Brinton.] ^o4 [gept. 2, 



gives a list of eight successive rulers of the " Toltecs," each of 

 whom was computed to reign at least fifty-two years, or one 

 cycle ; but it is noteworthy that he states these rulers were not 

 of " Toltec " blood, but imposed upon them by the " Chichi- 

 mecs." This does not reflect creditably on the supposed singular 

 cultivation of the Toltecs. Probably the warrior Aztecs sub- 

 jected a number of neighboring tribes and imposed upon them 

 rulers.* 



If we accept the date given by the Codex Ramirez for the 

 departure of the Aztecs from the Coatepetl — A. D. 1168 — tlien 

 it is quite possible that they might have occupied the site for a 

 couple of centuries or longer, and that the number of successive 

 chieftains named by Ixtlilxochitl should not be far wrong. 

 The destructive battles of which he speaks as preceding their 

 departure — battles resulting in the slaughter of more than five 

 million souls — we may regard as the grossly- overstated account 

 of some really desperate conflicts. 



That the warriors of the Azteca, on leaving Tula, scattered 

 over Mexico, Yucatan and Central America, is directly contrary 

 to the assertion of the high authorities I have quoted, and also 

 to most of the mythical descriptions of the event, which declare 

 they were all, or nearly all, massacred. f 



The above I claim to be the real history of Tula and its 

 Serpent-Hill, of tlie Toltecs and their dynasty. Now comes the 

 question, if we accept this view, liow did this ancient town and 



into a rational clirouology, remembering tliat there is an acknowledged hiatns of a 

 number of years about the eleventh and twelfth centuries in the Aztec records (Orozco y 

 Berra, notes to Codez Ramirez, p. 213). The Anales de Oiauhtitlan dates the founding of 

 Tula after that of Tlaxcallan, Huexotzineo and Cuauhtitlan (p. 29). 



* As usual, Ixtlilxochitl coutradicts himself in his lists of rulers. Those given in his 

 Hisforia Chichimeca are by no means the same as those enumerated in his Relaciones His- 

 toricas (Kingsborough, Mexico, Vol. ix, contains all of Ixtlilxochitl's writings). Entirely 

 different from both is the list in the Anales de Cuauhtitlnn. How completely euheme- 

 ristic Ixtlilxochitl is in his interpretations of Mexican mythology is shown by his 

 speaking of the two leading Nahuatl divinities Tezcatlipoca and Huitzilopochtli as 

 "certain bold warriors" ("ciertos caballeros muy valerosos." Relaciones HistoHcas, in. 

 Kingsborough, Vol. ix, p. 326). 



t See the note to page 3. But it is not at all likely that Tula was absolutely deserted. 

 On the contrarj', Herrera asserts that after the foundation of Mexico and the adjacent 

 cities (despues de la fundacion de Mexico i de toda la tierra) it reached its greatest 

 celebrity for skilled workmen. Decadas de Indias, Dec. iii, Lib. ii, cap. 11. The general 

 statement is that the sites on the Coatepetl and the adjacent meadows were unoccupied 

 for a few years— the Anales de Ciuxuhtitlan says nine years— after the civil strife and 

 massacre, and then were settled again. The Ilistoria de los Mexicanos por sus Pinluras, 

 cap. 11, says, "y ansi fueron muertos todos los de Tula, que no qued6 ninguno." 



