in a series found in the middle division of Plate II of the
Manuscript Troano.

The series, when written out with the substitutes heretofore used, is as
follows:

[(I)] [(I)]
Manik Ymix }
Men (?) Been } 9, X; 6, III; 11, I.
Chuen Chicchan }
Akbal Caban
Men Muluc

In Brasseur's fac simile the second symbol of the left hand column is
clearly that for Men. If this be accepted as correct, then no year bearer
(Kan, Muluc, Ix, Cauac) would be found in either column and the theory we
have advanced regarding the signification of the dots around the red unit
over the column would fall to the ground. Nor is this the only difficulty
we meet with in attempting to apply the theory to this series. The sum of
the black numbers is 26, which should also be the interval between the
days of the columns. Counting 26 days from 1 Manik brings us to 1 Been
instead of 1 Men; 26 more to 1 Cauac, a day not found in either column as
given in the original. Taking the second column and counting 26 days from
1 Ymix, we reach 1 Manik, instead of 1 Been. This gives us the key to the
series and solves the riddle. We must commence with 1 Ymix, then take 1
Manik, then 1 Been, and so on, going alternately from column to column.

Adopting this method and using the Cauac column of our calendar, Table
II, the result is as follows: Commencing with 1 Ymix, the third day of
the tenth figure column, and counting 26 days, we reach 1 Manik; 26 days
more bring us to 1 Been, and 26 more to 1 Cauac, the first day of the
first year of an Indication. The 1 Men of the left hand column should
therefore be 1 Cauac, which is also proved by counting the intervals,
without regard to the week numbers. For example, from Ymix to Been is 12
days, from Been to Chicchan 12 days, from Manik to Cauac 12 days, and so
on through each column. Or, if we take the columns alternately, the
interval is six days, thus: From Ymix to Manik, 6 days; from Manik to
Been, 6 days; from Been to Cauac, 6 days; from Cauac to Chuen, 6 days,
and so on to the end.

Although the proof is not absolutely conclusive that these red unit
numerals have this mark of distinction for the reason given, it
nevertheless furnishes what would seem to be a satisfactory explanation,
and, if so, affords proof that the calendar system, based upon the four
year series, was in vogue when the Manuscript Troano and the Codex
Cortesianus were written.

This mark of d