21 



THE CHRONOLOGICAL CALENDAR. 



I now come to what has been a stumbling-block to every one who has hitherto 

 attempted to deal with the Maya records. It has been known that the Mayas 

 reckoned time by ahaus, katuns, cycles, and great cycles, but what was the precise 

 length of any of these periods has been a debatable question. Some have contended, 

 with the best of proof apparently, that the katun is a period of twenty years, while 

 others have maintained, with proof equally good, that it is a period of twenty-four 

 years. The truth is, it is neither. 



The contention arose from a misapprehension, or total ignorance rather, of the Maya 

 chronological scheme. It was taken for granted that a year of 365 days must neces- 

 sarily enter into the reckoning ; whereas, the moment the Mayas departed from 

 specific dates and embarked upon an extended time reckoning, they left their annual 

 calendar behind and made use of a separate chronological one. 



The use of the term ahau-katun is avoided everywhere in these pages. Such a 

 period never existed, except as a delusion of Don Pio Perez and his misguided 

 followers. The error originated from a misconception of the Yucatec method of 

 distinguishing the katuns. The ahau was numbered according to its position in the 

 katun, as the eighth, tenth, or the sixth from the close ; but the katun was designated 

 by the particular number of the day Ahau with which it ended. Thus, for instance, 

 it might sometimes be spoken of as the katun 10 Ahau; and at other times, by a mere 

 reversal of the phrase, as the 10 Ahau katun. More frequently, however, the term 

 katun was not used at all, its existence and number being implied by simple mention 

 of the ahau date. But there was no ahau-katun. 



