,,maya ,,manuscripts999999 file which includes the original illustrations4 ,see #ahjac-;h4htm or #ahjac-;h4zip3 7https3_/_/www4gutenberg4org_/dirs_/#a_/ h_/j_/a_/ahjac_/ahjac-;h_/#ahjac-;h4htm7 or 7https3_/_/www4gutenberg4org_/dirs_/#a_/ h_/j_/a_/ahjac_/ahjac-;h4zip7 ,transcriber's ,note3 ,a number of typographical errors have been maintained in this version of this book4 ,a complete list is found at the end of the text4 ,papers of the ,peabody ,museum of ,american ,archaeology and ,ethnology1 ,harvard ,university ,vol4 ,,iv4--,no4 #a ,,representation ,,of ,,deities ,,of ,,the ,,maya ,,manuscripts by ,,dr4 ,,paul ,,schellhas ,second ,edition1 ,revised ,with #a ,plate of ,figures and #fe ,text ,illustrations ,translated by ,miss ,selma ,wesselhoeft and ,miss ,a4 ,m4 ,parker ,translation revised by the ,author ,cambridge1 ,mass4 ,published by the ,museum ,december1 #aijd4 ,,note4 ,in order to make more widely known and more easily accessible to ,american students the results of important researches on the ,maya hieroglyphs1 printed in the ,german language1 the ,peabody ,museum ,committee on ,central ,american ,research proposes to publish translations of certain papers which are not too lengthy or too extensively illustrated4 ,the present paper by one of the most distinguished scholars in this field is the first of the series4 ,f4 ,w4 ,,putnam4 ,harvard ,university ,september1 #aijd4 ,,preface4 ,since the first edition of this pamphlet appeared in the year #ahig1 investigation in this department of science has made such marked progress1 notwithstanding the slight amount of material1 that a revision has now become desirable4 ,it can be readily understood1 that a new science1 an investigation on virgin soil1 such as the ,maya study is1 makes more rapid progress and develops more quickly than one pertaining to some old1 much explored territory4 ,in addition to numerous separate treatises1 special mention should be made of ,ernst ,foerstemann's commentaries on the three ,maya manuscripts 7,kommentar zur ,mayahandschrift der ,koeniglichen oeffentlichen ,bibliothek zu ,dresden1 ,dresden #aija1 ,kommentar zur ,madrider ,mayahandschrift1 ,danzig #aijb1 and ,kommentar zur ,pariser ,mayahandschrift1 ,danzig #aijc7 which constitute a summary of the entire results of investigation in this field up to the present time4 ,the proposal made in the first edition of this pamphlet1 that the ,maya deities be designated by letters of the alphabet1 has been very generally adopted by ,americanists1 especially by those in the ,united ,states of ,america4 ,this circumstance1 in particular1 has seemed to make it desirable to prepare for publication a new edition1 improved to accord with the present state of the science4 ,warmest thanks are above all due to ,mr4 ,bowditch1 of ,boston1 who in the most disinterested manner1 for the good of science1 has made possible the publication of this new edition4 ,january1 #aijd4 ,p4 ,,schellhas4 ,,the ,,material ,,of ,,the ,,manuscripts4 ,the three manuscripts which we possess of the ancient ,maya peoples of ,central ,america1 the ,dresden 7,dr471 the ,madrid 7,tro4-,cort47 and the ,paris 7,per47 manuscripts1 all contain a series of pictorial representations of human figures1 which1 beyond question1 should be regarded as figures of gods4 ,together with these are a number of animal figures1 some with human bodies1 dress and armor1 which likewise have a mythologic significance4 ,the contents of the three manuscripts1 which undoubtedly pertain to the calendar system and to the computation of time in their relation to the ,maya pantheon and to certain religious and domestic functions1 admit of the conclusion1 that these figures of gods embody the essential part of the religious conceptions of the ,maya peoples in a tolerably complete form4 ,for here we have the entire ritual year1 the whole chronology with its mythological relations and all accessories4 ,in addition to this1 essentially the same figures recur in all three manuscripts4 ,their number is not especially large4 ,there are about fifteen figures of gods in human form and about half as many in animal form4 ,at first we were inclined to believe that further researches would considerably increase the number of deities1 but this assumption was incorrect4 ,after years of study of the subject and repeated examination of the results of research1 it may be regarded as positively proved1 that the number of deities represented in the ,maya manuscripts does not exceed substantially the limits mentioned above4 ,the principal deities are determined beyond question4 ,the way in which this was accomplished is strikingly simple4 ,it amounts essentially to that which in ordinary life we call memory of persons and follows almost naturally from a careful study of the manuscripts4 ,for1 by frequently looking attentively at the representations1 one learns by degrees to recognize promptly similar and familiar figures of gods1 by the characteristic impression they make as a whole1 or by certain details1 even when the pictures are partly obliterated or exhibit variations1 and the same is true of the accompanying hieroglyphs4 ,a purely inductive1 natural science-method has thus been followed1 and hence this pamphlet is devoted simply to descriptions and to the amassing of material4 ,these figures have been taken separately out of the manuscripts alone1 identified and described with the studious avoidance of all unreliable1 misleading accounts and of all presumptive analogies with supposedly allied mythologies4 ,whatever cannot be derived from the manuscripts themselves has been wholly ignored4 ,hypotheses and deductions have been avoided as far as possible4 ,only where the interpretation1 or the resemblance and the relations to kindred mythologic domains were obvious1 and where the accounts agreed beyond question1 has notice been taken of the fact so that the imposed limitations of this work should not result in one-sidedness4 ,since1 for the most part1 the accounts of ,spanish authors regarding the mythology of the ,mayas correspond only slightly or not at all with these figures of gods1 and all other conjectures respecting their significance are very dubious1 the alphabetic designation of the deities1 which was tentatively introduced in the first edition of this work1 has been preserved4 ,this designation has proved to be practical4 ,for the plate at the end of this pamphlet1 examples as characteristic as possible of the individual figures of gods have been selected from the manuscripts4 ,it is a well known fact that we possess no definite knowledge either of the time of the composition or of the local origin of the ,maya manuscripts4 ,the objection might1 therefore1 be raised that it is a hazardous proceeding to treat the material derived from these three manuscripts in common1 as if it were homogeneous4 ,but these researches themselves have proved beyond a doubt1 that the mythologic import of the manuscripts belongs to one and the same sphere of thought4 ,essentially the same deities and the same mythologic ideas are1 without question1 to be found in all the manuscripts4 ,the material of the inscriptions has been set entirely at one side1 because the style of representation contained in them1 both of the mythologic forms and of the hieroglyphs1 renders comparison exceedingly difficult4 ,in this field especial credit is due to ,foerstemann and ,seler1 for the work they have done in furtherance of interpretation1 and mention should not be omitted of the generosity with which the well known promoter of ,americanist investigations1 the ,duke of ,loubat1 has presented to the ,berlin ,museum of ,ethnology costly originals of reliefs and inscriptions for direct study4 ,the representations on the reliefs from the ,maya region1 it is true1 give evidence of dealing with kindred mythologic conceptions4 ,figures and hieroglyphs of gods1 made familiar by the manuscripts1 can also be found here and there4 ,but on the whole so little appears in support of instituting a comparison with the manuscripts1 that it seems expedient to leave the inscriptions for independent and special study4 ,i4 ,,representations ,,of ,,gods4 ,a4 ,the ,death-,god4 ,illustration3 ,figs4 #a-f ,god ,a is represented as a figure with an exposed1 bony spine1 truncated nose and grinning teeth4#aj-a ,it is plainly to be seen that the head of this god represents a skull and that the spine is that of a skeleton4 ,the pictures of the death-god are so characteristic in the ,maya manuscripts that the deity is always easily recognized4 ,he is almost always distinguished by the skeleton face and the bony spine4 ,several times in the ,dresden manuscript the death-god is pictured with large black spots on his body and in ,dr4 #ai;b a woman with closed eyes1 whose body also displays the black spots1 is sitting opposite the god4 ,while the ,aztecs had a male and a female death-deity1 in the ,maya manuscripts we find the death-deity only once represented as feminine1 namely on p4 #i;c of the ,dresden manuscript4 ,moreover the ,dresden manuscript contains several different types of the death-god1 having invariably the fleshless skull and 7with the exception of ,dr4 #i;c7 the visible vertebrae of the spine4 ,several times 7,dr4 #ab;b and #ac;b7 he is represented apparently with distended abdomen4 ,a distinguishing article of his costume is the stiff feather collar1 which is worn only by this god1 his companion1 the war-god ,f1 and by his animal symbol1 the owl1 which will both be discussed farther on4 ,his head ornament varies in the ,dresden ,codex2 in the first portion of the manuscript1 relating in part to pregnancy and child-birth 7see the pictures of women on p4 #af1 et seq471 he wears on his head several times a figure occurring very frequently just in this part of the ,dresden ,codex and apparently representing a snail 7compare ,dr4 #ab;b and #ac;b71 which among the ,aztecs is likewise a symbol of parturition4 ,in view of these variations in the pictures of the ,dresden ,codex1 it is very striking that in the ,codex ,tro4-,cortesianus1 there is only one invariable type of the death-god4 #aj-a ,see ,plate for representations of the gods1 ,a-,p ,a distinguishing ornament of the death-god consists of globular bells or rattles1 which he wears on his hands and feet1 on his collar and as a head ornament4 ,as can be distinctly seen in ,dr4 #aa;a1 they are fastened with bands wound around the forearm and around the leg2 in ,dr4 #ae;c these bells are black4 ,among the symbols of the death-god a cross of two bones should be mentioned1 which is also found in the ,mexican manuscripts4 ,this cross of bones seems to