[XIII-20] As late as 661 or 485, if Perez' statement of 8 Ahau be accepted, which is inconsistent with the whole record.
[XIII-21] From 218 to 360, according to Perez; or according to his statement that four epochs elapsed, from 270 to 366.
[XIII-22] 360 to 432, Perez; 533 to 605, on the basis of 24 years to an epoch.
[XIII-23] 432 to 576, Perez; 605 to 725 on the basis of 24 years to an epoch.
[XIII-24] Or 821 according to the other system.
[XIII-25] We have seen above that there is some confusion about the date of the Tutul Xius taking Chichen.
[XIII-26] In his commentary, Perez applies this stay of 13 epochs to the Tutul Xius, although the text seems to state the contrary, making them live in Champoton from 576 to 888; or if he had added simply the 260 years of the text, 576 to 836; or if he had correctly adapted his chronology to his own theory, from 821 to 1133. On a basis of 24 years to a Katun the stay of the Itzas at Champoton, as given in the text, was from 533 to 821.
[XIII-27] 888-936, Perez; 821-869, on the basis of 24 years. Perez, applying this wandering to the Tutul Xius, makes them settle again at Chichen.
[XIII-28] 936-1176, Perez; 869-1109, on basis of 24 years, but this of course would not agree with the two hundred years of the text.
[XIII-29] Perez makes these events, which he seems to regard as two or three distinct wars, fill the time from 1176 to 1258. From 1119 to 1157, on a basis of 24 years.