OCR Text |
Show . lHSSEit'l'. ..____I,,... .._.., II I 5 T 0 R Y 0 F M TI X I C 0. cau[t; letter , j may be faid, were invented aft t· t1l cit fcparation; but how is it J nown th:\t before they fcparated th<.:y had m::tdc the inven-tion of hicroglyphi s ? The tlrc:ls of the fidl: Egypti:1ns may have prohably hccn the fame as t h.tt of the othl!r Cons and nephews of Noah; at leaft we have no rcaJtll1 to think othcrwi(c. l~t:fpeB:ing the political cufioms of thofe fidl nwn \ VC know nothing. The moft :tncient Egyptians, of whom we have anv cl!rtaill rnarks , were thofe who lived in the times of the patriarch J Jo!eph. If we mean to make a compari{on of their ufagcs ment ioned irr the [tcrcd books with tho(e of the Mexicans, inficad of any ftmi·hrity, ,.vc il1all find the. ftrongeft difference between them. Lail:ly, we do not pretend to detnonfl:rate the opinion of Siguenza to be f,,J(c, but ,· llply to l11ew that it is not a truth llpon whi h we cnn fafcly roly. 'fhc cx tmvagant M. de P. f.1.ys, 1that the Mexicans derive their origin from the 1outhcrn ApaLtchites ; ·but he neither <.l0cs nor can offer :my n:a(on to make fn cb a fuppofition probable; and, although it were tr tc, the clifRculty would remain fl:ill unrefolved with rcgad to the orrgm f the A pahchites thcmfelves. It is true, that author finds littk diniculty, as he fometirnes gives us to under.fl:and that he is not unf.1vourable to the romantic 1yfl:em of La Feyrere. With refpcCl: to the opinion we have ventured t<\ form ourfclvcs, we fhall e 'plain it in the following conclutions. I. Th~ Americans defcendcd from different nations, or from different families, difpcrfed after the onfufion of tongues. No pcrfon will doubt of the truth of this, who has any knowledge of the multitude and great diverfity of the American languages. In Mexico we haye already found thirty-five: in South America there arc {l:ill more known. In the beginning of the laft century the Portugucfc ounted f1fty in Maragnon. It is true, that there is a great affinity between fome of thofe languages, which £hews that they are fprung from the f.1me parent, nimcly, the Eudeve, Opata, and Tanohumara, in North America, and the Mocobt", CJ'oba, and .Abipona in South :\mcrica; but there are many others a1fo, as different from each · other as the Illyrian from the Hebrew. We can fafely affirm, that there are no living or dead languages which can difler more among each other than the languages of the Mexicans, Otomics, Tarafcas, Mayas, • • .. H I S T 0 R Y 0 F M E X I C 0. Mayas, and Miztecas, five languages prevailing in different provinces of Mexico. It would there£ore b~ ~bfurd to fay, that . languages fo different were 1diffi rent dialeCts of one original. How is it pofl'ible ~ nation il10uld alt r its primitive language to fuch a degree, or multiply its dialeCts fo variouOy,' that there {hould not be, even ' after many ccntmies, if not fomc wo1ds commor1 to all, at leail: an affinity betw~cn them, or fame traces left of their origiq. ? Who can ever believe what we read in the hiftory of Acofh? That the Aztccas, or Mexicans, having arrived after their long percgPination in the ~dngdom of Michuacan, were allured hy the agreeablcncfs of the country, and became defi rous of e!bblifhing themfclves in it; but as the whole nation could not fettle there, ·their g6d Huitzi~0po htli cotl ·· fe.ntcd that fome of them might flay, and .fuggcll:ed to the others, when thofe who were to· remain went to bnthe in the lake of Pazcuaro, to freal their cloaths from them and P.,urfue their journey; tl~at thofe who bathed finding themfclves robbed of their garments and fooled by t~ c ir companio11s, were fo provoked, that they not only refo1ved to rernam there, but to adopt a new language; and that then c arofe the Tarafca language. The account adopted by Gomara and other hiilorians, is frill more incredible : that, of an old man ~allcd Iztac Mixcoatl and his wife Itancueit! were born fi~ chilJren, each with a ~iffcrent l~nguage, ! called Xolhu~, Tenoch, 0/mecatl, Xi(:a/lam:at!, Mt~tecat!, and Otomtt!, who were the founders of as many nation s, whtc.h people~ the country of Anahuac. This allegory by which the Mex1cans fign1fied that all thofe nations drew their origin from one common ftock, was made a fable of by the above mentioned authors from ignorance of its meaning. ' .II.' T.he Amet:i~ans do not derive their origin fi·om any people now ex1fl:1ng m the auc1ent world, or at leaft there is no grounds to affirm it. Thjs inference is founded on ~J1e £1.me argument with the preceding, fince if the Americans defcendcd of any of thofe people, it would be poffible to trace their origin by fame marks in their languages in fpite of the antiquity, of their feparation : but any fuch traces h~ve not been difcovercd hitherto, although many authors have ft:archl:d w~th the utmofl: attention, as appears from the work. of the Dominican Garcia. We have leifurely compared the Mexican and other Amcricnt VoL. II. E e languag~.:s _.. ; 209 DISSERT. I. ~ |