[VII-53] In the preceding pages it will be noticed that I have paid no attention to the plates and description by Mr J. G. Sawkins, from an exploration in 1837, as given by Col. Brantz Mayer in his Observations on Mexican History and Archæology, published among the Smithsonian Contributions to Knowledge. My reasons for disregarding Sawkins' authority are, that the said descriptions and plates are just sufficiently accurate to identify palace No. 1 with the one referred to, but otherwise constitute one of the most bare-faced frauds recorded in the annals of antiquarian exploration in America. The following points are more than sufficient to substantiate what I have said:—1st. Sawkins reverses the cardinal points, respecting which the other authorities agree, placing the principal building on the east of the court instead of the north, etc. To avoid repetition and confusion, I shall in the following remarks, however, correct this error and speak of each building in its proper location. 2d. Sawkins found five standing columns in the eastern building, d, four of which supported parts of a wall, while the other standing apart was taller than the rest; now the columns supporting the wall may have been the piers between the doorways—but only three of these were standing in 1806 (see Dupaix, pl. xxxi.); and the taller column standing apart agrees well enough with the truth, except that there were two of them standing in 1859. (See Charnay, Ruines Amér., phot. xii.) On the west our explorer correctly found everything obliterated, and the 'crumbling and indistinct walls' which he found on the south may have been part of palace No. 2. 3d. Coming now to the northern building, Sawkins found in the front 4 doorways, so narrow and low that only one person at a time could enter, and that only by stooping; during the next 20 years these doorways grew remarkably in size, and decreased in number, since Charnay's photograph shows 3 doorways with standing human figures in two of them, not obliged to stoop or much pressed for elbow room, as may be seen in the copy I have given. 4th. Sawkins found all the adornments removed from this façade; they were perhaps replaced before Charnay's visit. 5th. In the interior, A of the plan, Sawkins found niches in the end walls not seen by any other visitor. 6th. The six columns represented by Martin and Dupaix as standing in the centre of this apartment, had all been removed (!) at the time of Sawkins' visit. It was a strange freak of the camera to picture them all in place 20 years later. 7th. But Charnay's photographic apparatus had yet other repairs to make, for in the northern wing, C, the walls of the interior apartments had all disappeared, and even the interior surface of the outer walls, which enclosed the quadrangle, had no mosaic work, but the panels presented only 9 long recesses in three tiers on each side. Mr Sawkins' plates are two in number; one of them presents a general view of this palace from the west, and although faulty, indicates that the artist may have actually visited Mitla; the other is a rear view of the northern building, gives a tolerably correct idea of the construction of the walls, and may possibly have been made up from the large plate in Kingsborough's work. I have no more space to devote to Sawkins. He may have been already 'shown up' by some critic whose writings have escaped my notice. It is proper to add that as Col. Mayer apparently consulted only Humboldt's description of Mitla, it is not at all strange that this zealous investigator and usually correct writer was deceived by a pretended explorer.
[VII-54] Dupaix, pl. xxxii., fig. 81, where the dimensions are 6½×33½ varas. Carriedo's, or Mühlenpfordt's, plan, pl. ii., makes the court 114×135 feet, and the western building 128.9 feet on the inside; on page 495, and on another plan, it is implied that the eastern mound never bore any building.
[VII-55] Ilustracion Mej., tom. ii., p. 495.
[VII-56] Müller, Reisen, tom. ii., p. 280.
[VII-57] Charnay, Ruines Amér., phot. xiii.-xvi.; Dupaix, p. 33, pl. xxxiii., fig. 82-3; Kingsborough, vol. v., pp. 258-9, vol. vi., pp. 450-1, vol. iv., pl. xxx., fig. 84; Lenoir, in Antiq. Mex., tom. ii., div. i., pp. 53, 16; Mühlenpfordt, in Ilustracion Mej., p. 500, pl. vi.; Tempsky's Mitla, pp. 250-1.
[VII-58] Dupaix, 2d exped., pp. 32-3, pl. xxxiv.-v., fig. 82; Kingsborough, vol. v., p. 259, vol. vi., p. 451, vol. iv., pl. xxxii.-iii., fig. 86-7, ground plan, and section showing mosaic work; Ilustracion Mej., tom. ii., pp. 495-500, pl. iv., v., ix. Humboldt, Vues, tom. ii., pp. 278-82, places the gallery erroneously under the northern wing of palace No. 1, with an entrance in the floor of the column chamber. Murguia, in Soc. Mex. Geog., Boletin, tom. vii., pp. 170-3, from Burgoa, about the caves on which the palaces were built. Müller, Reisen, tom. ii., p. 280; Tempsky's Mitla, pp. 250-1; Fossey, Mex., p. 369; Charnay, Ruines Amér., pp. 264-5; Mayer's Observations, p. 30, with cuts from Dupaix. Lenoir, in Antiq. Mex., tom. ii., div. i., p. 53. 'Un appartement souterrain qui a 27 mètres de long, et 8 de large.' Humboldt, Essai Pol., p. 264.
[VII-59] Charnay, Ruines Amér., p. 263, phot. iii.-iv.; Dupaix, 2d exped., pp. 33, 35-6, pl. xxxvi., fig. 83; Kingsborough, vol. v., p. 259, vol. vi., p. 451, vol. iv., pl. xxxiv., fig. 88, this plan differs from the one given above in making the passage d straight. Ilustracion Mej., tom. ii., p. 496.
[VII-60] Dupaix, pl. xxxvii., fig. 84; Kingsborough, vol. iv., pl. xxxv., fig. 89. The latter plan represents three doorways in each of the buildings fronting on the northern court, C. See also references of preceding note.
[VII-61] Dupaix, pp. 34, 39, pl. xxxlx-xl., xliii-iv., fig. 86-7, 91-2; Kingsborough, vol. v., pp. 260-1, vol. vi., pp. 451-3, vol. iv., pl. xxxvii-ix., fig. 91-4; Lenoir, in Antiq. Mex., tom. ii., div. i., pp. 55-6; Charnay, p. 263, phot. ii.; Mühlenpfordt, in Ilustracion Mej., tom. ii., p. 496; Fossey, Mexique, pp. 368-9, locates these pyramidal groups east and north, instead of south and west of palace No. 1. He also mentions a granite block, or altar, 4½ feet long and one foot thick.
[VII-62] Dupaix, p. 34, pl. xxxviii., fig. 85; Kingsborough, vol. v., p. 259, vol. vi., p. 451, vol. iv., pl. xxxvi., fig. 90. Kingsborough's plate represents the walls as mostly fallen. Lenoir, in Antiq. Mex., tom. ii., div. i., p. 53.