The last eighteen sheets are not so filled with figures. They seem to be signs of Deities, and images of various objects. According to this Calendar in the Escurial, the Mexican year contained 286 days, divided into 22 months of 13 days.

Each day is represented by a different sign, taken from some natural object, a serpent, a dog, a lizard, a reed, a house, etc. The signs of days in the Calendar of the Escurial are precisely the same with those mentioned by Boturini, Idea, etc. p. 45. But, if we inay give credit to that author, the Mexican year contained 360 days, divided into 18 months of 20 days. The order of days in every month was computed, according to him, first by what he calls a tridecennary progression of days from one to thirteen, in the same manner as in the Calendar of the Escurial, and then by a septenary progression of days from one to seventy, making in all twenty. In this Calendar, not only the signs which distinguish each day, but the qualities supposed to be peculiar to each month, are marked. There are certain weaknesses which seem to accompany the human mind through every stage of its progress in observation and science. Slender as was the knowledge of the Mexicans in Astronomy, it appears to have been already connected with judicial Astrology. The fortune and character of persons born in each month are supposed to be decided by some superior influence predominant at the time of nativity. Hence it is foretold in the Calendar, that all who are born in one month will be rich, in another, warlike, in a third, luxurious, etc. The pasteboard, or whatever substance it may be, on which the Calendar in the Escurial is painted, seems, by Mr. Waddilove's description of it, to resemble nearly that in the Imperial Library at Vienna. In several particulars, the figures bear some likeness to those in the plate which I have published. The figures marked D. which induced me to conjecture that this painting might be a tribute-roll similar to those published by Purchas and the Archbishop of Toledo, Mr. Waddilove supposes to be signs of days: and I have such confidence in the accuracy of his observations, as to conclude his opinion to be well founded. It appears, from the characters in which the explanations of the figures are written, that this curious monument of Mexican art has been obtained, soon after the conquest of the empire. It is singular that it should never have been mentioned by any Spanish author.

NOTE XXXVI. p. 197.

The first was called the Prince of the deathful Lance; the second, the Divider of Men; the third, the Shedder of Blood; the fourth, the Lord of the Dark-house. Acosta, Lib. vi. c. 25

NOTE XXXVII. p. 202.

The temple of Cholula, which was deemed more holy than any in New Spain, was likewise the most considerable. But it was nothing more than a mount of solid earth. According to Torquemada, it was above a quarter of a league in circuit at the base, and rose to the height of forty fathom. Mon. Ind. Lib. iii. c. 19. Even M. Clavigero acknowledges that all the Mexican temples were solid structures, or earthen mounts, and of consequence cannot be considered as any evidence of their having made any considerable progress in the art of building.

II. 207.

•

Clavig.

From inspecting various figures of temples in the paintings engraved by Purchas, there seems to be some reason for suspecting, that all their temples were constructed in the same manner. See Vol. iii. p. 1109, 1110, 1113.

NOTE XXXVIII. p. 203.

Not only in Tlascala and Tepeaca, but even in Mexico itself, the houses of the people were mere huts built with turf, or mud, or the branches of trees. They were extremely low and slight, and without any furniture but a few earthen vessels. Like the rudest Indians, several families resided under the same roof, without having any separate apartment. Herrera, Dec. 2. lib. vii. c. 13. lib. x. c. 22. Dec. 3. lib. iv. c. 17. Torquem. lib. iii. c. 23.

NOTE XXXIX. p. 203.

I am informed by a person who resided long in New Spain, and visited almost every province of it, that there is not, in all

the extent of that vast empire, any monument, or vestige of any building more ancient than the conquest, nor of any bridge or highway, except some remains of the causeway from Guadaloupe to that gate of Mexico by which Cortes entered the city. MS. penes me. The author of another account in manuscript, observes, "That at this day there does not remain even the smallest vestige of the existence of any ancient Indian building, public or private, either in Mexico or in any province of New Spain. I have travelled (says he) through all the countries adjacent to them, viz. New Galicia, New Biscay, New Mexico, Sonora, Cinaloa, the New Kingdom of Leon, and New Santandero, without having observed any monument worth notice, except some ruins near an ancient village in the valley de Casas Grandes, in lat. N. 30o. 46′. longit. 258°. 24'. from the island of Teneriffe, or 460 leagues N. N. W. from Mexico." He describes these ruins minutely, and they appear to be the remains of a paltry building of turf and stone, plaistered over with white earth or lime. A missionary informed that gentleman, that he had discovered the ruins of another edifice similar to the former, about a hundred leagues towards N. W. on the banks of the river St. Pedro. MS. penes me.

