The Sacrificial Stone, so called, is a cylindrical block of porphyry, nine feet and ten inches in diameter, three feet seven and one fourth inches thick. This also was dug from the Plaza Mayor, was carried to the courtyard of the University, where it has lain ever since, much of the time half covered in the ground, and where different visitors have examined it. The cut, which I have copied from Col. Mayer's drawing, shows the sculpture which covers one side of the stone, the other side being plain. The name of Sacrificial Stone, by which it is generally known, probably originated from the canal which leads from the centre to the edge, and which was imagined to have carried off the blood of sacrifices; but the reader will notice at once that this stone bears not the slightest resemblance to the altars on which the priests cut out the hearts of their human victims, as described in a preceding volume. Some authors, among whom is Humboldt, believe this to be the temalacatl, or gladiatorial stone, on which captives were doomed to fight against great odds until overcome and put to death. The bas-relief sculptures, the central concavity, the canal, and the absence of any means of securing the foot of the captive, are very strong arguments against this use of the cylinder. A smooth surface would certainly be desirable for so desperate a conflict, and the sculptured figures on the rim, or circumference, soon to be noticed, show that the plain side of the stone was not in its original position uppermost. Gama, the first to write about the monument, pointed out very clearly the objections to the prevailing ideas of its aboriginal purpose. He claimed that the stone was, like the one already described, a calendar-stone, on which was inscribed the system of feast-days. The strongest objection to this theory was the existence of the central concavity and canal, which, however, Gama considers not to have belonged to the monument at all, but to have been added by the ruder hands of those who wished to blot out the face of the sun which originally occupied the centre. Latrobe also says, "I have but little hesitation in asserting that the groove in the upper surface formed no part of the original design;" but Col. Mayer, who has carefully examined this relic, tells me that the canal presents no signs whatever of being more recent than the other carving, and it must be admitted that the Spaniards would hardly have adopted this method of mutilation. Tylor suggests that this was a sacrificial altar, but used for offerings of animals. Fossey speaks of it as a 'triumphal stone.' But in alluding to these theories I am departing somewhat from my purpose, which is to give all the information extant respecting each relic as it exists.
Sculpture on the Sacrificial Stone.
The whole circumference of the stone is covered with sculptured figures, consisting of fifteen groups. Each group contains two human figures, apparently warriors or kings, victor and vanquished, differing but little in position or insignia in the different groups, but accompanied by hieroglyphic signs, which may express their names or those of their nations. Two groups as sketched by Nebel are shown in the cut. According to Gama these sculptured figures represent by the thirty dancers the festivities celebrated twice each year on the occasion of the sun passing the zenith; and also commemorate, since the festivals were in honor of the Sun and of Huitzilopochtli, the battles and victories of the Aztecs, the hieroglyphics being the names of conquered provinces, and most of them legible.[IX-57]
The idol of which the cut on the opposite page shows the front, was the first to be brought to light in grading the Plaza Mayor in August, 1790. It is an immense block of bluish-gray porphyry, about ten feet high and six feet wide and thick, sculptured on front, rear, top, and bottom, into a most complicated and horrible combination of human, animal, and ideal forms. No verbal description could give the reader any clearer idea of the details of this idol than he can gain from the cuts which I present, following Nebel for the front, and Gama for the other views. Gama first expressed the opinion, in which other authors coincide, that the front shown in the opposite cut represents the Aztec goddess of death, Teoyaomiqui, whose duty it was to bear the souls of dead warriors to the House of the Sun—the Mexican Elysion.[IX-58]
Huitzilopochtli, God of War.