THE AECHAIC CALENDARS. 11 



then began that journey through the wilderness which has lasted more than forty 

 years without any of his devout followers having even caught sight of the promised 

 land. I ran in the ruck for seven seasons before becoming satisfied that the pretended 

 oracle was an impostor. Then I turned and went back to Landa — to whom all 

 desirous of reliable information concerning Maya chronology must go at last. 



It is a signal instance of the irony of fate that this bigoted destroyer of the fruits of 

 -Maya science and art — the pietist whose zeal rendered him avid of the obliteration of 

 every vestige of their impious learning — should have been the only one to leave a clew 

 by which the mysterious codices and inscriptions will yet be deciphered. Nevertheless 

 he left such a clew — slight and vague, it is true ; but, when carefully followed up, it 

 broadens and leads into an open way where everything will presently become self- 

 evident. 



It is not necessary to reproduce in full Landa's information regarding the Maya 

 calendars. I will give only the formulation I made of its substance when I went back 

 to invoke him as an instructor : — 



1. A day of 24 hours was the unit of the annual count. 



2. There were twenty distinct days, designated by different signs, four particular ones coming 



invariably in place to serve as dominicals. 



3. Twenty days, numerated from 1 to 13 in sequent continuity, constituted a month. 



4. Eighteen months, distinguished by different characters, plus five days, constituted a year. 



5. The year consisted of 365 days and 6 hours, the extra hours being counted as a day every 



four years, making a year of 365 days. [Note. — These extra days could not have been 

 introduced into the calendar without crowding the dominicals from their places.] 



6. The year reckonings, formed according to the foregoing method, arranged in succession 



until the same dominical witli identical day and month numbers was reached (which 

 would be fifty- two yeai's), constituted the complete annual calendar. 



7. For chronological purposes a different style of reckoning was employed. The count was 



by thirteen 20-year periods, called katuns, which ran irregularly, being designated by the 

 numbers of the day Ahau, in the following sequence :— 11, 9, 7, 5, 3, 1, 12, 10, 8, 6, 4 

 2, 13. [Note. — The numbers of the day Ahau at twenty-year intervals do not succeed 

 each other in this order.] 



8. The calendar [Note. — It must have been a separate chronological one, as it could not possibly 



be the annual] did not begin with the first day of the year, but with 1 Ymix, which was 

 without fixed date, each one regulating his own reckoning. 



The foregoing is Landa's information respecting the calendars, as I boiled it down 

 for my own use. It will be seen that I annotated some of the paragraphs. One note 

 relates to the impracticability of introducing bissextiles into the annual calendar 

 without deranging the whole plan ; the others, to the probable existence of a separate 

 chronological calendar, and an inconsistency or error in one of the statements regarding 

 it. The possibility of unraveling the great katun mystery appeared to me to be 



