# A Study of the Manuscript Troano/Chapter 8

Table of Contents
CHAPTER VIII.
A DISCUSSION OF DATES, WITH SPECIAL REFERENCE TO THOSE OF THE PEREZ MANUSCRIPT.
As I have heretofore touched upon this topic, I must ask the reader to refer to what is there stated, that I may dispense with repeating it here. But it is proper to remind him here that having proven, at least satisfactorily to myself, that the Ahau consisted of twenty-four years, this number is always to be understood whenever this period is mentioned in this discussion. In the second place, I start with the understanding that a 13th Ahau closed with the year 1542. I have already given my reasons, somewhat at length, for this conclusion. I may add that Dr. Valentini, in his article on the Perez Manuscript, arrives at the same conclusion. Brasseur also concludes the 13th Ahau with the year 1542, as he gives the following explanation: "Dans le XIII Ahau Katun, cest-a-dire, entre les années 1618—1542"; thus counting twenty-four years to this period, notwithstanding his repeated statement elsewhere that it contained but twenty. We may therefore feel assured that we have in these dates—the 24th year of the XIII Ahau ═ A. D. 1542—one connecting link between the two chronological systems; and also that the author of the Perez Manuscript was correct in stating that at the period alluded to—the year 1536—"six years were wanting to the completion of the 13th Ahau."
THE MAYA MANUSCRIPT.
MAYA.
Lai u tzolan Katun lukci ti cab ti yotoch Nonoual cánte anílo Tutul Xiu ti chikin Zuiná; u luumil u talelob Tulapan chiconahthan.
1. Cánte bin ti Katun lie u ximbalob ca uliob uaye yetel Holon-Chantepeuh yetel u cuchulob: ca hokiob ti petene uaxac Ahau bin yan cuchi, uac Ahau, can Ahau, cabil Ahau, cankal haab catac hunppel haab; tumen hun piztun oxlahun Ahau cuchie ca uliob uay ti petene cankal haab catac hunppel haab tu pakteil yete cu ximbalob lukci tu luumilob ca talob uay ti petene Chacnouitan lae.
2. Uaxac Ahau, uac Ahau, cabil Ajau; kuchci Chacnouitan Ahmekat Tutul Xiu hunppel haab minan ti hokal haab cuchi yanob Chacnouitan lae.
3. Laitun uchci u chicpahal tzucubte Ziyan-caan lae Bakhalal, can Ahau, cabil Ahau, oxlahun Ahau oxkal haab cu tepalob Ziyan-caan ca emob uay lae; lai u haabil cu tepalob Bakhalal chuulte laitun chicpahci Chichen Itza lae.
4. Buluc Ahau, bolon Ahau, uuc Ahau, ho Ahau, ox Ahau, hun Ahau uac kal haab cu tepalob Chichen Itza ca paxi Chichen Itza, ca binob cahtal Champutun ti yanhi u yotochob ah Ytzaob kuyen uincob lae.
5. Uac Ahau, chucuc u luumil Chanputun, can Ahau, cabil Ahau, oxlahun Ahau, buluc Ahau, bolon Ahau, uuc Ahau ho Ahau, ox Ahau, hun Ahau, lahca Ahau, lahun Ajau, ua,xac Ahau, paxci Chanputun, oxlahun kaal haab cu tepalob Chanputun tumenel Ytza uincob ca talob u tzaclé u yotochob tu caten, laix tun u katunil binciob ah Ytzaob yalan che yalan aban yalan ak ti numyaob lae.
6. Uac Ahau, can Ahau, ea kal haabeatalob u hedzob yotoch tu eaten ca tu zatahob Chakanputun.
7. Lai u katunil cabil Ahau, u hedzei cab Ahcuitok Tutul Xiu Uxmal. Cabil Ahau, oxlahun Ahau, buluc Ahau, bolon Ahau, uuc Ahau, ho Ahau, ox Ahau, hun Ahau, lahea Ahau, lahun Ahau, lahun kal haab cu tepalob yetel u halach uinicil Chichen Itza yetel Mayalpan.
8. Lai u katunil buluc Ahau, bolon Ahau, uac Ahau, uaxac Ahau, paxci u halach uinicil Chichen Itza tumenel u kebanthan Hunac-eel, ea ueh ​ti Chacxib chac Chichen Itza tu kebanthan Hunac-eel u halach uinicil Mayalpan ichpac. Cankal haab catac lahun piz haab, tu lahun tun uaxac Ahau cuchie; lai u haabil paxci tumenel Ahzinte-yutchan yetel Tzunte-cum, yetel Taxcal, yetel Pantemit, Xuchu-cuet, yetel Ytzcuat, yetel Kakaltecat lay u kaba uinicilob: lae nuctulob ahmayapanob lae.
