of the work, and the beauty of the decorations. Their beauty, says M. Charnay, can be matched only by the monuments of Greece and Rome in their best days. One fact presented by some of the edifices at Mitla has a certain degree of historical significance. There appears to be evidence that they were occupied at some period by people less advanced in civilization than their builders. . . .
"Two miles or more away from the great edifices here mentioned, toward the west, is the 'Castle of Mitla.' It was built on the summit of an isolated and precipitous hill of rock, which is accessible only on the east side. The whole leveled summit of this hill is inclosed by a solid wall of hewn stone, 21 feet thick and 18 feet high. This wall has salient and retiring angles, with curtains interposed. On the east side it is flanked by double walls. Within the inclosure are the remains of several small buildings. The field of these ruins was very large three hundred years ago. At that time it may have included this castle."
Humboldt, in his Political Essay on New Spain, vol. ii, pp. 239, 240, has described these remains as follows:
"The village of Mitla was formerly called Miguitlan, a word that means, in the Mexican language, a place of sadness. The Tzapotec Indians call it Leoba, which signifies tomb. . . . The palace, or rather the tombs of Mitla, form three edifices symmetrically placed in an extremely romantic situation. The principal edifice is in the best preservation, and is nearly 130 feet in length. A stair formed in a pit leads to a subterraneous apartment of 88 feet in length and 26 feet in breadth. This gloomy apartment is covered with the same grecques which ornament the exterior walls of the edifice. But what distinguishes the ruins of Mitla from all the other remains of Mexican architecture is six porphyry columns, which are placed in the midst of a vast hall, and support the ceiling. These columns, almost the only ones found in the new continent, bear strong marks
