It is proper, to say, however, that Mr. Prescott declares that some of the remarks in the above paragraph would have been omitted had he enjoyed the benefit of Mr. Stephens' researches when it was originally written. Mr. Stephens, it should be remembered, is among those who grant no great antiquity to the ruins. On this subject, however, I find the fairest treatment in the profound reflections of Mr. Baldwin:
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 portion of them had been forgotten in the forests, or became 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. * * * * 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 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 period 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. * * * * * * * *
No well considered theory of these ruins can avoid the conclusion that most of them are very ancient, and that, to find the origin of the civilization they represent, we must go far back into the "deep of antiquity." * * * *
Nevertheless, some of them must be very old. The forest established since the ruin began, the entire disappearance of every thing more perishable than stone, the utter oblivion which veiled their history in the time of Montezuma, and probably long previous to his time, all these facts bear witness to their great antiquity. In many of them, as at Quirigua and Kabah, the stone structures have become masses of debris; and even at Copan, Palenque, and Mitla, only a few of them are sufficiently well preserved to show us what they were in the great days of their history. Meanwhile, keep in mind that the ruined cities did not begin their present condition until the civilization that created them had declined; and, also, that if we could determine exactly the date when they were deserted and left to decay, we should only reach that point in the past where their history as inhabited cities was brought to a close.
Take Copan, for instance. This city may have become a ruin during the time of the Toltecs, which began long before the Christian era and ended some five or six centuries probably before the country was invaded by Cortez. It was built before their time, for the style of writing, and many features of the architecture and ornamentation, show the workmanship of their predecessors, judging by the historical intimation found in the old books and traditions. We may suppose it to have been an old city at the time of the Toltec invasion, although not one of the first cities built by that more ancient and more cultivated people by whom this old American civilization was originated.[[4]]
From the foregoing it will be apparent how unsatisfactory are the conclusions respecting the age of America's ruined cities and monuments of antiquity; and since, as Mr. H. H. Bancroft remarks, there is nothing in the ruins themselves by which their age may be determined, it is clear that all the authorities are merely dealing in conjecture concerning them. The value of that conjecture will, of course, depend upon the general breadth of knowledge and judgment of the individual expressing it. This much may be safely claimed, so far as the Book of Mormon is concerned, in the question: there is nothing as to the age of American ruins that contradicts its statements, nor can I conceive of the rising of any circumstance in connection with the age of American ruined cities that would conflict with its claims. If it should turn out eventually that all the monuments of American ruins are of comparatively modern origin, that is, suppose they have arisen within that thousand years preceding the advent of the Spaniards, who came early in the sixteenth century, it could then be claimed that they were the monuments of Lamanite civilization merely; and that the monuments of the Jaredite and Nephite civilization had passed away, or that the monuments of Lamanite civilization were built in the midst of the monuments of the earlier civilizations, and so intermingled as to confuse everything and render classification impossible. If investigation, however, should finally establish the fact that the ruined cities of America are the monuments of very ancient and perhaps of successive civilizations, it would tend in a positive way to establish the truth of the Book of Mormon more clearly, and I now proceed to the consideration of that branch of the subject.
II.
Successive Civilizations.
Scattered over the southern plateaus are heaps of architectural remains and monumental piles. Furthermore, native traditions, both orally transmitted and hieroglyphically recorded by means of legible picture-writings, afford us a tolerably clear view of the civilized nations during a period of several centuries preceding the Spanish conquest, together with passing glances, through momentary clearings in mythologic clouds, at historical epochs much more remote. Here we have as aids to this analysis—aids almost wholly wanting among the so-called savage tribes—antiquities, traditions, history, carrying the student far back into the mysterious New World past; and hence it is that from its simultaneous revelation and eclipse, American civilization would otherwise offer a more limited field for investigation than American savagism, yet by the introduction of this new element the field is widely extended.
Nor have we even yet reached the limits of our resources for the investigation of this New World civilization. In these relics of architecture and literature, of mythology and tradition, there are clear indications of an older and higher type of culture than that brought immediately to the knowledge of the invaders; of a type that had temporarily deteriorated, perhaps through the influence of long-continued and bloody conflicts, civil and foreign, by which the more warlike rather than the more highly cultured nations had been brought into prominence and power. But this anterior and superior civilization, resting largely as it does on vague tradition, and preserved to our knowledge in general allusions rather than in detail, may, like the native condition since the conquest, be utilized to the best advantage here as illustrative of the later and better-known, if somewhat inferior civilization of the sixteenth century, described by the conqueror, the missionary, and the Spanish historian.[[5]]
In addition to the "passing glances" through "momentary clearings" in the mythological clouds "at historical epochs much more remote" than those "several centuries preceding the Spanish conquest," there is also the evidence afforded by the different ages in which the cities of America now in ruins were built; the difference being so marked in some instances as to suggest not only different ages for their construction, but their construction by different races. "That a long time must have passed between the erection of Copan and Utatlan,[[6]] the civilization of the builders meantime undergoing great modification, involving probably the introduction of new elements from foreign sources, is a theory supported by a careful study of the two classes of ruins.[[7]] * * * Then we have the strong differences noticeable between Uxmal[[8]] and Palenque, which lead us to conclude that these cities must have been built either at widely different epochs, or by branches of the Maya race which have long been separated; or by branches, which, under the influence of foreign tribes, lived under greatly modified institutions."[[9]]
Speaking of the ruins at Quiche, Mr. Stephens says:
The point to which we directed our attention was to discover some resemblance to the ruins of Copan and Quirigua; but we did not find statues, or carved figures, or hieroglyphics, nor could we learn that any had ever been found there. If there had been such evidences we should have considered these ruins the works of the same race of people, but in the absence of such evidences we believed that Copan and Quirigua were cities of another race and of a much older date.[[10]]
On this point of distinct eras in American civilization, Baldwin says: