questioned. But after seriously considering this point, I concluded it best to give to the world the result of my investigations with these explanations, as I felt confident I had made some progress in deciphering this mysterious Manuscript.
I take this opportunity of acknowledging the obligations I am under to Dr. D. G. Brinton, of Philadelphia, for the valuable notice of the Maya Manuscripts which he has contributed as an introduction to my paper.
RESULTS OF MY INVESTIGATIONS OP THE MANUSCRIPT TROANO.
These may be briefly summed up as follows:
1st. That the work was intended chiefly as a ritual or religious calendar to guide the priests in the observance of religious festivals, and their numerous ceremonies and other duties. That the very large number of day columns and numerals, which form fully one-half of what may be called the written portion, are simply dates which appear to run through one entire grand cycle of 312 years, fixing the time when festivals should be held and other religious observances take place. Also that much of the text proper—the portion in hieroglyphics or written characters—is purely ritualistic, consisting of very simple formulas.
2d. That the figures in the spaces are in some cases symbolical, in others simple pictographs, and, in quite a number, refer to religious ceremonies, but that in many instances they relate to the habits, customs, and occupations of the people—as, for example, their method of capturing game, which, as appears from this work, was as stated by Herrera, chiefly by "gins and traps"—and the incidents of the chase; that which relates to the business of the apiarists; making ropes; the manufacture of idols; agricultural pursuits; occupation and duties of the females, &c. But even here we see the religious element pervading everything.
3d. That the work appertained to and was prepared for a people living in the interior of the country, away from the sea-shore. This is inferred from the fact that nothing is found in it relating to fishermen, or their vessels.
