[13-§] Eduard Mühlenpfordt, Mexico, Bd. i, s. 255.
[14-*] The word is derived from tlatoa, to speak for another, and its usual translation was “chief,” as the head man spoke for, and in the name of the gens or tribe.
[14-†] The interesting account by Iglesias is printed in the Appendix to the Diccionario Universal de Geographia y Historia (Mexico, 1856). Other writers testify to the tenacity with which the Mixes cling to their ancient beliefs. Señor Moro says they continue to be “notorious idolaters,” and their actual religion to be “an absurd jumble of their old superstitions with Christian doctrines” (in Orozco y Berra, Geografia de las Lenguas de exico, p. 176).
[15-*] For instance, J. B. Carriedo, in his Estudios Historicos del Estado Oaxaqueño (Oaxaca, 1849), p. 15, says the nahualt was a ceremony performed by the native priest, in which the infant was bled from a vein behind the ear, assigned a name, that of a certain day, and a guardian angel or tona. These words are pure Nahuatl, and Carriedo, who does not give his authority, probably had none which referred these rites to the Zapotecs.
[15-†] Juan de Cordova, Arte en Lengua Zapoteca, pp. 16, 202, 203, 213, 216.
[16-*] Quoted in Carriedo, ubi suprá, p. 17.
[16-†] Hist. de las Indias Oc., Dec. iii, Lib. iii, cap. 12.
[17-*] So I understand the phrase, “figuras pintadas con zifras enigmaticas”
[17-†] Popoluca was a term applied to various languages. I suspect the one here referred to was the Mixe. See an article by me, entitled “Chontales and Popolucas; a Study in Mexican Ethnography,” in the Compte Rendu of the Eighth Session of the Congress of Americanists, p. 566, seq.
[17-‡] Constit. Diocesan, p. 19.