This book deals exclusively with the religion of the peoples of ancient Mexico. With the history and archæology of that country I am not concerned in these pages, unless where they have a bearing upon the main subject. By “Mexico” I mean that region of North America lying between the Tropic of Cancer and the Isthmus of Tehuantepec. Thus only passing reference to the religion of the Maya of Yucatan or the Quiche of Guatemala is made in the way of occasional comparison.
I have thought it best at the outset to make these points clear beyond the possibility of misapprehension. It was formerly usual to regard the entire tract occupied by Central American civilization from the Tropic of Cancer to Nicaragua as one and indivisible in its manifestations. But it is now clear that the type of advancement peculiar to the more northerly portion inhabited by the Nahua (Aztec and Chichimec) peoples of Mexico proper presents numerous and striking divergencies from the more southerly though related Maya civilization of Yucatan and Guatemala. Regarding the priority of these two cultures no doubt exists. The Maya was greatly the more ancient. But during the century preceding the conquest of Mexico by Cortéz it had been subjected to Nahua immigration and influences, especially as regards its religious beliefs. It is therefore necessary to exercise caution in the identification of Nahua or Mexican with Maya myths and divine forms, and with this in view I have directed my researches more especially to an examination of the deities and ritual practices of the Mexican area, in the hope that once the fundamental beliefs of this better-known [[vi]]region have been ascertained, the results arrived at may be applied with some measure of confidence to the obscure field of Maya belief. It seemed to me also essential, if progress were to be made, to apply a more intensive method of investigation than has hitherto been deemed possible or desirable to the first origins of the Mexican gods, and it is especially with the results obtained by this means that I am concerned rather than with the conclusions of others.
I have chosen The Gods of Mexico as the title of this book, as its contents refer more particularly to the development and general description of the deities of ancient Anahuac than to the questions of ritual, priesthood, or religious architecture. It has seemed to me that, once the fundamental nature of the gods has been made clear, when the multitudinous and conflicting details regarding them have been sifted, collated, and reduced to order, more will have been done to discover the whole purport of Mexican religion than if investigation had been directed in particular to ritual practice. But that I have not neglected the question of ritual is proved by the extended notices of the festivals I have appended to the description of each of the gods. I have, however, confined my descriptions and criticisms of ceremonial to these, and have refrained from the illustration of the sacraments of life and death, baptism, burial, and the like, as it is my hope to be able to deal with the whole subject of ritualistic practice among the Mexicans at a future date.
Many authorities, even should they sympathize with the endeavour set forth in these pages, will question its timeousness. Our knowledge of the religion of ancient Mexico, they will say, is still too vague and too fragmentary to permit of the assemblage and criticism of its material. Such a charge it is impossible to gainsay. Yet the bitter-sweet experience of twenty years of meditation among the ruins of the Mexican pantheon has emboldened me to attempt its partial restoration by the aid of such reconstructive capacity as I possess. My reasons for essaying this rather adventurous undertaking are twofold. The first is, that although the [[vii]]time is scarcely ripe for it, the venture may inspire more skilful investigators to address themselves to the task of research in a subject that has been unaccountably neglected in this country. The second is the hope that those who come after me in the study of Mexican religion may, as the result of my labours, be spared the many weary years of groping that have fallen to my lot, and be enabled to commence their journey from the point where I now stand.
Although political and financial conditions in Mexico frequently arouse a passing agitation in the minds of British people, the antiquities of that extraordinary land, various as Greece and mysterious as Egypt, have failed to appeal to them with the same degree of interest. We have not yet, perhaps, quite recovered from the amazement with which in our own day we have seen the secret gates of the East unlocked and the prodigies of Mesopotamia and the endless dynasties of the Nile emerge therefrom. Yet an archæology less venerable, but no less notable, pleads with us for recognition from a continent so closely associated with the spirit of modernity that we can scarcely believe in its ability to present us with the credentials of respectable antiquity. American scientists, however, have in recent years successfully addressed themselves to the problems of Isthmian research, and the antiquaries of Germany and France have, in certain respects, even improved upon their endeavours. Great Britain alone remains insensible to the lure of old Mexico, and small indeed is the band of workers that she has given to this department of archæology.
