[202] [For additional light upon the Mexican astronomical and calendar system and the “calendar stone,” easily accessible authors are: Bandelier, Archæological Tour, Peabody Museum Reports, ii. 572; Valentini, American Antiquarian Society Proceedings, April, 1878; Squier, Some New Discoveries respecting Dates on the Great Calendar Stone, etc.; American Journal of Science and Arts, Second Series, March, 1849; Bancroft, Native Races, ii. chap. 16 and v. p. 192; Short, North Americans of Antiquity, chap, ix.; Wilson, Prehistoric Man, i; Brasseur, Chronologie historiques des Méxicaines, in Actes de la Soc. d’Ethnographie, vol vi.; Payne, New World Called America, ii. 310 seq. Mrs. Nuttall claims that this calendar stone stood in the great market-place in Mexico, and that its purpose was to regulate the market-days.--M.] [203] In his second treatise on the cylindrical stone, Gama dwells more at large on its scientific construction, as a vertical sun-dial, in order to dispel the doubts of some sturdy skeptics on this point. (Descripcion, Parte 2, Apend. 1.) The civil day was distributed by the Mexicans into sixteen parts, and began, like that of most of the Asiatic nations, with sunrise. M. de Humboldt, who probably never saw Gama’s second treatise, allows only eight intervals. Vues des Cordillères, p. 128. [204] “Un calendrier,” exclaims the enthusiastic Carli, “qui est réglé sur la révolution annuelle du soleil, non-seulement par l’addition de cinq jours tous les ans, mais encore par la correction du bissextile, doit sans doute être regardé comme une opération déduite d’une étude réfléchie, et d’une grande combinaison. Il faut donc supposer chez ces peuples une suite d’observations astronomiques, une idée distincte de la sphère, de la déclinaison de l’écliptique, et l’usage d’un calcul concernant les jours et les heures des apparitions solaires.” Lettres Américaines, tom. i. let. 23. [205] La Place, who suggests the analogy, frankly admits the difficulty. Système du Monde, lib. 5, ch. 3. [206] M. Jomard errs in placing the _new fire_, with which ceremony the old cycle properly concluded, at the winter solstice. It was not till the 26th of December, if Gama is right. The cause of M. Jomard’s error is his fixing it before, instead of after, the complementary days. See his sensible letter on the Aztec calendar, in the Vues des Cordillères, p. 309. [207] At the actual moment of their culmination, according to both Sahagun (Hist. de Nueva-España, lib. 4, Apend.) and Torquemada (Monarch. Ind., lib. 10, cap. 33, 36). But this could not be, as that took place at midnight, in November, so late as the last secular festival, which was early in Montezuma’s reign, in 1507. (Gama, Descripcion, Parte 1, p. 50, nota.--Humboldt, Vues des Cordillères, pp. 181, 182.) The longer we postpone the beginning of the new cycle, the greater must be the discrepancy. [208]