The Mexican and Central American ruins make it certain that in ancient
times an important civilization existed in that part of the continent,
which must have begun at a remote period in the past. If they have any
significance, this must be accepted as an ascertained fact. A large
proportion of them had been forgotten in the forests, or become mythical
and mysterious, long before the arrival of the Spaniards.
In 1520, three hundred and fifty years ago, the forest which so largely
covers Yucatan, Guatemala, and Chiapa was growing as it grows now; yes,
four hundred and fifty years ago, for it was there a century previous to
this date, when, the Maya kingdom being broken up, one of its princes
fled into this forest with a portion of his people, the Itzas, and
settled at Lake Peten. It was the same then as now. How many additional
centuries it had existed no one can tell. If its age could be told, it
would still be necessary to consider that the ruins hidden in it are
much older than the forest, and that the period of civilization they
represent closed long before it was established.
In the ages previous to the beginning of this immense forest, the region
it covers was the seat of a civilization which grew up to a high degree
of development, flourished a long time, and finally declined, until its
cities were deserted, and its cultivated fields left to the wild
influences of nature. It may be safely assumed that both the
forest-covered ruins and the forest itself are far older than the Aztec
period; but who can tell how much older? Copan, first discovered and
described three hundred years ago, was then as strange to the natives
dwelling near it as the old Chaldean ruins are to the Arabs who wander
over the wasted plains of Lower Mesopotamia. Native tradition had
forgotten its history and become silent in regard to it. How long had
ruined Copan been in this condition? No one can tell. Manifestly it was
forgotten, left buried in the forest without recollection of its
history, long before Montezuma's people, the Aztecs, rose to power; and
it is easily understood that this old city had an important history
previous to that unknown time in the past when war, revolution, or some
other agency of destruction put an end to its career and left it to
become what it is now.
Moreover, these old ruins, in all cases, show us only the cities last
occupied in the periods to which they belong. Doubtless others still
older preceded them; and, besides, it can be seen that some of the
ruined cities which can now be traced were several times renewed by
reconstructions. We must consider, also, that building magnificent
cities is not the first work of an original civilization. The
development was necessarily gradual. Its first period was more or less
rude. The art of building and ornamenting such edifices arose slowly.
Many ages must have been required to develop such admirable skill in
masonry and ornamentation. Therefore the period between the beginning of
this mysterious development of civilized life and the first builders who
used cut stone laid in mortar and cement, and covered their work with
beautifully sculptured ornaments and inscriptions, must have been very
long.
We have no measure of the time, no clew to the old dates, nothing
whatever, beyond such considerations as I have stated, to warrant even a
vague hypothesis. It can be seen clearly that the beginning of this old
civilization was much older than the earliest great cities, and, also,
that these were much more ancient than the time when any of the later
built or reconstructed cities whose relics still exist, were left to
decay. If we suppose Palenque to have been deserted some six hundred
years previous to the Spanish Conquest, this date will carry us back
only to the last days of its history as an inhabited city. Beyond it, in
the distant past, is a vast period, in which the civilization
represented by Palenque was developed, made capable of building such
cities, and then carried on through the many ages during which cities
became numerous, flourished, grew old, and gave place to others, until
the long history of Palenque itself began.
Those who have sought to discredit what is told of the Aztec
civilization and the empire of Montezuma have never failed to admit
fully the significance of Copan, Palenque, and Mitla. One or two
writers, pursuing the assumption that the barbarous tribes at the north
and the old Mexicans were of the same race, and substantially the same
people, have undertaken to give us the history of Montezuma's empire
"entirely rewritten," and show that his people were "Mexican savages."
In their hands Montezuma is transformed into a barbarous Indian chief,
and the city of Mexico becomes a rude Indian village, situated among the
islands and lagoons of an everglade which afforded unusual facilities
"for fishing and snaring birds." One goes so far as to maintain this
with considerable vehemence and amusing unconsciousness of absurdity. He
is sure that Montezuma was nothing more than the principal chief of a
parcel of wild Indian tribes, and that the Pueblos are wild Indians
changed to their present condition by Spanish influence. There is
something in this akin to lunacy.
But this topic will receive more attention in another place. I bring it
to view here because those who maintain so strangely that the Aztecs
were Indian savages, admit all that is claimed for the wonderful ruins
at the south, and give them a very great antiquity. They maintain,
however, that the civilization represented by these ruins was brought to
this continent in remote pre-historic times by the people known as
Phoenicians, and their method of finding the Phoenicians at Palenque,
Copan, and every where else, is similar in character and value to that
by which they transform the Aztec empire into a rude confederacy of wild
Indians.