










































INTRODUCTION

Few events in the world have 
captured the fascination 

of curious masses as did the 
exhibition of the Aztec Children. 
Displayed for their physical 
difference from Western norms, 
the two siblings were paraded 
and showcased in front of eager 
nineteenth-century audiences 
for profit. During this century, 
freak shows were at the height 
of their popularity due to the growing need for national identity, and thus 
the fame of the Aztec Children and their exploitation was no coincidence. 
The misconceptions about foreign cultures and misunderstanding of 
microcephaly at the time led to the exhibition of the Aztec Children.
 The Aztec Children were first exhibited in 1849 in the state of New 
York. The exhibition focused firstly on their physical “deformities” and 
secondly on their cognitive disabilities. These two traits allowed for easy 
stigmatization as well as the confusion of race with disability. Audiences 
were encouraged to see the disabilities of these two as characteristics 
of their “Aztec” race. This stigmatized their entire race as cognitively 
underdeveloped and portrayed those with the disability as “savages.” The 
owners of the Aztec Children played up their supposed “Aztec” origins and 
lost-civilization appeal in order to attract customers and therefore profit 
from their exploitation. Incredibly, people believed these stories. As Nigel 
Rothfels states, “We know that especially in the early years of their tours 
many believed the pair could in fact have been representatives of a lost race 
of Aztecs” (159). In reality, the pair were mestizos. Mestizo refers to people 

Exhibit or Human?: Analysis on 
the Life of the Aztec Children
  -  Cassandra Grosh, Sarah Keck and Isabel Vazquez, Ball State University

Abstract
Through researching the lives of the Aztec Chil-
dren, the exploitation of performers becomes 
evident. These “children” were adults with a con-
genital disorder who were purchased and com-
modified since childhood. Due to the manipulation 
by their various owners, not even the true history 
of these two are known. This article delves into 
the history of these two, the issues surrounding 
their exhibition, and works at the time shedding 
further light on their time touring the world.

7

Digital Literature Review, vol. 3 (2016). © Ball State University. All Rights Reserved.
Please direct all requests for permission to photocopy or reproduce critical edition to dlr@bsu.edu.



with both Spanish and Native American blood (“Mestizo”).
     The Aztec Children were often displayed on stages throughout North 
America. They were dressed up in costumes with props that fit the image 
of “otherness” in the mid-1850s. They were generally dressed in clothing 
that conformed to the stereotyped notions of “Aztec” garments, such as 
in the following photo. In this historical photo, the siblings are shown 
wearing ill-fitting and amateurly made clothes with triangle patterns and a 
sun on the front. Their hair is teased, flamboyantly so, and they are shown 
on the ground next to some sort of stone pillar, hinting at primitivism 
and savagery. The background of a staircase and entrance is blurred and 

most likely painted, symbolizing lost 
civilizations and structures.
     In order to better understand 
the cultural significance of the Aztec 
Children, it is important to know their 
historical past. The “twins,” as they were 
known, were in fact siblings, a brother 
and sister with the names of Maximo and 
Bartola, respectively. In Aztec Children 
research, one comes across different, 
conflicting versions of the same story, 
some more realistic than others. This 
more than likely occurred due a lack of 

documentation in third-world areas, such as Central America, as well as the 
false stories that were created in order to promote their popularity as freaks. 
If documentation did exist, it was neither official nor precise but forged. 
In fact, P.T. Barnum is an example of someone who forged the history of 
human exhibits, even though at one point he claimed to be “duped” by a 
“forged bill of sale” for Joice Heth, the supposedly 161-year old nursemaid 
of George Washington (Fretz 102-103). Because of her “deteriorated” 
appearance, Barnum worked to make the story of her age believable in 
order to elicit profit. The Aztec Twins were treated similarly by their owner-
managers.
 Rothfels notes, “The true origins of the ‘Aztecs’ ‘Bartola’ and ‘Maximo’ 
will probably never be known” (159). According to an 1854 article, their story 
began in the village of San Puerty, Guatemala. A different version states that 

Grosh, Keck, Vazquez

Image of the Aztec Children taken from PENN Libraries Blog.