9. Laili u katunil uaxac Ahau, lai ca binob u pâ ah Ulmil Ahau tumenel u uahal-uahob yetel ah Ytzmal Ulil Ahau; lae oxiahun uudz u katunilob ca paxob tumen Hunac-eel: tumenel it dzabal u naatob; uac Ahau ca dzoci; hunkal haab catac can lahun pizi.
10. Uac Ahau, can Ahau, cabil Ahau, oxiahun Ahau, buluc Ahau, chucuc u luumil ich pâ, Mayalpan, tumenel u pach tulum, tumenel multepal ich cah Mayalpan, tumenel Ytza uinicob yetel ah Ulmil Ahau lae; can kaal haab catac oxppel haab; yocol buluc Ahau cuchie paxci Mayalpan tumenel ahuitzil dzul, tan cah Mayalpan.
11. Uaxac Ahau lay paxci Mayalpan lai u katunil uac Ahau, can Ahau, cabil Ahau, lai haab cu ximbal ca yax mani españoles u yaxilci caa luumi Yucatan tzucubte lae, oxkal haab pâaxac ich pâ, cuchie.
12. Oxiahun Ahau, buluc Ahau uchci mayacimil ich pâ yetel nohkakil: oxiahun Ahau cimci Ahpula: uacppel haab u binel ma dzococ u xocol oxiahun Ahau cuchie, ti yanil u xocol haab ti lakin cuchie, canil kan cumlahi pop tu holhun Zip catac oxppeli, bolon Ymix u kinil lai cimi Ahpula; laitun año cu ximbal cuchi lae ca oheltabac lay u xoc numeroil años lae 1536 años cuchie, oxkal haab paaxac ich pâ cuchi lao.
13. Laili ma dzococ u xocol buluc Ahau lae lai ulci españoles kul uincob ti lakin u talob ca uliob uay tac luumil lae, bolon Ahau hoppci cristianoil uchci caputzihil: laili ichil u katunil lae ulci yax obispo Toroba u kaba, heix ano cu ximbal uchie.
[Translation.]
This is the series of "Katunes" that elapsed from the time of tlieir departure from the land and house of Nonoual, in which were the four Tutul Xiu, lying to the west of Zuina, going out of the country of Tulapan.
§ 1. Four epochs were spent in traveling before they arrived here with Holon-Chantepeuh and his followers. When they began their journey toward this island it was the 8th Ahau, and the 6th, 4th, and 2d were spent ​in traveling; because in the year of the 13th Ahau they arrived at this island, making together eighty-one years they were traveling, between their departure from their country and their arrival at this island of Chacnouitan. (Years, 81.)
§ 2. The 8th Ahau, the 6th Ahau; in the 2d Ahau arrived Ajmekat Tutul Xiu, and ninety-nine years they remained in Chacnouitan. (Years, 99.)
3. In this time also took place the discovery of the province of Ziyan-caan, or Bacalar, the 4th Ahau and 2d Ahau, or sixty years, they had ruled in Ziyan-caan when they came here. During these years of their government of the province of Bacalar occurred the discovery of Chichen Itza. (Years, 60.)
4. The 11th Ahau, the 9th, 7th, 5th, 3d, and 1st Ahau, or 120 years, they ruled in Chichen-Ttza, when it was destroyed, and they emigrated to Champoton, where the Itzaes, holy men, had houses. (Years, 120.)
5. The 6th Ahau they took possession of the territory of Champoton; the 4th Ahau, 2d, 13th, 11th, 9th, 7th, 5th, 3d, 1st, 12th, 10th, and 8th Champoton was destroyed or abandoned. Two hundred and sixty years, the Itzaes reigned in Champoton, when they returned in search of their homes, and they lived for several katunes under the uninhabited mountains. (Years, 260.)
6. The 6th Ahau, 4th Ahau, after forty years, they returned to their homes once more, and Champoton was lost to them. (Years, 40.)
7. In this Katun of the 2d Ahau, Ajcuitok Tutul Xiu established himself in Uxmal; the 2d Ahau, the 13th, 11th, 9th, 7th, 5th, 3d, 1st, the 12th and 10th Ahau, equal to 200 years, they governed in Uxmal, with the governors of Chichen-Itza, and of Mayapan. (Years 200.)
