32/ 



We have in what has thus far been given a satisfactory explana- 

 tion of the meaning and use of the lines of numerals and also of their 

 relation to the day columns, but we still fall short of a complete in- 

 terpretation, inasmuch as we are unable to give the series a definite 

 location in the Maya calendar or in actual time. It is apparent, how- 

 ever, that the series cannot by any possible explanation be made to 

 agree with the calendar system as usually accepted, as there is noth- 

 ing in it indicating the four series of years or the year of 365 days. 

 It may be safely assumed, I think, from what has been shown, that 

 the year referred to in the series is one of 360 days, with probably a 

 periodic addition of one day. but the reason of the addition is not yet 

 apparent. 



If the numbers in the lowest line of numei'als over the day C(5lumns 

 indicate the days of the month, and those of the middle line the re- 

 spective months of the year, it is evident, as before stated, that 

 Muluc is the first day of the year throughout, a conclusion irrecon- 

 cilable with the Maya calendar as hitherto understood. It is prob- 

 able, however, that the mouth and day numbers do not refer to par- 

 ticular months and days, but are used only as intervals of time counted 

 from a certain day, which must in this case have been Muluc. 



The sum of the series as shown by the numbers over the second 

 column of Plate 58& is 33 years, 3 months, and 18 days. As this in- 

 cludes only the top day of this column (10 Cimi), we must add two 

 days to complete the series, which ends with 12 Lamat. This makes 



' The counters in the original at this point are certainly wrong, for here should be 

 7 months and 8 days, whereas the symbols are those for 8 months and 17 days. 

 ■' Here we have again the additional day. 

 'Added to show connection with the lower .series. 