8

https://pennrare.wordpress.com/2014/04/08/maximo-and-bartola-and-the-myth-of-iximaya/


they came from El Salvador (this difference might have to do with shifting 
geographical boundaries over the years). In this version, the mother of the 
Aztec Children sold the two siblings to a man by the name of Raimond 
(or Raymond) Selva, who had the intent to display and profit from them. 
Rothfels describes an origin story that is viewed as the most historically 
accurate by scholars and gives more details than previous versions. It 
states that the brother and sister were actual twins birthed to Innocento 
and Martina Murgos from the town of Tocoro in the Department of San 
Miguel and that Raimond Selva had taken a more active role in convincing 
the mother to sell them to him (Rothfels 159). This second version places 
responsibility for the exploitation of the Aztec Children on Selva, while the 
first story blames the mother.
 One of the less realistic stories states that the siblings passed into the 
ownership of an American man. Another version of the story focuses on a 
man by the name of Pedro Velasquez in the year 1851. Pedro Velasquez was 
said to be a traveler who wrote a memoir published in 1850, about having 
“discovered” the ancient Aztec city of Iximaya with two other companions 
and left with two children (Aguirre 45). He proclaimed he had with him 
twins from this lost city and that the twins were “found squatting on an altar 
of idols” (Bogdan, “Maximo and Bartola” 128). Not only were they found in 
those positions, but they apparently “looked” like sculptured images of Aztec 
origin. Thus, they were deemed to be the last two survivors of the Aztec race 
(Stephens 33).
 The next unrealistic story of Maximo and Bartola was created by 
their owner-manager, Morris. Morris fabricated this “history” after he 
learned about the traveler John Lloyd Stephens and his encounter with a 
Spanish Catholic priest in Central America (Aguirre 44).  Robert Aguirre 
cites Stephens’s volume about a lost city with inhabitants—still living there 
and speaking the Mayan language—who would murder any white man 
who approached them (Aguirre 44). It turned out Stephens never went to 
that lost city, and, since that fact was not mentioned in his work, it left an 
opportunity to construct an origin story for the Aztec Children (45). The 
fabricated stories of the Aztec Children, their exhibition—which exemplified 
cultural stereotypes, and their display both of disability and race all did 
cultural work that brought in audiences. All of this worked to stigmatize 
other races and cultures as well as to confirm white superiority.

Grosh, Keck, Vazquez

9



     The Aztec Children, in their fame, eventually made their way into 
Europe in the year 1853. They toured for the remainder of their lives, often 
showcased privately to scientists and aristocrats. In 1867, in order to draw 
more attention to them, the Aztec Children were officially married, despite 
being brother and sister, under the names Maximo Valdez Nuñez and 
Bartola Velasquez (Rothfels 160). It is noteworthy to mention that the last 
name “Velasquez,” given to Bartola for the sake of this marriage, comes from 
the supposed “savior” of the Aztec Children. Maximo died in the year 1913, 
while Bartola’s exact date of death is unknown.
     The Aztec Children, in all actuality, had a condition known as 
microcephaly. By definition, microcephaly is a condition characterized by 
an abnormally small head accompanied by an incomplete development of 
the brain (“Microcephaly”). Microcephaly was recognized in the scientific 
community during this time period, though people with this disability were 
often displayed in freak shows as “pinheads” (“Microcephaly”). Features that 
today point at developmental problems would have not been as obvious for 
audiences during the mid-1800’s, making it far easier for the fantastical and 
fictional stories of these “Aztec” beings to spread rapidly.
 The description of the siblings, as well as pictures of them, show the 
obvious physical differences of individuals with microcephaly. The two 
became well known, not just due to their tours around America and Europe, 
but also through their display before the scientific community. Doctors and 
scientists flocked to the Aztec Children in an attempt to better understand 
and classify disability and cognitive problems, as Rothfels states in his essay:

