AMERICAN ANTIQUITIES.

NUMBER FOUR.

In view of the reasons heretofore suggested, why it is improbable that either the Egyptians, the Carthaginians, or the Romans, were the first inhabitants of this continent, and why, from the present state of our knowledge, no other distinct nation of people is entitled to the exclusive reputation of having been the primitive discoverers of America, the reader is very naturally led to inquire for the evidences assigned by the advocates of particular theories for the sources of their origin. These evidences, although important to the antiquarian, cannot, from the brevity and popular mode proposed by us in treating this subject, be critically stated. We have, nevertheless, offered some reasons and inferences of our own, why those evidences cannot be conclusive; and we would refer others to our own or other means of information, should they feel disposed to make farther investigations. However plausible the story of Votan may have appeared, as testimony in point, the reader shall judge, from a few facts which will be here noticed, whether even that has much probability to support it. No one at least can deny the greater safety of doubting, where there is no better proof, should he not, with others, arrive at the ultimate conclusion, that the best evidence of all may be in favor of the opinion that these people originated where their relics are now found.

It has been said that the occasional resemblance observed among the ruins of Tulteca to those of the Egyptians, Romans, etc, affords no just grounds for attributing their origin to those nations, any more than to others whose remaining arts they equally resemble. Almost every ancient people might, in fact, from similar points of resemblance, claim the same distinction. Beside the particulars noticed in previous numbers, it might be mentioned, en passant, that had the Tultecans been Egyptian, they would most certainly have retained the language of Egypt, the signs, the worship, etc.; but this was not the fact. Had they been Romans, they would likewise have continued the language, the customs, and the religion of Romans; yet this was not the case; and so it would have been, had they been derived from any other nation. Above all, perhaps, would they have borne a personal resemblance to their progenitors, a circumstance far from truth. Religion, without doubt, is the last thing in which a people becomes alienated; yet we see no cöincidence in this respect between these people and their reputed originals. How then shall we account for their origin, but by supposing them, sui generis, Tultecans? Finally, it will be admitted, that unless the story of Votan presents some clue by which to solve the problem—and we do not see that it has even the claim of probability—we are not permitted, by the facts in evidence, to attribute the first American population to any other people of the earth.

The illustrious Fegjro, quoted as the best authority by the very author of Votan's story, and himself as much interested in propagating a theory favorable to popular Catholic opinions as any one of his clerical brethren, says upon this subject: 'After long study and attentive examination of so many and such various opinions, I find no one having the necessary appearance of truth, to satisfy a prudent judgment, and many that do not possess even the merit of probability.' Again, Cabrera says: 'To the present period, no hypothesis has been advanced, that is sufficiently probable to satisfy a mind sincerely and cautiously desirous of arriving at the truth.' And yet this is the man who holds forth the story of Votan as a true 'hypothesis.' It is plain, in all this writer says, by way of comment, that he himself doubts the truth of the whole matter, although he has pompously styled his treatise 'The Solution of the Grand Historical Problem of the Population of America!' The bishop, we will do him the justice to say, manifests much candor in speaking of the conduct of his brotherhood toward the relics of the people whose religion they had resolved to destroy. 'The injudicious and total destruction of the annals and records of the American nations,' says he, 'has not only proved a most serious loss to history, but very prejudicial to that religion whose progress it was supposed would thereby have been accelerated.' He asserts what is very true, in this; and also in his conclusion, that 'both in the means and the object, this practice is too frequently the result of prejudice or of ignorance.' Antonio Constantini, also cited as primary authority, declares, that 'whatsoever may be advanced upon this subject does not pass beyond the limit of mere opinion, as we have neither histories, manuscripts, nor traditions of the Americans!' And with the design farther to prevent all belief by posterity that their conquered subjects, whose admirable relics and records they had destroyed, possessed any knowledge of the arts, or the means of governing themselves, he says, 'when they were discovered, they were ignorant and uncultivated!' etc. Clavigero justly concludes, likewise, that 'the history of the primitive population of Anahuac, (Central America,) is so obscure, and so much involved in fable, as to render it not merely a most difficult matter for solution, but totally impossible to come at the truth.' These and similar declarations of the most accredited writers upon the early history of the inhabitants of Central America, one would think quite conclusive. If there had been other facts to be obtained, calculated to settle the question as to the origin of the first Americans, these, or other writers would have obtained them. Instead of this, however, they merely speak of works which 'probably' contained the facts announced as truth, without ever having seen them themselves, or stating plainly that they had, in reality, any facts within their reach. Thus numerous authors, whose means of information are said to have been complete on this subject, are mentioned by Cabrera; yet he professes to know nothing beyond conjecture or hearsay of the contents of their works. We will notice one or two instances, to show what confidence can be placed upon his assertions and gratuitous inferences in relation to Votan, and as samples of the whole.

