Sr Perez states that the year 1392 of our era was the Maya year 7 Cauac, 'according to all sources of information, confirmed by the testimony of Don Cosme de Burgos, one of the conquerors, and a writer (but whose observations have been lost).' Therefore the 8 Ahau Katun began on the second day of that year; the 6 Ahau Katun, 24 years later, in 1416; the 4 Ahau in 1440; the 2, in 1464; the 13, in 1488; the 11, in 1512; the 9, in 1536; the 7, in 1560; the 5, in 1584; the 3, in 1608, etc. As a test of the accuracy of his system of Ahau Katunes, the author says that he found in a certain manuscript the death of a distinguished individual, Ahpulá, mentioned as having taken place in the 6th year of Ahau Katun, when the first day of the year was 4 Kan, on the day of 9 Ix, the 18th day of the month Zip. Now the 13 Ahau began in the year 12 Cauac, or 1488; the 6th year from 1488 was 1493, or 4 Kan; if the month of Pop began with 4 Kan, then the 3d month, Zip, began with 5 Kan, and the 18th of that month fell on 9 Ix, or Sept. 11. All this may be readily verified by filling out the table in regular order.
On the other hand we have Landa's statement that the Ahau Katun was a period of 20 years; he gives however the same order of the numerals as Perez,—that is 13, 11, 9, 7, 5, 3, 1, 12, 10, 8, 6, 4, 2. He also states that the year 1541 was the beginning of 11 Ahau; but if 11 Ahau was the second day of 1541, that year must have been 10 Cauac, and 1561, 20 years later, would have been 4 Cauac, the second day of which would have been 5 Ahau; which does not agree at all with the order of numerals. In fact no other number of years than 24 for each Ahau Katun will produce this order of numerals, which fact is perhaps the strongest argument in favor of Sr Perez' system. Cogolludo also says that the Mayas counted their time by periods of 20 years called Katunes, each divided into 5 sub-periods of four years each. Sr Perez admits that other writers reckon the Ahau Katun as 20 years, but claims that they have fallen into error through disregarding the chek oc katun, or 4 unlucky years of the period. A Maya manuscript furnished and translated by Perez is published by Stephens and in Landa's work, and repeatedly speaks of the Ahau Katun as a period of 20 years. Again, this is the very manuscript in which the death of Ahpulá was announced, and the date of that event is given as 6 years before the completion of 13 Ahau, instead of the sixth year of that period as stated in the calculations of Sr Perez; and besides, the date is distinctly given as 1536, instead of 1403, which dates will in nowise agree with the system explained, or with the date of 1392 given as the beginning of 8 Ahau. Moreover, as I have already said, several of the statements on which Perez bases his computations are unsupported by any authority save manuscripts unknown to all but himself. Such are the statements that the Ahau Katun began on the 2d day of a year Cauac; that 13 Ahau was reckoned as the first; and that 8 Ahau began in 1392. These facts, together with various other inaccuracies in the writings of Sr Perez are sufficient to weaken our faith in his system of the Ahau Katunes; and since the other writers give no explanations, this part of the Maya calendar must remain shrouded in doubt until new sources of information shall be found.[1103] The following quotation made by Sr Perez from a manuscript, contains all that is known respecting what was possibly another method of reckoning time. "There was another number which they called Ua Katun, and which served them as a key to find the Katunes, according to the order of its march, it falls on the days of the uayeb haab, and revolves to the end of certain years: Katunes 13, 9, 5, 1, 10, 6, 2, 11, 7, 3, 12, 8, 4."
BISSEXTILE ADDITIONS.
