Page:A Study of the Manuscript Troano.djvu/131

Rh figures in the Manuscript; those on Plates 26, 27, and 28 apparently part of the trunk of a tree clothed, and around which a serpent is coiled. From this fact I infer that the character signifies a "stone" or "stone-heap." The same character is also found under the figures placed opposite each other in the lower divisions of Plates XX-XXIII of the Manuscript, the only exception being that under the left figure in the lower division of Plate XXII. I had, from a study of the character itself, come to the conclusion, previous to the discovery of the signification of the four plates of the Codex, that it was the symbol for stone, especially for the stone used in marking the divisions between periods of time. I was led to this conclusion by a careful comparison of Landa's symbol for the month Pax with other similar characters in the Manuscript. If I am correct in this opinion, then the character probably represents one of the two Maya words Piz, signifying "a stone serving to form the divisions in a Katun or cycle," or Fpic, "stones placed one upon another, serving to count the intervals in the cycles." We find this character, as before remarked, in the lower transverse lines of the plates of the Codex, in close proximity to the symbols of the cardinal points, which agrees very well with Landa's statement.

In the third or lowest division of Plate 27 we see the figure of a fish on two Kans, which are in a vessel. This probably represents the "angel" placed on the "palo" or litter "as a sign of water;" though it is possible it simply denotes one of the offerings made to the idol before which it is placed. It is worthy of note that a similar figure is found in the second character of the fifth line of the title-page of the Manuscript; but, in this case, it is in the column which has the symbol for "south" as its second character. As Plate 27 of the Codex relates to the close of a Cauac year, as well as to the commencement of a Kan year, the presence of this figure in these places agrees very well with the interpretation above given. Although we have by no means exhausted our explanation of the four plates of the Codex, we are now prepared to compare them with the four of the Manuscript, and will proceed to make the comparison, reserving what further interpretations we have to give of them to a subsequent part of our paper.

There are four plates in each, relating to the four dominical days or