These signs can have no relation to mythology. There is not a hieroglyph of a god among them, for if sign 6 could be taken for B's hieroglyph, the resemblance to the sign of the fist, familiar from the inscriptions, as well as the Imix and the cross-hatching as a prefix, makes this doubtful. The latter component would rather suggest the summer solstice. If sign 12 were intended to denote the Bacab, then it would refer to chronology rather than to mythology. Also the Cimi in 17 might equally well mean the day as the god. Indeed several things refer here to chronology and astronomy, among them the unmistakable union of numbers and month signs, which occur here repeatedly. Thus from what remains of the almost obliterated signs 1 and 2, they might denote the normal date IV Ahau 8 Cumhu, which always occupies the first place. Signs 7 and 20 are plainly the same, 9 Xul (sixth month) and sign 14 is 10 Yaxkin (seventh month). Sign 5 might be Caban combined with Uo (second month) and a ten. In sign 19 we again see Yaxkin without a number. Signs 9 and 23 are Zec (fifth month) and signs 21 and 22 may be Kankin (fourteenth month). The days occur in the same manner as the months. It is true that Kin is only a part of hieroglyph 10, the rest of which is effaced, but the familiar compound of Caban and Muluc appears in 18 and 24 and Cimi is in 17, as we have seen. In sign 13, Ahau is combined with a red number, which must lie between X and XV. But this should not be regarded as forming a calendar date with the 10 Yaxkin near by, for Ahau is never the tenth day of a month. Can 16 be the sign of the twelfth month, Ceh, combined with that for 7200? Hieroglyphs 3 and 8 are effaced and I do not understand 4, 11 and 15. There are no parallels in the kindred passages 46-50, unless it be 7 Zec on the bottom of page 49 and here in signs 9 and 23, but without a number. Cf. my paper on this page 60 in the "Weltall," year 6, pages 251-257. Page 61--64. On examining the reverse of the second part of our Manuscript, _i.e._, pages 61-74, we find an empty page on the left, the back of which is occupied by page 60. This may be explained by assuming that the scribe wrote pages 61-64 and possibly even pages 61-74 from right to left, the great series having occasioned such a proceeding, and that his material came to an end when he had finished page 61. Nevertheless, it is advisable to continue with the original numbering in order to avoid confusion. Aside from the concluding (or beginning) page 74, this whole section of pages 61-74 consists of three parts:--61-64, 65-69 and 70-73. Let us first consider the first section, which I have already discussed in my treatise "Zur Erläuterung der Mayahandschriften II."