These testimonies derive great credit from one circumstance, that they were not given in support of any particular system or theory, but as simple answers to queries which I had proposed. It is probable, however, that when these gentlemen assert, that no ruins or monuments of any ancient work whatever are now to be discovered in the Mexican empire, they meant that there were no such ruins or monuments as conveyed any idea of grandeur or magnificence, in the works of its ancient inhabitants. For it appears from the testimony of several Spanish authors, that in Otumba, Tlascala, Cholula, etc. some vestiges of ancient buildings are still visible. Villa Segnor Theatro Amer. p. 143, 308, 353. De Fran. Ant. Lorenzana, formerly archbishop of Mexico, and now of Toledo, in his introduction to that edition of the Cartas de relacion of Cortes, which he published at Mexico, mentions some ruins which are still visible in several of the towns through which Cortes passed, on his way to the capital, p. 4, etc. But neither of these authors give any description of them, and they seem to be so very inconsiderable, as to shew only that some buildings had once been there. The large mount of earth at Cholula, which the Spaniards dignified with the name

of temple, still remains, but without any steps by which to ascend, or any facing of stone. It appears now like a natural mount, covered with grass and shrubs, and possibly it was never any thing more. Torquem. lib. iii. c. 19. I have received a minute description of the remains of a temple near Cuernavaca, on the road from Mexico to Acapulco. It is composed of large stones, fitted to each other as nicely as those in the buildings of the Peruvians, which are hereafter mentioned. At the foundation it forms a square of twenty-five yards; but as it rises in height, it diminishes in extent, not gradually, but by being contracted suddenly at regular distances, so that it must have resembled the figure B in the plate. It terminated, it is said, in a spire,

NOTE XL. p. 207.'

The exaggeration of the Spanish historians, with respect to the number of human victims sacrificed in Mexico, appears to be very great. According to Gomara, there was no year in which twenty thousand human victims were not offered to the Mexican divinities, and in some years they amounted to fifty thousand. Cron. c. 229. The skulls of those unhappy persons were ranged in order in a building erected for that purpose, and two of Cortes's officers who had counted them, informed Gomara that their number was a hundred and thirty-six thousand. Ibid. c. 82. Herrera's account is still more incredible, that the number of victims was so great, that five thousand have been sacrificed in one day, nay, on some occasions, no less than twenty thousand. Dec. 3. lib. ii. c. 16. Torquemada goes beyond both in extravagance, for he asserts, that twenty thousand children, exclusive of other victims, were slaughtered annually. Mon. Ind. lib. vii. c. 21. The most respectable authority in favour of such high numbers is that of Zumurraga, the first bishop of Mexico, who, in a letter to the chapter general of his order, A. D. 1631, asserts that the Mexicans sacrificed annually twenty thousand victims. Davilla. Teatro Eccles. 126. In opposition to all these accounts, B de las Casas observes, that if there had been such an annual waste of the human species, the country could never have arrived at that degree of populousness for which it was remarkable when the Spaniards first landed there.

This reasoning is just. If the number of victims in all the provinces of New Spain had been so great, not only must popula tion have been prevented from increasing, but the human race must have been exterminated in a short time. For besides the waste of the species by such numerous sacrifices, it is observable, that wherever the fate of captives taken in war is either certain death or perpetual slavery, as men can gain nothing by submitting speedily to an enemy, they always resist to the uttermost, and war becomes bloody and destructive to the last degree. Las Casas positively asserts, that the Mexicans never sacrificed more than fifty or a hundred persons in a year. See his dispute with Sepulveda, subjoined to his Brevissima Relacion, p 103. Cortes does not specify what number of victims was sacrificed annually, but B. Diaz del Castello relates, that an inquiry having been made, with respect to this, by the Franciscan monks, who were sent into New Spain immediately after the conquest, it was found that about two thousand five hundred were sacrificed every year in Mexico. C. 207.

8

NOTE XLI. p. 208.

It is hardly necessary to observe, that the Peruvian Chronology is not only obscure, but repugnant to conclusions deduced from the most accurate and extensive observations, concerning the time that elapses during each reign, in any given succession of princes. The medium has been found not to exceed twenty years. According to Acosta and Garcilasso de la Vega, Huanna Capac, who died about the year 1527, was the twelfth Inca. According to this rule of computing, the duration of the Peruvian monarchy ought not to have been reckoned above two hun dred and forty years; but they affirm that it had subsisted four hundred years. Acosta, lib. vi. c. 19. Vega, lib. i. c. 9. By this account each reign is extended at a medium to thirty-three years, instead of twenty, the number ascertained by Sir Isaac Newton's observations; but so imperfect were the Peruvian traditions, that though the total is boldly marked, the number of years in each reign is unknown.