of the two
serpents whose open jaws enclose human heads in profile which together
form one face. The upper jaws end in two recurved appendages, each
exhibiting seven star symbols. As these obviously typify night or darkness
and the open jaws seem to threaten to absorb or engulf the ray of the sun
pointing downwards, it appears as though these typified a disappearance of
light into the underworld of darkness and destruction.

The symbolical surroundings of the downward ray are in striking contrast
to its opposite, the upward ray, which reaches to the 13 Acatl sign and
points to what appears to be the place of origin or birth of the twin
serpents. It certainly seems that this all-embracing and enfolding twin
pair are designed to typify the dual forces of nature under a form which
would also express quadruplication. By what must be termed a stroke of
genius the designer of the monolith chose to represent the forms of two
serpents, relying upon the fact that Nahuatl-speaking people would see in
each serpent (=coatl) a twin (=coatl). Did he not also realize that to a
Maya each serpent (=can) would mean 4 (=can) and that the pair would
appear to embody or express the numerals 4 and also 8?

It is noteworthy that each serpent is represented with one claw and that
these two added to those contained in the central nahui-ollin complete the
four-limbed figure which was essentially the image of a complete count=the
state, the nation, the era, etc. In this monument, as elsewhere, it is
possible to follow the development of the symbolism expressed by two heads
which form but one, twin-bodies which mean four and of four limbs which
represent the digital count=20.

Under different aspects the same theme repeats itself again and again upon
the stone, which proves that the master minds who planned and wrought it
destined it to be the image of a plan based on the idea of a central and
yet all-embracing, dual, yet quadruple force or power.

The preceding rapid sketch I have given of the wide-reaching significance
of this remarkable monument will, I hope, be found to amply support and
corroborate the view I advanced in 1886, when I pointed out that the
"Calendar-stone" answered to the description given by Duran, of the
"circular elaborately carved tablets which were kept in each market-place
and were held in great veneration." I trust that it is now clear why it
should have been frequently consulted and why the market-days were
regulated