THOMAS] THE FIRST DAY 209 
connection appears to be justified, and indicates that the symbol is used 
here for its phonetic value rather than with any reference to its primary 
signification. 
Dr Seler also refers in this connection to the lower line of symbols 
on Dres. 29-30b (three of which are shown in plate LXVIII, 15, 16, 17); 
to those shown in plate LXVvuI, 18, 19, from Tro. 14c¢; and those shown 
in plate Lxvin, 20, 21, from Tro. lla. He remarks that ‘in a number 
of hieroglyphs the character imix stands as an equivalent of a peculiar 
animal head which bears as a distinctive mark the element akbal over 
the eye. Thus in the hieroglyphs enumerating those above mentioned 
which, standing after the hieroglyphs of the cardinal points, seem to 
express the deities presiding over them, indeed there appears here on 
the same animal head, on one hand the character imix, on the other the 
element figure 165” (our plate LXTIV, 5). 
Although I am unable to interpret satisfactorily the imix symbols 
in the places above referred to, I think it can be made apparent that 
Dr Seler’s explanation is without foundation. For instance, by refer- 
ring to the plates of the Dresden and Troano codices mentioned, it will 
be seen that there is nothing whatever that refers to an ‘‘animal head 
which bears the element akbal over the eye,” unless we suppose it to be 
in plate Lxvitt, 16 (from Dres. 29b) and LxvuI, 21 (from Tro. 11a). 
There is no figure below or connected with either series to justify this 
conclusion. It is also certain that plate Lxviu1, 21 (Tro. 11a) is not an 
animal head. Possibly plate Lxvit1, 16 (Dres. 29b) may be intended 
for an animal head, but this is not certain and, moreover, it is not 
repeated in the series. 
Referring to Cort. 27a it will be seen that the compound glyph shown 
in plate LXVIII, 22 (apparently the same as that on Tro. 1la) is repeated 
four times in one line, each connected with a cardinal point symbol, and 
each standing immediately over and evidently referring to a large vessel.' 
It is stated that it was a custom among the Maya during certain reli. 
gious ceremonies to place a vessel in their temples at each of the four 
cardinal points.2, As cum and wamach are Maya words signifying ves- 
sel, we still find in these the m sound. It is therefore possible that the 
similar glyphs on Dres. 29b and Tro. 14 and 15 also refer to vessels. 
The supposition seems to be strengthened by tlfe fact that connected 

1Dr Brinton (Primer of Mayan Hieroglyphics, p. 93) claims to have discovered that this hitherto 
supposed ‘‘vessel”’ is, in reality, ‘‘adrum.’” As the four (Cort. 27a) are without any accompaniments 
toindicate their use as drums, and as each has above it one of the cardinal point signs, there is noth. 
ing, uniess it be the form, to lead to the supposition that they are drums. In the samedivision of the 
two preceding and three following pages we see vessels of different kinds represented. In the lower 
divisions pages 29 and 30, are vessels somewhat of the same elongate, cylindrical form, borne on the 
backs ciindividuals; and also in the lower division of page 40 are four tall cylindrical vessels, in 
each cs which the arm of a deity figure is thrust. This section is copied in Dr Brinton’s work with 
the subscript ‘*The beneficent gods draw from their stores.'’ Additional proof, if any is needed to 
show that these are vessels, is found in the Tro. Codex. On plates 6* and 7* are tall cylindrical vessel, 
with the same inverted VY marks on them; moreover, one of them has the upper portion margined by 
the same tooth-like projection as those in the Cortesian plate. That these are vessels of some kind is 
apparent from the use the pictures show is made of them. 
2See Brasseur’s Lexicon under bacab, also the mention below, under the day Jk, of four vessels. 
16 ETH 14 

