Aztec Civilisation
most interesting feature of Aztec civilisation. Nor should we fear that the present liberal government would seclude these treasures from the inspection of the scholar.
Much cannot be said in favour of the arrangement of these codices. In some of them, as the Mendoza Codex, for example, the plates are not even numbered; and one who would study them by the corresponding interpretation, must often bewilder himself I the maze of hieroglyphics, without a clue to guide him. Neither is there any attempt enlighten us as to the positive value and authenticity of the respective documents, even their previous history, beyond a barren reference to the particular library from which they have been borrowed. Little light, indeed, can be expected on these matters; but we have not that little.—The defect of arrangement is chargeable on other parts of the work. Thus, for instance, the sixth book of Sahagun is transferred from the body of the history to which it belongs to a preceding volume; while the grand hypothesis of his lordship, for which the work was concocted, is huddled into notes hitched on random passages of the text, with a good deal less connection than the stories of Queen Scheherezade, in the Arabian Nights, and not quite so entertaining.
The drift of Lord Kingsborough's speculations is, to establish the colonisation of Mexico by the Israelites. To this the whole battery of his logic and learning is directed. For this, hieroglyphics are unriddled, manuscripts compared, monuments delineated. His theory, however, whatever be its merits, will scarcely become popular; since, instead of being exhibited in a clear and comprehensive form, readily embraced by the mind, it is spread over an infinite number of notes, thickly sprinkled with quotations from languages ancient and modern, till the weary reader, floundering about in the ocean of fragments, with no light to guide him, feels like Milton's devil, working his way through chaos—
"neither sea,
Nor good dry land ; nigh foundered, on he fares."
It would be unjust, however, not to admit that the noble author, if his logic is not always convincing, shows much acuteness in detecting analogies; that he displays familiarity with his subject, and a fund of erudition, though it often runs to waste; that, whatever be the defects of arrangement, he has brought together a most rich collection of unpublished materials to illustrate the Aztec, and, in a wider sense, American antiquities; and that, by this munificent undertaking, which no government, probably would have, and few individuals could have executed, he has entitled himself to the lasting gratitude of every friend of science.
Another writer, whose works must be diligently consulted by every student of Mexican antiquities, is Antonia Gama. His life contains as few incidents as those of most scholars. He was born at Mexico, in 1735, of a respectable family, and was bred to the law. He early showed a preference for mathematical studies, conscious that in this career lay his strength. In 1771, he communicated his observations on the eclipse of that year to the French astronomer M. de Lalande, who published them in Paris, with high commendations of the author. Gama's increasing reputation attracted the attention of government; and he was employed by it in various scientific labours of importance. His great passion, however, was the study of Indian antiquities. He made himself acquainted with the history of the native races, their traditions, their languages, and, as far as possible, their hieroglyphics. He had an opportunity of showing the fruits of this preparatory training, and his skill as an antiquary, on the discovery of the great calendar stone, in 1790. He produced a masterly treatise on this and another Aztec monument, explaining73