occur once among the written characters as a hieroglyph and then in combination with a number3 ,tro4 #aj499 ,the figure ,death-god symbol is also a frequent symbol of the death-god4 ,its significance is still uncertain1 but it also occurs among the hieroglyphs as a death-sign and as a sign for the day ,cimi 7death74 ,the hieroglyphs of the death-god have been positively determined 7see ,figs4 #a to #d74 ,figs4 #a and #b are the forms of the ,dresden manuscript and ,figs4 #c and #d are those of the ,madrid manuscript4 ,god ,a is almost always distinguished by two hieroglyphs1 namely ,figs4 #a and #b or #c and #d4 ,moreover the hieroglyphs are always the same1 have scarcely any variants4 ,even in ,dr4 #i;c1 where the deity is represented as feminine1 there are no variations which might denote the change of sex4 ,the hieroglyphs consist chiefly of the head of a corpse with closed eyes1 and of a skull4 ,the design in front of the skull in ,figs4 #b and #d and under it in ,fig4 #c is a sacrificial knife of flint1 which was used in slaying the sacrifices1 and is also frequently pictured in the ,aztec manuscripts4 ,the dots under ,fig4 #a are probably intended to represent blood4 ,the death-god is represented with extraordinary frequency in all the ,maya manuscripts4 ,not only does the figure of the god itself occur1 but his attributes are found in many places where his picture is missing4 ,death evidently had an important significance in the mythologic conceptions of the ,mayas4 ,it is connected with sacrifice1 especially with human sacrifices performed in connection with the captive enemy4 ,just as we find a personification of death in the manuscripts of the ,mayas1 we also find it in the picture-writings of the ancient ,mexicans1 often surprisingly like the pictures of the ,maya codices4 ,the ,aztec death-god and his myth are known through the accounts of ,spanish writers2 regarding the death-god of the ,mayas we have less accurate information4 ,some mention occurs in ,landa's ,relacion de las cosas de ,yucatan1 ,sec4 ,,xxiii1 but unfortunately nothing is said of the manner of representing the death-god4 ,he seems to be related to the ,aztec ,mictlantecutli1 of whom ,sahagun1 ,appendix to ,book ,,iii1 ,de los que iban al infierno y de sus obsequias1 treats as the god of the dead and of the underworld1 ,mictlan4 ,when the representations of the latter1 for example in the ,codex ,borgia1 and in the ,codex ,vaticanus ,no4 #cggc1 are compared with those of the ,maya manuscripts1 there can be hardly a doubt of the correspondence of the two god figures4 ,in the ,codex ,borgia1 p4 #cg1 he is represented once with the same characteristic head ornament1 which the death-god usually wears in the ,maya manuscripts1 and in the ,codex ,fejervary1 p4 #h1 the death-god wears a kind of breeches on which cross-bones are depicted1 exactly as in ,dr4 #i 7bottom74 ,bishop ,landa informs us that the ,mayas had great and immoderate dread of death4 ,this explains the frequency of the representations of the death-god1 from whom1 as ,landa states1 all evil and especially death emanated4 ,among the ,aztecs we find a male and a female death-deity1 ,mictlantecutli and ,mictlancihuatl4 ,they were the rulers of the realm of the dead1 ,mictlan1 which1 according to the ,aztec conception1 lay in the north2 hence the death-god was at the same time the god of the north4 ,it agrees with the calendric and astronomic character of the ,maya deities in the manuscripts1 that a number of the figures of the gods are used in connection with specified cardinal points4 ,since1 according to the ,aztec conception1 the death-god was the god of the north1 we might expect that in the ,maya manuscripts also1 the death-god would be always considered as the deity of the north4 ,nevertheless this happens only once1 namely in the picture at the end of ,codex ,cort41 pp4 #da and #db4 ,elsewhere1 on the other hand1 this god is connected with other cardinal points1 thus ,dr4 #ad;a with the west or east 7the hieroglyph is illegible1 but it can be only west or east71 and in ,dr4 #bg;c with the west4 ,it is interesting to note that once1 however1 in a series of cardinal points1 the hieroglyph of the death-god connected with the numeral #aj stands just in the place of the sign of the north2 this is on ,tro4 #bd99 7bottom74 ,in regard to the name of the death-god in the ,maya language1 ,landa tells us that the wicked after death were banished to an underworld1 the name of which was ,mitnal1 a word which is defined as ,hell in the ,maya lexicon of ,pio ,perez and which has a striking resemblance to ,mictlan1 the ,aztec name for the lower regions4 ,the death-god ,hunhau reigned in this underworld4 ,according to other accounts 7,hernandez71 however1 the death-god is called ,ahpuch4 ,these names can in no wise serve as aids to the explanation of the hieroglyphs of the death-god1 since they have no etymologic connection with death or the heads of corpses and skulls1 which form the main parts of the hieroglyph4 ,furthermore1 the hieroglyphs of the gods certainly have a purely ideographic significance as already mentioned above1 so that any relation between the names of the deities and their hieroglyphs cannot exist from the very nature of the case4 ,the day of the death-god is the day ,cimi1 death4 ,the day-sign ,cimi corresponds almost perfectly with the heads of corpses contained in the hieroglyphs of the death-god4 ,a hieroglyphic sign1 which relates to death and the death-deity and occurs very frequently1 is the sign ,fig4 #e1 which is probably to be regarded as the ideogram of the owl4 ,it represents the head of an owl1 while the figure in front of it signifies the owl's ear and the one below1 its teeth1 as distinguishing marks of a bird of prey furnished with ears and a powerful beak4 ,the head of the owl appears on a human body several times in the ,dresden manuscript as a substitute for the death-deity1 thus ,dr4 #ah;c1 #ai;c1 #bj;a and #bj;c and in other places1 and the hieroglyphic group 7,fig4 #e7 is almost a regular attendant hieroglyph of the death-god4 ,a series of other figures of the ,maya mythology is connected with the death-god4 ,this is evident from the fact that his hieroglyphs or his symbols occur with certain other figures1 which are thus brought into connection with death and the death-deity4 ,these figures are as follows3 #a4 ,his companion1 god ,f1 the god of war1 of human sacrifice and of violent death in battle1 apparently a counterpart of the ,aztec ,xipe1 who will be discussed farther on4 #b4 ,the moan bird4 ,see beyond under ,mythological ,animals1 ,no4 #a4 #c4 ,the dog4 ,see the same1 ,no4 #c4 #d4 ,a human figure1 possibly representing the priest of the death-god 7see ,dr4 #bh1 centre1 ,dr4 #e;b and #i;a74 ,the last figure is a little doubtful4 ,it is blindfolded and thus recalls the ,aztec deity of frost and sin1 ,itztlacoliuhqui4 ,a similar form with eyes bound occurs only once again in the ,maya manuscripts1 namely ,dr4 #ej 7centre74 ,that this figure is related to the death-god is proved by the fact that on ,dr4 #i;a it wears the ,cimi-sign on the middle piece of the chain around its neck4 ,furthermore it should be emphasized that the ,aztec sin-god1 ,itztlacoliuhqui1 likewise appears with symbols of death4 #e4 ,an isolated figure1 ,dr4 #ej;a 7the sitting figure at the right74 ,this wears the skull as head ornament1 which is represented in exactly the same way as in the ,aztec manuscripts 7see ,fig4 #f74 #f4 ,another isolated figure is twice represented combined with the death-god in ,dr4 #bb;c4 ,this picture is so effaced that it is impossible to tell what it means4 ,the hieroglyph represents a variant of the death's-head1 ,cimi4 ,it seems to signify an ape1 which also in the pictures of the ,mexican codices was sometimes used in relation to the death-god4 ,the symbols of the death-god are also found with the figure without a head on ,dr4 #b 7#de7;a1 clearly the picture of a beheaded prisoner4 ,death symbols occur1 too1 with the curious picture of a hanged woman on ,dr4 #ec;b1 a picture which is interesting from the fact that it recalls vividly a communication of ,bishop ,landa4 ,landa tells us1 the ,mayas believed that whoever hanged himself did not go to the underworld1 but to paradise1 and as a result of this belief1 suicide by hanging was very common and was chosen on the slightest pretext4 ,such suicides were received in paradise by the goddess of the hanged1 ,ixtab4 ,ix is the feminine prefix2 tab1 taab1 tabil mean1 according to ,perez' ,lexicon of the ,maya ,language1 cuerda destinada para algun uso exclusivo4 ,the name of this strange goddess is1 therefore1 the ,goddess of the ,halter or1 as ,landa says1 ,the ,goddess of the ,gallows4 ,now compare ,dr4 #ec4 ,on the upper half of the page is the death-god represented with hand raised threateningly1 on the lower half is seen the form of a woman suspended by a rope placed around her neck4 ,the closed eye1 the open mouth and the convulsively outspread fingers1 show that she is dead1 in fact1 strangled4 ,it is1 in all probability1 the goddess of the gallows and halter1 ,ixtab1 the patroness of the hanged1 who is pictured here in company with the death-god2 or else it is a victim of this goddess1 and page #ec of the manuscript very probably refers1 therefore 7even though the two halves do not belong directly together71 to the mythologic conceptions of death and the lower regions to which ,landa alludes4 #g4 ,lastly the owl is to be mentioned as belonging to the death-god1 which1 strange to say1 is represented nowhere in the pictures realistically and so that it can be recognized1 although other mythologic animals1 as the dog or the moan bird1 occur plainly as animals in the pictures4 ,on the other hand1 the owl's head appears on a human body in the ,dresden manuscript as a substitute for the death-deity itself1 for example on ,dr4 #ah;c1 #ai;c1 #bj;a and #bj;c and elsewhere1 and forms a regular attendant hieroglyph of the death-god in the group of three signs already mentioned 7,fig4 #e74 ,among the antiquities from the ,maya region of ,central ,america1 there are many objects and representations1 which have reference to the cultus of the death-god1 and show resemblances to the pictures of the manuscripts4 ,the death-god also plays a role1 even today1 in the popular superstitions of the natives of ,yucatan1 as a kind of spectre that prowls around the houses of the sick4 ,his name is ,yum ,cimil1 the lord of death4 ,b4 ,the ,god ,with the ,large ,nose and ,lolling ,tongue4 ,illustration3 ,figs4 #g-aj ,the deity1 represented most frequently in all the manuscripts1 is a figure with a