ju or infant at the Canyon is (or was) a little sun child, or child of the sun.

American rulers called themselves "Children of the Sun," and we should be careful not to confound our Arizona Prince with any Asiatic ruler. [The Hao or Shao Hao of supposed Chinese origin is represented by some different symbols: see Williams' dict. p. 172, columns 1 and 2.]

The little Child of the Sun at the Ta-Hoh or Great Canyon should not be—must not be—confounded with any early Chinese sun-worshiper. We are to look far to the east of China for both the Canyon and the little Child of the Sun referred to in the account before us.

We are informed that the country connected with the Great Canyon was called "Shao Hao's country" (or the land of the Sun-child) on account of the little Prince. He entered (chi) it, and this furnished the reason (or chih) for its title—Land of the Sun-child.

The infant (or ju) is distinctly called a ruler (or ti.) Moreover, although he was little (shao) or but a ju (suckling); he was a supreme king (or chwen suh). (Note 22.)

Chwen is formed by putting together the two words "only" and "head." And suh is a Chinese term composed of the two significant words "only" and "king" (see Williams' dict. pp. 117, 825, 1043.)

Evidently the baby ruler (or ju ti) was regarded by his people, in this region remarkable for its mountains, as the only or supreme head—the chwen suh, as Chinese historians might forcibly phrase it—of the people ruled.

[Because the infant was king and even the supreme king, it seems reasonable to suppose that his father was dead (and his mother alive) at the time when he was carried into the Great Canyon and duly suckled there.] We need not just here attempt to unravel his history. Enough to show that our Grand Canyon is positively and clearly referred to in Chinese literature. We may, however, note the fact that the royal infant (see translation) belonged to the Kin Tien or Golden Heaven family, and this title must be considered when the history of our Arizona Prince comes to be investigated. It should further be remarked that the respected translator has erred slightly in his supposition that the Chwen Suh (or Supreme Head) was "Shao Hao's descendant." The Chinese terms in the original are: shao hao (not hao's) ju (baby) ti (ruler) chwen suh (head king.) It was the little sun child ruler and supreme king who was at the Canyon.

Particular attention should be paid to the fact, that, although regarded as a supreme ruler, the Prince is represented as being but a suckling (or ju) when in the neighborhood of the Great Canyon.

Now, the translation states that this baby or supreme lord "of whom no further description is given, left there his lute and lyre. It says that his lute and lyre are in this canyon."

MUSIC IN THE GRAND CANYON?

It is absurd to imagine for a moment that a sucking infant could own, or could be really supposed to own, a lute. The Chinese text does not say that the musical instrument is "his." And yet, curiously enough, it does declare that the baby-prince left or abandoned (k'i) a Lute or Lyre in the Canyon.

Why should such a matter be mentioned? Supposing that a fiddle was left behind, or a drum, or a rattle, why should the trivial fact be gravely recorded?

If a Lute was left in the mighty chasm, its remains might be there still. But how could an infant be said to leave or abandon a Lute? Would he not try, so well as our memory serves, to first get it into his mouth? Would not his chubby hands, quite stout enough for destructive arts, tear the strings apart and feed the music to the nearest cat? Would it be a lute at all when ultimately relinquished? And if the babe derived pleasure from ill-treated and squalling strings, why should he leave the lute behind? As well say that the suckling abandoned there a fishing-rod! Would not a milk-bottle be a much readier fount of ecstacy than either a lute or a flute? Why, neither one nor the other could be heard within the Canyon.

A Chinese commentator, however, relieves us from the necessity of seeking for a literal lute between the resounding jaws of the mighty chasm (note 23.) He says it is erroneous (ngo) to suppose that the baby emperor (ju ti) grasped (ping,) or left behind (chi) or abandoned in the place of midnight darkness (huen) any lutes or lyres (kin seh.) In hyperbolical language (wu wu)—which is never true when taken literally—a clear limpid river (shuh) would be the lute (kin.)

But how could a clear stream serve as a lute?

The running water might produce limpid notes. Thus Moore, in his ode on "Harmony," uses the following words:

Here is a current of water likened to the string of a harp, and the playing of winds compared to music.

Mrs. Sigourney calls Niagara a "Trump," and we accept the assertion (although literally it is quite untrue.)

But if the Chinese account placed a Trump in the Ontario chasm there would be considerable difficulty in finding it.

Fortunately, in the case immediately before us, it is a Chinese author who tells us that we are to seek for limpid streams rather than for literal lutes or lyres.

The mention of the latter would probably imply that the sounds of some stream or streams in the Great Canyon are of a remarkably soft and musical character.

Streams may produce delightful tones. Thus one observer (at Yellowstone) tells of the "mysterious music of the distant falls" "like the tremulous vibration of a mighty but remote harp-string." (note 24)

If falling water under certain peculiar acoustic circumstances can produce notes like those struck off from harp-strings, the tones can also be compared to those of lutes or lyres (for all are stringed instruments.)

The very volume which places lutes and lyres in the Great Canyon, also tells of a forest elsewhere, which is a "Forest of Lutes and Lyres" (note 25.)

Of course sounds merely resembling those of the stringed instruments, are here referred to. A forest is composed of trees rather than musical instruments, but it may produce musical tones like those of Lutes and Lyres.

And similarly the notes arising from the Grand Canyon may be of a lute-like character. This is the teaching of the Ancients. We have found the Bottomless stream and it is certain that visitors should return with accounts of melody arising from the Canyon. Future explorers should listen for musical notes. They will certainly not be disappointed.

One visitor says: "The waters waltz their way through the Canyon, making their own rippling, rushing, roaring music." We further read of innumerable cascades adding their wild music to the roar of the river."

What are these innumerable cascades but the strings of the Lute which was heard ages ago by enraptured ears and which has kept on resounding ever since. The concert in the Canyon drowns even the basic roar of the river. The music is there.

"We sit on some overhanging rocks, and enjoy the scene for a time, listening to the music of falling waters away up the canyons." (n. 26.)

It appears that the acoustic properties of the Grand Canyon are calculated to produce most notable effects: "Great hollow domes are seen in the eastern side of the rock.... Our words are repeated with startling clearness, but in a soft mellow tone, that transforms them into magical