No manifestation of the life and thought of ancient Mexico so well deserves the attention of British students of antiquity as its picturesque if bizarre religion. Our position in folklore is pre-eminent; indeed we may with justice claim the reconstruction of traditional science as due to the efforts of British scholarship. As the English word “folklore” is in world-wide use, so is the terminology of the science it denotes replete with English expressions; yet in British works which deal with traditional lore the Mexican analogies employed are almost invariably quoted at second-hand, sources of the [[viii]]most unsatisfactory description are drawn upon to illustrate Mexican belief, and it is obvious that the few modern treatises which have sought to explain this most involved of all mythologies are not sufficiently taken advantage of by authorities on folklore.
To those who possess even an elementary acquaintance with the study of Mexican religion this will cause no surprise, for the initial difficulties which confront even the experienced antiquary who desires to gain a working knowledge of its principles are sufficiently discouraging. In all likelihood the quest is sooner or later abandoned in despair of acquiring that fundamental information from which it is possible to proceed to a more profound knowledge of the subject. The native languages, familiarity with which is desirable, are complex and difficult of mastery. The paintings or codices which depict the gods present a riot of symbolic intricacy sufficient in itself to damp enthusiasm. Many years must be spent in the study of a system of symbolic painting, to which a specially qualified section of the Mexican priesthood dedicated itself in the full knowledge of a mythological scheme at the nature of which we can but guess. It is, above all, necessary to become thoroughly conversant with an overwhelming body of Spanish Colonial literature, which must be handled with the greatest discretion, owing to its vague, contradictory, and essentially untrustworthy character. Lastly, an acquaintance with manuscript sources, obscure and difficult of access, is quite as indispensable, and these, indeed, are among the most valuable of the adjuncts to a knowledge of Mexican belief.
By far the most eminent and successful among modern writers on Mexican mythology and ritual is Professor Eduard Seler, of Berlin, who, owing to the generosity of the Duc de Loubat, has been enabled to publish monographs upon the principal Mexican hieroglyphical paintings or codices. In these he has done much for the elucidation of the involved symbolism in which the native MSS. abound, and has greatly added to our knowledge of the divine forms represented in their grotesque pages. Elaborate photogravure reproductions [[ix]]of these, the papyri of Mexico, have also been published, superseding the older and less accurate copies in the great collection of Lord Kingsborough. In his Gesammelte Abhandlungen,[1] too, a work quite encyclopædic as regards its scope and aim, Professor Seler has approached almost every problem presented by Mexican archæology. But his work might have been of greater value had he been mindful of the difficulties which the subject presents to the non-specialist reader. Indeed, the technicality and aridity of his general method often render his output comprehensible to few but the “senior wranglers” of the study.
American students of ancient Mexico and Central America have almost entirely confined themselves to the examination of sites and monuments. In France, M. Beuchat has provided students with an admirable handbook in his Archéologie Américaine, which, if too general in its purport and marred by a lack of linguistic knowledge, is still valuable as an elementary manual to American antiquity. The essays of Lehmann, De Jonghe, and Preuss have provided the student with translations of manuscript material hitherto closed to him, or have smoothed his way to a clearer comprehension of the difficulties connected with the Mexican calendar. The best modern English handbook on Mexican archæology is that by Mr. T. Athol Joyce, of the British Museum, but its lack of references is a serious drawback and the material it contains suffers from compression.
The method of my investigation of the divine forms of Mexico is set forth in the introductory paragraph immediately preceding that part of the book which deals with the gods more especially. Regarding the tonalamatl and the Calendar, I have thought it best to relegate this difficult and obscure subject to an appendix, in order that it should not interfere with the main current of proof. In dealing with the Codices throughout I have employed the pagination of Seler rather than that of Kingsborough, as referring to the more modern and greatly preferable editions of the Duc de Loubat, except [[x]]in cases where a manuscript is to be found in Kingsborough’s work alone. It is my sincere hope that the bibliography at the end of the book as well as that to be found at the conclusion of the appendix on the tonalamatl will lighten the labour of students of Mexican religion, whose co-operation in the discovery of errors I most cordially invite.