long1 proboscis-like1 pendent nose and a tongue 7or teeth1 fangs7 hanging out in front and at the sides of the mouth1 also with a characteristic head ornament resembling a knotted bow and with a peculiar rim to the eye4 ,fig4 #g is the hieroglyph of this deity4 ,in ,codex ,tro4-,cortesianus it usually has the form of ,fig4 #h4 ,god ,b is evidently one of the most important of the ,maya pantheon4 ,he must be a universal deity1 to whom the most varied elements1 natural phenomena and activities are subject4 ,he is represented with different attributes and symbols of power1 with torches in his hands as symbols of fire1 sitting in the water and on the water1 standing in the rain1 riding in a canoe1 enthroned on the clouds of heaven and on the cross-shaped tree of the four points of the compass1 which1 on account of its likeness to the ,christian emblem1 has many times been the subject of fantastic hypotheses4 ,we see the god again on the ,cab-sign1 the symbol of the earth1 with weapons1 axe and spears1 in his hands1 planting kernels of maize1 on a journey 7,dr4 #fe;b7 staff in hand and a bundle on his back1 and fettered 7,dr4 #cg;a7 with arms bound behind his back4 ,his entire myth seems to be recorded in the manuscripts4 ,the great abundance of symbolism renders difficult the characterization of the deity1 and it is well-nigh impossible to discover that a single mythologic idea underlies the whole4 ,god ,b is quite often connected with the serpent1 without exhibiting affinity with the ,chicchan-god ,h 7see p4 #bh74 ,in ,dr4 #cc;b1 #cd;b and #ce;b1 the serpent is in the act of devouring him1 or he is rising up out of the serpent's jaws1 as is plainly indicated also by the hieroglyphs1 for they contain the group given in ,fig4 #aj1 which is composed of the rattle of the rattlesnake and the opened hand as a symbol of seizing and absorption4 ,god ,b himself is pictured with the body of a serpent in ,dr4 #ce;b and #cf;a 7compare ,no4 #b of the ,mythological ,animals74 ,he likewise occurs sitting on the serpent and in ,dr4 #ff;a he is twice 7#ast and #c;d figures7 pictured with a snake in his hand4 ,god ,b sits on the moan head in ,dr4 #ch;c1 on a head with the ,cauac-sign in ,dr4 #ci;c1 #ff;c1 and on the dog in ,dr4 #bi;a4 ,all these pictures are meant to typify his abode in the air1 above rain1 storm and death-bringing clouds1 from which the lightning falls4 ,the object with the cross-bones of the death-god1 on which he sits in ,dr4 #ff;c1 can perhaps be explained in the same manner4 ,as the fish belongs to god ,b in a symbolic sense1 so the god is represented fishing in ,dr4 #dd 7#a74 ,his face with the large nose and the tongue 7or fangs7 hanging out on the side in ,dr4 #dd 7#a7;a 7#ast figure7 is supposed to be a mask which the priest1 representing the god1 assumes during the religious ceremony4 ,furthermore the following four well-known symbols of sacrificial gifts appear in connection with god ,b in the ,dresden manuscript2 a sprouting kernel of maize 7or1 according to ,foerstemann1 parts of a mammal1 game71 a fish1 a lizard and a vulture's head1 as symbols of the four elements4 ,they seem to occur1 however1 in relation also to other deities and evidently are general symbols of sacrificial gifts4 ,thus they occur on the two companion initial pages of the ,codex ,tro4-,cortesianus1 on which the hieroglyphs of gods ,c and ,k are repeated in rows 7,tro4 #cf-;,cort4 #bb4 ,compare ,foerstemann1 ,kommentar zur ,madrider ,handschrift1 pp4 #ajb1 #ajc74 ,god ,b is also connected with the four colors--yellow1 red1 white and black--which1 according to the conception of the ,mayas1 correspond to the cardinal points 7yellow1 air2 red1 fire2 white1 water2 black1 earth7 and the god himself is occasionally represented with a black body1 for example on ,dr4 #bi;c1 #ca;c and #fi4 ,this is expressed in the hieroglyphs by the sign1 ,fig4 #i1 which signifies black and is one of the four signs of the symbolic colors for the cardinal points4 ,god ,b is represented with all the four cardinal points1 a characteristic1 which he shares only with god ,c1 god ,k1 and1 in one instance1 with god ,f 7see ,tro4 #bi99;c72 he appears as ruler of all the points of the compass2 north1 south1 east and west as well as air1 fire1 water and earth are subject to him4 ,opinions concerning the significance of this deity are much divided4 ,it is most probable that he is ,kukulcan1 a figure occurring repeatedly in the mythology of the ,central ,american peoples and whose name1 like that of the kindred deity ,quetzalcoatl among the ,aztecs and ,gucumatz among the ,quiches1 means the feathered serpent1 the bird serpent4 ,kukulcan and ,gucumatz are those figures of ,central ,american mythology1 to which belong the legends of the creation of the world and of mankind4 ,furthermore ,kukulcan is considered as the founder of civilization1 as the builder of cities1 as hero-god1 and appears in another conception as the rain-deity1 and--since the serpent has a mythologic relation to water--as serpent deity4 ,j4 ,walter ,fewkes1 who has made this god-figure of the ,maya manuscripts the subject of a monograph 7,a ,study of ,certain ,figures in a ,maya ,codex1 in ,american ,anthropologist1 ,vol4 ,,vii1 ,no4 #c1 ,washington1 #ahid71 also inclines to the belief that ,b is the god ,kukulcan1 whom he conceives of as a serpent-and rain-deity4 ,this view has been accepted by ,foerstemann 7,die ,tagegoetter der ,mayas1 ,globus1 ,vol4 #gc1 ,no4 #aj7 and also by ,cyrus ,thomas 7,aids to the ,study of the ,maya ,codices1 ,washington1 #ahhh74 ,the same opinion is held also by ,e4 ,p4 ,dieseldorff1 who1 a resident of ,guatemala1 the region of the ancient ,maya civilization1 has instituted excavations which have been successful in furnishing most satisfactory material for these researches 7see ,dieseldorff3 ,kukulcan1 ,zeitschrift fuer ,ethnologie1 #ahie1 p4 #ghj74 ,others have considered god ,b as the first parent and lord of the heavens1 ,itzamna who has a mythologic importance analogous to that of ,kukulcan4 ,itzamna is also held to be the god of creation and founder of civilization and accordingly seems to be not very remotely allied to the god ,kukulcan4 ,others again1 for example ,brasseur de ,bourbourg and ,seler1 have interpreted the figure of god ,b to represent the fourfold god of the cardinal points and rain-god ,chac1 a counterpart of the ,aztec rain-god ,tlaloc4 ,the fact that this god-figure is so frequently connected with the serpent and the bird is strongly in favor of the correctness of the supposition1 that we should see in god ,b a figure corresponding to the ,kukulcan of tradition4 ,thus we see the god represented once with the body of a serpent and with a bird near by 7,cort4 #aj;b71 while ,b's hieroglyph appears both times in the text4 ,god ,b is also pictured elsewhere repeatedly with a serpent body1 thus for example on ,dr4 #ce;b1 #cf;a4 ,on pages #d-f of the ,codex ,cortesianus he is pictured six times and each time in connection with a serpent4 ,the accounts we have received concerning the mythology of the ,maya peoples are very meagre and owing to the uncertainty respecting the origin of the ,maya manuscripts1 it cannot even be determined which of these accounts are applicable to the ,maya manuscripts1 or1 indeed1 whether they are applicable at all4 ,for it is by no means positively proved that these manuscripts did not originate in regions of ,maya culture1 regarding which we have received no accounts at all4 ,as our present purpose is purely that of description and determination1 it remains quite unimportant which of these recorded figures of gods shall be regarded as god ,b4 ,god ,b is nearly allied to1 but in no wise identical with1 the deity with the large ornamented nose1 designated by ,k1 who will be discussed farther on4 ,god ,k is an independent deity designated by a special hieroglyph1 but like ,c he stands in an unknown relation to ,god ,b 7for details see ,k74 ,finally it should be mentioned1 that god ,b never appears with death symbols4 ,he is clearly a deity of life and creation1 in contrast to the powers of death and destruction4 ,his day seems to be ,ik 7aspiration1 breath1 life74 7,compare ,foerstemann1 ,die ,tagegoetter der ,mayas1 ,globus1 ,vol4 #gc1 ,no4 #aj74 ,c4 ,the ,god with the ,ornamented ,face4 ,illustration3 ,figs4 #aa-af ,this is one of the most remarkable and most difficult figures of the ,maya manuscripts1 and shows1 at the same time1 how imperfect must be the information we have received in regard to the ,maya mythology1 since from the frequency of his representations he is obviously one of the most important deities and yet can be identified with none of the representations of gods handed down to us4 ,his hieroglyph is definitely determined 7,figs4 #aa1 #ab74 ,the circular design in front of the forehead of the hieroglyph head seems1 as a variant from the ,codex ,tro4 7,fig4 #ab7 leads us to suppose1 to denote the ideographic representation of pouring out or emptying a vessel1 the contents of which flow into the mouth of the god4 ,another variant of this prefix occurs in ,tro4 #ac99;b2 ,fig4 #ae1 the symbol of the sacrificial knife1 and instead of the prefix the numeral #ac occurs in one instance6 7,tro4 #ab99;c74 ,the head alone1 without any accessory symbol whatever1 is also found a few times1 not in the text1 however1 but only in the pictures1 for example ,cort4 #aj 7bottom7 and ,tro4 #ac99 7bottom74 ,this deity does not occur very often in the ,dresden manuscript1 the places where it is depicted are3 ,dr4 #e;a1 #f;c1 #ac;b1 #ce;a1 #fh;a1 and as a subordinate figure on #h;c1 #db;a4 ,his hieroglyph occurs alone a few times1 as in ,dr4 #d2 it is more frequent in the ,madrid manuscript4 ,it appears on pp4 #ae to #ah of the ,paris manuscript4 ,in regard to the significance of this deity1 he doubtless represents the personification of a heavenly body of astronomic importance1 probably the polar star4 ,in ,codex ,cort4 #aj 7bottom71 his head is represented surrounded by a nimbus of rays1 which can only mean a star 7see ,fig4 #ac74 ,on the lower part of the same page1 the third picture from the left1 we again see the deity hanging from the sky in a kind of rope4 ,furthermore it appears in ,codex ,tro4 #bj1 #bb and #bc 7centre7 ,fig4 #ad1 in the familiar rectangular planet signs4 ,tro4 #ag99 7at the top7 the head surmounts the cross-shaped tree of god ,b1 which denotes the lofty1 celestial abode4 ,indeed1 these passages prove positively that a heavenly body underlies the idea of this deity4 ,furthermore1 the head of this god recurs in entire rows in the calendric group of tabular form on the so-called initial page of