Part 50 (1/2)
Fearing that we will be misunderstood in the last statement, we will state to whom it applies. The Christian world hold that G.o.d revealed himself to his chosen people, and that we draw from his Word what is permitted mortals to know of his government and the future world. We make no question but that this is true. But long before there was a Hebrew people there was a Paleolithic race, who doubtless had some vague, shadowy, ill defined idea of supernatural power, and sought, in some infantile way, to appease the same. Afterwards, but long before the glories of Solomon, a Neolithic people were living in Palestine, and the same culture was wide-spread over the world. To this day a large part of the world's inhabitants have never so much as heard of the Christian religion. It is to such people that we especially refer.
The religious beliefs of the Indians have not been fully studied as yet; but, until that is done, it is scarcely possible to understand and fully weigh what is said as to the religious beliefs of the Mexicans. What we can discern of the religion of the Nahua and Maya tribes shows us that it is not at all probable they had reached a stage of development in which they had any idea of One Supreme, Over-ruling Power. But our scholars differ on that point, many contending that the Mexicans distinctly affirmed the existence of such a G.o.d.<48> To form such conceptions implies a power of reasoning on abstract topics that is vain to expect of a people in their state of development. We think, therefore, that the idea that they had such a belief, arises from a misconception. Let us see if we can discover how that was.
Nearly all of the North American tribes had some word to express supernatural power. The Iroquois used for this purpose the words ”oki”
and ”otkon.”<49> The first meaning of these words is ”above.” As used by these Indians, however, they expressed the working of any unseen, mysterious, and, therefore, to them, supernatural power. There was, however, no idea of personality or of unity about it. Other Indian tribes had words to express the same meaning. The English and French explorers translated these words into their languages in various ways.
The most common is the rather absurd one of ”medicine,” which has pa.s.sed into common use. Thus, to mention one in very frequent use, we have the expression ”Medicine-men”--meaning their priests and conjurers. The same custom prevailed among the higher cla.s.s of sedentary Indians of Mexico and Central America. The Aztecs used the word ”teotl” to express the name meaning; the Mayas, the word ”ku;” the Peruvians, ”huaca.” But the word used, in each case, meant not so much a personal supreme-being as it did an ill-defined sense of supernatural, mysterious power. This point not being clearly understood, it was quite natural that the early writers understood by these various expressions their name of the First Cause.
In the present state of our knowledge, it is certainly very hard to give an intelligent statement of the religious conceptions of the Maya and Nahua tribes. Among the Nahuas, their conception of creative power was that of a pair--a man and wife. These were not the active agents, however--they engendered four sons, who were the creators. This seems to be a widely extended form of tradition. Two authors, writing about fifty years after the conquest, speak of the four princ.i.p.al deities and statues. They had a great many idols besides--but four were the princ.i.p.al ones.
It would be very satisfactory could we frame some theory to account for this state of things. If we could only be sure that each G.o.d was symbolic of some of the elements--or, if we could only say that this was but another instance of the use of the number ”four”--and thus connect them with the cardinal points, it would be very satisfactory to many.
The amount of study that has been bestowed on this question is very great, and it is very far from being settled. Each of these four was the princ.i.p.al, or guardian, deity of a particular tribe.<50> All of these appear in native traditions as historical personages, as well as deities. It is for this reason that Mr. Bandelier concludes that the ”four princ.i.p.al G.o.ds were deified men, whose lives and actions became mixed up with the vague ideas of natural forces and phenomena.”<51>
As prominent a figure as any in Central American Mythology is Quetzalcohuatl; and we can form a good idea of the force of the preceding remarks by considering this case. The name is a compound of two words, ”quetzal-cohuatl”--and is, says Mr. Bandelier, a fair specimen of an Indian personal name. He tells us that the meaning is ”bright,” or ”s.h.i.+ning snake.” Others have translated it, ”feathered serpent.” We have referred to the attempt to show that the tablet of the cross, at Palenque, had reference to him. Those who think he was the nature-G.o.d of the Nahuas find a great deal of significance in the name.<52> Mr. Bandelier, after carefully considering all reference to him by the early writers, shows that it is quite as likely that Quetzalcohuatl ”was a man of note, whose memory was afterward connected with dim cosmological notions.” It is plain that our idea of the culture of the Mexicans will vary according as we consider the base of this myth to be a man, or the forces in nature producing the fertilizing summer rain.<53>
The wors.h.i.+p of Quetzalcohuatl was very widely extended; but it was mostly confined to the Nahua tribes. But there are somewhat similar traditions among the Maya tribes; and this is one of those few points which, like the similarity of their calendar systems, seems to point to a close connection in early times. The Quiches have a very similar myth.
Briefly, it is to the effect that four princ.i.p.al G.o.ds created the world.
One of these was named Guc.u.matz--meaning, also, s.h.i.+ning, or brilliant snake. Some think that this is the same personage as Quetzalcohuatl, and from this fact show how true it is that the operations of the forces of nature everywhere affect the minds of men in a similar manner.<54> Others will not, however, go as far as this, and will only say there is a similarity between the two characters. The tribes in Yucatan also have a tradition of Cuculcan, whose name means the same as the two already mentioned. The authority who refers to him speaks of him only as a man.
The Quiche legend, already referred to, speaks of Guc.u.matz only as a G.o.d. The Nahua traditions of Quetzalcohuatl, as we have seen, are confused accounts of a man and a G.o.d.
The traditions having reference to the earthly career of Quetzalcohuatl represent him as having considerable to do with Tulla and Cholula. At Tulla he appears in the light of a great medicine-man, or priest; at Cholula, as a sachem. Still other traditions represent him as a great and successful warrior. None of these characters are incompatible with the others, from an Indian point of view. These traditions are so hopelessly confused, that it is doubtful if any thing of historical value can be gained from them. As a deity, he was wors.h.i.+ped as G.o.d of the air or wind. Why he should be so considered is answered in various ways. If, reasoning from his name, we choose to believe he is a nature-G.o.d--as such standing for the thunder-storm, clouds of summer--then, as the winds ”sweep the path for the rain-clouds,” he would be considered their G.o.d. Also, following out this line of thought, we can see how, as the G.o.d which brings the fertilizing summer rain, he would be considered the G.o.d of wealth, and the patron deity of traders.
We must not lose sight of the fact that all these traditions are most woefully mixed; that, since the conquest, many ideas from other than native sources have been engrafted on them; and, furthermore, that other explanations that are worth considering can be presented. The horticultural tribe located at Cholula had Quetzalcohuatl for their tutelar deity. Their crops depend upon the timely descent of the rain.
What more natural than that they should regard such rains as sent by him? This pueblo was also famous for its fairs. ”By its geographical position, its natural products, and the industry of its people,” it became a great trading market. Near it was raised cochineal dye, in large quant.i.ties. This was eagerly sought after by traders from a distance. Cholula was also famous for its pottery. The Tlaxcaltecos told Cortez that the inhabitants of Cholula were a tribe of traders; what more natural, then, than that their tutelar deity should become, in the eyes of foreign tribes, the G.o.d of traders.<55>
Quetzalcohuatl was but one of the four princ.i.p.al G.o.ds. The tutelar deity of the Mexicans was Huitzilopochtli. His altars were almost daily wet with the blood of sacrificed victims. No important war was undertaken, except with many ceremonies he was duly honored. If time were so short that proper care could not be bestowed on the ceremonies, then there was a kind of deputy G.o.d that could be served in a hurried manner that would suffice.<56> After a successful battle, the captives were conducted at once to his temple, and made to prostrate themselves before his image.
In times of great public danger, the great drum in his temple was beaten. The Spaniards, by dire experience, knew well the meaning of that awful sound.
