commend itself to me as altogether explanatory of this, and I think we must look to Uitzilopochtli’s nature as a wizard or sorcerer to enlighten us upon this point. Jacinto de la Serna40 states that in his time some of the Mexican conjurers used a wand around which was fastened a living serpent, in much the same way as the priests of the Pueblo Indians do at the present day; and as the great invisible medicine man of the tribe, Uitzilopochtli may have been thought of as doing the same. “Who is a manito?” asks the Meda chant of the Algonquins. “He,” is the reply, “who walketh with a serpent, he is a manito.” For the connection of the Indian magicians with the serpent the reader is referred to the pages of Brinton.41
In many lands the serpent is the symbol of reproductive power and has a phallic significance. In Mexico he casts his winter skin near the time of Uitzilopochtli’s first festival, about the beginning of the rainy season. Moreover, this reptile is connected with soothsaying, and in this respect resembles the god.
His myths, as well as his status in Mexico-Tenochtitlan, of which he was the tutelary deity, make it plain that Uitzilopochtli was a tribal god of the Aztecâ, their national god par excellence. The brave Quauhtemoc, the last native defender of the city, imagined himself invincible when armed with the bow and arrows of Uitzilopochtli, and we know that the advice of the oracle of that deity was sought by the Mexicans when hard pressed by the Conquistadores.
Nor is there any dubiety regarding his character as a god of war. This may have arisen from the circumstance that he presided over the liquor which was given to the troops when about to engage in