little reliance can be placed. It is certain, however, that the great teocalli of the city of Mexico was constructed within a few years of the conquest, after which the formation of such works was prohibited by the ecclesiastical authorities of Spain. It being certain that America was first peopled, after the general deluge, by migrants proceeding eastwardly from the plains of Tartary, where barrows had been the temples and tombs from the earliest ages, those emigrants would of course continue their established practice, by raising barrows wherever they might abide. Such are now extant in several provinces of North America, as has been already instanced above. There can be little doubt that barrows might be found in all the countries intervening between those provinces and the Mexican; but that in the latter, they are more numerous from the ample population, and more magnificent from the power of the people that constructed them.

These reasons will vindicate the position, that the barrows and pyramids of America were all constructed upon principles exactly the same as those of other parts of the world, and that, like them, they were symbolical representations of the world, and of the presence of the deity in the created world; and, according to the errors of idolatry, each symbol was the deity himself. The different stages of the Mexican structures indicate, that the larger pyramids especially were intended to be such imitations. It appears from the statements of the scientist, that the Mexicans had nearly the same opinions of the earth and of the universe, as were till late years entertained by the Hindus. Indeed, it is very probable that they may have received such knowledge directly from the Hindus. The wide wandering habits of the Hindu Yogis or Ascetics are well known. It is likely, and indeed all but certain, that such persons did visit, at different times, the provinces of America. A person named Bochica is celebrated in their annals. Bochica is described as having all the

characteristics of the Yogi. He practised austerities; he officiated as priest; he gave them laws remarkable for their analogy to those of Thibet and Japan; he established classes or casts; and after the practice of austerities for two thousand years, miraculously disappeared. Other instances of similitude between the observances of the Mexicans and the nations of eastern Asia might be adduced, shewing that the construction of the American barrow was a continuation of the early usages of the other continents.

The series of sacred structures of different ages and nations, described as above, afford decisive proof, that, however various in magnitude and form, they all owe their origin to one structure, the altar raised beneath the shade of the trees of knowledge and of life in the Garden of Eden. After the expulsion, Adam constructed an altar, the same in form as that at which he had worshipped under happier circumstances, and shaded, like that altar, by trees surrounded by a grove, as in the Garden. This was his second temple, and being an imitation of the first, was a representation of the scene of the frequent visits of the Deity, and the symbol of the Divine presence. The authorities of Holy Writ shew that the sons of God, the orthodox patriarchs, used no other form than the altar in the grove, until it pleased the Almighty, for reasons about to be stated in subsequent pages, to ordain the construction of the tabernacle in the wilderness, which, after numerous removals, obtained finally a permanent site and solid construction in the temples builded in succeeding ages on Mount Sion in Jerusalem.

The simple altar and fenced grove did not suffice the theories devised and maintained by the theologues of the Gentile nations. Adopting the doctrine that the world or created universe was not only the symbol of the divine presence, and the abode of the divine spirit, but that it was God himself, they deemed it indispensably necessary that

z Humboldt's American Researches, vol. ii. p. 107.

their temples should bear the same form as the world. The observations made in successive ages, led them to adopt different opinions on this subject, and these induced them to vary the forms of their temples, so that they might accord with the cosmographical theories of the age and nation. Hence it came that the altar became a pyramid variously formed, and the enclosure was circular, quadrangular, or octangular, according as such forms might, for the reasons above given, gain the approval of the builders.

The materials composing the inclosure, containing a grove whenever that could be obtained, were very various, as circumstances might admit. In some instances, the altar or barrow was surrounded by a platform, bounded by a trench, or a trench and vallum or raised bank; in others by rows of upright stones or pillars, perhaps with imposts as at Stonehenge, often without. Improved means changed these inclosures into regular and magnificent colonnades, as with the temples or pagodas of India, where the votaries, sheltered from storms or shaded from the sun, performed the sacramental rites of the sacrifices and oblations offered within the inclosed court and in front of the pyramidal structure, the symbol of the presence or the person of the god.

In the forms of the structures already described, there is no resemblance to the present forms of Christian churches. The consecration of the areas or inclosed grounds by which the churches of the present age are surrounded, is, however, owing to the ancient and universal practice of giving sanctity to the platform that surrounded the barrow, the high place, or the pyramid. Such a cincture was always held to be a necessary appendage to the sacred structure, and is so deemed still. The barrow or high place being regarded as desirable for sepulture, introduced the practice of interment within its bounds, and of devoting churchyards to the same purpose, in cases where it might not be expedient to inter within the structure itself, as in the barrow or pyramid.

The exposition of the rationale of these inclosures or churchyards is not perhaps without its interest; it shews that the universal practice of consecration did not originate in chance, but was adopted for reasons which wisdom will not fail to approve. The means by which the churches and cathedrals of Christian countries obtained their towers, spires, naves, ailes, and chancels, remain to be developed. This will be done in the following chapters by a reference to the primal principle, the obligation to render the temple or church a proper symbol of the divine presence, from the resemblance it might be supposed to bear to the created world.

CHAPTER III.

ON SACRED STONES AND PILLARS.

It has been shewn, in the chapter introductory to this treatise, that, according to the popular opinion of ancient ages, the earth was borne up and sustained in its place by pillars standing on some unknown substratum, but figuratively represented by various symbols. Upon the authority of this theory, a pillar was adopted as a symbol of strength and firmness; a symbol also of the divine power, and, by a ready inference, a symbol or idol of the Deity himself. The use of the symbol as significant of strength has been instanced, first, in the act of the patriarch Jacob, when, on his journey to Haran, he set up a stone as a sacred pillar at Bethel, as a testimony of his resolve to serve the God of his fathers; and secondly, in the stone set up by him for a pillar, at the foot of the mound or altar heaped up at Galeed, on his agreement with Laban. Such use of the pillar is sanctioned in Holy Writ, as may be seen by other instances already noticed. Thus far the use of the