224 



NATURE 



[Julys. 1897 



Rotifers Commensal with Caddis-worms. 



It may be of interest to record the fact that, like Gammarus 

 pulex and Asellus aquatiais, the larva of Phryganea grandis is 

 a host for the commensal rotifer, Callidina parasitica. On 

 one specimen, taken near Potter Heigham Bridge, I found 

 between fifty and sixty of these commensals. As is the case 

 with the commensals of Gammarus and Asellus, those of the 

 caddis-worm gradually disappear when the hosts are kept in an 

 aquarium. Rotifer tardus was also found among the materials 

 of the larval case. Henry Scherren. 



The Lost Books of Euclid. 



Will you or any of your numerous readers kindly let me know, 

 through the medium of your journal, if the lost books of Euclid 

 (Books vii., viii., ix. and x.) have been found and published in 

 English ; if so, the name of the editor and that of the publish- 

 ing house. 



I may say, in reference to this inquiry, that an Indian Prince, 

 who is at present in this country for the Jubilee celebration, 

 possesses a complete copy of Euclid in Sanskrit — no book or 

 books missing. A. K. Ghose. 



6 Forest Road, Kew, June 8. 



[We are indebted to Mr. H. M. Taylor for the following 

 information : — 



The first English translation of the Elements, published at 

 London in 1570, had the title (16 Books) :— 



" The Elements of Geometric of the most ancient Philosopher 

 Euclide of Megara, Faithfully (now first) translated into the 

 Englishe toung by H: Billingsley, City of London. Where- 

 unto are annexed certain Scholias, Annotations and Inventions 

 of the best Mathematicians both of time past and in this our 

 age." 



The English edition of the first printed Greek text, published 

 at Basel, contained all the extant works attributed to Euclid. 

 This was published in 1703, at Oxford, by Dr. David Gregory, 

 and was entitled "EJ/cAetSou to o-to^o/ue'ta." 



See End. Brit., ninth edition, for further information. — 

 Editor.] 



ARCHAIC MAYA INSCRIPTIONS. 



THERE can be no surer sign of the smallness of the 

 number of persons in this country who take an 

 interest in the progress of our knowledge of American 

 archfeology, than the fact that not many years ago the 

 editor of this journal asked me to review my own work 

 on the subject, a request which, as far as courtesy would 

 allow, I succeeded in avoiding by effecting a compromise 

 which resulted in the publication of a few general notes 

 on the ancient civilisation of Central America (Nature, 

 April 28, 1892). The far more grateful task has now 

 been entrusted to me of calling the attention of the 

 readers of this journal to an essay on the Archaic Maya 

 Inscriptions, by Mr. J. T. Goodman, of California, which 

 has been published as an appendix to the archceological 

 section of the " Biologia Centrali Americana." 



It is to the liberality and sympathetic kindness of Mr. 

 F. du Cane Godman and Mr. Osbert Salvin that my 

 work on Central American antiquities is being published 

 in its present sumptuous form. Their names, indeed, 

 figure on the title-page as editors ; but the old-fashioned 

 and much abused title of patrons would be more appro- 

 priate in expressing an ideal relationship in which they 

 have confined their editorial duties to giving the kindliest 

 and most valuable advice, whilst leaving me an absolutely 

 free hand in the selection of material, and relieving me 

 of all expense of printing and publication, and the re- 

 production of photographs, plans and drawings, which 

 already extend over 175 double quarto plates. 



It is again to this same liberality that my friend Mr. 

 Goodman's interesting essay owes its publication ; and 

 were he here I know how heartily he would join me, and 

 I think I may add so would every other student of 

 American archaeology, in a grateful acknowledgment of 

 the deep debt of gratitude we owe to the editors of the 



NO. 1445. VOL. 56] 



" Biologia." To Mr. Goodman, as to myself, has been 

 accorded an unrestricted freedom in the expression of 

 his views ; and after fully acknowledging the assistance 

 he has received on this side of the water, there are 

 passages in the preface to his essay which may be taken 

 to express a natural disappointment that the value of his 

 work was not recognised, and its publication ensured in 

 the land which he loves so well. 



Such attempts as have previously been made to 

 interpret American hieroglyphic inscriptions have been 

 mainly directed towards the interpretation of the three 

 or four Maya manuscripts or codices which alone have 

 escaped destruction. Although Mr. Goodman has not 

 failed to devote the most careful attention to that branch 

 of the subject, giving years of study to the codices as 

 well as to the Yucatec and Cachiquel Calendar systems, 

 it is to the interpretation of what he terms the " Archaic 

 system," that is to say, the system of notation employed 

 in the carved inscriptions found amongst the ruins of 

 Palenque, Copan. Quirigua, Menche and Tikal— an 

 almost untrodden field of research — that the present 

 essay is devoted. 



It will doubtless be disappointing to the general reader 

 to learn that the greater part of the carved Maya inscrip- 

 tions deal only with dates and the computation of in- 

 tervals of time ; but this is a fact which has gradually 

 been forcing itself on the minds of students. 



As Mr. Goodman says : — 



" It may appear absurd, at first thought, that temples, 

 monuments and altars should be covered with elaborately 

 carved inscriptions that record nothing but dates and 

 other forms of time reckoning. But a little reflection 

 should convince one that such inscriptions, under certain 

 conditions, would not be preposterous, but the wisest and 

 most useful of records. A calendar is an indispensable 

 requisite of civilisation. The very attempt to construct 

 one is the first step towards evolution from savagery, and 

 a completed calendar of any kind is proof that the 

 transition has been accomplished." 



The work of constructing a satisfactory calendar 

 system from the chaotic fragments of information which 

 have come down to us, has been a work necessitating the 

 most extraordinary patience and insight. Not only must 

 such a system stand the test of application to the inscrip- 

 tions which are already known, but it must be prepared 

 to stand the further tests to which it will be continually 

 submitted as hitherto undiscovered inscriptions are 

 brought to light. 



Of the methods employed by Mr. GoocVnan in the 

 preparation of his calendar a slight sketch is given us, 

 and he tells us how it was to the writings of Diego di 

 Landa (a.d. 1566), the Bishop of Yucatan and arch- 

 destroyer of Maya records, that he had finally to return 

 as his only trustworthy guide. 



It is impossible in a short notice even to touch on the 

 numerous points which had to be considered in the pre- 

 paration of the calendar tables which accompany Mr. 

 Goodman's essay. The main factor is the concurrent use 

 of two systems based, one on a year of 360 days, and the 

 other on a year of 365 days. 



The Chronological Calendar deals with the former 

 system, the divisions of time being 



20 days 

 18 Chuens 

 20 Ahaus 

 20 Katuns 



[3 Cycles = I Great Cycle. 



I Chuen. 



I Ahau (360 days). 



I Katun. 



I Cycle. 



It is somewhat unfortunate that the Ahau, or period of 

 360 days, bears the same name as one of the twenty days 

 of the Maya month, and in the same manner that the 

 Chuen, or twenty-day period, is made to bear the name 

 of another day of the month. 



The Annual Calendar is divided into eighteen named 



