252 DAY SYMBOLS OF THE -MAYA YEAR (ETH. ANN. 16 
F 
meaning of quii-lana. In Tzotzil gtov signifies “to split, break off, 
break open, to chop.” In Maya we have tok, which, as a substantive, 
Perez explains by “pedernal, la sangria;” as a verb it signifies ‘to 
bleed, let blood.” In this dialect tox denotes ‘to drain, draw off liquor, 
spill, shed.” 
The usual form of the Mexican symbol for this day is shown in plate 
LXV, 32. It is also a naked skull. 
Like Dr Seler, I am compelled to admit that I can give no satisfac- 
tory suggestion as to the origin of the form shown in plate Lxv, 27, 
According to Colonel Mallery,'! one sign among the Indians for knife is 
to “eut past the mouth with the raised right hand,” which, if figured, 
would probably bear some resemblance to the marks on this symbol.’ 
THE SEVENTH DAY 
Maya, manik; Tzental, moxic; Quiche-Cakchiquel, queh; Zapotec, china; Nahuatl, 
mazatl, 
The symbol for this day, shown in plate LXyuI, 31, is without any 
change worthy of notice, the only difference observable being a greater 
or less degree of perfection with which it has been drawn by the abo- 
riginal artist. It is found, however, in various combinations where it 
is subject to variation in form, if these in truth be intended for this 
symbol. As Brasseur de Bourbourg has suggested, this appears to 
have been taken from the partially closed hand, where the points of the 
fingers are brought round close to the tip of the thumb. Whether 
intended to show the palm or back outward is uncertain, though appar- 
ently the latter. The nearest approach I find among the Indian signs 
figured by Colonel Mallery is that denoting “little, diminutive, small.” 
But the position of the hand in the symbol appears to indicate the act of 
grasping; either signification gives ch as the chief phonetic element of 
the Maya word chan and chichan, signifying “little,” and chue, chucah, 
“to grasp, to seize” (“alecanzar, asir, prender,” Perez); or chuuc, “to 
take, grasp, catch, seize,” Henderson.’ It would seem from this that if 
the symbol is phonetic in any sense, the chief element of the word indi- 
cated isch. The supposition by Drs Schellhas and Seler that this sym- 
bol sometimes contains the elements of the sign of the four winds or 
wind cross, appears to be without any real foundation. The partial 
cross-shape figure in it is merely the conventional method of drawing 
the opening between the fingers, and would be just as correctly given 
as an oyal as an inverted tau. 
As this interpretation of the symbol is quite different from that given 
by other writers, some evidence to justify it is presented here. 

1First Ann. Rep. Bur. Ethn., p. 386. 
‘Dr Brinton (Primer, p. 65) says: ‘‘Former students have been unable to explain this design” and 
suggests that it is a maggot. 
*Brinton follows Brasseur in supposing it represents the ‘grasping hand,” and thinks it is a rebus 
of mach, *‘asir, tomar con los manos.” 
