Chapter II

for the discussion of this point and the quotations from contemporary authorities, both Spanish and native, on which the above statement is based.

[240] As explained on p. 31, tonalamatls were probably used by the priests in making prophecies or divinations. This, however, is a matter apart from their composition, that is, length, divisions, dates, and method of counting, which more particularly concerns us here.

[241] The codices are folded like a screen or fan, and when opened form a continuous strip sometimes several yards in length. As will appear later, in many cases one tonalamatl runs across several pages of the manuscript.

[242] If there should be two or more columns of day signs the topmost sign of the left-hand column is to be read first.

[243] In the original this last red dot has disappeared. The writer has inserted it here to avoid confusing the beginner in his first acquaintance with a tonalamatl.

[244] This and similar outlines which follow are to be read down in columns.

[245] The fifth sign in the lower row is also a sign of the Death God (see fig. 3). Note the eyelashes, suggesting the closed eyes of the dead.

[246] The last sign Chuen, as mentioned above, is only a repetition of the first sign, indicating that the tonalamatl has re-entered itself.

[247] As previously stated, the order of reading the glyphs in columns is from left to right and top to bottom.

[248] The right-hand dot of the 13 is effaced.

[249] The manuscript has incorrectly 7.

[250] In the title of plate 30 the page number should read 102 instead of 113.

[251] The manuscript incorrectly has 24.

[252] Incorrectly recorded as 13 in the text.

[253] Incorrectly recorded as 15 in the text.

[254] _Bull. 28, Bur. Amer. Ethn._, p. 400.

[255] The terminal dates reached have been omitted, since for comparative work the Initial-series numbers alone are sufficient to show the relative positions in the Long Count.

[256] The manuscript incorrectly reads 10.13.3.13.2; that is, reversing the position of the tun and uinal coefficients.

[257] The manuscript incorrectly reads 10.8.3.16.4. The katun coefficient is changed to 13, above. These corrections are all suggested by Professor Förstemann and are necessary if the calculations he suggests are correct, as seems probable.

[258] The manuscript incorrectly reads 8.16.4.11.0. The uinal coefficient is changed to an 8, above.

[259] The manuscript incorrectly reads 10.19.6.0.8. The uinal coefficient is changed to 1, above.

[260] The manuscript incorrectly reads 9.16.4.10.18. The uinal coefficient is changed to 11, above.

[261] The manuscript incorrectly reads 9.19.8.7.8. The tun coefficient is changed to 5, above.

[262] Bowditch, 1909: p. 279.

[263] The manuscript has incorrectly 16 Uo. It is obvious this can not be correct, since from Table VII Kan can occupy only the 2d, 7th, 12th, or 17th position in the months. The correct reading here, as we shall see, is probably 17 Uo. This reading requires only the addition of a single dot.

[264] In the text the coefficient appears to be 8, but in reality it is 9, the lower dot having been covered by the marginal line at the bottom.

[265] Counting backward 8.2.0 (2,920) from 9 Ahau, 1 Ahau is reached.

[266] Professor Förstemann restored the top terms of the four numbers in this row, so as to make them read as given above.

[267] The manuscript reads 1.12.5.0, which Professor Förstemann corrects to 1.12.8.0; in other words, changing the uinal from 5 to 8. This correction is fully justified in the above calculations.