early Maya sculptures and the accounts of the Yucatec by Landa and Cogolludo; but the identification of the different deities is to a large extent a conjectural matter, impossible of short treatment since it involves the production of much detailed evidence. The following account does not pretend to be more than the result of a careful consideration of most of the sources, and for the evidence itself the reader must be referred elsewhere. It cannot be denied that many of the conclusions here set forth are controversial, but it may be claimed that there do exist in all cases certain definite points of evidence in their favour. Mayan religion shows a close fundamental similarity to that of the Mexicans, so much so in fact that it is fair to argue from what we know of the latter to the former, always with proper precautions. Care is necessary, since the migration legends of the Quiché, Kakchiquel and books of Chilan Balam all mention Tulan as a resting-place or starting-point, and there is always the possibility that the myths contained in them may have been influenced by "Toltec" beliefs. I hope to show later, however, that the basis of the Toltec culture was in fact Mayan, and I therefore think it fair to claim that many, though certainly not all, of the similarities between the two religions are due to a common Mayan element. This is especially true of what we are able to conjecture concerning the beliefs of the builders of the ruins in Honduras, Guatemala and Chiapas.
As among the Mexicans, tribal gods, under whose leadership migrations took place, are found also among the Maya. In Yucatan we hear of a god Itzamna, supposed to have come from the east, whose attributes are much the same as those of Tonacatecutli. Connected with the sites of Chichen Itza and Mayapan was the god Kukulkan, of whose name "Quetzalcoatl" is a literal translation, and who was supposed to have come
from the west. The god of the Quiché was Tohil, and
