SKIER] THE MEXICAN CHRONOLOGY 35 



here, and refer the reader to my work quoted above. The two glyphs, 

 which I have given in the plate accompanying- this work ( f and r/ 

 tigure 3), are characteristic companion glyphs, /'of Ivinchaiiau and (/ 

 of Itzamna. The former gives the idea of clouds or heaven, lightnino-, 

 and fire; the latter may he translated as Ahtok, "Lord of the stone 

 knife '\ 



Now, how are we to understand this difference between the Dresden 

 manuscript and Landa's assertions in regard to the first day of the 

 ^'ear? Are we to assume that Landa was mistaken in making the 

 Kan, Muluc, Ix, and Cauac years begin also with the days Kan, 

 Muluc, Ix, and Cauac? Or shall we assume that at some particular 

 period later than that of the composition of the Dresden manuscript a 

 correction was made, in consequence of which the first days of the 

 years ascribed to the east, north, west, and south no longer fell upon 

 the signs Been, Ezanab, Akbal, and Lamat, but on the signs Kan, 

 Muluc, Ix, and Cauac? I incline to the latter view, and remark that 

 according to this the Troano and Cortes codices, which are only the two 

 halves of one and the same codex, would belong to the later pei'iod. 

 For on pages 23 to 20 of the Troano codex, whose meaning corresponds 

 with that of pages 25 to 28 of the Dresden manuscript, on the front of 

 the pages, not the initial days Been, P^zanab, Akl)al, and Lamat, but 

 likewise, thirteen times repeated, the da3^s Cauac, Kan, Muluc, and Lx 

 are found. 



In spite of this variability of the beginning of the \-ear the Maya 

 races obtained a fixed chronology b}" reckoning, not the years, but the 

 days, from a zero point. Thus the tonalamatl reckoning afforded a 

 firm basis, which prevented any error. 



Among the Cakchikels the zero point was furnished ])y a particu- 

 lar historic event, the destruction of the seditious race of the Tukuchee, 

 which occurred on the day 11 Ah (11 XIII). By counting from this 

 zero vigesimall}^ — that is, by 20x20 days — they obtained periods 

 which all began with the day Ah (XIII, or the Mexican Acatl), which 

 successively took the numbers 11, 8, 5. 2, 12, 9, 6, 8, 13, 10, 7, -1, 1, 

 and then again 11. Such a period Avas called a huna, and twenty 

 such periods a may (see my communication in the Zeitschrift fiir Eth- 

 nologie, volume 21, Verhandlungen, page 475). 



Among the Mayas the starting point was undoubtedly the zero jwint 

 ■1 Ahau 8 Cumku pointed out in the Dresden manuscript by Forste- 

 mann— that is, a day which bore the numeral 4 and the sign Ahau (XX, 

 or the Mexican Xochitl), and was the 8th of the month Cumku, the 

 last of the eighteen months of the year. But from this zero point the 

 reckoning was not consistently vigesimal, but, as also follows from the 

 computation in the Dresden manuscript set forth by Forstemami. by 

 periods of 20X360 days. These periods, since their munhcr is divis- 

 ible by 20, had alwa3^s to take the same sign Ahau (XX, or the Mcxi- 



