472 THE INSCRIPTIONS AT COPAN. 
Again we have a native source of the greatest value, copied by a member of 
the most important native family in Yucatan at the time of the conquest, namely, 
the Xiu, from “an ancient book”’ in ‘“‘characters by name Anares.”” In Anares we 
can hardly fail to see the word “‘analtehes,” which Villagutierre uses less than 15 
years later (1701) to describe the hieroglyphic manuscripts of Canek, the last 
independent Mayanruler: “Because their king (Canek) had read it in his analtehes, 
they had knowledge of the provinces of Yucatan, and of the fact that their ancestors 
had formerly come from them (analtehes or histories being one and the same thing).””} 
And in “‘characters”’ (Spanish caracteres) we have precisely the same word, which 
Landa, Lizana, and Ponce use to describe the hieroglyphics themselves.” 
This evidence is so convincing that the writer believes the ‘‘ancient book”’ 
from which Don Juan Xiu copied the entries on page 66 of the Chronicle of 
Oxkutzcab on May 29, 1685, was nothing less than a hieroglyphic manuscript, in 
short a codex, and that his copy thereof may be regarded as an original source of 
the highest order of credibility. 
The sixth source, Cogolludo’s History of Yucatan, contains no material for cor- 
relating the u kahlay katunob with Christian chronology. It gives, however, a full 
account of the history of the Roman Catholic Church in Yucatan during the first 
century of the Spanish régime, and is particularly complete in regard to the activi- 
ties of the friars. Its especial importance in the present connection lies in the fact 
that it fixes the dates in Christian chronology of Event C (the death of Napot Xiu), 
Event D (the foundation of Merida), Event E (the arrival of Bishop Toral in Yuca- 
tan), and Event F (the death of Bishop Landa), which the native authorities give 
in terms of their own chronology in 
the u kahlay katunob. 
Molina Solis says Cogolludo 
wrote his history in 1656, although 
it was not published until 1688 in 
Madrid,*? and we may doubtless 
assume that his information as to 
these early events of Spanish history 
in Yucatan is substantially correct. 
The seventh source is insepar- 
able from the preceding, since it was 
published therein, and is in fact the 
only illustration the book contains.* 
Fortunately we have independent 
corroboration of its existence by 
Stephens in 1841. Itis an old Indian 
painting (see figure 73) which, ac- 
cording to Cogolludo’s interpreta- 
tion, sets forth the death of Napot 
Xiu at Otzmal. Inthe page facing 
this plate the Bishop states that the 
original painting had the year 1536 
on it, although he tries to prove this wo . : 
is an error for 1541.° This painting Fic. 73—Representation of a Katun-wheel (?) on page 133 
shows acircle of 13 human heads with of Bishop Cogolludo’s Historia de Yucathan. 


1Villagutierre Sotomayor, 1701, p. 353. 
*Landa, 1881, p. 103; Lizana, 1893, p. 3; and Ponce, 1872, tom. Hy, p. 392. 
®Molina Solis, 1904, p. 66. On page 127 of his history, Cogolludo speaks of “how I went this year of 1655 
personally” to Campeche for the purpose of verifying the date of its foundation. 
4Cogolludo, 1688, p. 133. 5Jbid., p. 132. 
