Let us see how the name Quetzal-coatl occurs in Mexico. It is given as the name of the “supreme god whose substance was as invisible and intangible as air,” but who was also revered as the god of fire. The constant reference to air in connection with the supreme divinity caused him to be also adored as the god of air and of the four winds. On the other hand, the divine title of Quetzal-coatl was carried by the culture-hero whose personality has been discussed and who was a Yucatec ruler and high priest. Sahagun (_op. cit._ book III, chap. IX) informs us that “Quequet-zalcoa,” the plural form of the word Quetzalcoatl, was employed to designate “_the high priests_ (elsewhere designated as the ‘supreme pontiffs’) _who were the successors of Quetzalcoatl_.” He also states that “the high priest of the temple was [the representative of] the god Quetzalcoatl” (book I, chap. 5). “The priest who was most perfect in his conduct and in wisdom was elected to be high priest and assumed the name of Quetzalcoatl.... There were two such high priests equal in rank and honours.... One of these, the Quetzalcoatl Totec Tlamacazqui, was in the service of Huitzilopochtli.” Without pausing here to analyze this title since it will be discussed in detail in another publication I will only repeat that, after years of careful research, I have obtained the certainty that the foregoing title and office were those held by Montezuma at the time of the Conquest. What is more, I can produce ample evidence to prove that he was the living personification of Huitzilopochtli one of the “divine twins” and of the Above. He was not the first Mexican ruler who had filled this exalted rôle, for it is recorded that Axayacatl, one of Acamapichtli’s successors, had represented, in life, “our god Huitzilopochtli.” After his death his effigy “was first covered with a fine robe representing Huitzilopochtli; over this was hung the dress of Tlaloc ... the next garment was that of Youalahua [=the lord of the wheel] and the fourth was that of Quetzalcoatl” (Duran, vol. I, chap. 39, pp. 304 and 306).