ally flat slabs carved with figures and inscriptions in low relief on
one side only. External ornament of the buildings usually moulded in
stucco. War-like weapons but very scarce.

3. Tikal. Intermediate between Nos. 2 and 4, but somewhat different and
distinct from either.

4. Yucatan. Chichen-Itza, Uxmal, etc. Stelae very few in number and poorly
carved. Inscriptions carved in stone are very scarce. Inscriptions were
probably _painted_ on the walls of the temples. External ornament of
buildings formed by a mosaic of cut stones somewhat resembling Zapotec or
Aztec style. Every man portrayed as a warrior [on the bas-reliefs].

By means of the magnificent set of casts which Mr. A. P. Maudslay has
generously presented to the South Kensington Museum, London, and with the
aid of his monumental and splendidly illustrated work on the Archaeology
of Central America, which has been appearing as a part of the Biologia
Centrali-Americana, edited by Messrs. Godman and Salvin, I have been able
to verify the following facts which will be found to throw light on the
purpose and meaning of some of the ancient monuments.

Before examining the great, elaborately carved stelae which are
characteristic of Quirigua and Copan, let us search the native chronicles
for some clue explanatory of the purpose for which they were erected.

Bishop Landa has transmitted to us some details about the destroyed
metropolis of Mayapan given to him by Yucatec informants who stated that
"in the central square of that city there still were 7 or 8 stones, about
ten feet high, rounded on one side and well sculptured, which exhibit
several rows of the native characters, but were so worn that they had
become illegible. It is supposed, however, that they are the record of the
foundation and destruction of that capital. Similar, but higher monuments,
are at Zilan, a town on the coast. Interrogated as to the meaning of these
monoliths the natives answered: It had been or was customary to erect
similar stones at intervals of 20 years which was the number by which they
counted their eras." Bishop Landa subsequently remarks that "this
statement is not consistent," for, according to this "there should be many
more such stones in existence, and none exist in any other pueblo but
Mayapan and Zilan."(58)

Disagreeing with the venerable Bishop, I find in the above statements the
most valuable indications of the former existence of two centres of
culture in Yucatan. T