The two were measured in every possible way: their skulls 
(twenty-eight separate measurements by Rudolf Virchow in 1877 
to be expanded upon in later examinations) were compared 
to those of apes; their hair, cropped peculiarly to further the 
theatrical presentation of difference, was compared to that of 
all the known races...the scientists discussed the vocalizations, 
expressions of will, and potential reproductive capability of the 
pair. (Rothfels 166)

While Rothfels failed to comment on this in his discussion of disability, 
it is interesting to note the issue of consent. Due to the siblings’ cognitive 
disability, it is questionable whether informed consent was ever possible for 
them. They were unable to give clear definite agreement, and this resulted 

Grosh, Keck, Vazquez

10



in their own mother selling them in exchange for gold coins. The siblings 
were then paraded around the world in order to make fortunes for their 
owners without a say in their own fates.
 Freaks who were physically, but not cognitively, disabled were able 
to give their consent, but even this consent presents ethical dilemmas for 
scholars. David Gerber states, 

Choice and consent continue to be problematic precisely 
because of the role of circumstances, such as the accident of the 
social situation into which we are born, in our lives, and because 
we are not equal in power to influence the course of our lives or 
even to understand them. (Gerber 41)

The fact that the Aztec Children were developmentally disabled intensifies 
this problem.
 The exhibition of the Aztec Children created not only a form of 
cheap entertainment but also a platform that both justified and conquered 
societal fears. The display of these “freaks” was directly tied to the thing that 
audiences at that time feared the most, namely an “other.” With evolutionary 
theory becoming a major issue during this time, it was no wonder audiences 
flocked towards these “Aztecs” (Rothfels 171). Such fears and other social and 
cultural issues during this time period will be addressed in the following 
section.

CULTURAL ISSUES REGARDING DISPLAYS
 One reason for the multiple versions of Maximo and Bartola’s 
origin story is that the Aztec Children were handled by different managers 
and owners who concocted the stories to assure audiences of how other-
worldly the siblings were. The managers may have had some facts, but they 
mixed fiction into the stories to get the audience’s attention. For example, 
Pedro Velasquez was made up, along with the lost city of Iximaya, in order 
to fabricate Maximo and Bartola’s origins. Their history in the 48-page 
booklet provided by Morris was a hoax; their origin story along with their 
appearances—“dwarfish” (Bogdan, “Maximo and Bartola” 128) with smaller-
than-normal skulls due to microcephaly (Tredgold 122), which mimicked 
the Central American drawings and sculptures (Rothfels 159)—furthered 
the speculation that they were of Aztec origin. People took in the twins’ 
exhibition and believed these two to be part of a long-lost civilization. J. 

11



Tithonus Pednaud’s research on human marvels and bizarre history backs 
up this belief as he writes that they wore “Aztec-looking garb,” especially 
the Aztec suns on their fronts (1). Rothfels writes their hair was “cropped 
peculiarly to further the theatrical presentation of difference” (166). This cut 
would expose more of their heads to show people that they looked like the 
drawings and sculptures of the Aztec people. This look distinguished the 
twins from “normal,” “modern-day” people at the time.
 When Maximo and Bartola were first placed on display in 1853 in 
Europe, they were exhibited before the Ethnological Society of England 
(Bogdan, “Maximo and Bartola” 130). According to Ronald Rainger’s 
research on organizations of anthropology, this society was known 
for collecting ethnographic data and publishing materials to learn 
about mankind’s “distinguishing characteristics” and what causes those 
characteristics (713). During that time, along with Britain’s imperialism, 
the scientific community was fascinated with racial theory (Aguirre 41); in 
America, they wanted to learn more about other races and civilizations, 
like the Mayans, who had been the subjects of recent publications (Pednaud 
1). Learning about the discovery of the “Aztecs” was just as desirable. Their 
microcephaly, a highly stigmatized trait, was used to make the Aztec 
Children and their entire “race” out to be inferior. This framed them, 
and their entire race, as the “other” when compared to Americans and 
Europeans.
 Belief in white supremacy was common at the time. People of 
European descent believed they were culturally and morally superior 
(Gardiner 3) and that they were “more fit” in regards to physical and 
intellectual capacity than African Americans, Native Americans, etc., 
according to Social Darwinism (Gardiner 12). Rosemarie Garland Thomson 
recognizes this in her article, “The Cultural Work of American Freak Shows,” 
as she stresses how freak shows were an “opportunity to formulate the self 
in terms of what it was not” (59), which means that audiences could define 
themselves as ideal in comparison to what they considered “inhuman”: 
one who was not white, civilized, or able-bodied. Freak shows would assure 
spectators of their superior selves. Those represented as “freaks” could 
be anybody who was different from the norm in appearance or anybody 
considered “less evolved” or “primitive” in a white supremacist culture.
 In Britain, scientists were drawn to Latin American people, especially 