After parading the titles of a great number of works, which may or may not exist, so far as his own knowledge of their contents is concerned, or perhaps that of any one else, he says: 'There is in the Jesuits' College of Tepozotlan,' (preserving the same particularity, as to titles, localities, dates, etc.,) 'a history of the voyages of the Aztecas to the country of Anahuac, written by a noble Mestee Mexican. The title of this manuscript,' he continues, 'shows it to be one of importance, as it very probably contains an account of the voyage of the Mexicans, who are the Aztecas, and of the primitive families of the Culebras, (snakes) who, I shall demonstrate, were from the old continent to the new, with an account of the first empire they founded in America, its duration, and their expulsion from the first settlements of Anahuac!' Again, after enumerating a list of works, to which he would have the reader infer he has had access, he says: 'The fourth is some historical memoirs of the Tultecas, and other nations of Anahuac, all of which works were preserved in the library of the college before-mentioned. It is probable, that the last production treats of their coming from the old to the new continent, of their expulsion from the first settlement at the city of Palenque, in the kingdom of Amaguemecan, and the cause thereof,' etc. Thus there is, from beginning to end, the same ambiguity, the same want of personal inspection, and yet the same display of authority. How important such works would have been to him and to the world, had they existed, in satisfactorily settling this question! The author of Votan's account does not seem to have known a solitary fact himself, which bears upon the subject matter of his story, though he proposes to 'demonstrate,' etc. The several representations, of a mysterious character, which he has so wofully distorted to an agreement with the said story, mean and represent, in fact, any thing else than the incidents of that story; indeed, this is the lamest part of the fabrication. Truly unfortunate is it for all the materials concerned in the case, 'that they were,' to use his own language, 'unfortunately lost;' 'did not appear, in consequence of his death,' etc., 'very probably,' so and so. Again he says: 'It is to be regretted, that the place is unknown where these precious documents of history were deposited, but still more that the great treasure should have been destroyed!' And, in the next paragraph he says: 'It is possible that Votan's historical tract, alluded to by Nunez de la Vega'—for he is indebted, after all, for the sum total of this now simple historical tract, to the allusions of some unknown writer—'or another,' he says, 'similar to it, may be the one now in the possession of Don Ramon de Ordonez y Aguiar,' (though before pronounced to have been destroyed!) So much for the proof of this story, good, bad, or indifferent. To have continued out these observations, we could have more clearly shown its folly and untruth; but, though necessary to satisfy the mind of the curious on so important a subject, yet we would avoid unnecessary minutia, and deem what has already been stated, quite sufficient to establish our position.

Now for the story itself. This, he says, was 'communicated' to him by some 'valuable notices,' (how, we are left entirely to conjecture,) 'by the above writer,' (Aguiar,) 'who' he says, 'is engaged at this time in composing a work, the title of which I have seen!' The said title is 'Historia del Cielo y de la Tierra!' (History of Heaven and Earth!) 'that will not only embrace the original population of America, but trace its progress from Chaldea, immediately after the confusion of tongues, its mystical and moral theology, its mythology, and most important events!' Such a work we should be glad to see, and so would all the world beside; but 'unfortunately' it has never appeared, though 'this time' spoken of, was more than forty years ago! The title of the work, and the abilities which he ascribes to its author, he says, 'lead us to anticipate a work so perfect in its kind as will completely astonish the world!' Let the reader notice the agreement between this source of 'communicated' information, and that 'alluded to' by Nunez de la Vega. 'The memoir in his possession, (Aguiar's) consists,' he continues, 'of five or six folios of common quarto paper, written in ordinary characters in the Tzendal language; an evident proof,' he farther adds, 'of its having been copied from the original in hieroglyphics, shortly after the conquest.' We do not see, in this circumstance, the 'evident proof mentioned, or 'the shadow, thereof;' but this is in keeping with all his 'proofs.'

