Page:A History of Architecture in All Countries Vol 2.djvu/598

582 582 PERUVIAN ARCHITECTURE. Paut III. In the centre of it is a mask cut with very considerable skill, and on each side a number of panels containing incised emblematical figures, whose purport and meaning have not yet been explained. The other doorway (Woodcut No. 1008) is erect and entire, but perfectly plain. Its only ornaments are ^ square sinkings cut with the admirable precision and clearness characteris- tic of the style. ^ There is also at Tia ^1^ Huanacu a great mound, apparently about 1000 ft. long by 400 in width, but the stone revetment that gave it form has been removed in modern times, so that its shape is undis- tinguishable. It was ap- parently surrounded by a range of monolithic pil- lars or obelisks, like a Ccylonese dagoba, and had a wall of Cyclopean masonry outside these. There is also a square marked out by similar pillars, each of a single stone, 18 to 20 ft. in height, but whether originally connected or not cannot now be ascertained. The wonder of the place, however, is a monument of very uncertain destination, called the " Seats of the Judges," consisting of great slabs of stone — there are either three or four, each 36 ft. sq. and 5 ft. thick, at one end of wdiich the seats are carved. Without detailed plans and drawings it is difficult to form any reliable opinion regarding these remains, but it does seem that the people who executed them had a wonderful power of quarrying and moving masses, and an aspiration after eternity very unlike anything else found in this continent, and the details of their orna- mentation neither resemble those of Mexico nor the succeeding style of the Incas.^ 1008. Gateway at Tia Huanacu. (From a Photograph.) ' It is only fair to state that Mr. Marlfliam (Joiu-nal Roy. Geo. Soc, vol. xli. p. 307) denies the Aymara origin of the Tia Huanacu ruins, and ascribes them to the Incas, and consecjuently disputes the distinction pointed out above. The truth seems to be that, until we get more photographs or de- tailed drawings, all conclusions regard- ing Peruvian architecture must be con- sidered as more or less hypothetical. 2 For the principal part of this in- formation I am indebted to Mr. William Bollaert and the photographs of the Messrs. Helsby, of Liverpool, and also to a paper on the Aymara Indians, by Dr. David Forbes, communicated to the Ethnological Society of London in June, 1870.