The herald., 1893-10-01
on the plea Of heredity, and that Pizarro
recognized the plea.
That there wRa no nation.

on the plea OF heredity, and that Pizarro
recognized the plea.
That there wRa no nation.
That there was o nation, and that At
ahualpa was the undoub bted chief.
Mr.. Lummis's unfortunate propensity
for contradicting himself has followed
him even TO the present paper. as wit
ness the following: I'm every ruin are
the overwhelming proofs that In this
Arcadian society (the Incas) not only
was eensuality dominant, but every sort
of unnatural crime" And few lines
further on he says that the worst he can
conscientiouely eay of the Incas is that
they were pfrates--like the British.
Mr.. Lummis coolly ignores the real
issues-the character OF Pizarro-and
confines himself to lecturing me on my
ignorance OF ..'the new but accepted
conclusions OF modern SCIENCE" and
producing such gems as the following:
"The personal part OF Mr.. Joh1ston's
invective is not of concern. His hail
pours fast at Pizarro and then at my
uncertain which of us is worthier of the
deep damnation OF his taking off, So
another once starved between two bun
hiCS vi nay, uuC0Ebdln WhlCh w CoOs
He holds me personally responsible for
all Pizarro's crimes, of which he paints
many. So far as that goes, would
career than for Mr.. Jchnston's. His
blindest defamers have never charged
the conqueror of Peru with not knowing
what to dc when it rained."
4 have to thank him again for going
~ % IL ;x,ex n
names. $50 another" How consider
ate You see he did not like to call me
jackass right out, for fear of hurting
my feelings, yet his simile seems to be
little mixed. He says mis- hail-the
jackass' hail, OF course-"pours first at
Pizsrro. and then at my humble head"
A jackaes pouring hail ia q new and
peculiar specimen in natural history, it
eeems to me.
l did not "paint any of Pizarro's
crimes" but was careful to alludeto
none but those painted" by Mr.. Lum-
mis- himself.
His sllusion to my ''career" is quite
touching.
AS to the Drama of Ollantay."it it may
be spurious; it is not at all improbable !;
such forgeries are constantly being
brought to light. I will take Mr.. Lum.
mis- word for it and assume that it is,
and count myself in his debt for the in
formation. But even here be does not
score complete victory. He says that
''the language of the Incas is one OF
those languages characteristic of peoples
who had not the remotest conception Of
either society or politics, as the terms
are used in civilization" yet this drama
which he calls "Spanish in every fibre"
ia written in that tongue. II Mr.. Lum-
mis- estimate of the language is correct,
no words would have been found in it fit
to express sentiments that were "Span-
ish in every FIBRE"
To reenme: "Mr. Jobnston's dne
sweep OF the hand. dsmolishing my poor
notions about the religion of the ancient
Peruvians, is equally humiliating !"
everywhere we dig up the divinities
they did worship, in every ruin are the
indeecribably obscene, the hideously dis
gusting objects, both of religion and
art"
My sine sweep" consisted in the
brief remark, that sit is pretty csr-
tain that the Sun-god was virtually the
only one worshiped," which still be-
lieve to be true; not that they did not
have idols, Just as many ancient races
of the old world did, who nevertheless
acknowledged one Supreme God just as
the Hindoos do today. and for the mat
ter of that, Just as the Spsniards them
selves did-with little difference in
name. A modern Russian will pray as
earnestly to his icon" today as ever
Peruvian did, in the old days, to his lit
tie clay image, yet the Russian would be
astoniehed to be told that be worshiped
any but the one true God.
Ae for obscene images, one need go no
further than the sacred temple OF
Benares, in civilized India, to find
specimens that put to shame any that
Peru could produce.
1.-THE Jobnetonian twistings OF the af-
fair at Caxamarca, and his able exposi-
ton Of Indian royalty. needs no serious
rejoinder." 1t certainly does not-for
sim ply reproduced Mr.. Lummis' own
words, and the 'twistings," If any. were
of his own weaving, and that made no
exposition OF Indian royalty" anyone
oan zee who reads; that too was Mr..
Lummis' own.
Mr.. Lummis's diatribe, summed up
and boiled down. amounts to this:
That | am fool.
That / am ignorant.
That 1 am dishonest.
That am jackass-''pouring hail."
That / knowingly violate truth.
That l am a Briton.
That my article is humorous, but that
the wit is not mine.
That have read only one book on
Peru. -
That do not know what to do when
it rains.
& That my career" is less enyiable than
that of Pizarro. 5hf
That stand very much in need of
salt. ,,s
There are convincing arguments, in
deed, and I suppose come under the
head of courteous confederation.
The only material point at issue be-
tween Mr.. Lummis and myself--and l
believe between him and the great ma
jority of well-informed readers-is the
question whether Pizsrro is to go down
in history as hero or an atrocious
monster. hold the latter-base born
and base liver with Init ono manly