CORRELATION OF MAYA AND CHRISTIAN CHRONOLOGY. 485 
These dates for Napot Xiu’s death are so close to the end of Katun 13 Ahau, 
about a third of a year off at the most, that if the author of the original wu kahlay 
katunob from which Juan Josef Hoil made his redaction in 1782 (X) had been at all 
confused as to the exact date of that event, except that it occurred either in the 
latter part of 1536 or early in 1537, he might easily have referred it to the first tun 
of Katun 11 Ahau instead of to the /ast tun of Katun 13 Ahau. The leeway here is 
so short, less than 5 months, that the writer believes it satisfactorily explains this 
single disagreement in ail the native sources as to the name of the katun in which 
any one of our seven events fell. 
Our last source treating of Event C is page 85! of the Book of Chilan Balam of 
Chumayel (XII). Here, under date of the year 1537, erroneously assigned to the 
year-bearer 9 Cauac,? we find an important entry bearing upon this event, wherein 
mention is twice made of the fact that it was the Xiu ruler (halach vinic) who had 
been killed, his name being given once as Ah Tutul Xiu, and the place of his death 
as Otzomal. Ah Tutul Xiu is nothing more than The Tutul Xiu, using the definite 
article as in The Campbell or The MacNaughton in speaking of the heads of those 
Scottish clans, a fact further indicated by reference to the dead man as the halach 
vinic or ruler. 
“ce 
1537. 9 Cauac its day-name, it was that the nobles gathered at the town of Mani 
for full discussion about the reception of the coming strangers [7. ¢., the Spaniards] to the 
country because of the fact that their ruler (halach vinic) had been killed. These were 
their names: Ah-moo Chan Xiu,’ Nahaues, Ahtz’un Chinab, Napoot Cupul, Napot Che, 
Nabatun Ytza, the priest Evan from Cocel; Nachan Uc, who came from T7z’ibilkal, the 
priest Ucan, who came from Ekob, Nachi Uc, the herald Koh, Nachan Motul, Nahau Coyi; 
these the grandees talked of receiving the strangers to the town because the ruler (halach 
vinic) of the city, Ah Tutul Xiu, had been killed at Otzomal.” 
The strangers here referred to are the Spaniards who, under Francisco Montejo 
the younger, had landed at Champoton in 1537 in their second attempt to conquer 
the country, the first, which lasted from 1527 to 1535, having failed.* 
Summarizing the foregoing data as to Event C, the following conclusions appear 
to be reasonably certain: 
(1) That it was a pilgrimage to Chichen Itza for the purpose of offering human sacri- 
fices, slaves of both sexes, to the rain deities at the Sacred Cenote, in order that the drought 
from which the whole country was suffering at the time might cease. Actually stated in II, 
and implied in the word ahpula, ahpulha, or ahpulhaob (plural), water-bringer, in III, IV, 
Pix, and X. 
(2) That it took place in 1536. Actually stated in III, IV, V, and VII, and stated in 
II to have taken place between the end of the first Spanish entry in 1535 and the beginning 
of the second in 1537; and stated in XII to have taken place prior to 1537. 
(3) That it took place at Otzmal. Actually stated in V, VI, and XII, and stated by II 
to have taken place in the territory of the Cocom. 
(4) That the leader of the pilgrimage was Napot Xiu. Actually stated in VII, IX, 
and X, and stated in V and XII that it was the leader or ruler of the Tutul Xiu, doubtless 
the same individual. dE 
(s) That the year 1536 fell in a Katun13 Ahau. Actually stated in IIT and IV, implied 
in I, II, and V, and stated in X that Event C took place in the first tun of a Katun 11 Ahau. 
The foregoing points appear to be reasonably clear, although the existence of 
certain contradictory data as to the Christian year, katun, tun, and year-bearer, 
must be admitted. ; 

1$ee Gordon, 1913, plate 85. The writer is indebted to Mr. Gates for the above translation of this passage. 
2A will be seen later (pages 495-497), this is probably an error either for 8 Cauac or 9 Kan. 
8This individual appears on the genealogical tree in the Chronicle of Oxkutzcab as a great-great grandson 
of the first Lord of Mani. 
4Cogolludo, 1688, pp. 74, 94, and 114. 
