FOOTNOTES:[1]For those unacquainted with Maya arithmetic the following points will explain matters: the Mayas used the vigesimal system of enumeration; they counted by twenties instead of tens. A bar represented five, and a dot stood for one. They represented numbers larger than twenty by position, just as we do. However, instead of having the smallest denomination at the right and the largest at the left of a horizontal series of figures, they had the smallest at the bottom and the largest at the top of a column of numbers. Instead of each unit in a given position representing ten times the value of that of the preceding position, it represented twenty times the value, except in the third position where it was only eighteen times as great. Thus each unit of the bottom number represented one (Kin), that of the number above it twenty (Uinal), that of the third number 20 × 18 or 360 (Tun), that of the fourth position 20 × 360 or 7200 (Katun), etc. For ease in handling, these numbers are written in our script with arabic numerals, the bottom number on the right, and separated by periods. Thus in column three, page 53a, the upper number is 1. 7. 2, which means that the kin of this group is 2, the Uinal 7, (7 × 20) and the Tun 1 (1 × 360), making in all 2 + 140 + 360 or 502.The Maya calendar, like ours, consisted of a series of numbers and a series of names for each day, each series repeating itself constantly, irrespective of the other. There were twenty different day names, which remained in an unchangeable order, and thirteen numbers. In the pages under discussion these day names appear as glyphs preceded by the necessary number.For further details consult S. G. Morley,An Introduction to Maya Hieroglyphs, Bulletin 57, Bureau of American Ethnology, Washington, D. C., 1915, and C. P. Bowditch, 1910.[2]Bowditch, 1910, pp. 222, 223.[3]By Dr. Förstemann, Dr. Thomas, and Mr. Bowditch.[4]Förstemann, 1901, p. 123.[5]Bowditch, 1910, p. 217.[6]Förstemann, 1886, p. 34.[7]Ibid., pp. 68-71.[8]Thomas, 1888, p, 325.[9]Förstemann, 1898.[10]Ibid., 1901, pp. 118-133.[11]Förstemann, 1901, p. 121.[12]Ibid., p. 123.[13]Bowditch, 1910, pp. 211-231.[14]Ibid., p. 218.[15]Bowditch, 1910, pp. 222, 223.[16]Ibid., p. 224.[17]Ibid., pp. 229, 230.[18]Ibid., p. 231.[19]Meinshausen, 1913, pp. 221-227.[20]Ibid., p. 225.[21]Meinshausen, 1913, p. 225.[22]Ibid., pp. 226, 227.[23]Professor Willson’s work on the Dresden manuscript has not yet been published. It is referred to here only through his kind permission.[24]Schram, 1908, pp. 358, 359.[25]That is, the 177-day, 148-day and 178-day groups.
[1]For those unacquainted with Maya arithmetic the following points will explain matters: the Mayas used the vigesimal system of enumeration; they counted by twenties instead of tens. A bar represented five, and a dot stood for one. They represented numbers larger than twenty by position, just as we do. However, instead of having the smallest denomination at the right and the largest at the left of a horizontal series of figures, they had the smallest at the bottom and the largest at the top of a column of numbers. Instead of each unit in a given position representing ten times the value of that of the preceding position, it represented twenty times the value, except in the third position where it was only eighteen times as great. Thus each unit of the bottom number represented one (Kin), that of the number above it twenty (Uinal), that of the third number 20 × 18 or 360 (Tun), that of the fourth position 20 × 360 or 7200 (Katun), etc. For ease in handling, these numbers are written in our script with arabic numerals, the bottom number on the right, and separated by periods. Thus in column three, page 53a, the upper number is 1. 7. 2, which means that the kin of this group is 2, the Uinal 7, (7 × 20) and the Tun 1 (1 × 360), making in all 2 + 140 + 360 or 502.The Maya calendar, like ours, consisted of a series of numbers and a series of names for each day, each series repeating itself constantly, irrespective of the other. There were twenty different day names, which remained in an unchangeable order, and thirteen numbers. In the pages under discussion these day names appear as glyphs preceded by the necessary number.For further details consult S. G. Morley,An Introduction to Maya Hieroglyphs, Bulletin 57, Bureau of American Ethnology, Washington, D. C., 1915, and C. P. Bowditch, 1910.
[1]For those unacquainted with Maya arithmetic the following points will explain matters: the Mayas used the vigesimal system of enumeration; they counted by twenties instead of tens. A bar represented five, and a dot stood for one. They represented numbers larger than twenty by position, just as we do. However, instead of having the smallest denomination at the right and the largest at the left of a horizontal series of figures, they had the smallest at the bottom and the largest at the top of a column of numbers. Instead of each unit in a given position representing ten times the value of that of the preceding position, it represented twenty times the value, except in the third position where it was only eighteen times as great. Thus each unit of the bottom number represented one (Kin), that of the number above it twenty (Uinal), that of the third number 20 × 18 or 360 (Tun), that of the fourth position 20 × 360 or 7200 (Katun), etc. For ease in handling, these numbers are written in our script with arabic numerals, the bottom number on the right, and separated by periods. Thus in column three, page 53a, the upper number is 1. 7. 2, which means that the kin of this group is 2, the Uinal 7, (7 × 20) and the Tun 1 (1 × 360), making in all 2 + 140 + 360 or 502.
The Maya calendar, like ours, consisted of a series of numbers and a series of names for each day, each series repeating itself constantly, irrespective of the other. There were twenty different day names, which remained in an unchangeable order, and thirteen numbers. In the pages under discussion these day names appear as glyphs preceded by the necessary number.
For further details consult S. G. Morley,An Introduction to Maya Hieroglyphs, Bulletin 57, Bureau of American Ethnology, Washington, D. C., 1915, and C. P. Bowditch, 1910.
