صور الصفحة
PDF
النشر الإلكتروني

of ruins, and the country was made a wilderness. And thus ended the Toltec empire, (A.D. 1070.)

A large portion of M. De Bourbourg's work is devoted to tracing the fortunes of the exiled Toltecs, whose ruined cities have been so graphically described by Stephens in his Incidents of Travel in Yucatan. But we shall confine ourselves to the history of Mexico, which occupies the concluding portion of the work. After the devastation of the territories which formed the ancient Toltec empire, those savages who had achieved it were in their turn pressed upon by others from the north. A great emigration to the south had set in, the cause of which is unknown, and has excited much speculation. It is now that, for the first time, we hear of the Mexicans, or Mexicas, a name derived from one of their earliest chiefs, Mexitl. They were an Aztec tribe, who quitted their native country, Aztlan, about the year 1090, and after some years of wandering, rested at Chicomoztoc, (A.D. 1116,) where reigned a powerful prince named Mateuczomatzin, (transformed by the Spaniards into the more euphonious and easily remembered name of Montezuma.) They abode eleven years at Chicomoztoc; thence they sojourned successively at Acahualtzinco, (now San Juan del Rio,) Coatepec, Tepeyrac, and Chapultepec, where they fortified themselves. This pilgrimage lasted seventy years, (1116-1186.) But where was Aztlan? and who were the Aztecs? These questions cannot be answered with any degree of certainty. The Spanish missionaries among the Indians, in the sixteenth century, say that the name of Aztahan was given by the natives to the river Huaqui or Yaqui. In the ancient manuscripts this name is often confounded with Aztlan: sometimes the two are joined together. Sometimes Aztlan is combined with Chicomoztoc and represented as a very large city situated on an island, the abode of the ancestors of the Mexicans. It was in the dominions of Montezuma, where were two other great cities, Aztlan-Aztatlan and Teo-Culhuacan. In the regions between the Yaqui and the Colorado are found the imposing ruins known as "the great houses of Montezuma." Immense ruins bearing this title are found on the banks of the Gila, and here, doubtless, at a remote period, before the invasion of the Toltec empire in the

eleventh century, the Aztecs held sway. But why did they emigrate southward? This has hitherto remained a mystery.

Traces of a civilization similar to that of the Aztecs have been found much further north than Sonora. Gigantic monuments, tumuli, pyramids, and fortifications have been discovered near the St. Lawrence and the Great Lakes of the North, and thence down the valley of the Mississippi to the gulf of Mexico. The Teo-Chichimees, who invaded the Aztec plateau in the eleventh, twelfth, and thirteenth centuries, constructed defensive earth-works similar to those found in the north. This race appears to have consisted of a mixed population, a portion being addicted to living in large cities; another portion leading a wandering life; they were, in fact, partly civilized, partly savage. It further appears probable that they were expelled from their settlements near the Great Salt Lake in Utah, and the Canadian lakes, by a fierce race of northern savages, who had gradually driven before them all the civilized races, laying cities and villages in ruins, and whose descendants are at this day pursuing their remorseless mission in Sonora and Chihuahua. These tribes are now known as the Apaches and the Camanches. For more than a thousand years they have been pursuing their fell career, leaving the tracks of their devastating ferocity behind them. The tradition of their cruelty is still preserved in Kentucky, where the slaughter of the native tribes appears to have been so great as to have obtained for that state the name of "The dark and bloody ground."

It would be tedious as well as unprofitable to bestow much attention on the wars and contests for supremacy between the rival chiefs of the various tribes settled in the valley of Anahuac. Surrounded by powerful enemies, the Mexicans heroically held their ground and preserved their independence, thus showing that their race possessed extraordinary vitality. However, they came very near being entirely destroyed, in the year 1297, when the neighboring kings laid Chapultepec in runis and carried off its population. But their valor found favor for them with the king of Culhuacan, who gave them the island of Tizaopan for their residence, (A.D. 1299,) on condition of their serving him in war. The next remarkable event in their history is the foundation of the city of Mexico, (A.D. 1325.) It

was occasioned by the cruelty of the Culhuan king, who drove the Mexicans out of his kingdom. They fled to Azcapotzalco, where they were received for a time, but subsequently were expelled. They then took refuge in Tenochtitlan, where they finally settled, and built the celebrated city which bears their name. Here they flourished, notwithstanding civil feuds occasioned by the encroachments of the priesthood. The people became divided into two parties, who brought great tribulation on each other; but a series of able though cruel princes finally consolidated them into one, and thus they were enabled to carry on sanguinary wars with their neighbors. They subjugated province after province, until, about the year 1500, their empire attained to the extent and wealth in which Cortez found it.

