thomIs] correspondence between the calendars. 61 



days, or eig^lit inoiitlis. The Mexicans aud Central Ameri(;ans had their 

 legular or sidereal year of 3(J5 days, consisting, however, of eighteen 

 months of twenty days each and five added days: and they, too, 

 liad a sacred year or period of 2G0 days. There are, however, four 

 points in what has been mentioned in which they agree: Tlie length of 

 the year; the intercalation of live days; the fact that this intercalation 

 was by adding the five days at the end of the last month; and in 

 having a sacred period of about two-tliirds of the year. As this sacred 

 period included eight months of thirty days, or 240 days, it varied but 

 little in length from tliat of the Mexicans, which embraced 2G0 days. 

 The Zunis, according to Mr. Gushing, had a sacred period of between 

 eight and nine lunar montlis. This i^eriod was the portion of the year 

 considered sacred, or during which religious observances of a certain 

 character took place. Possiblj^ this was not strictly observed in prac- 

 tice at the time of the Spanish conquest, but used, nevertheless, as a 

 period in their calendar system. If one such period was included in each 

 year then the system is not comparable with the Hebrew aud Chai- 

 deo-Assyrian twofold manner of commencing the year; nor with the 

 Egyptian system by whi(di the lunar and solar years were made to 

 coincide at the end of each "Apis x)eriod" of twenty-live years. 



That this sacred period was included in, or formed a part of, each 

 year among the Hawaiian s is positively stated in the above extract 

 from Judge Fornander's work. Mr. Oushing also informs me that it 

 was so with the Zufiis. That it was also true in regard to the Mexican 

 calendar seems to be indicated in some of the time series in the Mexi- 

 can codices. For example, in the Borgian codex (and all were formed 

 on the same plan) the time series on plates 31-38 (to be read to the left) 

 is bordered above and below by a line of symbolic figures, each line 

 containing 52, or the two together 104. These added to the 200 of the 

 five interior lines, give 3(54, lacking but one day of the complete year. 

 As they exactly fill out the spaces .according to the scheme, we may 

 suppose this to be the reason why the odd day was omitted; or it is 

 possible there was some other reason understood by the priests. At 

 any rate, the exidanation given is not a rash one. It is a singular 

 coincidence that in an aucient Javanese manuscript five days of the 

 calendar are represented in the same manner by symbolic figures.* 



Bastian, speaking of the Maori, makes a remark which implies 

 that this people also had a sacied period. He says, "They * * * 

 reckoned nine months aud then three months from the tenth month or 

 Ngakuru, the unemployed months (March, April, May,) in which season 

 the Kumara were harvested and tlie i)lantiug began again in June."t 

 Although ai)parently relating to agricultural puisuits, we must bear in 

 mind the fact that these among aboriginal tribes were largely regu- 

 lated by religions ceremonies, 



"Crawfurd, "Indian Archipelago," vol. I, plate 7. 

 tluselgruppeu, p. iy9. 