The tract is then stated to go on by means of a painted description, on the first leaf, in different colors, of the two continents. This is declared to be characterized by the letters s and ss, with works which he made, (Votan, it is supposed,) signifying on the margin, the places he had visited on the old continent. Between these squares stands the title of his history, viz: 'Proof that I am Culebra,' (a snake) which title he proves in the body of his work, by saying, that he is Culebra, because he is Chivim.' This is 'demonstration,' of course! He then states that he conducted seven families from Valum Votan to this continent, so says Cabrera, and assigned lands to them; that he is the third of the Votans; that having determined to travel until he arrived at the root of heaven! (who can tell where the root of heaven is, and what road should be taken to get there?) in order to discover his relations, the Culebras, and make himself known to them; (mark, his relations in America,) he made four voyages to Chivim, which is expressed by repeating four times from Valum Votan to Valum Chivim, from Valum Chivim to Valum Votan; that he arrived in Spain, and that he went to Rome; that he saw the great house of God building; that he went by the road which his brethren Culebras had bored; that he marked it, and that he passed by the houses of the thirteen Culebras. He relates that, in returning from one of his voyages, he found seven families of the Tzequil nation, who had joined the first inhabitants, and recognised in them the same origin as his own, that is, of the Culebras. He speaks of the place where they built their first town, which from its founders received the name of Tzequil. He affirms that he taught them refinement of manners in the use of table-cloths, dishes, basins, cups, and napkins; that, in return for these, they taught him knowledge of God, and of his worship, his first ideas of a king, and obedience to him, and that he was chosen captain of all the united families!

Having announced all this badinage from a work not read nor even written, with as much confidence as if he had seen the narrated circumstances, he says: 'Let us now follow the progress of this celebrated chief of the first inhabitants of the American continent!' He then goes into the descriptions of Del Rio, and his ingenious but labored and wordy commentaries. How much there may be to 'demonstrate' with these premises, we shall not undertake to prove; but it would excite a smile in the reader, to notice with what avidity he seizes hold of the supposed hieroglyphical drawings of the before-mentioned explorer, and explains what they mean, from the wonderful light thrown in his path by the title of a work not then, nor yet now, written, and also from the 'allusions' of some reputed writer, unknown even to himself!

What the curious specimens of sculpture and of phonetic representation, before referred to, actually mean, is alike unknown to all inquirers, notwithstanding Bishop Cabrera's commentaries. The 'historical treasure' respecting Votan's Voyages, etc., is represented by the author first mentioned, viz. Vega, among other historical manuscripts, to state, or rather he states for Votan, that 'Votan is the third gentile placed in the calendar; that he wrote an historical tract in the Indian idiom, wherein he mentions by name the people with whom, and the places where, he had been. Up to the present time,' says he, 'there has existed a family of the Votan's in Teopizca.' He says, also, that 'he is lord of the Tapanahuasec; that he (Votan) saw the great house,' meaning, as the writer says, the Tower of Babel, 'which was built by order of his grand-father, Noah! from the earth to the sky; that he is the first man who had been sent hither to divide and portion out these Indian lands.' (How came the Indian here so soon after his grand-father Noah's flood?) We had thought himself and his seven families were the first; and that, at the place where he saw the great house, (the Tower of Babel,) a different language was spoken!' This 'historical tract,' so invulnerable to the effects of time, under the varied circumstances to which, 'it is very probable,' it had been exposed, was indeed a treasure; but the venerable prelate, not having the fear of antiquity before his eyes, and intent only on destroying all 'the means of confirming more strongly an idolatrous superstition,' says, 'he did give them up, when they were publicly burned in the square at Heuguetan, on our visit to that place in 1691!' (One hundred years before Cabrera wrote.) The Indian tradition of this treasure, says Cabrera, though he omits any reference to authority, 'was, that it was placed by himself (Votan,) as a proof of his origin, and a memorial for future ages, in the casa cabrega, 'house of darkness, that he had built in a breath!' He committed this deposite to a distinguished female, and a certain number of plebeian Indians, appointed annually for the purpose of its safe custody. His mandate was scrupulously observed by the people of Tacoaloya, in the province of Socanusco, where it was guarded with extraordinary care, until, being discovered by the prelate before-mentioned, he obtained and destroyed it.

