TEMPLE OF THE SUN, PALENQUE.
Three other temples are found on a plateau, some 200 yards south-east of the palace at the foot of Cerro Alto. First in order is a small temple of the Sun, in a perfect state of preservation; the front measures 38 feet by 27 feet deep. The pilasters, the roof, and superstructure, were all covered with sculptures and complicated decorations. Any one who is acquainted with sacred Japanese architecture would be struck with the resemblance of this temple to a Japanese sanctuary; and this is very clearly seen in our cut. How is this to be explained? A theory might be started with respect to the probable Asiatic origin of the Toltec tribes; of the influence of a Japanese civilisation, through the steady traffic they formerly carried on, on the coast north-west of America, as also by fortuitous immigrations resulting from shipwrecks. In the present day, the average of Japanese vessels shipwrecked on the Californian coast is only two a year. However it may be, we will for the present leave to others the task of elucidating the question of origin.
The interior of the temple is a large room, receiving its light
JAPANESE TEMPLE. through three apertures in the façade; the end is occupied by a sanctuary, and each side by a small dark room. The sanctuary is a kind of oblong tabernacle, crowned with a richly decorated frieze and stuccoed mouldings. Two pilasters supported the roof, and formerly were covered with inscriptions or sculptured slabs representing various subjects; these flags have been broken or taken away, and not one remains in loco.
Those which were in the Temple of the Cross No. 1, have already been described and a drawing given. The end of the sanctuary is occupied by three slabs in juxtaposition, with sculptures of a religious character; in the central portion or tablet is a hideous face, with protruding tongue, identical with that found on the Aztec calendar in Mexico, known as the Tablet of the Sun. This symbolical figure is found also at Tikal carved in wood.
In our cut of the Temple of the Cross No. 2, three distinct subjects are seen: in the central slab is a cross, branching out with palms supporting two figures; the body of the cross, which rests on a hideous head, is sculptured in the centre, and at the upper end are two human figures, crowned by a symbolic bird having a long tail and eagle claws. The left slab represents a man richly habited, with collar, medallion, girdle, and greaves; the right slab a woman, to judge from her size, long plait of hair, and peculiar clothing. This female is borne on palms having the very well-preserved outline of human heads. Both the male and female seem to stand before the symbolic bird offering presents, the nature of which it is not easy to specify. To the rear of each device is an inscription of sixty-eight characters, doubtless explanatory of the ceremony the whole sculpture represents, but which no one has yet been able to read.
We are of opinion that the Temple of the Cross No. 1 was a sanctuary consecrated to Tlaloc and Quetzalcoatl, and that the altar in the same Temple No. 2 was dedicated to Tlaloc; our only ground for this belief, however, is the cross, which we know was a later symbolic personification of the god of rain; but we will leave this question until we come to Lorillard, where monuments of the same kind, and the authority of ancient writers, will furnish data to strengthen our theory. It may not be irrelevant to add that neither temples nor palaces were provided with doors, and that stuff or matting curtains were used for all apertures, indicated by the large and small rings fixed on the pilasters on each side of the entrances, and the whole length of the inner cornice. We know that neither the Toltecs nor Aztecs had doors to their houses, which seems to show great respect for property, or as Clavigero puts it, “the severity of the laws was a powerful preservative.” What he says of Mexico is equally applicable to Palenque: “Houses had no doors, for they deemed that dwellings were sufficiently guarded by the stringency of the laws; and the people, not to be overlooked by their neighbours, had curtains to all the openings, while resounding pottery, or some other rattling object, was suspended over the entrance to warn the inmates whenever a stranger raised the curtain to pass into the house. No one was allowed admittance who had not the owner’s full permission to do so, unless the degree of relationship or necessity justified the liberty.”[100]