the ,codex ,tro4 #cf1 with its continuation in the ,cort4 p4 #bb1 and in exactly the same manner in the allied passage of ,tro4 #ad 7middle and bottom74 ,in addition1 his head is contained in the symbol for the north 7,fig4 #af72 the head contained in this sign is in fact nothing else than the head of god ,c4 ,brinton also accepts this interpretation of god ,c4 ,according to ,foerstemann 7,die ,mayahieroglyphen1 ,globus1 ,vol4 #ga1 ,no4 #e71 the fact that the figure of god ,c in the ,tonalamatl in ,dr4 #d;a-#aj;a occurs on the day ,chuen of the ,maya calendar1 which corresponds to the day ,ozomatli1 the ape1 in the ,aztec calendar1 seems to indicate that the singular head of ,c is that of an ape1 whose lateral nasal cavity 7peculiar to the ,american ape or monkey7 is occasionally represented plainly in the hieroglyph picture4 ,hence it might further be assumed that god ,c symbolizes not the polar star alone1 but rather the entire constellation of the ,little ,bear4 ,and1 in fact1 the figure of a long-tailed ape is quite appropriate to the constellation1 at any rate decidedly more so than the ,bear2 indeed1 it suggests the prehensile tail by means of which the ape could attach himself to the pole and in the form of the constellation swing around the pole as around a fixed point4 ,these astronomical surmises seem to be contradicted by the fact that god ,c1 as already stated1 is represented with all the four cardinal points 7compare for example ,cort4 #aj and #aa1 bottom71 which would certainly seem to harmonize ill with his personification of the north star1 unless we assume1 that in a different conception of the polar star he is ruler of the cardinal points1 which are determined from him as a centre4 ,it has already been remarked of ,b1 that the deity ,c appears to stand in some sort of relation to him4 ,in fact1 we find on those pages of the ,dresden manuscript1 where ,b is represented with the four cardinal points1 that the hieroglyph of ,c almost always occurs in the text also 7for example ,dr4 #bi1 et seq41 especially ,dr4 #cb;c74 ,indeed1 ,c's hieroglyph is connected even with the signs of the symbolic colors of the cardinal points1 already mentioned in connection with ,b4 ,finally1 it should be borne in mind1 that god ,c also seems to be connected in some way with the serpent 7compare ,dr4 #cf;b1 #ast and #c;d pictures74 ,according to ,foerstemann1 the day ruled by ,c seems to be ,chuen4 ,d4 ,the ,moon- and ,night-,god4 ,illustration3 ,figs4 #ag-bj ,this is a deity who is pictured in the form of an old man with an aged face and sunken1 toothless mouth4 ,he is frequently characterized by a long1 pendent head ornament1 in which is the sign ,akbal1 darkness1 night1 which also appears in his hieroglyph before the forehead of the deity1 surrounded by dots as an indication of the starry sky4 ,his name-hieroglyph is ,fig4 #ag1 and a second sign almost always follows 7,fig4 #ah7 which evidently serves likewise as a designation of the god1 just as god ,a also is always designated by two hieroglyphs4 ,the second sign consists of two sacrificial knives and the sign of the day ,ahau1 which is equivalent to king4 ,the head of this deity appears in reduced1 cursive form as the sign of the moon 7,fig4 #bj74 ,this character also has the significance of #bj as a number sign in the calendar4 ,the association of these ideas probably rests upon the ancient conceptions1 according to which the moon appearing1 waxing1 waning and again disappearing1 was compared to man1 and man in primeval ages was the most primitive calculating machine1 being equivalent1 from the sum of his fingers and toes1 to the number #bj4 ,twenty days is also the duration of that period during which the moon 7aside from the new moon7 is really alive4 ,moreover the sign 7,fig4 #bj7 appears in many places as a counterpart of the sign for the sun4 ,god ,d occurs once as feminine in the same passage mentioned above1 in which the death-deity is also pictured as feminine 7,dr4 #i;c74 ,in a few other places the god is1 curiously enough1 depicted with a short beard1 as ,dr4 #d;c1 #g;a1 #bg;b4 ,he seems to stand in an unknown relation to the water-goddess ,i 7see this deity7 with the serpent as a head ornament1 compare ,dr4 #i;c1 where apparently this goddess is represented1 though the text has ,d's sign2 still it is possible that god ,d is pictured here with the attributes of goddess ,i4 ,god ,d is not connected with the grim powers of destruction2 he never appears with death symbols4 ,in ,dr4 #e;c and #i;a he wears the snail on his head4 ,he seems1 therefore1 like god ,a to be connected with birth4 ,in ,dr4 #h;c he is connected with god ,c1 and this is quite appropriate1 if we look upon these gods as heavenly bodies4 ,the aged face1 the sunken1 toothless mouth are his distinguishing marks4 ,in the ,madrid manuscript1 where god ,d occurs with special frequency1 his chief characteristic1 by which he is always easily recognized1 is the single tooth in his under-jaw 7see ,fig4 #ai71 compare too ,dr4 #h;c1 where the solitary tooth is also to be seen4 ,in ,dr4 #i;a 7#ast figure7 the god holds in his hand a kind of sprinkler with the rattles of the rattlesnake1 as ,landa 7,cap4 #bf7 describes the god in connection with the rite of infant baptism 7see also ,cort4 #bf1 ,tro4 #g99;a and #ac99;c7 ,a very remarkable passage is ,tro4 #ae992 there a figure is pictured carving with a hatchet a head1 which it holds in its hand4 ,above it are four hieroglyphs4 ,the first shows a hatchet and the moon2 the second probably represents simply a head1 while the third and fourth are those of god ,d1 the moon-god4 ,this passage1 the meaning of which is unfortunately still obscure seems to contain a definite explanation of god ,d4 ,j4 ,walter ,fewkes has made god ,d the subject of a special1 very detailed monograph 7,the ,god ,d in the ,codex ,cortesianus1 ,washington1 #ahie7 in which he has treated also of gods ,b and ,g1 whom he considers allied to ,d4 ,he believes ,d to be the god ,itzamna1 as do also ,foerstemann1 ,cyrus ,thomas and ,seler1 and sees sun-gods in all three of these deities4 ,whether god ,d is to be separated from ,g and ,b as an independent deity1 ,fewkes thinks is doubtful4 ,brinton again holds that god ,d is ,kukulcan4 ,these different opinions show1 at all events1 on what uncertain grounds such attempts at interpretation stand1 and that it is best to be satisfied with designating the deities by letters and collecting material for their purely descriptive designation4 ,according to ,foerstemann the calendar day devoted to ,d is ,ahau4 ,e4 ,the ,maize-,god4 ,illustration3 ,figs4 #ba-bg ,this god bears on his head the ,kan-sign and above it the ear of maize with leaves 7,fig4 #bc72 compare ,dr4 #i;b 7left figure71 #aa;b1 #ab;a1 etc4 ,the hieroglyph is definitely determined 7,fig4 #ba74 ,the god is identical with the figures recurring with especial frequency in the ,madrid manuscript1 the heads of which are prolonged upward and curved backward in a peculiar manner2 compare ,cort4 #ae;a1 #bj;c1 #dj 7bottom71 ,tro4 #cb99;b 7,figs4 #be-bg7 and especially the representation in ,dr4 #ej;a 7,fig4 #bd71 which is very distinct4 ,this head was evolved out of the conventional drawing of the ear of maize2 compare the pictures of the maize plant in the ,codex ,tro41 p4 #bi;b 7,fig4 #bb7 with the head ornament of the god in ,dr4 #i;b 7,fig4 #bc71 #i;a1 #ab;a2 what was originally a head ornament finally passed into the form of the head itself1 so that the latter appears now as an ear of maize surrounded by leaves4 ,compare the pictures1 ,figs4 #be-bg4 ,that these gods with elongated heads are1 in point of fact1 identical with ,e is plainly seen from the passage in ,dr4 #b 7#de7;c 7first figure74 ,there the figure represented1 which is exactly like the pictures in the ,madrid manuscript1 is designated explicitly as god ,e by the third hieroglyph in the accompanying writing4 ,the hieroglyph of this deity is thus explained2 it is the head of the god merged into the conventionalized form of the ear of maize surrounded by leaves4 ,when we remember that the ,maya nations practised the custom of artificially deforming the skull1 as is seen in particular on the reliefs at ,palenque1 we may also regard the heads of these deities as representations of such artificially flattened skulls4 ,god ,e occurs frequently as the god of husbandry1 especially in the ,madrid manuscript1 which devotes much attention to agriculture4 ,he seems to be a counterpart of the ,mexican maize-god ,centeotl4 ,the passages in the ,madrid manuscript 7,tro4 #bi;a and ,cort4 #ci;a1 #dj;a7 are very remarkable1 where the deity ,e is represented in the position of a woman in labor with numerals on the abdomen2 perhaps the underlying idea is that of fruitfulness4 ,in the ,codex ,cort41 p4 #dj1 this grain-deity is pictured with a tall and slender vessel before him1 which he holds in his hands4 ,it is possible that this is meant to suggest a grain receptacle2 to be sure1 in the same place1 other figures of gods likewise have such vessels in their hands4 ,at any rate1 it is interesting to note that in the passage already mentioned 7,dr4 #ej;a7 god ,e also holds a similar tall and slender vessel in his hands4 ,according to all appearances the scene pictured in ,dr4 #ej;a has reference to the conflict of the grain-god with a death-deity4 ,the latter1 the figure sitting on the right1 is characterized by a skull as a head ornament 7see ,fig4 #f7 and seems to address threats or commands to god ,e1 who stands before him in the attitude of a terrified and cowed individual4 ,furthermore god ,e has nothing to do with the powers of the underworld2 he is a god of life1 of prosperity and fruitfulness2 symbols of death are never found in connection with him4 ,brinton calls this god ,ghanan1 equivalent to ,kan2 it is possible1 too1 that he is identical with a deity ,yum ,kaax who has been handed down to us and whose name means ,lord of the harvest fields4 ,according to ,foerstemann the day dedicated to this god is ,kan4 ,f4 ,the ,god of ,war and of ,human ,sacrifices4 ,illustration3 ,figs4 #bh-cd ,this is a deity closely related to the death-god ,a1 resembling the ,aztec ,xipe1 and may1 ,i think1 without hesitation be regarded simply as the god of human sacrifice1 perhaps1 even more generally1 as the god of death by violence4 ,his hieroglyph is ,figs4 #bh-cj2 it contains the number #aa4 ,a variant of this occurs on ,dr4 #g;b1 where instead of the #aa there is the following sign3 ,hieroglyph ,the characteristic mark of god ,f is a single black line usually running perpendicularly down the face in the vicinity of the eye4 ,this line