Grosh, Keck, Vazquez

12



the “mestizo” (Aguirre 41), which is defined by the Oxford English Dictionary 
as a person of Spanish and Native American heritage (“Mestizo”). To 
scientists, mixed race individuals “confounded reigning binary models” 
(Aguirre 41). Mixed races were disapproved of because some people 
interpreted them to be offspring of “sin.” There are Biblical verses that 
people saw as condemning interracial marriage. One example is from 
Deuteronomy 7:3-4, when Moses spoke with the Israelites: “Do not 
intermarry with them [Hittites, Jebusites, etc.]. Do not give your daughters 
to their sons or take their daughters for your sons, for they will turn your 
sons away from following me to serve other gods” (NIV/KJV Parallel Bible, 
Deut. 7:3-4). Mixing races was seen as going against the norms of society. 
The Aztec Children’s parents were “mulattos”—a period term for those with 
African and European heritage (Aguirre 56).
 Because of the theory of polygenism, a theory stating that humans 
evolved from several independent pairs of ancestors (“Polygeny”), children 
of racially mixed couples were believed to be infertile (Aguirre 56). Not 
only would the Aztec Children be othered for being racially mixed, but 
their otherness would be confirmed if they could not produce children. 
According to Robert Bogdan’s article, “The Social Construction of Freaks,” 
human differences, both physical and mental, were considered “dangerous” 
and were used to warn people that these exhibits would need to be 
“controlled” so they could not “weaken the breeding stock” (34).
       Maximo and Bartola’s small statures combined with their mental 
disabilities confirmed spectators’ beliefs that what they were seeing was a 
childish race. In one of the twins’ exhibitions in England, they were reported 
as behaving like “English children at two or three years of age” (Aguirre 52). 
Their small physical size allowed many spectators to see them as “children.” 
Their small heads were touched most of the time and were compared to 
“dolls’ heads.” But these touches weren’t necessarily forced on them. In fact, 
their acts “encouraged mutual interaction”: not only were the twins touched, 
but they also touched spectators (Aguirre 52-53). Unfortunately, as Gerber 
points out, shortness was stigmatized in and out of the Western world; it 
was thought to signal “immaturity and powerlessness” (49). Their mental 
condition was not emphasized, but they were not treated as the adults.

THE “AZTECS” AND EVOLUTION

Grosh, Keck, Vazquez

13



 Rothfels proclaims that, even though the story of their lives was in 
question, Maximo and Bartola held an “important and almost unique place 
in history” (Rothfels 160). Whether people believed the story of Aztec origins 
or not, the scientific community saw their exhibition as a “preeminent site” 
for formulating and debating the “technical and philosophical features” 
of two theories: evolution and recapitulation (Rothfels 160-62). The latter 
theory is defined as the “repetition of evolutionary stages in the growth of a 
young animal” (“Recapitulation”).
 For anatomist Carl Vogt, the twins’ microcephalism provided “the 
classic case for exploring the validity of recapitulation and the importance 
of arrested developments” (Rothfels 166). The latter subject is defined as 
“development stopped at some stage of its progress” (“Arrested”). That, along 
with recapitulation, would raise the question of whether the twins could 
present a “milestone” in the understanding of human evolution (Rothfels 
166). In The Descent of Man, Charles Darwin takes note of Carl Vogt’s study 
with “microcephalous idiots.” 

