FuKSTKMAN'x.] DAY GODS OF THE MAYAS 569 



(Seler in the Compte rendu des Berliner Kongresses, pages 561 to 

 569). 



The Aztec glyph of the da}' distiuetly designates a house, while 

 that of the Mayas is still unintelligible to me. Seler (Berliner Kon- 

 gress, page 562) sees in this a representation of the mountain cavern, 

 the jaws of the earth. This deity we shall ])robably find in the black 

 god whom Schellhas has denoted by L. 



I am unable to discover a methodic arrangement in the significance 

 of the 20 days or in the gods belonging to them. When Brinton in 

 his calendar undertakes to construct an organic order of the day 

 names I am not able to follow him. 



It is plain that in this grouping of the gods with the daj^s, along 

 with nuicli that is certain, there is also much that is doubtful, but I 

 believe that I am in a ])osition to find confirmation of my opinions in 

 another direction. My hope rests, first of all, on the unique tonala- 

 matl of the Dresden codex, pages 4a to 10a, which in the customary 

 manner treats the first 52 da3^s more in detail, but specifically divides 

 them into 20 different parts, w'hich occurs in no other tonalamatl. 

 One is therefore involuntarily led to ask whether a relation may not 

 be discovered between these small time periods and the 20 days. At 

 first glance the answer to this question is in the negative. The tona- 

 lamatl has as its zero point the day Imix, y; but if, proceeding from 

 this point, we attempt to prove the divisions of time recorded in the 

 manuscript and the representations concluding them, then the day 

 found in no case corresponds with the pictures and their glyphs. 



It is quite a different matter if we assume that the zero point was 

 mistakenly placed at Imix, y, by the scribe, instead of five days 

 earlier at Cib, t, where it should be. He seems to have placed the 

 tonalamatl of a certain j-ear on the same days of the next year, with- 

 out reflecting that they ought to be moved forward five days. This 

 supposition seems to me to become a certainty through the following 

 statement. 



If we proceed from the day 13 (Cib, f) the intervals of one, two, 

 three, or four days will give at the close the following days of the 20 

 sections : 



1 15 Ezanab 11 2 Chicchan 



2 19Ik 12 6Miihic 



3 3 Cimi 13 8 Chuen 



4 4Manik 14 11 Ix 



5 8Clmen 15 13 Cib 



6 10 Ben Ifi 16 Cauac 



7 12 Men 17 18 Imix 



8 16 Cauac 18 1 Kan 



9 18 Imix 19 3 Cimi 



10 20Akbal 20 5 Lamat 



Thus it appears that there was no attempt made to have all the 20 

 days represented, for the days 3, 8, 16, and 18 occur a second time 



