The Books of Chilan Balam number the katuns on a different principle
from that used on the inscriptions or in the Dresden Codex, but the two
methods can be readily and usefully brought together, as the katun
itself remains the same in both methods. In the inscriptions the katuns
are numbered from 0 to 19, using Goodman's method though not his exact
nomenclature, and twenty of them equal one cycle. In the Chilan Balam
books, the katuns are named as Katun 13 Ahau, Katun 11 Ahau, etc., these
being the days with which they begin or with which the previous katun
ended; and as after thirteen katuns the same name is again given, this
nomenclature fixes a date within a period which equals 13 multiplied by
the number of days in a katun. There has been a difference of opinion as
to this number of days in a katun, but it is clear from the Books of
Chilan Balam that their reckoning was by terms of 20 × 360 days. The
followers of Perez, however, insist that the length of the katun was 24
× 365 days. Sr Perez has indeed made this assertion,[2] but he rests his
opinion to a great degree on the fact that the naming of the katuns
proceeded in the following order, taking their names from the day Ahau
with which they began, viz.:
Katun 13 Ahau,
Katun 11 Ahau,
Katun 9 Ahau,
Katun 7 Ahau, etc.,
and that by starting with a katun which begins with 13 Ahau and counting
forward a period of 24 × 365 days, we should reach another katun
beginning with 11 Ahau. But the same result is brought about by
considering the katun as a period of 20 × 360 days, as has been shown by
Dr Seler, among others; and since the Books of Chilan Balam state
distinctly that they reckon by so many scores of so-called years, and
as the initial dates of the inscriptions all reckon in the same way, it
is now generally considered that the katun consisted of 20 × 360 or 7200
days. An objection to considering a katun as 20 × 360 days may be raised
in that the Books of Chilan Balam use the word "año" or year, but this
can be easily explained by the fact that the Spanish "year" was the
period which most nearly agreed with their tun or 360-day period, and
that the Books did not pretend to speak with scientific accuracy.
[2] Stephens, _Incidents of Travel in Yucatan_, p. 441 et seq.
Besides the above count, it is well known that the Mayas had a
year-and-month count. This consisted in naming each one of the twenty
days and in attaching to each of these days one of the numbers 1 to 13.
Besides this, each day so numbered was declared to be a given day of a
given month and to occur in a year marked by one of the year bearers--as
for instance in the Book of Chilan Balam, already quoted, where the day
is given as 9 Ymix 18 Zip in the year 4 Kan. Now this day and this year
could recur only after the lapse of fifty-two years or 18,980 days.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account