Their “skulls [were] smaller, and the convolutions of the brain 
[were] less complex, than in normal men. The frontal sinus…
is largely developed, and the jaws are prognathous (projected 
forward), so that these idiots somewhat resemble the lower types 
of mankind” (116-17). 

Their brains were thought to resemble those of apes (117), and thus it 
could be inferred that people like Maximo and Bartola might be seen 
as links between apes and humans. Given that they were presented as 
representatives of their race, the entire Latin American world was thus made 
“primitive.”
 Maximo’s and Bartola’s features were measured and compared to apes’ 
features. One argument was that, if what the promoters said was true when 
they claimed these Aztec Children were really descendants of “primitive 
people,” then Maximo and Bartola would be part of a race somehow half-
human and half-ape (Rothfels 166-67). In other words, their condition was 
seen as making them, not simply primitive, but also less human, equated 
with animals.
 Rudolf Virchow, an anatomist, had a different opinion however. He 
did not believe the Aztec race was a “mature form of an extinct species or 
race.” Because of the idea of “survival of the fittest,” Virchow felt the Aztecs 

Grosh, Keck, Vazquez

14



would not be fit to live (Rothfels 167). Virchow believed they would have died 
off long ago due to the arrested development of their cognitive abilities: 
they would not understand how to survive and thrive. The Aztec Children, 
he thought, could not be part of that extinct race if they were still alive in 
the nineteenth century.

CONCLUSION
          The exhibition of Maximo and Bartola offered to provide people a 
look into a lost civilization apart from the Western World and, in doing so, 
made Westerners feel superior. The Aztec Children were made to seem 
primitive in comparison. Because they were presented as representatives of 
an uncivilized, undeveloped, and primitive race, the stigma against them 
was extended to include an entire people. Even though it was all a hoax, 
people still believed in what managers’ booklets said about the life story of 
the Aztec Children. The constructed origins and appearances of the Aztec 
Children, combined with their misunderstood microcephalic symptoms, 
contributed to their exhibition.
 

PRIMARY SOURCES

“The Aztec Children”:
This newspaper article goes into great detail about the physical appearance 

The boy, named “Maximo,” is about ten years of age, and 33 3/4 inches in height; weighs 20 
pounds 12 ounces; circumference of chest, which is well developed, 18 1/4 inches; ditto of 
waist, 17 inches; circumference of head, 12 3/4 inches.

The girl, named “Bartola,” is about eight years of age, and 29 1/2 inches in height; weight, 
17 pounds; circumference of head, 13 inches. In both, the arms and legs are of the pipe-
step order of animal architecture, but are muscular, strong and tough. Their physiological 
and anatomical formations have been pronounced perfect after several very careful 
examinations. In short, they are like each other, and nobody else, and nothing else, living, 
dead, or imagined.

Grosh, Keck, Vazquez

15



of the Aztec Children.  These children were such a physical anomaly that 
they gained headlines simply so others could picture their appearance prior 
to seeing the show. While this newspaper article was not typical propaganda 
because it was not created by the exhibit itself, the information within the 
article was clearly provided by those exhibiting the Aztec Children. Without 
having to pay for or directly associate themselves with the story, the owners 
of the exhibit were able to publicize and attract interest simply by providing 
a newspaper with the fascinating and unusual physical description of these 
twins. These descriptions also made the exhibit seem educational—these 
people were not on display for entertainment but for their value as scientific 
discoveries. By providing the physical measurements of the twins, readers 
of the newspaper could visit them under the pretense they were fascinated 

from a scientific standpoint.