[2]Bowditch, 1910, pp. 222, 223.
[2]Bowditch, 1910, pp. 222, 223.
[3]By Dr. Förstemann, Dr. Thomas, and Mr. Bowditch.
[3]By Dr. Förstemann, Dr. Thomas, and Mr. Bowditch.
[4]Förstemann, 1901, p. 123.
[4]Förstemann, 1901, p. 123.
[5]Bowditch, 1910, p. 217.
[5]Bowditch, 1910, p. 217.
[6]Förstemann, 1886, p. 34.
[6]Förstemann, 1886, p. 34.
[7]Ibid., pp. 68-71.
[7]Ibid., pp. 68-71.
[8]Thomas, 1888, p, 325.
[8]Thomas, 1888, p, 325.
[9]Förstemann, 1898.
[9]Förstemann, 1898.
[10]Ibid., 1901, pp. 118-133.
[10]Ibid., 1901, pp. 118-133.
[11]Förstemann, 1901, p. 121.
[11]Förstemann, 1901, p. 121.
[12]Ibid., p. 123.
[12]Ibid., p. 123.
[13]Bowditch, 1910, pp. 211-231.
[13]Bowditch, 1910, pp. 211-231.
[14]Ibid., p. 218.
[14]Ibid., p. 218.
[15]Bowditch, 1910, pp. 222, 223.
[15]Bowditch, 1910, pp. 222, 223.
[16]Ibid., p. 224.
[16]Ibid., p. 224.
[17]Ibid., pp. 229, 230.
[17]Ibid., pp. 229, 230.
[18]Ibid., p. 231.
[18]Ibid., p. 231.
[19]Meinshausen, 1913, pp. 221-227.
[19]Meinshausen, 1913, pp. 221-227.
[20]Ibid., p. 225.
[20]Ibid., p. 225.
[21]Meinshausen, 1913, p. 225.
[21]Meinshausen, 1913, p. 225.
[22]Ibid., pp. 226, 227.
[22]Ibid., pp. 226, 227.
[23]Professor Willson’s work on the Dresden manuscript has not yet been published. It is referred to here only through his kind permission.
[23]Professor Willson’s work on the Dresden manuscript has not yet been published. It is referred to here only through his kind permission.
[24]Schram, 1908, pp. 358, 359.
[24]Schram, 1908, pp. 358, 359.
[25]That is, the 177-day, 148-day and 178-day groups.
[25]That is, the 177-day, 148-day and 178-day groups.
BIBLIOGRAPHYBowditch, C. P.1910. The Numeration, Calendar Systems and Astronomical Knowledge of the Mayas. Cambridge.Förstemann, E.1886. Erläuterungen zur Mayahandschrift der Königlichen öffentlichen Bibliothek zu Dresden. Dresden.1898. Zur Entzifferung der Mayahandschrift, VII. Dresden. (Trans. in Bull. 28, Bur. Am. Ethnol., pp. 463-72.)1901. Commentar zur Mayahandschrift der Königlichen öffentlichen Bibliothek zu Dresden. Dresden. (Trans. in Papers of the Peabody Museum, Vol. IV, No. 2.)Meinshausen, Martin.1913. Über Sonnen- und Mondfinsternisse in der Dresdener Mayahandschrift. Zeit. für Ethnol., Bd. XLV, pp. 221-227.Schram, R.1908. Kalendariographische und Chronologische Tafeln. Leipzig.Thomas, Cyrus.1888. Aids to the Study of the Maya Codices. 6th Ann. Rep., Bur. Am. Ethnol., pp. 253-371.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Bowditch, C. P.
1910. The Numeration, Calendar Systems and Astronomical Knowledge of the Mayas. Cambridge.
Förstemann, E.
1886. Erläuterungen zur Mayahandschrift der Königlichen öffentlichen Bibliothek zu Dresden. Dresden.
1898. Zur Entzifferung der Mayahandschrift, VII. Dresden. (Trans. in Bull. 28, Bur. Am. Ethnol., pp. 463-72.)
1901. Commentar zur Mayahandschrift der Königlichen öffentlichen Bibliothek zu Dresden. Dresden. (Trans. in Papers of the Peabody Museum, Vol. IV, No. 2.)
Meinshausen, Martin.
1913. Über Sonnen- und Mondfinsternisse in der Dresdener Mayahandschrift. Zeit. für Ethnol., Bd. XLV, pp. 221-227.
Schram, R.
1908. Kalendariographische und Chronologische Tafeln. Leipzig.
Thomas, Cyrus.
1888. Aids to the Study of the Maya Codices. 6th Ann. Rep., Bur. Am. Ethnol., pp. 253-371.
PRINTED ATTHE HARVARD UNIVERSITY PRESSCAMBRIDGE, MASS., U. S. A.
PRINTED ATTHE HARVARD UNIVERSITY PRESSCAMBRIDGE, MASS., U. S. A.
Peabody Museum Papers.Vol. Vi, No. 2, Plate 1Dresden Codex, Pages 51 to 58Dresden Codex, Pages 51 to 58.
Peabody Museum Papers.Vol. Vi, No. 2, Plate 1
Peabody Museum Papers.
Vol. Vi, No. 2, Plate 1
Dresden Codex, Pages 51 to 58
Dresden Codex, Pages 51 to 58.
Transcriber’s NotesThe cover image was created by the transcriber and is dedicated without reservation to the public domain.Footnoteshave been renumbered and then moved from bottom of the relevant page to the end of the text.Tables within a paragraph have been relocated to immediately above or below the relevant paragraph.Table XI (page 24): The reference for the asterisk at No. of Month 32 was not found.Obvious printer's errors have been silently corrected.
Transcriber’s Notes