CORRELATION OF MAYA AND CHRISTIAN CHRONOLOGY. 493 
These last two passages give us a seventh date fixed in the two chronologies, 
namely, that the year 1618 fell in a Katun 3 Ahau, which we shall presently see 
agrees with the best interpretation of the other six events. 
THE CORRELATION OF THE U KAHLAY KATUNOB AND CHRISTIAN CHRONOLOGY. 
Let us next examine the foregoing data and ascertain if it is possible to derive 
therefrom any correlation of the two chronologies which will not violate statements 
in one or other of our sources. These data indicate that: 
Event A, 1511 fell in a Katun 2 Ahau. 
Event B, the end of a Katun 2 Ahau fell in 1517. 
Event C, 1536 fell in a Katun 13 Ahau. 
Event D, January 6, 1542, fell in a Katun 11 Ahau. 
Event E, August 1 to 15, 1562, fell in a Katun 9 Ahau. 
Event F, April 29, 1579, fell in a Katun 7 Ahau. 
Event G, 1618 fell in a Katun 3 Ahau. 
The dates of these seven events cover a period of 107 years, being sufficiently 
scattered, ISII, 1517, 1536, 1542, 1562, 1579, and 1618—6, 19, 6, 20, 17, and 39 
years apart respectively—to furnish an exacting test of the accuracy of the corre- 
sponding correlation of Christian years and Maya katuns, and to establish a cor- 
relation of the two chronologies to at least within a year. Indeed, as regards the 
specific katuns in which these several Christian years fell there is all but unanimous 
agreement, as the following table will show:' 






Event A. Event C. Event D. Event E. Event F. Event G. 
Source. 







rt ett Bee Eh (od aaa id Katun 11 Ahau.} Katun 9 Ahau. 
Wn Belt aes OR ie Saher 6 he) |e Katun 11 Ahau. 
III... .| Katun 2 Ahau.| Katun 13 Ahau.}| Katun 11 Ahau.| Katung Ahau.| Katun 7 Ahau. 
IV....| Katun 2 Ahau.} Katun 13 Ahau.| Katun 11 Ahau.| Katung Ahau.} Katun 7 Ahau. 
Worsicwl BR eis eat ae Katun 13 Ahau.| Katun 11 Ahau. 
te eee OM eg or. tarn eee ed aes a fom e os deed ee [era aera beets. Katun 3 Ahau. 
IX....| Katun 2 Ahau.| Katun 13 Ahau.| Katun 11 Ahau.} Katung Ahau.| Katun 7 Ahau. 
3 tay eh ee ae Katun 11 Ahau.| Katun 11 Ahau.} Katung Ahau.| Katun 7 Ahau. 
(first tun). 
SRS toe WOR gee id eh ee rae ee Katun 11 Ahau. 
Katun 11 Ahau. 
Piece) elk o 4) Sisaa: «.:e 10), Ocopo se wie Be 16 0) Oa: +e eo Ale ose ie/i a 
The single entry which does not conform with the above correlation is the 
passage in X which assigns Event C to the first tun of Katun 11 Ahau instead of 
to Katun 13 Ahau as do the others. But even here it is the first tun of Katun 11 
Ahau, and, as already pointed out, a difference of a few days at the close of 1536 
or early in 1537 would have thrown Event C from the /Jast tun of Katun 13 Ahau 
into the first tun of Katun 11 Ahau. In view of all the other evidence as to this 
event, as well as to all the other events in all the other sources, the writer feels it 
is perfectly safe to accept the foregoing points of contact between the u kahlay 
katunob and Christian chronology as correct. 
Of course, on the basis of Event B alone, it is possible to reach a correlation 
correct to within a year, since it states that a katun, which we have seen could only 
have been Katun 2 Ahau, came to an end some time during 1517; but even omitting 
this for the moment, the other six events give a correlation correct to within less 



1Event B is omitted only because on its face it fixes the correlation of the wu kahlay katunob and Christian 
chronology toa year. It also agrees with the other six events. 
