{*} [Humboldt, strictly speaking, has not confounded the Colhuans with the Acolhuans, but has written, in the places cited, the latter name for the former. “Letzterer Name,” says Buschmann, “ist der erstere mit dem Zusatz von _atl_ Wasser,--Wasser Colhuer.” (Uber die aztekischen Ortsnamen, S. 690.) Yet the two tribes, according to the same authority, were entirely distinct, one alone--though which, he is unable to determine--being of the Nahuatlac race. Orozco y Berra, however, makes them both of this stock, the Acolhuans being one of the main branches, the Colhuans merely the descendants of the Toltec remnant in Anahuac.--K.] [32] [This is not quite correct, since the form used in the letters of Cortés and other early documents is _Temixtitan_, which is explained as a corruption of Tenochtitlan. The letters _x_ and _ch_ are convertible, and have the same sound,--that of the English _sh_. _Mexico_ is _Mexitl_ with the place-designation _co_, _tl_ final being dropped before an affix.--K.] [33] Clavigero gives good reasons for preferring the etymology of Mexico above noticed, to various others. (See his Stor. del Messico, tom. i. p. 168, nota.) The name _Tenochtitlan_ signifies _tunal_ (a cactus) _on a stone_. Esplicacion de la Col. de Mendoza, apud Antiq. of Mexico, vol. iv. [34] “Datur hæc venia antiquitati,” says Livy, “ut, miscendo humana divinis, primordia urbium augustiora faciat.” Hist. Præf.--See, for the above paragraph, Col. de Mendoza, plate 1, apud Antiq. of Mexico, vol. i.,--Ixtlilxochitl, Hist. Chich., MS., cap. 10,--Toribio, Historia de los Indios, MS., Parte 3, cap. 8,--Veytia, Hist. antig., lib. 2, cap. 15.--Clavigero, after a laborious examination, assigns the following dates to some of the prominent events noticed in the text. No two authorities agree on them; and this is not strange, considering that Clavigero--the most inquisitive of all--does not always agree with himself. (Compare his dates for the coming of the Acolhuans, tom. i. p. 147, and tom. iv., dissert. 2:)-- A. D. The Toltecs arrived in Anahuac 648 They abandoned the country 1051 The Chichimecs arrived 1170 The Acolhuans arrived about 1200 The Mexicans reached Tula 1196 They founded Mexico 1325 See his dissert. 2, sec. 12. In the last date, the one of most importance, he is confirmed by the learned Veytia, who differs from him in all the others. Hist. antig., lib. 2, cap. 15. [35] [In a somewhat similar way was founded the Italian Venice. It was the fear of death at the hands of Attila and his Huns that caused the peopling of the islands among the lagoons of the Adriatic. It was the easy subsistence the lagoons afforded that caused the steady growth of the Italian village.--M.]