7. Cimi. 5. Ezanab.
13. Ix. 11. Cimi. 9. Ezanab. 7. Oc. 5. Ik.
13. Ezanab. 11. Oc. 9. Ik. 7. Ix. 5. Cimi.
13. Ik. 11. Ix. 9. Cimi. 7. Ezanab. 5. Oc.
13. Cimi. 11. Ezanab. 9. Oc. 7. Ik. 5. Ix.

3. Oc. 1. Ik. 12. Ix.
3. Ix. 1. Cimi. 12. Ezanab.
3. Ezanab. 1. Oc. 12. Ik.
3. Ik. 1. Ix. 12. Cimi.
3. Cimi. 1. Ezanab. 12. Oc.

TABLE IX.

10. Men. 8. Manik. 6. Cauac. 4. Chuen. 2. Akbal.
10. Cauac. 8. Chuen. 6. Akbal. 4. Men. 2. Manik.
10. Akbal. 8. Men. 6. Manik. 4. Cauac. 2. Chuen.
10. Manik. 8. Cauac. 6. Chuen. 4. Akbal. 2. Men.
10. Chuen. 8. Akbal. 6. Men. 4. Manik. 2. Cauac.

13. Men. 11. Manik. 9. Cauac. 7. Chuen. 5. Akbal.
13. Cauac. 11. Chuen. 9. Akbal. 7. Men. 5. Manik.
13. Akbal. 11. Men. 9. Manik. 7. Cauac. 5. Chuen.
13. Manik. 11. Cauac. 9. Chuen. 7. Akbal. 5. Men.
13. Chuen. 11. Akbal. 9. Men. 7. Manik. 5. Cauac.

3. Men. 1. Manik. 12. Cauac.
3. Cauac. 1. Chuen. 12. Akbal.
3. Akbal. 1. Men. 12. Manik.
3. Manik. 1. Cauac. 12. Chuen.
3. Chuen. 1. Akbal. 12. Men.

There is still another and somewhat probable supposition in regard to
the object of this division of the days of the month into groups of
five, which will obviate one objection to the explanation given in my
former work, viz, the very large number of dates given in the Manuscript
Troano on the supposition that there are four years to each numeral
connected with, the day columns. It is possible that the days of one
group indicate the year intended; that is, whether it is a Cauac, Kan,
Muluc, or Ix year.

For example, column No. 4 (Table IV), or some other, one of the four,
may relate to Kan years; No. 1 to Muluc years; No. 2 to Ix years, and
No. 3 to Cauac years. Assuming this to be correct, then the example
heretofore given, where the days named are 1 Cib, 1 Ahau, 1 Kan, 1
Lamat, and 1 Eb, and the month the first (Pop), would indicate only the
years 7 Muluc, 3 Muluc, 12 Muluc, 8 Muluc, and 11 Muluc. These would all
come in Ahau No. VI, as before, but would indicate that the festival, or
whatever they referred to, occurred but once every fo