I concluded the above communication with the statement: “Before publishing my final results I shall submit them to a searching and prolonged investigation. An examination of the originals of many of the Codices reproduced in Lord Kingsborough’s ‘Mexican Antiquities’ will be necessary to determine important points and during the forthcoming year my line of researches will be in this direction.” In my youthful enthusiasm and inexperience I little foresaw, when I wrote the above sentences, that I should spend thirteen years in diligent research before I felt ready to express my ripened conclusions concerning the Calendar-stone. Although the results I am about to submit are final they are necessarily incomplete, their full presentation with adequate illustrations being included in my forthcoming special work on the Social and Calendaric system of ancient America. For the present I have limited myself to the reproduction of the outline drawing of the monolith made by the late Dionysio Abadiano of Mexico and published in his somewhat fanciful work on this subject.(69) No one, however, had studied the Calendar-stone more carefully than he; and, besides being extremely accurate in outline, his drawing has the merit of including the eight deep circular holes which were drilled at regular intervals outside of the worked border of the stone as well as the groups of smaller circular and shallow depressions which Señor Abadiano discovered on the outer unworked portion of the monolithic block. Without discussing here the question whether the eight drill holes were intended to support a species of gnomon, as Leon y Gama first maintained, or merely served for the guidance of those who carved this marvel of accurate workmanship and symmetrical design, I shall merely point out that, although the group of circular depressions in the block, in the lower corner to the left of the spectator, offers a certain resemblance to the form of the constellation of Ursa Major, this may be merely the result of chance. Facing the problem of the meaning and purpose of the “Calendar-stone,” after thirteen years of assiduous study, I find that the interpretation I suggested in 1886, is substantially strengthened and corroborated by freshly accumulated evidence. The difference is that I now lay less stress upon the phonetic elements and values of the symbols, although, as I shall set forth in the special publication alluded to, no study of the monument can be considered complete unless these be carefully analyzed and understood. The one great stride in advance that I think I have made is the recognition that the monolith is an image of the Great Plan or Scheme of Organization which has been expounded in the preceding pages and which permeated every branch of native thought.