ART. V.-1. An Historical Sketch of Columbia College in the City of New York. By N. F. MOORE. 16mo, pp. 126. New York, 1846.

2. Statutes of Columbia College and its Associated Schools; to which are added the Permanent Resolutions and Orders of the Board of Trustees. 8vo, pp. 92. New York, 1866. 3. Annual Report of the Treasurer of Columbia College, with the Report of the Managers of the Accumulating Fund. New York, 1868.

8vo.

4. Letter to the Hon. the Board of Trustees of the University of Mississippi. By FREDRICK A. P. BARNARD, LL.D.

5. Prof. Barnard on Collegiate Education and College Government. 8vo, pp. 104. New York, 1855.

BEFORE doing ourselves the pleasure of indicating some of the very agreeable evidences of progress presented by Columbia College during the last two or three years, we beg leave to make a few observations which, although they may seem somewhat irrelevant at first sight, yet, when considered in their bearing on the different branches of our subject, will, we trust, be found not to do any serious violence to the unities so far as the latter are governed by reason, common sense, and a proper regard for the development of truth and the overthrow of its ancient foes, narrow-mindedness and prejudice.

We trust we need hardly remind our readers, at the close of our eighteenth volume, that to no object have our editorial labors been more earnestly devoted than to the elevation of the standard of education in our colleges, and we think it is equally superfluous to remind them that in giving our impressions of the institutions of our various religious sects, none have acted in more full accordance with the maxim of the Tyrian queen. At no time were we so sanguine as to expect that we could please all; we were quite as well aware ten years ago as we are now that none ever did so who attempted to point out defects as well as merits.

In

Far from feeling any regret, however, after an experience of nine years we have many reasons for congratulation. at least nineteen cases out of twenty we have been treated in the most courteous and cordial manner by chancellors of universities, presidents of colleges, and principals of seminaries, male and female. In this proportion those various institutions have cheerfully offered us every facility to enable us to form an opinion of their respective systems of education. Nor have they evinced any wrath toward us on being criticised; or been prevented by our criticisms from again furnishing us any facilities we required. We need hardly say that it is the most accomplished educators who have evinced the most cordial willingness to be thus communicative; in other words, those who are at the heads of institutions that perform faithfully the work they undertake-those who are qualified for their positions-have no dread of criticism; indeed, they are much more likely to invite free expressions of opinion, as we can testify from experience.

Even the most timid and retiring female educators, when conscious of their ability and of the fidelity with which they perform their work, are quite willing that any one who conducts himself properly may enter their seminaries, and give such opinions of their systems of instruction as he may think fair. Some think that the educators, male and female, of one sect are more willing to submit the results of their efforts to criticism than those of another; but we can truly say that among the competent class we have not observed the slightest difference in this respect. We have found the accomplished

Catholic instructor just as willing to have the work he performs for the public put to the test as the Protestant instructor. Proverbial as the nuns are in all parts of the world for their retiring habits, those of them engaged in education, and qualified for their positions, have the good sense to understand that those whom they expect to send them their children should have an opportunity of deriving what aid they can from the opinions of others in forming an estimate of the instructions their children are to receive. Accordingly, many of those estimable ladies, while fully aware of our not being a Catholic, have done us the honor, not only of expressing their cheerful willingness that we should visit their institutions whenever we felt disposed, but of cordially inviting us and urging us to go, without any request on our part; and in those instances in which we have availed ourselves of the privilege we have been most courteously afforded every facility to form a correct opinion of their schools. If we have ever abused this privilege, we ask when or where?

Nor have we had any different experience of those respectable seminaries or schools for young ladies, whether in city or country, which are in charge of competent laymen or clergymen of any denomination. Thus, for example, the Rev. Dr. Van Norman, principal of a first-class female institute in this city, has proved more than once that he had no apprehension that we would do any injustice to himself, his corps of instructors, or his students. His chief reason was, that he felt conscious of having done his work well; and it afforded us pleasure to testify how well-founded and honest that consciousness was. We felt bound to inform our readers after our last visit that, apart from other agreeable evidences of high culture, it had never been our privilege to have heard interesting passages in the Æneid of Virgil more elegantly or more correctly translated than by the young ladies of Dr. Van Norman's own class. We have been honored with similar invitations by the president of the Rutgers Female College, and by the lady principals of the Ferris Female Institute.

These remarks have been suggested to us by a somewhat re

* Vide N. Q. R., for March, 1868, pp. 391–393.

VOL. XVIII.—NO. XXXVI,

20

« السابقةمتابعة »