Illustrated Memoir:
This memoir was clearly a piece of promotional propaganda intended to 
entice and interest potential spectators. By publishing a memoir covering 
the expedition to and from the home of the Aztec Children, owner-
managers legitimized the heritage of these twins. Rather than simply telling 
spectators the whole history of these twins at the beginning of a show, this 
pamphlet provided a history, an adventure story, thrilling action, an escape 
from uncivilized people, and a triumphant return to the safety of civilized 
society—all for what was no doubt a bargain of a price. The pamphlet opens 
with a list of each royal family the twins met while traveling through Europe 
on their tours prior to coming to America. The reader is then engaged in 
a gripping tale featuring diary entries describing both the journey and the 
people included in great detail. Nearly everyone in the party died, but the 

Grosh, Keck, Vazquez

16

In brief, these Aztec Children present the most extraordinary phenomenon in the human race 
ever witnessed by the modern world: let their origin be what it may—let their history and their 
country’s history be ever so vague and traditionary—doubt the truth of Velasquez’s narrative 
or believe it wholly, these children present themselves the eighth wonder of the world. They 
are, without exception, the most remarkable and intensely interesting objects that were ever 
presented to the European public.



Aztec Children and their savior, Velasquez, miraculously lived. This tale 
would most likely be sold outside the tent exhibiting the twins. It would 
ideally create a profit, interest people in the show, and potentially lead 

people to return to the exhibit after reading this supposed history.

“Marriage of the Aztec Children”:
This newspaper article was placed directly above other marriage notices, 
but the content is clearly different. The other marriage notices within this 
particular issue mentioned people within Philadelphia, the city where 
this paper was published. However, rather than just focusing on the local 
news, the Aztec Children were considered so notable that the paper needed 
to include the London Herald’s view on this marriage. Despite not being 
married within the United States, the Aztec Children served as so large an 
attraction that the news of their marriage traveled across the globe. It is 
also carefully noted that the Aztec Children had the permission of their 
guardian to get married, a requirement most men and women are not 
forced to adhere to. The article also focused carefully on their attire. This 
extra attention draws the reader’s notice away from the joy of the ceremony 
and toward a mental image of how these “freaks” might have appeared in 
traditional wedding dress.

The human monstrosities known here some years ago as the “Aztec Children” have recently 
been exhibited in England. The London papers report that they were married in that city on the 
7th instant. The London Herald says:

“The bride was dressed in a Russian costume, presented to her by the Governor-General of 
Moscow; and the couple proceeded, with Mr. J. M. Morris, their guardian, to the office of the 
Registrar of St. George’s, Hanover Square, where, in the presence of the Registrar-General, 
who had issued the license after due inquiry whether there was any bar to the union, the couple 
were made one by civil contract. They then returned to their lodgings, where the girl was attired 
in a white satin dress, with a lace veil, an orange-blossom wreath, all, as well as the jewelry 
which she wore, being made for the occasion….”

Grosh, Keck, Vazquez

17



Monroe Doctrine:
While one does not generally connect the Monroe Doctrine with the Aztec 
Children, this passage clearly shows how the two are related. Despite being 
just children, the Aztec Children were taken from their home and travelled 
around Europe and the United States as nothing more than a sideshow. 
The Monroe Doctrine clearly states that people from established lands in 
the Americas will not be bothered, but the Aztec Children were taken from 
their small community in Mesoamerica by outsiders. These outsiders were 
from the American continent themselves, but they directly violated the 
moral- and respect-based standards posed by the Monroe Doctrine. Rather 
than leaving these children to their life in a small, unknown community, 
these children were kidnapped and used as a commodity—the exact act the 
Monroe Doctrine sought to discontinue. European nations saw the Americas 
as a source of cheap labor and a land filled with foolish, uneducated people 
who could be used to better an educated man’s existence. When the Aztec 
Children were taken and used in freak show, they served only to create a 
profit and amuse a middle- or upper-class family who chose to witness 
the spectacle of foreigners with strange, and seemingly disproportioned 
features.  

Grosh, Keck, Vazquez

18

We owe it, therefore, to candor and to the amicable relations existing between the United 
States and those powers to declare that we should consider any attempt on their part to extend 
their system to any portion of this hemisphere as dangerous to our peace and safety. With the 
existing colonies or dependencies of any European power we have not interfered and shall not 
interfere. But with the Governments who have declared their independence and maintain it, and 
whose independence we have, on great consideration and on just principles, acknowledged, 
we could not view any interposition for the purpose of oppressing them, or controlling in any 
other manner their destiny, by any European power in any other light than as the manifestation 
of an unfriendly disposition toward the United States.