should be distinguished from the parallel lines of ,c's face and from the line1 which1 as a continuation of god ,e's head resembling an ear of maize1 frequently appears on his face1 especially as in the variants of the ,madrid manuscript 7compare ,figs4 #be-bg74 ,these pictures of ,e can always be unfailingly recognized by the peculiar shape of the head and should be distinguished from those representing ,f4 ,the black face-line is the distinguishing mark of god ,f1 just as it is of the ,aztec ,xipe4 ,it sometimes runs in a curve over the cheek as a thick1 black stripe1 as ,cort4 #db4 ,sometimes it encircles the eye only 7,dr4 #f;a7 and again it is a dotted double line 7,dr4 #f;b74 ,the hieroglyph of god ,f likewise exhibits this line and with the very same variants as the god himself4 ,see the hieroglyphs of the god belonging to the pictures in ,dr4 #f;a1 #ast and #c;d figures1 in which the line likewise differs from the other forms 7,figs4 #cj-cd74 ,in a few places god ,f is pictured with the same black lines on his entire body1 which elsewhere he has only on his face1 the lines being like those in ,fig4 #ca1 namely ,tro4 #bg99;c4 ,indeed1 in ,tro4 #bh99;c1 the death-god ,a likewise has these black lines on his body and also ,f's line on his face2 a clear proof of the close relationship of the two deities4 ,these lines probably signify gaping death-wounds and the accompanying rows of dots are intended to represent the blood4 ,since god ,f is a death-deity the familiar sign 7,fig4 #e71 which occurs so frequently with the hieroglyphs of ,a1 also belongs to his symbols4 ,f is pictured in company with the death-god in connection with human sacrifice 7,cort4 #db72 an exactly similar picture of the two gods of human sacrifice is given in ,codex ,tro4 #cj;d2 here1 too1 they sit opposite one another4 ,the identity of this attendant of death with the deity1 designated by the hieroglyph with the numeral #aa1 is proved by the following passages3 ,tro4 #ai1 bottom 7on the extreme right hand without picture1 only hieroglyph1 see ,fig4 #bi71 ,dr4 #e;b1 #f;a1 b1 and c and many others4 ,in some of the passages cited 7,dr4 #e;a and b7 he is distinguished by an unusually large ear-peg4 ,his hieroglyph occurs with the hieroglyph of the death-god in ,dr4 #f;c1 where he is himself not pictured4 ,as war-god1 god ,f occurs combined with the death-god in the passages mentioned above 7,tro4 #bg99-bi99;c71 where he sets the houses on fire with his torch and demolishes them with his spear4 ,god ,f occurs quite frequently in the manuscripts and must therefore be considered as one of the more important deities4 ,according to ,foerstemann his day is ,manik1 the seizing1 grasping hand1 symbolizing the capturing of an enemy in war for sacrificial purposes4 ,f's sign occurs once1 as mentioned above1 in fourfold repetition with all the four cardinal points1 namely in ,tro4 #bi99;c4 ,in ancient ,central ,america the captured enemy was sacrificed and thus the conceptions of the war-god and of the god of death by violence and by human sacrifice are united in the figure of god ,f4 ,in this character god ,f occurs several times in the ,madrid manuscript in combat with ,m1 the god of travelling merchants 7see page #ce74 ,spanish writers do not mention a deity of the kind described here as belonging to the ,maya pantheon4 ,g4 ,the ,sun-,god4 ,illustration3 ,figs4 #ce-cf ,god ,g's hieroglyph 7,fig4 #ce7 contains as its chief factor the sun-sign ,kin4 ,it is one of the signs 7of which there are about #ab in the manuscripts71 which has the ,ben-ik prefix and doubtless denotes a month dedicated to the sun4 ,there is1 ,i think1 no difference of opinion regarding the significance of this deity1 although ,fewkes1 as already stated1 is inclined to identify ,g with ,b1 whom1 it is true1 the former resembles4 ,it is surprising that a deity who from his nature must be considered as very important1 is represented with such comparative infrequency4 ,he occurs only a few times in the ,dresden manuscript1 for example #bb;b1 #aa;c1 and in the ,codex ,tro4-,cortesianus none can be found among the figures which could be safely regarded as the sun-god2 in no manuscript except the ,dresden does a deity occur wearing the sun-sign ,kin on his body4 ,but once in the ,codex ,cort4 the figure of ,d appears with the sun-sign on his head1 as pointed out by ,fewkes in his article entitled ,the ,god ',d' in the ,codex ,cortesianus4 ,g's hieroglyph1 to be sure1 is found repeatedly in the ,madrid manuscript1 for example ,codex ,tro4 #ca;c4 ,god ,g seems to be not wholly without relation to the powers of death2 the owl-sign 7,fig4 #e7 occurs once in connection with him 7,dr4 #aa;c74 ,besides the sun-sign ,kin1 which the god bears on his body1 his representations are distinguished by a peculiar nose ornament 7,fig4 #cf7 which1 as may be seen by comparison with other similar pictures in the ,dresden manuscript1 is nothing but a large and especially elaborate nose-peg4 ,similar ornaments are rather common just here in the carefully drawn first part of the ,dresden manuscript4 ,compare ,dr4 #bb;b 7middle figure71 #ba 7centre71 #ag;b1 #ad;a1 b2 occasionally they also have the shape of a flower1 for example #ab;b 7centre71 #aa;c 7left71 #ai;a4 ,lastly it is worthy of note1 that god ,g is sometimes represented with a snake-like tongue protruding from his mouth1 as in ,dr4 #aa;b and c4 ,h4 ,the ,chicchan-,god4 ,illustration3 ,figs4 #cg-dj ,the figure of a deity of frequent occurrence in the ,dresden manuscript is a god1 who is characterized by a skin-spot or a scale of a serpent on his temple of the same shape as the hieroglyph of the day ,chicchan 7serpent74 ,moreover the representations of the god himself differ very much1 so that there are almost no other positive1 unvarying characteristic marks to be specified4 ,his picture is plainly recognizable and has the ,chicchan-mark on the temple in ,dr4 #aa;a1 #ab;b and #bj;b4 ,the hieroglyph belonging to this deity likewise displays the ,chicchan-sign as its distinguishing mark4 ,furthermore several variants occur4 ,the ,chicchan-sign has sometimes the form of ,fig4 #cg and again that of ,fig4 #ch4 ,the prefix likewise differs very much1 having sometimes the form of ,fig4 #cg1 and again that of ,fig4 #ch or of ,figs4 #ci and #dj4 ,thus there are1 in all1 four different forms of the prefix4 ,it is to be assumed that all these hieroglyphs have the same meaning1 notwithstanding their variations4 ,taking into consideration the frequency of the variations of other hieroglyphs of gods and of the hieroglyphs in the ,maya manuscripts in general1 it is quite improbable from the nature of the case1 that a hieroglyph1 which displays so great an agreement in its essential and characteristic elements1 should denote several different gods4 ,the dissimilarity which ,seler thinks he finds between the forms of the ,chicchan-sign in ,figs4 #cg and #ch and which leads him to assume that ,fig4 #cg is not a ,chicchan-sign at all1 but that it denotes another face ornament1 cannot be satisfactorily proved1 and must be regarded as an arbitrary assumption4 ,the ,chicchan-mark in the sign of the day ,chicchan also differs very much from that on the bodies of the serpents pictured in the manuuscripts1 so that variations of this kind by no means make it necessary to assume that the hieroglyphs actually denote different things4 ,observe1 for example1 the different ,chicchan-spots on the serpent's body in ,tro4 #bg;a4 ,the crenelated1 black border of the ,chicchan-spot in ,fig4 #ch passes in rapid cursive drawing almost of itself into the scallops of ,fig4 #cg1 a transition to which there are distinct tendencies on the serpent's body in ,tro4 #bg;a4 ,nor does the fact1 that under ,h's hieroglyph different personages are very often pictured1 whom we cannot positively identify1 compel the assumption that we have here not one1 but two or more mythical figures1 for the same is true of other hieroglyphs of gods4 ,there are many places in the manuscripts where the text contains a definite well-known hieroglyph of a god1 while the accompanying picture represents some other deity or some other figure not definitely characterized1 perhaps merely a human form 7priest1 warrior1 woman and the like74 ,thus in ,dr4 #d;a we see ,h's hieroglyph in the text1 but the picture is the figure of god ,p while in other places we miss the characteristic ,chicchan-spot on the figure represented1 for example ,dr4 #d;c1 #f;a1 #g;b1 #g;c1 #ad;a1 #ba;c4 ,in the ,madrid manuscript1 it is true1 ,h's hieroglyph also occurs often enough1 but not in a single instance is a deity represented displaying the ,chicchan-spot4 ,this fact is1 ,i think1 to be explained by the coarser style of the drawing1 which does not admit of representing such fine details as in the ,dresden manuscript4 ,in the ,paris manuscript ,h's hieroglyph occurs but once 7p4 #h1 bottom74 ,seler thinks he recognizes in some of the figures represented under ,h's hieroglyph in the manuscripts1 a so-called young god4 ,such a deity is unknown and the assumption is entirely arbitrary4 ,apparently this young god is an invention of ,brinton4 ,the purely inductive and descriptive study of the manuscripts does not prove the existence of such a personage1 and we must decline to admit him as the result of deductive reasoning4 ,in this so-called young god1 we miss1 first of all1 a characteristic mark1 a distinct peculiarity such as belongs to all the figures of gods in the manuscripts without exception and by which he could be recognized4 ,except his so-called youthfulness1 however1 no such definite marks are to be found4 ,furthermore there is no figure of a god in the manuscripts which would not be designated by a definite characteristic hieroglyph4 ,no such hieroglyph can be proved as belonging to the young god4 ,the figures1 which are supposed to have a youthful appearance in the ,madrid manuscript1 often convey this impression merely in consequence of their smallness and of the pitiful1 squatting attitude in which they are represented4 ,furthermore real children do occur here and there1 thus1 for example1 in the ,dresden manuscript in connection with the pictures of women in the first part and in ,tro4 #bj99;c in the representation of the so-called infant baptism4 ,that god ,h has some relation to the serpent must be conjectured from what has been said4 ,thus1 for example1 on ,dr4 #ae;b1 we see his hieroglyph belonging to the figure of a woman with the knotted serpent on her head1 in ,dr4 #d;a to the god ,p1 who there bears a serpent in his hand1 and in ,dr4 #ce;b in connection with a serpent with ,b's head4 ,what this relation is1 