object in one hand; on her right stands the death-god A holding in his hands what may be an apron or breech-clout; there is a similar representation in Cod. Tro. 29*b.

The hieroglyphs are

Of these 1, 6 and 8 are one of the signs of A, 7 another, and 4 may be a third, recalling the Moan, which, as on page 14c, rests on a hand held beneath it. 2 and 5 seem to signify a carpet or other fabric (or a lying-in bed?), on the one hand suggesting the occupation of the figures in 2b and 2c, and on the other the checkered hieroglyph, which is so common in the Palenque inscriptions. Finally 3 is the woman pictured beneath.

Page 3.

We come now to the sacrificial scene proper, which practically fills the upper half of the page. The victim, a woman, lies bound hand and foot, on the sacrificial stone, just as in the Cortes. 41-42; the incision above the stomach is already made and the eyes are closed. Behind her rises the tree of life with a bird (vulture?) sitting in its branches, which holds in its bill one end of an object, resembling a ribbon (entrails) issuing from the eyes of the victim, just as in Tro. 26*a and 27*a.

This picture is surrounded by four gods, who, however, differ very much from the other four in the second sacrificial scene, page 34a. At the right above is K, who, I think, is the storm-god; the figure at the left above is almost entirely destroyed, and its hieroglyph wholly; I prefer to consider it a rain deity, so that these two gods shall signify the productive season. The two gods below may refer to the blessing upon the harvest and chase resulting from the season and the sacrifice. For, at the left below, we see the maize deity E, holding a dish of fruit, while her head-ornament contains a second head. At the right below sits the serpent deity H and in front of him is an animal with the noose still around its neck, with which it was caught.

The hieroglyphs are in the following order:—

Of these, 1-5 are wholly effaced and also the most essential part of 6.

Of these hieroglyphs four (1-4, 13-16, 17-20 and 21-24) clearly belong to each of the four deities, for 15, 18, and 22 (the last again with the dot between two crosses as on page 2a) certainly belong to the picture. From this it seems to follow that Hieroglyphs 5 to 12 refer to the sacrifice itself. As a matter of fact 9 and 11, which are directly above the sacrifice, also refer particularly to that part of the representation.

I wish also to call special attention to the two signs 8 and 16 which seem to correspond to one another. They are the two which I have designated with q and a, which are met with here for the first time (aside from the q with the Ben-Ik, which is not in question here) and which, I think, denote the good and evil days, q referring to the sacrifice and a to its results.

In regard to the rest of these hieroglyphs, 7 and 9 are Cimi; 10, 14, 17 and 24 the cross b and 11 and 23 the hieroglyph c. 12 is the head with the Akbal eye, having for its prefix the uplifted arm, which is joined thus to the most diverse signs, and which also occurs in the Tro-Cort. 13 is a similar head, 19 again

Imix, 20 the sign o and 21 a hieroglyph, which is without doubt a simplified head.

Here, too, we have a Tonalamatl, and one beginning on an especially ceremonial day I Ahau, which seems to play the same role in celestial affairs as IV Ahau does in terrestrial matters. On the sacrificial stone we read the days Ahau, Eb, Kan, Cib and Lamat, and I think it likely that the same days occur in the passage of the Cortes. referred to above; the passage evidently contains some errors. The subdivisions of this Tonalamatl are not known to us, for here the manuscript is somewhat confused. I propose to read it as follows:—

but Cyrus Thomas, "Aids," p. 294, has

Either reading is dubious. The scribe divided the lower half of page 3 into two parts, and drew in each the outline of five days; but then he saw that, to continue his work, he needed a long surface extending from left to right, and he therefore omitted filling in these two sections.

Pages 4a—10a.

We have here a normal Tonalamatl, which, however, was evidently meant by the author to serve a very special purpose, since he divided the first section of 52 days into no less than 20 parts of 2, 3 or 4 days. I give the following arrangement here, remarking, at the same time, that in one doubtful case (between the third and fourth groups) I deviate from my former plan:—

X 2, XII 4, III 3, VI 2, VIII 4, XII 2, I 2, III 4, VII 2, IX 2, XI 2, XIII 4, IV 2, VI 3, IX 2, XI 3, I 2, III 3, VI 2, VIII 2, X.

Since the five sections on page 4a begin with the days Imix, Ben, Chicchan, Caban, and Muluc, we have resulting from this and from the intervals specified, the following days:—

X Imix, XII Akbal, III Manik, VI Oc, VIII Eb, XII Cib, I Ezanab, III Ahau, VII Kan, IX Cimi, XI Lamat, XIII Oc, IV IX, VI Cib, IX Cauac, XI Imix, I Kan, III Cimi, VI Muluc, VIII Chuen, X Ben.

Now, however, in the "Globus," Vol. LXXIII, in my two articles entitled "Die Tagegötter der Mayas," I have expressed the opinion that there is good reason to believe that the scribe has made a grave mistake here.

I assume that the scribe simply transferred the so-called month days from the year just past to the year in which he was writing, in doing which they were, of course, moved five days on (since 365 = 20 × 18 + 5), but he did not bear in mind, that the pictures and the hieroglyphs could then no longer correspond. Hence the days must be not

Imix, Akbal, Manik, Oc, Eb, Cib, Ezanab, Ahau, Kan, Cimi, Lamat, Oc, Ix, Cib, Cauac, Imix, Kan, Cimi, Muluc, Chuen, Ben,

but

Cib, Ezanab, Ik, Chicchan, Manik, Chuen, Ben, Men, Cauac, Imix, Akbal, Chicchan, Muluc, Chuen, Ix, Cib, Cauac, Imix, Kan,