'It 'consisted,' observes Vega, who now speaks for himself, 'of some large earthen vases, of one piece, and closed with covers of the same material, on which were represented, in stone, the figures of the ancient Pagans, whose names are in the calendar, with some Chalchihnites, which are solid, hard stones, of a green color, and other superstitious figures!' All this looks a good deal like a 'historical tract,' as Cabrera calls these earthen pots, etc. These 'historical treasures' were taken from a cave by the Indian lady herself!' Quite an accommodating and antique-looking lady, we imagine, having held in charge the venerable relics from the time of Votan, the grandson of Noah, according to the document itself, until delivered in person to the trusty and veracious bishop, and by him burned as aforesaid! This, then, is the whole of the story of Votan! Forbid, Muse of History! that we should weaken or destroy one syllable of the description, or a jot of its meaning—its force or probability!

The pious bishop, it should be said, in proof of his blind devotion, whatever may be thought of his acts by liberal-minded men, faithfully expressed his reckless bigotry and wild fanaticism, by destroying all the valuable remains of the Tultecan people, 'lest,' as he says, 'by being brought into notice, they should be the means of confirming more strongly an idolatrous superstition!' History weeps over the ruins created by such mad and superstitious zealots; and no where with more reason than in Central America. The history of man is, indeed, but a record of persecution for opinion's sake, the result only of peculiar yet mainly unavoidable circumstances; and that record is black with deeds of shame and bloodshed. Poor human Nature!—we could almost wish that oblivion had hidden for ever thy acts from posterity!

Having, as we presume, satisfied the curious in respect to the foundation of the 'hypothesis' for peopling America, as proposed by the story of Votan, we shall next notice some interesting particulars in the early history of the Tultiques, which may shed light upon our inquiries. After this, we shall describe other and not less remarkable ruins of ancient time, in the various provinces of Central America; notice their connection with the relics and people of North America, the singular works of art, and the primitive inhabitants of portions of this country.

The Tultecan people, or Chiapanese, being the original inhabitants of America, and having quietly dwelt within the central provinces before-mentioned for an unknown period of time, all intelligence respecting them—if, in fact, we have any thing on which to rely, save the remains of their magnificent arts—is completely disconnected from all other people prior to the destruction of their capital. At what period this occurred, we are equally ignorant, notwithstanding the assurance with which some have given dates, and attempted to establish epocha in the history of the primitive American people. It is certain that the evidences of their antiquity are coëval at least with the most ancient of the human family. Tradition, at best, is a very uncertain guide for the antiquarian; that, therefore, of the grandson of Noah coming 'from the north' to people this continent by express command of God, may be regarded as hypothetical. Still, if the first Americans were to be considered the immediate descendants of Noah, the ruins of Central America might be aptly compared with the date at which the deluge and the dispersion at the Tower of Babel are reported to have occurred. Votan, according to this tradition, is said to have been one of those who built the great tower, which was to reach to heaven, that he was selected from among those which tradition likewise made to attempt building so high a structure, and that he was commanded to travel 'off north,' with a colony of the people, for the purpose of inhabiting this unknown land. How he and his colony got here by travelling north, we shall not attempt to explain, and particularly with a trackless sea, of three thousand miles in extent, intervening. This colony, it is said, also divided on their arrival at Soconusco, South America, a part remaining in the province of Chiapa, and the others proceeding on to Nicaragua. But from what we have already stated, this colony consisted, according to Votan's records, of only seven families; each colony, therefore, comprised three whole families! The form of government of this people thereafter, until they numbered many millions, was vested in two military chiefs, chosen by the priests. So says tradition.

Humboldt thinks that there existed other people in Mexico, previous to the arrival of the Toultecs, the date of whose appearance in Mexico he has put down at 648, of the Christian era. It matters not by what name the people who first inhabited America are called; nor does this writer name the people he supposes to have preceded the Toultecs. We have called the primitive inhabitants Tultecans; and we are justified by the best authorities, certainly by the most numerous, in giving them this appellation. But we think Humboldt was mistaken in the antiquity of the Tultiques. The date assigned by him for their appearance may have been when they were driven by the northern nations of Chicemecks, or perhaps by the Olmecas, from their ancient city, and forced to mingle with the other nations that about that time made their appearance in Mexico, from the north. It is possible that the dates given by writers, and purporting to have been derived from the hieroglyphic paintings of the ancient inhabitants, may have some truth for their bases; but these, liable as they were to misinterpretation, have induced writers to come to the conclusion, that no certainty exists in the dates which have been given for the population of Central America. Whether the inhabitants of Palenque, the famous ruins of which we have noticed, are the Toultecs known at a subsequent period, or whether the name of that people is 'past finding out,' our means do not allow us to determine at present. That they had a different name, prior to the appearance of the Toultecs in 596 of Clavigero, or 548 of Humboldt, may be admitted. Still, it is not improbable that they may have left their country in 544, as thought by some, arrived in the valley of Mexico in 648, and founded the city of Tula in 670; but to suppose that this people afterward reared the monuments we have before mentioned, is not at all probable; on the contrary, the period of their origin supposed by the 'hypothesis' already mentioned and some three thousand years since, would be altogether more in accordance with their ruins. The Tultiques were evidently the first people known in Mexican history; but from whence they came, and the date of their first establishment in Central America, is unknown. Humboldt himself says, 'We do not know on what authority these dates are founded.' We shall speak of the people here mentioned as the Toultecs, and as entirely distinct from the ancient inhabitants of Palenque, though we have designated the latter by a similar name, for the sake of preserving cöincidence with others. All must be agreed, in accordance with our statement, and with Humboldt, that a people existed in Anahuac long previous to the appearance of these Toultecs we now speak of, though this distinguished traveller had no knowledge of the great ruins of Palenque.

The history of the Toultecs, like that of all the nations which have subsequently peopled Central America, is involved in fable. It is said, however, that their history relates that they were banished from their own country of Huehuetapallan, in their year 1, (Teepatl,) which is likewise said to correspond with our year 596; that proceeding southerly, under the direction of their chiefs, they arrived, after sojourning at various places on the way, for the space of one hundred and twenty-four years, on the banks of a river, where they built a city, and called it Tollan, or Tula, which, as Clavigero thinks, was the name of the kingdom they had left, situated north-west of Mexico. This then was the oldest, as it was one of the most celebrated cities in the history of Mexico, and the capital of the Toultec kingdom. This kingdom lasted three hundred and eighty-four years, which was divided into cycles of fifty-two years each; and each cycle was occupied by the reign of one king. Seven kings had thus ruled the people, when, during the twenty-eighth year of the reign of the eighth monarch, the nation was destroyed by a pestilence. If a monarch died during one of these cycles, the government was administered by the nobles. Tradition, as well also as the paintings of this people, beside Tollan and Huehuetapallan, mention Aztlan as their first residence. This fact, in connection with the remaining arts of a numerous and highly civilized people, now found in Wisconsin Territory, and near St. Louis, Missouri, have given rise to the opinion that there was their first residence. It has been contended that the Castine Ground, in the vicinity of that city, was the identical Aztlan of the wandering Toultec nation. We shall hereafter refer to the facts which induced us to announce in our first numbers that a connection existed between the inhabitants of Mexico and the original people of the western valleys of the United States.

The Toultecs, as has already been said, exhibited a high state of civilization, and an astonishing knowledge of the arts and sciences, at the earliest periods of their history. Their government was the most permanent, efficient, and happy; and to them have all succeeding nations acknowledged their indebtedness for their knowledge of the arts, and of agriculture. They were familiar with the working of metals, cutting gems, with hieroglyphical paintings, etc.; and in their divisions of time, they were much more perfect than the Greeks or Romans. 'But where,' inquires a distinguished writer, 'is the source of that cultivation? Where is the country from which the Toultecs and Mexicans issued?' If we have no evidence that they came from the United States, nor from Asia, is not the query solved, by supposing that they were the Palencians? dispersed by the pestilence which deprived them of their eighth and last monarch, with the bulk of the Toultec people. The magnificent arts still presented to the curious traveller in Mexico, are the work of this people, and they exhibit a degree of skill, industry, and intellect, which astonish those of our times. But they differed from all others in these arts. Where then shall we find their analogue? Did they come from China, as De Guignes would prove from the Chinese annals, subsequent to 458? Horn, in his 'De Originibus Americanis,' and M. Scherver, would make this by no means difficult, nay, extremely probable. They 'might have been a part of those Hiongnoux, who, according to the Chinese historians, emigrated under Punon, and were lost in the north of Siberia; or, were they the Indians of North America? The pastoral character of the Toultecs resembled that of the Asiatics, and their arts those of Egypt; but they cultivated no other gramina than maize, while the Asiatic tribes cultivated various cereal gramina, at the earliest periods of their history. To the Chinese, and particularly the Japanese, they bore a striking similarity, so far as regards the state of civilization; yet, in their facial and cranial characteristics, they differed materially. On the whole, it is much more reasonable to suppose that the people of whom we are now speaking, were of the Mongol race, than that the Palencians were any particular race now known.

