1887.] ^41 [Brinton. 



the Toltecs in the Chronicles of the Maxjas and the Annals of 

 the Kakchiquels are loans from the later mythology of the 

 Nahuas. It is high time for this talk about the Toltecs as a 

 mighty people, precursors of the Azteca, and their instructors 

 in the arts of civilization, to disappear from the pages of his- 

 tory. The residents of ancient Tula, the Tolteca, were nothing 

 more than a sept of the Nahuas themselves, the ancestors of 

 those Mexica who built Tenochtitlan in 1325. This is stated as 

 plainl}' as can be in the Aztec records, and should now be con- 

 ceded by all. The mythical Tula, and all its rulers and inhab- 

 itants, are the baseless dreams of poetic fancy, which we prin- 

 cipally owe to the Tezcucan poets. 



In conclusion, I have no hesitation in repeatii^g the words 

 which I printed some 3'ears ago, and which gave considerable 

 offence in certain quarters : " Is it not time that we dismiss, 

 once for all, these American myths from the domain of historical 

 traditions? Wh}' should we try to make an enlightened ruler 

 of Quetzalcoatl, a cultured nation of the Toltecs, when the 

 proof is of the strongest that the}' are the fictions of m3-thol- 

 ogy ? Let it be understood hereafter that whoever uses these 

 names in an historic sense betrays an ignorance of the subject 

 he handles, which, were it in the better-known field of Aryan or 

 Egyptian lore, would convict him of not meriting the name of 

 scholar." * 



* Antcrican Hero Myths, p. 35. The only writer ou ancient American history before me 

 who has wliolly rejected the Toltecs is, I believe, Albert Gallatin. In his able and 

 critical study of the origin of American civilization {Transactions of the American Ethno- 

 logical Society, Vol. i, p. 203) he dismissed them entirely from historical consideration 

 with the words : " The tradition respecting the Toltecs iiscends to so remote a date, and 

 is so obscure and intermixed witli mythological fobles, that it is impossible to designate 

 either the locality of their primitive abodes, the time when they first appeared in the 

 vicinity of the Valley of Mexico, or whether they were preceded by nations speaking 

 the same or different languages." Had this well-grounded skepticism gained the ears of 

 writers since 1845. when it was published, we should have been saved a vast amount of 

 rubbish which has been heaped up under the name of history. 



Dr. Otto StoU {Guatemala; Reit'cn und Schilclerungen, ss. -108, 409, Leipzig, I8861 has 

 joined in rejecting the ethnic existence of the Toltecs. As in later Xahuatl the word 

 toltecatl meant not only "resident of Tollan," but also "artificer" and "trader," Dr. 

 Stoll thinks that the Central American legends which speak of " Toltecs" should be in- 

 terpreted merely as referring to i'oreign mechanics or pedlars, and not to any particular 

 nationality. I quite agree with tliis view. 



PUOC. AMER. I'HIIiOS. SOC. XXIV. 136. 2e. PRINTED OCT. 22, 1887. 



