THOMAS] PLATE 62, DRESDEN CODEX 727 
that the 14th day of the seventeenth month (Kayab) of this year is 
3 Cimi, which proves the calculation to be correct. 
To those familiar with the Dresden codex it will be apparent that 
the month symbol used under the red column looks as much if not 
more like that for Tzec than that for Pax, yet, as it has elements of 
both and as the calculation works out only with Pax, it has been 
assumed that this is the month intended. That the month Tzee can 
not in any way be made consistent with the numbers of the series is 
easily made manifest thus: 3 Ix, the 7th day of the fifth month Tzec, 
will fall only in the year 8 Lamat, and 3 Cimi, the 14th day of the 
seventeenth month Kayab, only in the year 8 Ben. Looking on table 
3, we see that in counting forward from 8 Lamat to 8 Ben we pass 
over an interval of only 12 years, and in counting backward over an 
interval of 38 years. As the interval shown by the numerals is (after 
one calendar round, which does not affect the count, has been sub- 
tracted) 9,152 days, it is apparent that 7 Tzec can not be the date 
intended. Férstemann’s totals of these series are as follow: 
CC enter ear ae sm a Suis sh a ee ee 12, 466, 942 
Ta kage eet teiaioie reo ice ee Ee oe 12, 438, 810 
Difference eee seas aoe Sete ee ee eee 28, 132 
showing precisely the difference given above. The absolute difference 
between the two dates is 2 months 18 days+52 years+24 years+16 
months+14 days, which, together, equal 77 years and 27 days. 
The immense stretch of these periods is a point not to be overlooked. 
One of those referred to amounts to 12,466,942 days, or 34,156 years 
and 2 days, counting 20 cycles to the great cycle, according to Férste- 
mann’s method. This brings up again the question as to the number 
of units of the fifth order to form one of the sixth, or, using Good- 
man’s terms, the number of cycles which make a great cycle. Although 
the discussion of this question would perhaps be more appropriate after 
we have considered the inscriptions, it may as well be introduced here. 
Mr Goodman, while holding 13 as the number in the inscriptions, 
admits that in the Dresden codex 20 was the number used; but this 
admission only renders the subject more complicated, as there is no 
reason to believe that a different rule prevailed in the inscriptions from 
that in the codex. That the vigesimal system of notation was the rule 
among the Maya tribes is well known, the use of 18 units of the second 
order to make one of the third, in time counting, having apparently 
been adopted for convenience in bringing the month into the calcula- 
tion. This fact, though not positive proof of regular vigesimal suc- 
cession elsewhere in the time system, is sufficient to justify the 
assumption of regularity, unless satisfactory evidence of variation 
can be adduced. 
Although the last example reaches to the great cycle, and inyolyes 
