HOLDEN.] THE MAYA HIEROGLYPHS. 239 
front and once in rear of the figure. The heads of the two figures have 
only one resemblance, but this is a very important one. The tusks be- 
long to HuUIrztLOPOcHTLI and to his trinity, and specially to TLALOG, 
his companion. : 
Both Plate 20 and LX have the serpent wand or yoke clearly ex- 
pressed. In LX the serpent is decorated with crotalus heads; in 20 by 
images of the sun (?), as in the FerJAVARY MS. (KINGSBOROUGH). 
The front apron or ornament of Plate 20 is of snake skin, ornamented 
with sun-symbols. Comparing Plate 20 with Fig. 52 (ante), we find 
quite other resemblances. The head-dress of 20 is the same as the pro- 
jecting arm of the head-dress of Fig. 52; and the tusks are found in the 
helmet or mask of Fig. 52. 
These and other resemblances show the Kabah inscription to be a 
TLALoc. It is interesting specially on account of its hieroglyphs, 
which I hope to examine subsequently. The style of this writing ap- 
pears to be late, and may serve as a connecting link between the stones 
and the manuscripts, and it is noteworthy that even the style of the 
drawing itself seems to be in the manner of the Mexican MS. of LAaup, 
rather than in that of the Palenque stone tablets. 
From the card catalogue I select the following chiffres as appertaining 
to the family of the Tlalocs. As I have said, these must for the present 
remain in a group, unseparated. Future studies will be necessary to 
discriminate between the special signs which relate to special members 
of the family. The chiffres are Nos. 3200; 1864; 1403; 811; 1107?; 
19437; 41142?; b?; 1893 (beazded faces, or faces with teeth very promi- 
nent); 1667; 422; 8072; 622; 1557; 26; 1547; 1657; 1642; 805; 4109; 
1915? ; 67522; 63522 (distinguished by the characteristic eye of the 
TLALOCS). 
Here, again, the writing is ideographic, and not phonetic. 
X. 
CUKULCAN OR QUETZALCOATL. 
The character 2021 occurs many times in Plate LVI (Fig. 48), and oc- 
casionally elsewhere. The personage represented is distinguished by 
having a protruding tongue, and was therefore at once suspected to be 
QUETZALCOATL. (See BANCROFT’S Native Races, vol. iii, p. 280.) The 
protruding tongue is probably a reference to his introduction of the sac- 
rificial acts performed by wounding that member. 
The rest of the sign I suppose to be the rebus of his name, ‘ Snake- 
plumage”; the part cross-hatched being “snake,” the feather-like orna- 
ment at the upper left-hand corner being “plumage.” It is necessary, 
however, to prove this before accepting the theory. To do this I had 
recourse to Plates I and IV (Figs. 49, 50), my dictionary of synonyms. 