We have seen that the Maya year by means of intercalary days added at the end of the month Cumhu was made to include 365 days. How the additional six hours necessary to make the length of the year agree with the solar movements were intercalated without disturbing the complicated order already described, is altogether a matter of conjecture. The most plausible theory is perhaps that a day was added at the end of every four years, this day being called by the same name and numeral as the one preceding it, or, in other words, no account being made of this day in the almanac, although it was perhaps indicated by some sign in the hieroglyphics of these days. The Nicaraguan calendar was practically identical with that of the Aztecs, even in nomenclature although there were naturally some slight variations in orthography. The following table shows the names of the months in several other Maya calendars, whose system so far as known is the same as that in Yucatan.
| Quiché.[1104] | Cakchiquel.[1104] | Chiapas and Soconusco.[1105] | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Nabe Tzih '1st word' | I Bota 'rolls of mats' | Tzun |
| 2 | U Cab Tzih '2d word' | Qatic 'common seed' | Batzul |
| 3 | Rox Tzih '3d word' | Izcal 'sprouts' | Sisac |
| 4 | Che 'tree' | Pariche 'firewood' | Muetasac |
| 5 | Tecoxepual | Tocaxequal 'seeding time' | Moc |
| 6 | Tzibe Pop 'painted mat' | Nabey Tumuzuz '1st flying ants' | Olati |
| 7 | Zak 'white' | Rucab Tumuzuz '2d flying ants' | Ulol |
| 8 | Chab 'bow' | Cibixic 'time of smoke' | Oquinajual |
| 9 | Huno Bix Gih '1st song of sun' | Uchum 'resowing time' | Veh |
| 10 | Nabe Mam '1st old man' | Nabey Mam '1st old man' | Elech |
| 11 | U Cab Mam '2d old man' | Ru Cab Mam '2d old man' | Nichqum |
| 12 | Nabe Ligin Ga '1st soft hand' | Ligin Ka 'soft hand' | Sbanvinquil |
| 13 | U Cab Ligin Ga '2d soft hand' | Nabey Togic '1st harvest' | Xchibalvinquil |
| 14 | Nabe Pach '1st generation' | Ru Cab Togic '2d harvest' | Yoxibalvinquil |
| 15 | U Cab Pach '2d generation' | Nabey Pach '1st generation' | Xchanibalvinquil |
| 16 | Tziquin Gih 'time of birds' | Ru Cab Pach '2d generation' | Poin |
| 17 | Tzizi Lagan 'to sew the standard' | Tziquin Gih 'time of birds' | Mux |
| 18 | Cakam 'time of red flowers' | Cakam 'time of red flowers' | Yaxquin |
DAYS IN GUATEMALA AND CHIAPAS.
The names of the days in the same calendars are as follows:
| Quiché and Cakchiquel.[1106] | Chiapas (Tzendal?) Soconusco.[1107] | |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Imox 'sword-fish' | Imox or Mox |
| 2 | Ig 'spirit' or 'breath' | Igh or Ygh |
| 3 | Akbal 'chaos' | Votan |
| 4 | Qat 'lizard' | Chanan or Ghanan |
| 5 | Can 'snake' | Abah or Abagh |
| 6 | Camey 'death' | Tox |
| 7 | Quieh 'deer' | Moxic |
| 8 | Ganel 'rabbit' | Lambat |
| 9 | Toh 'shower' | Molo or Mulu |
| 10 | Tzy 'dog' | Elab or Elah |
| 11 | Batz 'monkey' | Batz |
| 12 | Ci or Balam, 'broom,' 'tiger' | Evob or Enob |
| 13 | Ah 'cane' | Been |
| 14 | Yiz or Itz 'sorcerer' | Hix |
| 15 | Tziquin 'bird' | Tziquin |
| 16 | Ahmak 'fisher,' 'owl' | Chabin or Chahin |
| 17 | Noh 'temperature' | Chic or Chiue |
| 18 | Tihax 'obsidian' | Chinax |
| 19 | Caok 'rain' | Cahogh or Cabogh |
| 20 | Hunahpu 'shooter of blowpipe' | Aghual |
I shall treat of the Maya hieroglyphics by giving first the testimony of the early writers respecting the existence of a system of writing in the sixteenth century; then an account of the very few manuscripts that have been preserved, together with illustrative plates from both manuscripts and sculptured stone tablets; to be followed by Bishop Landa's alphabet, a mention of Brasseur de Bourbourg's attempted interpretation of the native writings, and a few speculations of other modern writers on the subject. The statements of the early writers, although conclusive, are not numerous, and I will consequently translate them literally.