WORKS CITED

Aguirre, Robert D. “Exhibiting Degeneracy: The Aztec Children and the 
Ruins of Race.” Victorian Review 29.2 (2003): 40-63. JSTOR. Web. 4 Apr. 
2016.

“Arrested Development.” Oxford English Dictionary. 2nd ed. 1989. Print.   
   
“The Aztec Children.” The Daily Crescent 28 Dec 1850. Web. 10 Nov. 2015.

Bogdan, Robert. “Maximo and Bartola.” Freak Show: Presenting Human 
Oddities for Amusement and Profit. Chicago: U of Chicago, 1988. 127-28, 
130-31. Print.

--- “The Social Construction of Freaks.” Thomson 23-37.

Darwin, Charles. The Descent of Man, and Selection in Relation to Sex: In 2 Vol. 
New York: D. Appleton and Co., 1871. 116-117. Print.

Fretz, Eric. “P.T. Barnum’s Theatrical Selfhood and the Nineteenth-Century 
Culture of Exhibition.” Thomson 97-107.

Gardiner, William J. Reflections on the History of White Supremacy in the United 
States (2009): 3, 12. UUA.org. Unitarian Universalist Association, 2015. 
Web. 20 Feb. 2016.

Gerber, David A. “The ‘Careers’ of People Exhibited in Freak Shows: The 
Problem of Volition and Valorization.” Thomson 38-54.

“Marriage of the ‘Aztec Children.’” The Daily Evening Telegraph 24 Jan 1867: 8. 
Web. 14 Oct. 2015.

Maximo and Bartola. n.d. University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia. PENN 
Libraries Blogs. Web. 14 Mar. 2016. 

“Mestizo.” Oxford English Dictionary. 2nd ed. 1989. Print.

“Microcephaly.” Virginia Genetics Program. Virginia Department of Health, 
n.d. Web. 12 Nov. 2015.

Monroe, James. Congress. 2 Dec 1823. Annual Presidential Address.

NIV/KJV Parallel Bible. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2002. Print.

Pednaud, J. Tithonus. “Maximo & Bartola—The Pinhead Aztec Children.” 

Grosh, Keck, Vazquez

19



Circus Freaks and Human Oddites. The Human Marvels, 5 Dec. 2007. 
Web. 1 Nov. 2015.

Rainger, Ronald. “Philanthropy and Science in the 1830’s: The British and 
Foreign Aborigines’ Protection Society.” Man 15.4 (1980): 702-717. 
JSTOR. Web. 21 Feb. 2016.

“Recapitulation.” Def. 1b. Oxford English Dictionary. 2nd ed. 1989. Print.

Rothfels, Nigel. “Aztecs, Aborigines, and Ape-People: Science and Freaks in 
Germany, 1850-1900.” Thomson 158-172.

Stephens, John L. Illustrated Memoir of an Eventful Expedition into Central 
America Resulting in the Discovery of the Idolatrous CIty of Iximaya, in an 
Unexplored Region; and the possession of two remarkable Aztec Children 
Maximo (the boy), and Bartola (the girl), Descendants and Specimens of the 
Sacerdotal Caste (now nearly extinct), of the Ancient Aztec Founders of the 
Ruined Temples of that Country. New York: Wynkoop, Hallenbeck & 
Thomas Printers, 1860. Print.

Thomson, Rosemarie Garland. “The Cultural Work of American Freak 
Shows, 1835-1940.” Extraordinary Bodies: Figuring Physical Disability in 
American Culture and Literature. New York: Columbia UP, 1997. 59. Print.

---, ed. Freakery. New York: New York UP, 1996. Print.

Tredgold, A.F. “Microcephaly.” The British Medical Journal 2.3680 (1931). 
JSTOR. Web. 20 Feb. 2016.

Grosh, Keck, Vazquez

20


