10. Men. 8. Manik. 6. Cauac. 4. Chuen. 2. Akbal.
10. Cauac. 8. Chuen. 6. Akbal. 4. Men. 2. Manik.
10. Akbal. 8. Men. 6. Manik. 4. Cauac. 2. Chuen.
10. Manik. 8. Cauac. 6. Chuen. 4. Akbal. 2. Men.
10. Chuen. 8. Akbal. 6. Men. 4. Manik. 2. Cauac.
13. Men. 11. Manik. 9. Cauac. 7. Chuen. 5. Akbal.
13. Cauac. 11. Chuen. 9. Akbal. 7. Men. 5. Manik.
13. Akbal. 11. Men. 9. Manik. 7. Cauac. 5. Chuen.
13. Manik. 11. Cauac. 9. Chuen. 7. Akbal. 5. Men.
13. Chuen. 11. Akbal. 9. Men. 7. Manik. 5. Cauac.
3. Men. 1. Manik. 12. Cauac.
3. Cauac. 1. Chuen. 12. Akbal.
3. Akbal. 1. Men. 12. Manik.
3. Manik. 1. Cauac. 12. Chuen.
3. Chuen. 1. Akbal. 12. Men.
There is still another and somewhat probable supposition in regard to
the object of this division of the days of the month into groups of
five, which will obviate one objection to the explanation given in my
former work, viz, the very large number of dates given in the Manuscript
Troano on the supposition that there are four years to each numeral
connected with, the day columns. It is possible that the days of one
group indicate the year intended; that is, whether it is a Cauac, Kan,
Muluc, or Ix year.
For example, column No. 4 (Table IV), or some other, one of the four,
may relate to Kan years; No. 1 to Muluc years; No. 2 to Ix years, and
No. 3 to Cauac years. Assuming this to be correct, then the example
heretofore given, where the days named are 1 Cib, 1 Ahau, 1 Kan, 1
Lamat, and 1 Eb, and the month the first (Pop), would indicate only the
years 7 Muluc, 3 Muluc, 12 Muluc, 8 Muluc, and 11 Muluc. These would all
come in Ahau No. VI, as before, but would indicate that the festival, or
whatever they referred to, occurred but once every four years, in the
first month of the year. Hence if the five days of a column (as of the
Manuscript Troano) are all taken from one side of the quadrilateral of
our scheme they will refer to years of one dominical sign only; if
alternately from opposite sides, then to the years of two dominical
signs, but if taken alternately from the four sides they would refer to
the four classes of years. This will reduce the number of dates in the
Manuscript Troano very considerably from the other supposition, but will
not in any way change the position of the Ahaues in the Grand Cycle.
As one further item of evidence in regard to this method of arranging
the twenty days of the month in four groups or columns, I call attention
to what is found on Plate 32 of the Dresden Codex. Here we find the four
columns of five days each, corresponding precisely with the arrangement
of the Maya days into four groups, as heretofore. I present here the
arrangement as found on this plate: