66 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [bull. 28 



the setting sun, devoured by the earth, i.s opposed to him, similarly as 

 the sun god is opposed to the death god. He may perhaps be described 

 as a sun god of southern tribes (Zapotecs^). In the Mexican legend 

 he appears as the representative of human sacrifice 'and as the god of 

 monstrosities, perhaps identical with Nauauatzin, the "poor leper", 

 who leaps into the flaming fire, sacrificing himself, in order that he may 

 rise again as the sun in the firmament. The Xolotl head (quaxolotl) 

 is therefore one of the most prominent warrior devices." Xolotl is 

 doubtless a kindred figure to the god Xipe, and his home should be 

 sought in the immediate vicinity of Xipe's home. The shield with the 

 human arm as its emblem, which is worn by Axayacatl of the Cozcat- 

 zin codex and by the Bilimec warrior, is therefore hardly to be regarded 

 as an irregularity or as anything contradictory to the former costume. 



I now come to the device on the back, the remarkable standard, which 

 von Hochstetter has used to interpret the Viennese ornament. For 

 the sake of clearness I have drawn it once more from the Cozcatzin 

 codex as 6^, figure 9, and contrasted it with the Bilimec warrior, d. 

 Here, first of all, we should consider the framework, from which the 

 standard apparently rises. It is obvious that it is not a house, as von 

 Hochstetter and Mrs Nuttall assumed, and as Doctor Uhle finally 

 "proved". 



We grant Doctor Uhle, to be sure, that the "dark distinguishable 

 door and window openings " in the small Bilimec picture might lead him 

 astray. In other respects the frame on the Bilimec warrior resembles a 

 Mexican house as little as possible. On the contrary, that the object in 

 question is a genuine framework carried on the back is clearly shown 

 by the straps crossing over the breast of the figures in the Cozcatzin 

 codex. But what kind of a framework can it be? Of course, it has 

 nothing to do with the ladderlike carrying frame (cacaxtli), to which 

 devices for the back are fastened elsewhere. 1 hesitate between two 

 theories. The most natural conjecture would be to consider it only 

 an ill-drawn ueuetl, a drum, such as King Nezaualcoyotl wears in h.^ 



a See Zeitschrift fiir Ethnologic, 1891, v. 23, p. 127. 



b Singular conflicts have arisen in regard to this portrait. It belongs, with three others, to a manu- 

 script which is ascribed to the hi.storian Don Fernando Alva de Ixtlilxochitl, a decendant of Tetz- 

 cocanic kings; later it doubtless came into the hands of the learned Jesuit Don Carlos de Sigiienza y 

 Gongora with all Ixtlilxochitl's possessions, and now forms a part of the Aubin-Goupil collection. At 

 the time that it wa.s in Sigiienza's hands, the Neapolitan traveler, Gemelli Carreri, visited Mexico 

 and copied these four portraits, with other parts of the manuscripts, to use in the accountof his travels. 

 These four portions represent, as the legends accompanying them state, the Tetzcocanic kings 

 Nezaualcoyotl and Nezaualpilli and two Tetzcocanic nobles (tribal chiefs ?), named Tocuepotzin and 

 Quauhtlatzocuilotzin. But Gemelli Carreri classed these with a fifth portrait, which, according to 

 Boturini, also represents King Nezaualpilli, and gave them the names of the INIexican kings Tizoc, 

 Axayacatl, Auitzotl, Motecuhzoma, and Quauhtemoc. But it happened that in the first Neapolitan edi- 

 tion of his "Giro del mundo " (Naples, 1699-1701), the original, correct name (Nezaualcoyotl) was left 

 attached to the second figure. In later editions ( Venice, 1719; Paris, 1719) the list of Mexican kings is 

 complets. Kingsborough's five portraits are reproduced from the first Neapolitan edition, and I 

 owe it to this circumstance that I was enabled to give King Nezaualcoyoti (6, fig. 9) his true name in 

 mj work. 



