[1] A word of explanation should be said concerning the Mexican language. Like other American tongues its structure is such that long compound words and names are built up of significant elements, many of them being thus equivalent to a whole sentence. The practice is not unknown in this country, for is not “Obadiah Bind-their-kings-in-chains-and-their-nobles-in-links-of-iron” familiar to every reader of Macaulay? At the same time it adds considerable difficulty to the study of Mexican archæology. As regards pronunciation, the chief points to be noted are as follows: X is always pronounced as SH and J as H; C is always hard except before E and I; CH is sounded as the CH in CHILD; Z as in ZEBRA. In Maya we find a happy tendency to monosyllables. X again is pronounced as SH; but C is always hard. [2] Sahagun states that this prince came to the throne in 1489, but the Codex Telleriano-Remensis assigns that year to his death. [3] This is according to Sahagun’s statement; at the present time in the valley of Mexico the rains commence in May-June and end in September-October. [4] At this point the Kakchiquel annals prove a useful check upon the account given by the Popol Vuh. Tepepul and Iztayul, according to the latter, preceded Quicab, and Quicab was succeeded by Tepepul and Xtayub. It is evident that some duplication has taken place in the Quiché legend, that Tepepul and Iztayul are the same as Tepepul and Xtayub, and that they succeeded Quicab. [5] The very early dates which occur at Palenque, a late site, must be themselves artificial or mythical, and so too, I believe, are the dates which occur on the celebrated Leiden plate and Tuxtla figure. [6] By an error the katun number has been drawn as two bars and three dots, instead of three bars. [7] There is a wall-painting at Chichen Itza which seems to picture a human sacrifice, but this is on a building which undoubtedly belongs to a later period, when the Maya had already come in contact with Mexican influences, as will be seen later. [8] One of these was also found by Maudslay, near Quirigua. [9] The corners of the Castillo at Chichen Itza also appear to have been slightly rounded and not square, as shown in Fig. 73, _f_; p. 321. [10] The qualification is necessary, since Tulum appears to have been inhabited at the conquest.