nteenth number of the eighth figure column, and
count 52 days, we reach 1 Eb, the second day of our column as given
above; 52 days more bring us to 1 Kan, the first day of the first month
in the calendar and third day of our column. If the theory of the four
year series be correct, then 1 Kan of the Kan series must be the first
day of the first year of an Indication or week of years. This fact was
probably considered by the aboriginal artist of sufficient importance to
give this day a mark of distinction. As it is not possible for any of the
other days of the column to be thus distinguished, it is fair to presume
this peculiar marking of the final number refers to Kan. Moreover, this
distinction would not occur if any other than the Kan series were used.

In the upper division of Plate IX of the same manuscript is the following
series:

XIII
Men }
Manik } 20, VII; 20 [(I)]; 1, II; 4, VI; 7, XIII.
Cauac }
Chuen
Akbal

In this, I, the second red number of the series, has the circle of dots
around it. The number over the column is partially obliterated, but is
readily restored, and should be XIII.

If we select, on our calendar, the Cauac column, or series, a reason for
this distinction will appear. The sum of the black numbers is 53, which
is also the interval between the days. As has heretofore been shown, the
red numbers of the series refer to certain days selected by the priests,
for special reasons unknown to us, which occur between the days of the
column.

In this case the intermediate days are as follows:

Between 13 Manik and 13 Cauac: 7 Manik, 1 Manik, 2 Lamat, and 6 Eb.

Between 13 Cauac and 13 Chuen: 7 Cauac, 1 Cauac, 2 Ahau, and 6 Kan.

Here we find the explanation for which we are seeking, as in the interval
between 13 Cauac and 13 Chuen is 1 Cauac, which, if the Cauac column of
the calendar be selected, is the first day of the year 1 Cauac, the first
year of an Indication. As this occurs only when a year commencing with
Cauac is selected, we infer that the series is based upon the system with
the four year series.

The best illustration of this peculiarity and the strongest evidence of
its signification is probably found in the series contained in the middle
division, Plate XI, same manuscript. This, when written out and the
numbers properly arranged, is as follows:

[(I)] [(I)]
Oc Ahau }
Cib Cimi } 1, II; 2, IV; 2, VI; 5, XI; 2, XIII; 4, IV; 9(?