate of Alexander von Humboldt, the

second was transferred to the Berlin Museum from the Ducal Museum of

Braunschweig.

LEHMANN, WALTER. Die altmexikanischen Mosaiken des Ethnographischen

Museums in Kopenhagen. _Globus_, Bd. XCI, Nr. 21, pp. 332-335, 6 June,

1907. Abb. I-III.

The author describes and figures the two pieces in Copenhagen, giving

front and side views, and two different drawings of one of the masks in

Rome.

1908

DÍAZ DEL CASTILLO, BERNAL. (Maudslay, A. P., translator and editor.)

The true history of the conquest of New Spain. Edition of the Hakluyt

Society, vol. I, London.

Under the title “Montezuma’s Gifts to Cortés,” Maudslay describes

(Appendix, pp. 299-302) and illustrates (pl. 13-16) the three mosaic

masks in the British Museum. Pl. 16 is a rear view of the skull mask

showing the leather strap by which it was attached to the head. This

mask Maudslay identifies as probably that of Tezcatlipoca, and the

other two as belonging to Quetzalcoatl.

1910

GAMIO, MANUEL. Los monumentos arqueológicos de las inmediaciones de

Chalchihuites, Zacatecas. _Anales del Museo Nacional de Arqueología,

Historia y Etnología_, tome II, pp. 469-492, pls. 1-8, Mexico.

On pl. 8 are figured two pieces of mosaic-work found in the ruins near

Chalchihuites.

BLACKISTON, A. HOOTON. Recent discoveries in Honduras. _American

Anthropologist_, N. S., vol. 12, Lancaster, Pa.

Describes (p. 539) and illustrates (pl. XLVI) the mosaic wooden mask

found in 1908 in a cave in an arroyo on the headwaters of a small

stream flowing into the Rio Chamelecon, about 25 miles distant from the

ruins of the ancient city of Naco. This specimen is now in the Museum

of the American Indian, Heye Foundation. See our pl. XVII.

1912

JOYCE, T. A. A short guide to the American antiquities in the British

Museum. London.

Joyce describes (p. 14) and illustrates (figs. 12-17) six of the mosaic

pieces in the British Museum.

1914

JOYCE, T. A. Mexican archæology. An introduction to the archæology of

the Mexican and Mayan civilizations of pre-Spanish America. New York

and London.

In pl. I is reproduced in colors the skull mask, and in pl. XVIII, fig.

1, the knife with handle. Reference to these is made on p. 141.

HOLMES, W. H. Masterpieces of aboriginal American art. II. Mosaic

work, minor examples. _Art and Archæology_, vol. I, no. 3, Washington,

November.

A description (pp. 91-102) of some of the more important specimens of

mosaics, with colored frontispiece and 9 figures.

1915

POGUE, JOSEPH E. The turquoise. A study of its history, mineralogy,

geology, ethnology, archæology, mythology, folklore, and technology.

_Memoirs of the National Academy of Sciences_, vol. XII, part II, third

memoir, Washington.

Mexican mosaics are described on pp. 93-97; fig. 4 illustrates the bird

mask in Gotha; pl. 15-17, Mexican mosaics in the British Museum and in

Rome (10 pieces). The Use of Turquois in Mexico and Central America:

Use as Attested by Historical Evidence, pp. 90-92; Use as Attested by

Objects, pp. 93-97.

1921

ARREOLA, JOSÉ MARÍA. Como legítima el Museo Nacional ha adquirido una

pieza falsificada. _El Excelsior_, Mexico, Oct. 20.

Illustrates in this signed newspaper article a stone mask with turquois

mosaic decoration said to have been found in Guerrero. He concludes

that it is fraudulent.

LEHMANN, WALTER. Altmexikanische Kunstgeschichte ein Entwurf in

Umrissen. Band 8 des Orbis Pictus. Weltkunst-Bücherei herausgegeben von

Paul Westheim. Berlin.

In this short study of old Mexican art history Dr. Lehmann illustrates

a number of notable Mexican antiquities. The Xolotl figure in Vienna

is illustrated, front and side views, pl. 7, and the crouching animal

figure in the British Museum is given on pl. 8. He gives brief

descriptions in the description of plates on pp. 22-23.

1922

GAMIO, MANUEL. Una máscara de mosaico falsificada. [A counterfeit

mosaic mask.] _Ethnos_, tomo I, núms. 8-12, pp. 260-264, Mexico, Nov.

1920-Mar. 1921.

Gamio denounces as fraudulent the stone mosaic mask claimed to have

been discovered in Guerrero by Porfirio Aguirre.

MENA, RAMON. La arqueología debe de estar en manos de arqueológicos.

_El Universal_, Mexico, April 2.

In this signed newspaper article Mena defends the authenticity of the

stone mask decorated with turquois mosaic, said to have been found in

Guerrero.

Transcriber’s Notes:

Italics are shown thus: _sloping_.

Small capitals have been capitalised.

Variations in spelling and hyphenation are retained.

Punctuation has been retained as published.