Ill.u.s.tration of Huitzilopochtli.------------
The plate represents what was probably the idol of Huitzilopochtli. ”It was brought to light in grading the Plaza Mayor in the City of Mexico in August, 1790. It was near the place where the great Teocalli stood, and where the princ.i.p.al monuments of Mexico were. They were thrown down at the time of the conquest and buried from sight. 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 animal, human, and ideal forms.”<57> This idol is generally stated to be that of the G.o.ddess of death. But Mr. Bandelier, after carefully reviewing all the authorities, concludes that it represents the well-known war-G.o.d of the Mexican tribe.<58>
To properly conduct the services in honor of these various G.o.ds, required established rites and a priesthood. What we call ”Medicine men”
wizards, and names of similar import among the northern tribes, were more correctly priests. There was no tribe of Indians so poor but what they had these priests. But we would expect this office to increase more in power and importance among the southern Indians. Among the Iroquois, we are told each gens elected certain ”keepers of the faith.” These included persons both male and female. Their princ.i.p.al duty was to see that the feast days were properly celebrated. From what we know of the gens we feel confident that they would be perfectly, independent in religious matters as well as in other respects. Consequently it is not probable that there was even in Mexico any hereditary caste of priests.<59>
However set aside, or chosen, or elected, we have every reason to believe that the organization of the priesthood was systematic. The aspirant for the office had to acquaint himself with the songs and prayers used in public wors.h.i.+p, the national traditions, their principles of astrology, so as to tell the lucky and unlucky days.
When admitted to the priesthood, their rank was doubtless determined by meritorious actions. Successes in war would contribute to this result as well as sanct.i.ty, a priest who had captured several prisoners ranking higher than one who had captured but one, and this last higher than the unfortunate who had taken none.<60> We must not forget that war was the duty of all among the Mexicans. The priests were not in all cases exempt; part of their duties may have been to care for the wounded. It is not likely that the priests of any one G.o.d ranked any higher than the priests of others, or had any authority over them.
This body of priests of whom we have just treated concerned themselves a great deal with the social life of the Mexicans, and their power was doubtless great. Their duties commenced with the birth of the child, and continued through life. No important event of any kind was undertaken without duly consulting the priests to see if the day selected was a lucky one. The Nahuas were, like all Indians, very superst.i.tious, so there was plenty of work cut out for the priests. Into their hands was committed the art of explaining dreams, fortune-telling, astrology, and the explanation of omens and signs. Such as the flight and songs of birds, the sudden appearance of wild animals; in short, any unexpected or unusual event, was deemed of sufficient importance to require in its explanation priestly learning. In addition there was the regular routine of feasts.<61> We have seen what a mult.i.tude of G.o.ds the Nahuas wors.h.i.+ped. Like all Indian people, they were very fond of feasts and gatherings of that character; therefore feast days in honor of some one of the numerous deities were almost constantly in order, and every month or two were feasts of unusual importance. The most acceptable sacrifice to these G.o.ds, and without which no feast of any importance was complete, was human life.
This introduces us to the most cruel trait of their character. It was not alone true of the Mexicans, but of all the Nahua tribes and of the Mayas, though in a less degree. On every occasion of the least importance victims were sacrificed. Any unusual event was celebrated in a similar manner. Before the departure of a warlike expedition, the favor of Huitzilopochtli was sought by the sacrifice of human life; on the return of the same, similar scenes were enacted. On all such occasions the more victims the better. These victims were mostly captives taken in war, and wars were often entered into for the express purpose of procuring such victims. They were even made a subject of tribute. Devout people sometimes offered themselves or their children for the sacrifice. The number of victims, of course, varied from year to year, but it is possible that it counted up into the thousands every year.
What we are able to gather from the religious beliefs of the civilized nations sustains the conclusions we have already arrived at in reference to their culture. We can but believe this had been greatly overrated.