G8 A STUDY OF THE MANUSCRIPT TROANO. 



the midst of the flame renders almost certain .the correctness of this inter- 

 pretation. 



This agreement in so many particulars between these plates and Landa's 

 statements is certainly sufficient to warrant ns in assuming that the two refer 

 to the same things; that is, to the festivals held during the TJaijeijah haab or 

 closing days of the diff'erent years. 



Before attempting to show the relation these jilates of the Dresden 

 Codex bear to those of the Manuscript Troano, it will be necessary for me 

 to ask the reader to examine them carefully as I enter into more particular 

 details. 



It is apparent from Landa's language that the festival of the last days 

 of one year was intended as a celebration of the new or incoming year; 

 that is to say, the festival of the last days of the Kan j-ear was intended as 

 a celebration of the incoming Muluc year, and, in fact, did not close until 

 the first or second day of the latter. This being the case, we presume that 

 the plate containing the last two days of the Kan year, for example, repre- 

 sents tiie commencement of the Muluc year, and that some, at least, of the 

 figures and characters shown on it refer to that year. Following up this 

 idea, I conclude that Plate 25, on which the days are Eb and Ben, the last 

 days of the Muluc year, refers to the commencement of, and may properly 

 be called the plate of the Ix years; that Plate 2G refers to the beginning of 

 the Cauac years, Plate 27 to the Kan 3'ears, and Plate 28 to the Muluc 

 years. 



Taking for granted that this conclusion is correct — which I think few 

 if any will doubt — let us see what further can be deduced from it. 



Landa, Cognlludo, and Perez tell us that each of the four dominical 

 days was referred by the Indians to one of the four cardinal points. As the 

 statements of these three authorities appear at first sight to conflict with 

 each other, let us see if we can bring them into harmony without resorting 

 to a violent construction of the language used. Perez's statement is clear 

 and distinct, and as it was made by one thoroughly conversant with the 

 manners and customs of the natives, and also with all the older authorities, 

 it is doubtless correct. 



He says, "the Indians made a little wheel in which they placed the initial 



