48
when four Katunes were counted on the east of the wheel. His death happened on the 18th day of the mouth Zip, on the 9th day Imix. This date is wrong according to my reckoning; for the year 4 Cavac expired at the beginning and not at the end of the epoch, otherwise it would have been the year 4 Muluc. In the first case, the year 4 Cavac was that of 1496, in the other case it would be the year 1506, and never that of 1536, for in that year the 9th Ahau began.[1]"
We give, besides, a recapitulation which Senor Perez himself added to his commentary, and for which we are indebted to the kindness of the late Dr. C. Hermann Berendt:—
"From what we have stated it will be seen that by only taking into account the number of epochs which are mentioned in the manuscript, and which elapsed between events, and by restoring this nomenclature according to the progressive series of the Ahaues, it appears that all indicated facts occur within the space of 58 epochs of 24 years each, which makes in all 1392 years to the expiration of the Uth Ahau. If we subtract these years from the year 1536, in which the Uth Ahau expired, 1444 A. D. remains as the year when the Toltecs seem to have arrived to colonize the country.
But if we allow the epochs and their enumeration to stand as they are, and in order to integrate the Ahaues in the sequence above indicated, add those which are missing, we should find that 97 epochs, each of 24 years had passed. The sum of 2328 years, represented by this count, is a space of time of too great magnitude to bring into harmony with Mexican history, and would signify that this country was 40 years older than the foundation of Rome, and 17 years older than the Introduction of Greek Olympiads, which is very improbable.
Should any hypercritical person fail to believe in the list of epochs because their succession is incorrect, let him remember that the list has much to render it worthy of belief, though it must be subjected to corrections. Still less ought any one to refuse belief in the historical- ↑ Señor Perez in his commentary makes his calculation that 1496 was the year of the death of Chief Ajpula, and succeeds in giving it a plausible appearance of correctness. But we observe that in order to reach this date he was not aware of having altered the words of the Maya text, and those of his own translation. This translation said correctly: "There were still six years wanting before the completion of the 13th Ahau." In the text of the commentary, however, we find him starting his count on the supposition that the original text was the sixth year of the 13th Ahau. Though this change is by no means allowable, he succeeds, ingeniously enough, in arriving at the year above quoted, and in stating also the dates of the day and month, precisely as the annalist had set them down.