Whether the last mentioned people, after their dispersion from their great capital in the province of Chiapa, were or were not the nucleus around which the many distinct tribes that afterward constituted the people of the great Mexican empire, all our inquiries are unable clearly to establish; still, there are strong evidences in favor of that opinion. Hence the name Tultecan, by which we have designated the primeval inhabitants of this continent, and the authors of the extensive arts, the ruins of which have been noticed, may be identical with the Toultecs. All agree that there was a race of people existing for an unknown period of time in Central America before the Toultecs, the Aztecs, or the Chichimecas appeared in the beautiful Mexican valley. This agreement, in connection with the antique relics found on the site of the famous Palencian city, and the indisputable evidences of the superior knowledge of the ancient Palenquans, renders the conclusion to which we have arrived inevitable.

It is also extremely probable, from the analogy observed among the arts of succeeding inhabitants of Mexico, the similarity of their manners and customs, and their knowledge of the arts and sciences, in which the original Tultecans were so highly distinguished, that a part of the latter people, after the destruction of their great capital, was united with the former. This probability, though unnoticed by writers upon the early inhabitants of Mexico, amounts, in our mind, to conviction. It forms a basis to the only conclusion which presents itself in attempting to explain the origin of the extraordinary arts now found throughout the Mexican valley, and in other parts of that once extensive empire. The inference is not less conclusive in relation to the people with whom the original Tultiques became united, and with whom they in part constituted the subsequent great nation of Mexicans. This people were clearly the previous inhabitants of our own western states. Their arts are distinctly traced from Wisconsin and Missouri Territories, all the way into the valley of Mexico. Among those which now characterize that valley, are to be seen numerous specimens so closely resembling the relics of the United States, that no other inference can be drawn from the fact, than that they were the work of the same people. Still, it will be observed that others exist in Mexico, which as plainly show the existence of a distinct and peculiar class of men. The most remarkable of these are found among the ruins of Palenque, Copan, and at other places in the province of Chiapa, Yucatan, and Guatemala. Others again exist, scattered throughout both Peru and Mexico, among the Pacific Islands, and west of the Rocky Mountains, which differ in many striking particulars from those of this country, from those of Palenque, and among themselves. This is strongly in evidence of the historical fact, that the ancient Mexicans were composed of numerous and very different tribes of people. That various tribes have also dwelt in our western valleys, is quite certain; and that our whole country has, at remote periods, been the theatre of strange events, and the residence of peculiar people, cannot admit of doubt. While some of that people were unacquainted with the use of metals, others must have possessed a very good knowledge of them, and withal the mode of working them. A well-finished steel bow, found in one of the western tumuli, and the scoria, evidently the product of forges discovered among the works which have been left by some previous inhabitants of the Ohio valley, are among the proofs of this fact. Hieroglyphical writing, long a desideratum among the remains of the primitive inhabitants of the United States, has also been discovered. Descriptive paintings similar to those executed by the Mexicans, may in like manner have been left by this people, but they would have disappeared, had they been so left, from the effects of time. No stone edifices resembling those of Mexico have however been found among us; no piles of rude masonry, stone fortifications, bridges, viaducts, etc., as at Palenque and other places. There are some traces, if recent accounts be true, of tumuli and walls in this country, which were built in part of burnt bricks, not unlike those with which the great pyramid of Chollula was built; yet there are none in the same style and magnificence. Enough, however has been noticed, among the ancient arts of this country, to satisfy us that our primitive inhabitants may have been among the builders of that stupendous structure. The same form may now be noticed in a tumulus near Cincinnati. Others have been destroyed, which had the same pyramidal form, with regular off-sets. On the tops of these, and particularly those of a large size, it has been conjectured that structures similar to those of Mexico were built. The one ruthlessly destroyed at Circleville, Ohio, affords strong evidences of its having been devoted to the worship of the sun, and to the offering of human sacrifices. But more of this anon. Subsequent remarks will tend to show, when we shall have furnished other particulars of newly-discovered ruins in Central America, how far those of our own country agree with the ancient arts of Mexico.