cannot now be stated4 ,the day dedicated to god ,h is ,chicchan1 and the sign for this day is his distinguishing hieroglyph4 ,i4 ,the ,water-,goddess4 ,illustration3 ,fig4 #da ,in the ,dresden manuscript the figure of an old woman1 with the body stained brown and claws in place of feet1 occurs repeatedly4 ,she wears on her head a knotted serpent and with her hands pours water from a vessel4 ,evidently we have here a personification of water in its quality of destroyer1 a goddess of floods and cloud-bursts1 which1 as we know1 play an important part in ,central ,america4 ,page #bg1 of the ,codex ,troano contains a picture1 in which this character of goddess ,i may be distinctly recognized4 ,in accordance with this character1 also on ,dr4 #gd1 where something resembling a flood is represented1 she wears the cross-bones of the death-god4 ,the goddess is pictured in the manner described in the following places3 ,dr4 #ci;b1 #dc;b1 #fg;a and #gd4 ,the figure corresponding to her in the ,madrid manuscript1 in ,tro4 #bg and #cd99;c1 displays some variations1 in particular the tiger claws on the feet and the red-brown color of the body are lacking4 ,but the agreement cannot be questioned1 ,i think1 when we recall that the ,maya manuscripts doubtless originated in different ages and different areas of civilization1 circumstances which readily explain such variations4 ,the goddess distinguished in the ,madrid manuscript by symbols of flood and water is doubtless the same as goddess ,i of the ,dresden manuscript described above2 her unmistakable character of water-goddess in both manuscripts is in favor of this4 ,in both manuscripts she is invariably distinguished by the serpent on her head1 which1 as we know1 is a symbol of the water flowing along and forming waves4 ,strange to say1 a fixed hieroglyph of this goddess cannot be proved with certainty4 ,there is some probability in favor of the sign given in ,fig4 #da4 ,the well-known oblong signs1 which ,foerstemann 7,drei ,mayahieroglyphen1 published in the ,zeitschrift fuer ,ethnologie1 #aija1 pp4 #bae-bba7 interprets as the sign for evil days1 frequently occur with her4 ,this would be appropriate for the goddess of floods4 ,in the ,dresden manuscript a few similar figures of women are found1 who1 like goddess ,i1 wear a knotted serpent on the head4 ,representations of this kind occur in ,dr4 #i;c1 #ae;b1 #ah;a1 #bj;a1 #bb;b and #bc;b4 ,whether they are identical with goddess ,i is doubtful1 since there is no symbolic reference to water in these passages4 ,besides1 the hieroglyphs of other known deities occur each time in the above-mentioned places1 so that definite mythologic relations must be assumed to exist here between the women repsented and the deities in question4 ,thus in ,dr4 #i;c we find ,d's sign1 in #ae;b that of ,h2 on #ah;a1 #bb;b and #bc;b we see only the general sign for a woman4 ,in ,dr4 #bj;a the signs are effaced4 ,in the ,codex ,troano goddess ,i occurs on pp4 #be;b and #bg2 there is also a woman with the knotted serpent on her head in ,tro4 #cd99;c4 ,in the ,codex ,cortesianus and in the ,paris manuscript these forms are wholly lacking4 ,k4 ,the ,god with the ,ornamented ,nose4 ,illustration3 ,figs4 #db-dc ,this god1 as already mentioned in connection with ,b1 is not identical with the latter1 but is probably closely related to him4 ,his hieroglyph is ,fig4 #db2 ,fig4 #dc is the form in the ,madrid manuscript4 ,he is closely related to god ,b4 ,he is represented in ,dr4 #be 7centre7 where he is perhaps conceived of as a priest wearing a mask with the face of the god1 also in ,dr4 #g;a1 #ab;a 7with his own hieroglyph and that of ,e671 #bf 7bottom7 with a variant of the sign4 ,his figure without the hieroglyph occurs in ,dr4 #c4 ,very frequently the well-known group1 #c ,oc1 is given with him and in connection with his hieroglyph 7in ,dr4 #c1 #g;a1 #aj;b 7right72 without picture1 #ab;a74 ,foerstemann 7,drei ,mayahieroglyphen1 ,zeitschrift fuer ,ethnologie1 #aija4 pp #bae-bba7 sees in this the sign for good days1 a proof that we have to do here with a benevolent deity well disposed to mankind1 his kinship with ,b being also in favor of this interpretation4 ,his hieroglyph alone without his picture occurs in ,dr4 #aj;b1 #di 7middle and bottom71 #eh 7bottom1 left71 and ,tro4 #h99;b2 with a variant of the attribute in ,dr4 #bd 7third vertical row74 ,a slight variation appears also in ,dr4 #fi 7top1 right74 ,in ,dr4 #fe;a 7middle7 ,b is pictured4 ,but in the text we see ,k's hieroglyph presented by a hand4 ,the next figure on the same page at the right represents god ,b with the head of ,k on his own and the same head once more in his hand4 ,agreeing with this1 we find in the accompanying text the signs of ,b and ,k1 the latter in a hand4 ,k seems to be pictured again in ,dr4 #df 7bottom72 the passage1 however1 is somewhat obliterated4 ,the hieroglyph is lacking in this place2 it is found1 however1 on the preceding page #de 7middle74 ,in addition to the passage already mentioned1 which represents god ,k together with ,b1 such double deities again occur in the ,paris manuscript1 p4 #ac1 where ,b holds ,k's head in his hand2 in ,dr4 #cd;b1 where he carries this head on his own and in ,dr4 #fg;a where he appears to carry it in a rope4 ,once1 how ever1 a variation of these plainly synonymous representations occurs1 namely in ,dr4 #di 7at the top71 where we see a feminine form above whose head rises the head of god ,k4 ,in the ,paris manuscript1 so far as its defaced condition permits us to recognize the representation1 ,k occurs very frequently1 as for example1 in ,per4 #c1 #d1 #e1 #f1 #g and #i 7in part only his head is given1 presented by god ,b1 as in the ,dresden manuscript74 ,brinton considers this figure simply as a special manifestation of ,b and identical with that god4 ,foerstemann thinks that god ,k is a storm-deity1 whose ornamental nose1 according to the conventional mode of drawing of the ,central ,american peoples1 is intended to represent the blast of the storm4 ,apparently1 however1 the deity has an astronomic significance and seems to symbolize a star4 ,in favor of this is the fact1 that on the so-called initial pages of the ,madrid manuscript 7,cort4 #bb-,tro4 #cf7 a row1 composed of repetitions of his sign1 occurs below the signs of the cardinal points and parallel to a row composed of signs of god ,c1 the god of the polar star and the north4 ,the hieroglyphs of ,c and ,k are the only hieroglyphs of gods1 which are repeated #ac times on these pages with the #ac days enumerated there4 ,the two gods must1 therefore1 have either a parallel or an opposite astronomic and calendric meaning4 ,the fact that in ,dr4 #be and #bf ,k appears as regent of the year1 is an argument in favor of his astronomic significance4 ,according to ,foerstemann1 ,muluc is the day dedicated to god ,k4 ,in the head of god ,k we recognize the ornament so common in the temple ruins of ,central ,america--the so-called elephant's trunk4 ,the peculiar1 conventionalized face1 with the projecting proboscis-shaped nose1 which is applied chiefly to the corners of temple walls1 displays unquestionably the features of god ,k4 ,the significance of god ,k in this architectural relation is unknown4 ,some connection with his character as the deity of a star and with his astronomic qualities may1 however1 be assumed1 since1 as we know1 the temple structures of ,central ,america are always placed with reference to the cardinal points4 ,l4 ,the ,old1 ,black ,god4 ,illustration3 ,fig4 #dd ,god ,l's features are those of an old man with sunken1 toothless mouth4 ,his hieroglyph is ,fig4 #dd1 which is characterized by the black face4 ,god ,l1 who is also black1 must not be confounded with ,m whose description follows4 ,l is represented and designated by his hieroglyph in the accompanying text1 in ,dr4 #ad;b and #ad;c and ,dr4 #df;b2 the figure has the characteristic black face4 ,he appears entirely black in ,dr4 #g;a4 ,the hieroglyph alone occurs in ,dr4 #ba;b and #bd 7third vertical line in the first passage7 with a variation1 namely without the ,ymix-sign before the head4 ,this deity does not occur in the ,madrid and ,paris manuscripts4 ,the significance of god ,l does not appear from the few pictures1 which are given of him4 ,in ,dr4 #df;b the god is pictured armed and in warlike attitude4 ,both in ,dr4 #ad;b and #ad;c he wears a bird on his head and has a ,kan in his hand4 ,according to ,foerstemann1 his day is ,akbal1 darkness1 night4 ,cyrus ,thomas 7,aids to the ,study of the ,maya ,codices1 in the #fth ,annual ,report of the ,bureau of ,ethnology1 ,washington1 #ahhh1 p4 #ceh7 thinks he is the god ,ekchuah1 who has come down to us as a black deity4 ,god ,m seems1 however1 to correspond to ,ekchuah 7see the description of ,m74 ,m4 ,the ,black ,god with the ,red ,lips4 ,illustration3 ,figs4 #de-dh ,god ,m's hieroglyph is ,figs4 #de1 #df2 it seems to represent an eye rimmed with black1 though the figure of the god himself displays an entirely different drawing of the eye 7see ,fig4 #dg74 ,the god is found in the ,dresden manuscript only three times1 namely in ,dr4 #af;b 7with a bone in his hand7 in picture and sign1 in ,dr4 #ac;c grouped with an animal1 without the hieroglyph1 and in ,dr4 #dc;a 7with his sign7 while finally his hieroglyph alone appears in ,dr4 #ef 7top1 left7 in a group and of a somewhat different form4 ,on the other hand1 god ,m appears with special frequency in the ,madrid manuscript1 which treats of this deity with great fullness of detail4 ,while he is represented in the ,dresden manuscript 7#af;b7 with his body striped black and white1 and on p4 #dc;a entirely white1 he is always entirely black in the ,codex ,troano4 ,his other distinguishing marks are the following3 #a4 ,the mouth encircled by a red-brown border4 #b4 ,the large1 drooping under lip4 ,by this he can be recognized with certainty also in ,dr4 #dc;a4 #c4 ,the two curved lines at the right of the eye4 ,his significance can be conjectured4 ,he seems to be of a warlike nature1 for he is almost always represented armed with the lance and also as engaged in combat and1 in some instances1 pierced by the lance of his opponent1 god ,f1 for example in ,tro4 #c;c1 #g;a1 #bi99;a4 ,the peculiar object with parallel stripes1 which he wears on his head is a rope from which a package frequently hangs4 ,by means of a rope placed around his head the god frequently carries a bale of merchandise1 as is the custom today among the aborigines in different parts of ,america4 ,on #d;b and #e;a in the ,cod4 ,tro4 this can plainly be seen4 ,all these pictures lead us to conclude1 that we have here to do with a god of