What shall we say to this story that M. Le Plongon brings us of ancient Maya civilization? It is unquestioned that he has expended a great amount of patient labor in his work, has braved many dangers, and is thoroughly in earnest. He has also spent years in the field, and ought to be well qualified to judge of the ruins. We believe, however, he is altogether wrong in his conclusions. The keystone of his discoveries—the one on which he relies to prove the accuracy of his methods—fails him. This was the discovery of the statue of Chaac-mol himself, which is here represented. He claims to have found it as the result of successfully rendering certain mural tablets in the funeral chamber, but a careful reading of his own account of the affair leaves us under the impression that the “instincts of the archæologist” had as much to do with it as any thing else.62
Be that as it may, he certainly did find this statue buried in the ground. He is very positive it is Chaac-mol, claiming to have read the name readily in hieroglyphics on the ear-tablets. He says: “It is not an idol, but a true portrait of a man who has lived an earthly life. I have seen him represented in battle, in council, and in court receptions. I am well acquainted with his life, and the manner of his death.” This statue was seized by the Mexican Government, and taken to Mexico. Here a curious discovery was made. Another statue similar to this was already in the museum. This latter had been found not far from Mexico. Since then, still a third, smaller than the others, but evidently representing the same personage, has been discovered. In short, it has been shown that this is an idol, worshiped as well by the Aztecs as by the Mayas, and, instead of being buried, as Le Plongon asserts, five thousand years ago, we have not much doubt it was buried to prevent its falling in to the hands of the Spaniards.63
As to the antiquity with which Le Plongon would clothe Chichen, if his method be right, he has not more than made a beginning. Mr. Stephens counted three hundred and eighty of these same columns, and tells us there were many more.64 We know no good reason for supposing Chichen was not inhabited at the time of the conquest. The wooden beams and lintels in the temples have not yet decayed, and the masonry had not been cleaned out of some of the rooms. On this point we wish to make a suggestion, a mere hint. The pillars that supported the arches in the temple mentioned some pages back were covered with sculpture. Amongst some others, but very faintly represented, was the preceding figure of a bearded man. May it not be that it represents a Spaniard? We must recall the stucco figure of the horse and its rider at Kabah. It seems to us a reasonable suggestion that they should carve on the pillars of their temples representations of the Spaniards, for the Spaniards were twenty-five years in gaining a permanent foothold in Yucatan, and during that time the Indians would continue to build and ornament as before.
REFERENCES