putation and that of Mr.
Morley rests solely in this: according to Mr. Bowditch the Golden Age
or Old Empire had its beginnings as far back as 75 B.C.; Mr. Morley, on
the other hand, believes that up to 200 A.D. there was a wholly
indefinite Migratory period which led up to the Golden Age and to the
Colonization period (that is, to 700 A.D.). From 700 onward the two
systems are the same. Whatever divergence exists between Mr. Bowditch
and Mr. Morley on the subject of chronology concerns only the Golden
Age or Old Empire cities.]

[Footnote 2: Nakum was first studied scientifically by Count Maurice de
Perigny (1908). Its importance is exceeded, however, by that of Tikal,
which, in addition to being very near Lake Peten, is now well known.
Descriptions of this elaborate group of ruins are to be found in
Charnay (1887), Maudslay (1883), and in other earlier writers. The most
satisfactory work on Tikal is that of Maler and Tozzer (1911). In both
Nakum and Tikal the buildings are excellent examples of Old Empire
construction, having massive substructures, towering superstructures,
and a mass of intricate ornamentation. The dates at Tikal range from
9.2.13.0.0. to 9.15.13.0.0. (about 210-480 A.D.).]

[Footnote 3: This documentary history is based on the Books of Chilan
Balam. Daniel G. Brinton's translations as given in his Maya Chronicles
have been used. For bibliographical purposes the reader is referred to
Tozzer, 1917.]

[Footnote 4: Although the terms Maya and Itza are used more or less
interchangeably, it is to be noted that there is authority for
believing them to mean two separate races. Ancona (1878, vol. i, p. 31
ff.) says that the Itzas were the earlier inhabitants of Yucatan. He
adds that they worshiped Itzamna and founded Itzamal, Tihoo, and
Chichen Itza. The Maya, on the other hand, worshiped Kukulkan, were
enemies of the Itzas, and were the founders of Mayapan, Uxmal, and
other cities. This distinction, though a fine one and hard to prove
correct, deserves to be noted.]

[Footnote 5: This name, Cocom, will be brought to our attention later
on, and it will be advisable for us to compare now the exceedingly
confusing accounts of what the Cocom family was.

Brinton (1882, p. 165), in his introduction to the Book of Chilan Balam
of Chumayel, says: "We have no longer to do with the reckoning of the
subjects of the Xiu family who ruled at Mani, but with one which
emanates from the priests of the Cocomes, who we