travelling merchants4 ,a deity of this character called ,ekchuah has been handed down to us1 who is designated explicitly as a black god4 ,in favor of this is also the fact1 that he is represented fighting with ,f and pierced by the latter4 ,for the travelling merchant must1 of course1 be armed to ward off hostile attacks and these are admirably symbolized by god ,f1 for he is the god of death in war and of the killing of the captured enemy4 ,the god is found in the ,codex ,troano in the following places and on many pages two or three times3 pp4 #b1 #c1 #d1 #e1 always with the hieroglyph1 then without it on pp4 #f1 #g1 #ai1 #d99;c1 #ad99;b1 #ag99;a1 #ah99;b and again with the hieroglyph on pp4 #bb99;a1 #bc99;a1 #be99;a2 finally it is found again without the hieroglyph on pp4 #bi99;a1 #cj99;a1 #ca991 #cb991 #cc991 #cd994 ,in the ,codex ,cortesianus god ,m occurs in the following places3 p4 #ae1 where he strikes the sky with the axe and thus causes rain1 p4 #ai 7bottom71 #bh 7bottom1 second figure71 #cd 7bottom7 and #cf 7top74 ,m is always to be recognized by the encircled mouth and the drooping under-lip2 figures without these marks are not identical with ,m1 thus for example in ,tro4 #bc1 #bd1 #be1 #ba994 ,tro4 #cd99;a shows what is apparently a variant of ,m with the face of an old man1 the scorpion's tail and the vertebrae of the death-god1 a figure which in its turn bears on its breast the plainly recognizable head of ,m4 ,god ,m is also represented elsewhere many times with the scorpion's tail1 thus for example on ,tro4 #cj99;a1 #ca99;a4 ,besides his hieroglyph mentioned above1 ,figs4 #de and #df1 another sign seems to refer to god ,m1 namely ,fig4 #dh 7compare for example ,tro4 #e;a and ,cort4 #bh1 bottom74 ,the head in this sign has the same curved lines at the corner of the eye as appear on the deity himself4 ,foerstemann mentions this sign in his ,commentary on the ,paris ,manuscript1 p4 #ae1 and in his ,commentary on the ,dresden ,manuscript1 p4 #ef4 ,he thinks the hieroglyph has relation to the revolution of ,venus1 which is performed in #ehd days4 ,a relation of this kind is1 ,i think1 very possible1 if we bear in mind that all the god-figures of the manuscripts have more or less of a calendric and chronologic significance in their chief or in their secondary function4 ,it should be mentioned that ,god ,m is represented as a rule as an old man with toothless jaw or the characteristic solitary tooth4 ,that he is also related to bee-culture is shown by his presence on p4 #d99;c of the ,codex ,troano1 in the section on bees4 ,besides gods ,l and ,m1 a few quite isolated black figures occur in the ,codex ,troano1 who1 apparently1 are identical with neither of these two deities1 but are evidently of slight importance and perhaps are only variants of other deities4 ,similar figures of black deities are found in the ,codex ,tro4 #bc1 #bd and #be 7perhaps this is a black variant of ,b as god of the storm87 and on #ba99;c we twice see a black form with the aged face and the solitary tooth in the under jaw 7perhaps only a variant of ,m74 ,in the ,codex ,cortesianus and in the ,dresden manuscript no other black deities occur1 but in the ,paris manuscript a black deity seems to be pictured once 7p4 #ba1 bottom74 ,according to ,brinton 7,nagualism1 ,philadelphia #ahid1 pp4 #ba1 #ci71 there is among the ,tzendals in addition to ,ekchuah1 a second black deity called ,xicalahua1 black lord4 ,n4 ,the ,god of the ,end of the ,year4 ,illustration3 ,figs4 #di-ea ,we have here a deity with the features of an old man and wearing a peculiar head ornament reproduced in ,fig4 #ej1 which contains the sign for the year of #cfj days4 ,the god's hieroglyph is ,fig4 #di1 which consists of the numeral #e with the sign of the month ,zac4 ,foerstemann has recognized in god ,n the god of the five ,uayeyab days1 which were added as intercalary days at the end of the original year of #cfj days1 and were considered unlucky days4 ,n is1 therefore1 the god of the end of the year4 ,foerstemann has discussed him in detail under this title in a monograph published in ,globus1 ,vol4 #hj1 ,no4 #ab4 ,it is still open to question whether god ,n actually occurs in all the places of the ,dresden manuscript1 which are mentioned by ,foerstemann4 ,he can be recognized positively on ,dr4 #ag;a1 #ba;c 7grouped with a woman7 and #cg;a2 also on #ab;c1 but in this latter place with pronounced deviations from the usual representations4 ,the figures in ,dr4 #bc;c 7first group7 and #dc;a 7third picture7 are doubtful1 especially since the hieroglyph of the god is lacking in both instances4 ,the third group in ,dr4 #ba;c is equally dubious4 ,here a woman is pictured sitting opposite a god4 ,the latter seems to be god ,n1 yet in the text we find instead of his sign the hieroglyph given in ,fig4 #ea4 ,it is not impossible that this sign likewise denotes god ,n4 ,god ,n is found a few times in the ,paris manuscript1 for example on p4 #d1 where he holds ,k's head in his hands1 and on p4 #bb4 ,o4 ,a ,goddess with the ,features of an ,old ,woman4 ,illustration3 ,fig4 #eb ,this goddess occurs only in the ,madrid manuscript and is distinguished by the solitary tooth in the under jaw1 as a sign of age1 the invariable characteristic of aged persons in the manuscripts4 ,she is pictured in the following places3 ,tro4 #e99;c1 #f99;b1 and #aa99;b1 c and d1 ,cort4 #aj;b1 #aa;a1 #ch;a4 ,in ,tro4 #aa99 she is represented working at a loom4 ,she does not appear at all in the ,dresden and ,paris manuscripts4 ,the figures of women mentioned under ,i with the serpent on their heads1 are especially not to be regarded as identical with goddess ,o1 for she never wears the serpent1 but a tuft of hair bound high up on her head and running out in two locks4 ,her hieroglyph is ,fig4 #eb2 it is distinguished by the wrinkles of age about the eye4 ,owing to the limited number of her pictures1 there is little to be said concerning the significance of this goddess4 ,p4 ,the ,frog-,god4 ,illustration3 ,fig4 #ec ,we call him the frog-god because in the ,codex ,tro4 #ca1 he is pictured in the first and second lines with the club-shaped fingers of a frog1 which occur only on this figure4 ,the blue background1 which is his attribute twice in the same passage1 likewise points to a connection with water1 and that the god also has something to do with agriculture may be deduced from the fact that he is pictured sowing seed and making furrows with the planting-stick4 ,the two black parallel stripes at the corner of the eye seem to be folds of skin or marks on the skin1 which may represent a peculiarity of this particular species of frog4 ,his head ornament is very characteristic and contains the sign for the year of #cfj days4 ,he therefore bears some unknown relation also to the computation of time4 ,it should be recalled in this connection that one of the ,maya months is called ,uo1 frog4 ,the god is pictured again in ,tro4 #cj;a and b1 ,tro4 #bb 7top1 scattering seed7 and ,cort4 #e 7at the very bottom1 the figure lying down74 ,finally his neck ornament must be mentioned1 which1 as a rule1 consists of a neck-chain with pointed1 oblong or pronged objects1 probably shells4 ,in the ,dresden manuscript he occurs but once1 ,dr4 #d;a 7first figure71 with some variations it is true4 ,the text at this place contains ,h's hieroglyph4 ,god ,p does not occur in the ,peresianus4 ,his hieroglyph is ,fig4 #ec4 ,it occurs in ,tro4 #ca 7top7 and can be unerringly recognized by the two black parallel stripes at the corner of the eye2 which correspond exactly to the same marks on the face of the picture of the god himself4 ,this is all that can be said respecting this deity from the pictures in the manuscripts4 ,its meaning is obscure4 ,seler's assumption that god ,p is ,kukulcan 7,zeitschrift fuer ,ethnologie1 #ahih1 p4 #djc7 has certainly very slight foundation1 and in view of the material from the manuscripts described in the preceding pages1 it is in the highest degree improbable4 99 99 99 99 99 ,the foregoing is an almost complete enumeration of the god-figures proper in the ,maya manuscripts4 ,whatever other figures of gods occur in the manuscripts are details of slight importance4 ,this is especially true of the ,dresden manuscript1 which is well nigh exhausted by the types enumerated here2 there may be1 ,i think1 a few figures still undescribed in the ,madrid manuscript1 the careless drawing of which renders the identification very difficult4 ,an isolated figure of the ,dresden manuscript still remains to be mentioned1 concerning which it is doubtful whether it is intended to represent a deity or only a human personage4 ,this is the figure characterized by a peculiar head ornament in ,dr4 #bj;b4 ,it is designated in the text by two hieroglyphs1 which belong together1 ,figs4 #ed and #ee1 the latter occurring once with ,k 7,dr4 #g;a74 ,it seems to represent blowing from the mouth1 screaming or speaking4 ,illustration3 ,figs4 #ed-ee ,,ii4 ,,mythological ,,animals4 #a4 ,,the ,,moan ,,bird4 ,illustration3 ,figs4 #ef-ei ,this bird#da-a belongs to the death-god as his symbol and attendant4 ,its hieroglyph 7,fig4 #ef7 contains the numeral #ac2 other forms are ,figs4 #eg-ei4 ,it is pictured in ,dr4 #g;c1 #aj;a1 #aa;a1 #af;c1 #ah;b1 and its hieroglyph without the picture is seen in ,dr4 #h;b4 ,a realistic representation of the whole figure of the moan as a bird1 occurs on the head of the woman in #af;c 7#ast figure7 and #ah;b4 ,god ,b sits on the head of the moan in ,dr4 #ch;c2 the third hieroglyph of the accompanying text refers to this representation4 ,just as in ,dr4 #af and #ah1 the moan bird appears in ,tro4 #ah99;c on the head of a woman4 ,its character as an attribute of the death-god is expressed by the ,cimi-sign1 which it wears upon its head 7e4 g41 ,dr4 #aj;a71 and also by the regular occurrence of symbols of the death-god in the written characters1 which refer to the moan bird4 ,in the same manner the sign of the owl1 ,fig4 #e1 also occurs frequently with it4 #da-a ,see plate for representations of the ,mythological ,animals1 #a-f4 ,the moan confers name and symbol alike on one of the eighteen months of the ,maya year1 and thus1 as ,foerstemann conjectures 7,die ,plejaden bei den ,mayas1 in ,globus1 #ahid71 has an astronomic bearing on the constellation of the ,pleiades4 ,according to ,brinton the moan is a member of the falcon family and its zoological name is ,spizaetus tyrannus4 #b4 ,,the ,,serpent4 ,this is one of the most common and most important mythological animals1 and is closely related to different deities1 as has already been more fully discussed in connection with the individual