Grecques on Interior of Room at Mitla.
ROOF STRUCTURES.
I now have to speak of the roof which originally covered this building, since in the other buildings and palaces nothing will be found to throw any additional light on the subject. It seems evident that the columns in the southern wing were intended to support the roof, and if there were no contradictory evidence, the natural conclusion would be that the covering was of wooden beams stretching completely across the narrow apartments, and resting on the pillars of the wider ones, as we have seen to be the case at Tuloom, on the eastern coast of Yucatan.[VII-48] Burgoa, in whose time it is not impossible that some of the roofs may have been yet in place, tells us that they were formed of large stone blocks, resting on the columns, and joined without mortar.[VII-49] Humboldt states that the roof was supported by large sabino beams, and that three of these beams still remained in place (1802). According to Dupaix, both the roofs and floors in the northern wing were formed by a row of beams, or rather logs, of the ahuehuete, a kind of pine, a foot and a half in diameter, built into the top of the wall, and stretching from side to side. He does not inform us what traces he found to support his opinion. Mühlenpfordt[VII-50] found traces of a roof in one of the northern rooms sufficient to convince him that the original "consisted of round oak timbers, eight inches in diameter, placed across the room at a distance of eight inches one from another; these were first covered with mats, on which were placed stone flags, and over the latter a coat of lime; forming thus a solid and water-proof covering." Fossey speaks of one worm-eaten beam, but probably obtained his information from Humboldt. Tempsky, notwithstanding the shortness of his exploration, made the remarkable discovery that one of the northern rooms was still covered by a flat roof of stone. He also found windows in some of the buildings. What would he not have found had he been able to remain a few hours longer at Mitla? Viollet-le-Duc judges from the quantity and quality of the débris in the south wing, that the roof could not have been of stone in large blocks, but was formed by large beams extending longitudinally from pillar to pillar, and supporting two transverse ranges of smaller timbers, laid close together from the centre to either wall, the whole being surmounted by a mass of concrete like that which constitutes the bulk of the walls; and finally covered with a coating of cement. I have no doubt that this author has given a correct idea of the original roof structure, although in attempting to explain in detail the exact position which—'il y a tout lieu de croire'—each timber occupied, it is possible that the distinguished architect has gone somewhat beyond his data.[VII-51]
View from Court of Palace No. 1.
As I have said before, the western building of the palace No. 1—like the southern building, if any ever stood on the south of the court—has entirely fallen. Of the eastern building, d, there remain standing a small portion of the wall fronting on the court, including a doorway and its lintel, and also two of the five columns which occupied the centre of the building. The condition of this side structure seems not to have changed materially between Dupaix's and Charnay's visits, a period of over fifty years. The preceding cut, taken by Baldwin from Tempsky's work, gives a tolerably correct idea of what remains of it, except that the lintel had a sculptured front. It is a view from the south side of the court, and includes an imperfect representation also of the northern façade.[VII-52]
The palaces of Mitla are differently numbered by different writers, and much that has been written of them is so vague or confused that is difficult to determine in many cases what particular structure is referred to; I believe, however, that the preceding pages include all that is known of the palace numbered 1 on my general plan. I close my account of this palace by presenting on the opposite page a cut copied for Baldwin's work from one of Charnay's photographs, a general view of the ruins. The cut is a distant view of the palace No. 1 from the south-west, and cannot be said to add very materially to our knowledge respecting this building.[VII-53]