cases4 ,apparently it has no independent significance as a deity4 ,its most important personification is that in god ,b1 ,kukulcan1 the feathered serpent4 ,hence a fixed hieroglyph designating the serpent as a deity1 as a mythologic form1 does not occur1 though there are numerous hieroglyphs which refer to serpents or represent individual parts of the serpent1 as its coils1 its jaws1 the rattles of the rattlesnake1 etc4 ,the serpent appears in the mythologic conceptions of the ,mayas chiefly as the symbol of water and of time4 ,in the great series of numbers of the ,dresden manuscript1 certain numbers occur which are introduced in the coils of a large serpent 7compare in regard to this1 ,foerstemann1 ,zur ,entzifferung der ,mayahandschriften1 ,,ii1 ,dresden1 #ahia74 ,the serpent is very frequently represented in all the manuscripts1 sometimes realistically and sometimes with the head of a god1 etc4 ,in the ,dresden manuscript it occurs in the following places3 #a;a1 #bf1 #bg1 #bh;c1 #ce;b1 #cf;a1 #cf;b1 #cg;b #dj1 #db;a1 #fa1 #fb1 #fe;c #ff;a and #fi4 ,it is prominent also in the ,madrid manuscript1 occurring for example in ,cort4 #d-f1 #ab-ah1 ,tro4 #be1 #bf1 #bg and elsewhere4 #c4 ,,the ,,dog4 ,illustration3 ,fig4 #fj ,fig4 #fj is its hieroglyph4 ,it is the symbol of the death-god and the bearer of the lightning4 ,the latter follows quite clearly from the picture in ,dr4 #dj;b where the god is distinguished by its hieroglyph4 ,this animal is again represented in ,dr4 #g;a1 #ac;c on the right1 #ba;b with its hieroglyph1 #bi;a1 #cj;a 7forming a part of #ca;a1 where god ,b holds the bound dog by the tail71 and #ci;a without the hieroglyph1 #dg 7bottom7 with a variant of the hieroglyph4 ,in ,dr4 #cf;a the dog bears the ,akbal-sign on its forehead4 ,the writing above it contains a variant of the hieroglyph for the dog2 this is the third of the rubric4 ,it shows 7somewhat difficult of recognition7 the ,akbal-sign on the forehead of the dog's head occurring in it1 and on the back of the head the ,kin-sign1 as symbols of the alternation of day and night4 ,the same sign occurs again with adjuncts in ,dr4 #gd 7last line1 #bnd sign7 and once with the death-god in ,dr4 #h;a4 ,the dog as lightning-beast occurs with the ,akbal-sign in the eye instead of on the forehead in ,codex ,tro4 #bc99;a2 here again its hieroglyph is an entirely different one 7the third of the rubric74 ,that the dog belongs to the death-god is proved beyond a doubt by the regular recurrence in the writing belonging to the dog1 of the hieroglyphs1 which relate to this deity1 especially of ,fig4 #e4 ,according to ,foerstemann his day is ,oc4 #d4 ,,the ,,vulture4 ,illustration3 ,fig4 #fa ,this bird is distinctly pictured as a mythological figure in ,dr4 #h;a4 ,it appears again1 in feminine form1 together with the dog1 in ,dr4 #ac;c and also in #ai;a4 ,in the first passage1 its hieroglyph is almost effaced2 the hieroglyph is very striking and occurs nowhere else in the whole collection of manuscripts4 ,the body of this animal-deity is striped black and white2 in ,dr4 #ch;b it is almost entirely black4 ,the same passage displays a second hieroglyph for this figure 7,fig4 #fa72 this hieroglyph also occurs with the numeral #d in ,dr4 #ef;b4 ,in ,dr4 #cf;b this bird of prey is pictured fighting with the serpent2 its hieroglyph occurs in the second form2 the serpent is designated by the ,chuen1 the gaping jaws of the serpent 7first character of the rubric74 ,finally it should be mentioned that the head of this bird occurs frequently as a head ornament1 thus in ,dr4 #aa;a1 #aa;b1 #ab;b and #ad;b4 ,mention should also be made of the realistic representations of the vulture1 eating the eye of a human sacrifice 7,dr4 #c1 ,tro4 #bf99;a and #bg99;a74 ,according to ,foerstemann his day is ,cib4 #e4 ,the ,jaguar4 ,illustration3 ,fig4 #fb ,the jaguar is likewise an animal with mythological significance4 ,it is represented in ,dr4 #h;a1 where its hieroglyph is the third sign in the writing2 it also occurs in ,dr4 #bf 7at the top74 ,it occurs in ,tro4 #ag 7at the end7 with a hieroglyph which represents the jaguar's head and contains the numeral #d 7,fig4 #fb72 again it appears without a hieroglyph on p4 #bj 7bottom7 and on #ba and #bb 7bottom74 ,its day is ,ix1 and hence it also relates occasionally as year regent to the ,ix years1 for example in ,dr4 #bf;a4 #f4 ,the ,tortoise4 ,illustration3 ,figs4 #fc-fe ,this animal1 like the dog1 appears as a lightning-beast 7see ,dr4 #dj;b1 middle74 ,its hieroglyph is ,figs4 #fc1 #fd4 ,this sign also is connected with the numeral #d1 which occurs so often with animals 7but not alone with quadrupeds7 as to be worthy of attention4 ,the sign of the tortoise without the numeral is seen in ,cort4 #ag;a1 where the tortoise itself is also represented4 ,it must have reference to the #agth month of the ,maya year1 for the month ,kayab 7and apparently also ,pop7 contains the head of the tortoise 7compare ,fig4 #fe74 ,it occurs several times in the ,cortesianus1 thus on pp4 #ac1 #ai1 #cg1 #ch2 on p4 #ai with the hieroglyph 7on the top of the lower half of the page1 #ast line and at the right of the margin74 ,in ,dr4 #fi 7at the top7 we see the sign of the tortoise with the ,kin-sign as its eye and the numeral #ab2 under this group ,b1 with a black body1 is seated on the serpent2 on the same page the sign occurs again2 each time1 moreover1 apparently as a month-hieroglyph4 ,according to ,foerstemann the tortoise is the symbol of the summer solstice1 as the snail1 which occurs only as a head ornament in the manuscripts and not independently1 is the symbol of the winter solstice2 both1 as the animals of slowest motion1 represent the apparent standstill of the sun at the periods specified4 ,this explains why the month ,kayab1 in which the summer solstice falls1 should be represented by the head of a tortoise1 which has for its eye the sun-sign ,kin 7,foerstemann1 ,zur ,entzifferung der ,mayahandschriften ,,iii1 ,schildkroete und ,schnecke in der ,mayaliteratur1 ,dresden #ahib74 ,according to ,foerstemann its day is ,cauac4 99 99 99 99 99 ,finally the owl and the ape 7or monkey7 must be mentioned as animals of mythologic significance1 of which we have already spoken in connection with gods ,a and ,c4 ,the scorpion also seems to have an important mythologic significance1 and appears in the manuscripts in connection with figures of gods1 as1 for example1 in ,cort4 #g;a and ,tro4 #ca99;a1 #cc99;a1 #cd99;a 7god ,m with a scorpion's tail74 ,in addition to those discussed in this paper1 there are a few animals in the manuscripts1 which probably also have a partial mythologic significance1 but which have been omitted because they are represented in a naturalistic manner1 thus1 for example1 the deer on ,tro4 #h1 et seq41 while idealization 7with human bodies1 with torches1 hieroglyphic character on the head1 etc47 should be considered as an unmistakable sign of mythologic meaning4 ,a mythologic significance also seems to belong to the bee which plays so prominent a part of the ,codex ,troano4 ,probably the section in question of the ,madrid manuscript 7#a99 et seq47 treats of bee-keeping1 but incidentally it certainly has to do also with the mythologic conceptions connected with the culture of bees4 ,the bat which is found as a mythological figure on pottery vessels and inscriptions from the ,maya region 7compare ,seler1 ,zeitschrift fuer ,ethnologie1 #ahid1 p4 #egg7 does not occur in the manuscripts4 ,it is true1 however1 that hieroglyphic signs1 which seem to relate to the head of the bat1 occur in isolated cases in the manuscripts4 ,,summary4 ,an enumeration of the most important deities in the manuscripts gives the following results1 in connection with which it is to be noted that1 of course1 the numbers cannot be absolutely correct1 because one or another of the pictures occasionally remains doubtful4 ,as far as possible1 however1 only the positively determined representations have been considered4 ,the deity occurring most frequently in the ,,dresden ,,manuscript is god ,b1 who is pictured there #ada times4 ,following him in point of number in the same manuscript are the death-god ,a pictured #cc times1 god ,d #ai times1 and gods ,c and ,e #ag and #ad times respectively4 ,in the ,,madrid ,,manuscript1 god ,d1 with #hd pictures1 is of most frequent occurrence4 ,he is followed by the maize-god ,e with #gf pictures1 god ,b with #ga1 god ,a with #ec1 ,c with #ch and ,m with #cg pictures4 ,in the ,,paris ,,manuscript1 god ,e's picture can be verified #h times1 those of ,c and ,b #f times each and that of god ,a twice2 ,n and ,k are also frequently represented4 ,an enumeration of all the pictures in all the manuscripts shows that the following deities occur most frequently and are therefore to be considered the most important3 #a4 ,god ,b3 pictured #bah times4 #b4 ,d3 #ajc #c4 ,e3 #ih #d4 ,a3 #hh #e4 ,c3 #fa #f4 ,m3 #dj #g4 ,f3 #cc ,furthermore1 interesting conclusions can be arrived at1 by means of a list of those deities1 who occur in the representations of the manuscripts1 so united or grouped together as to make it evident that they must stand in some relation to one another4 ,mythologic combinations of this kind occur among the following deities and mythological animals3 #a4 ,in the ,,dresden ,,manuscript3 ,d and ,c1 ,b and ,c1 dog and vulture1 bird and serpent1 ,b and ,k4 #b4 ,in the ,,madrid ,,manuscript3 ,f and ,m1 ,b and ,m1 ,c and ,m1 ,e and ,m1 ,a and ,e1 ,a and ,d1 ,a and ,f1 ,b and ,c1 ,d and ,c1 ,d and ,e4 #c4 ,in the ,,paris ,,manuscript3 ,n and ,k1 ,b and ,k4 ,the most common of these combinations are those of the deities ,a and ,f1 ,m and ,f1 ,a and ,e1 ,d and ,c4 ,these groups are entirely intelligible1 consisting of death-god and war-god1 god of the travelling merchants and war-god1 death-god and maize-god 7as adversaries3 meaning famine71 night-god and deity of the polar star4 ,illustration3 ,i4 ,gods4 ,a ,b ,c ,d ,e ,f ,g ,h ,i ,k ,l ,m ,n ,o ,p ,,ii4 ,mythological ,animals4 #a #b #c #d #e #f 99 99 99 99 99 99 ,transcriber's ,note3 ,typographical errors3 ,page #aj ,footnote #a missing final period #ag serpent-and rain-deity should read serpent-and-rain-deity #bc ,sentence ending with and #ac99;c7 does not have a period #bi manuuscripts should read manuscripts #cb repsented should read represented #cc pp #bae-bba should read pp4 #bae-bba #db comma missing following #cg;b comma missing following #fe;c ,inconsistencies3 ,the placement of punctuation at the end of a word or phrase surrounded by quotation marks is inconsistent1 usually it is placed outside the final close quotation mark but occasionally is found inside the mark4