8. These are the Katunes 11th, 9th, and 6th Ahau. In the 8th Ahau the governor of Chichen-Itza was deposed, because he murmured disrespectfully against Hunac-eel. This happened to Chacxibchac of Chichen-Itza, governor of the fortress of Mayapan. Ninety years had elapsed, but the 10th year of the 8th Ahau was the year in which he was overthrown by Ajzinte-yutchan, with Tzuntecum, Taxcal, Pantemit, Xuch-uenet Ytzcuat, and Kakaltecat; these are the names of the seven Mayalpanes. (Years 90.) ​9. In the same Katun of the 8th Ahau they attacked Chief Ulmil, in consequence of his quarrel with Ulil, Chief of Yzamal; thirteen divisions of troops he had when he was routed by Hunac-eel; in the 6 th Ahau the war was over, after 34 years. (Years 34.)
10. In the 6th Ahau, 4th, 2d, 13th, and 11th Ahau, the fortified territory of Mayapan was invaded by the men of Itza, under their Chief Ulmil, because they had walls, and governed in common the people of Mayapan: eighty-three years elapsed after this event, and at the beginning of the 11th Ahau Mayapan was destroyed by strangers of the Uitzes, Highlanders, as was also Tancaj of Mayapan. (Years 83.)
11. In the 8th Ahau, Mayapan was destroyed, the epochs of the 6th, 4th, and 2d Ahau elapsed, and at this period the Spaniards for the first time arrived, and gave the name of Yucatan to this province, sixty years after the destruction of the fortress. (Years 60.)
12. The 13th and 11th Ahau, pestilence and small-pox were in the castles. In the 13th Ahau Chief Ajpula died; this year was counted toward the east of the wheel, and began on the 4th Kan. Ajpula died on the 18th day of the month Zip, in the 9th Ymix; and that it may be known in numbers, it was the year 1536, sixty years after the destruction of the fortress.
13. Before the termination of the 11th Ahau the Spaniards arrived. Holy men from the east came with them when they reached the land. The 9th Ahau was the commencement of baptism and Christianity; and in this year was the arrival of Toroba (Toral), the first bishop.
Before entering upon a discussion of this manuscript I will attempt to connect the two chronological systems at one or two other points, in reference to which we find some data left on record besides that found in the manuscript.
The destruction of Mayapan (the last one, if there were two, as stated by this authority) was an important event likely to be remembered by the people at the time of the Spanish conquest, as it was the beginning of a marked change in the condition of affairs in Yucatan, and occurred, at the earliest, not more than a hundred years before the first appearance of these invaders on the coast of this peninsula. ​As I have already shown, the important event alluded to by Perez as occurring in the year 7 Cauac of the 8th Ahau, which he fixes in 1393, really happened in 1435, as we see by correcting the manifest error of his calculation. This event, I believe, was the destruction of Mayapan, which this manuscript asserts took place in the 8th Ahau.
The two statements in this document—first (in the 11th paragraph), that the first arrival of the Spaniards, at the close of the 2d Ahau (1518), was 60 years after the fall of Mayapan; second (12th paragraph), that the year 1536 was 60 years after this event—cannot both be correct; one or the other, or both, must be erroneous. Rejecting the latter, and counting three Ahaues, the number the author gives, at 24 years each, instead of 20 (the length at which he estimates them), we have 72 years, which, deducted, carries us back to 1446. This corresponds exactly with Landa's computation. Herrera says that this happened, "according to the reckoning of the Indians, about seventy years before the Spaniards came into Yucatan," which would place it in 1448. According to the tables I have given, the 8th Ahau included the years 1423-1446, which agrees exactly with Brasseur's calculation (Hist des Nat. Civ), in which work he appears to have adopted 24 years as the number to an Ahau, instead of 20, as in his notes to Landa and the Perez Manuscript. As I was not aware of this fact until after the preceding part of this paper was delivered for publication, I call attention to it now, as it is apparent from this that his comparison of the dates of the two systems must agree throughout precisely with what is given in my Table XVII.
If we are correct in counting 24 years to an Ahau, then it is certain the 8th must have included from 1423 to 1446; and if the document referred to by Perez (which unfortunately was lost) was right in stating that 7 Caua,c was the year of the destruction, it occurred in 1435.
We learn from Herrera (loc. cit.) that this city was destroyed five hundred years after it was built. As a matter of course, this is given in round numbers, and cannot be considered as exact; yet it will afford some aid in our comparison. Deducting 500 from 1435 gives us the year 935 as the date of the founding of the city, which may be considered as at least approximately correct. Counting back by Ahaues, we ascertain that this would fall in the 11th of the preceding grand cycle. ​Although, as shown by Table XVII, the grand cycles, if counted from the year 1 of each period, would begin with the 1st Ahau, yet, as the Indians chose, for some reason, to begin these periods with the 13th, our calculations must correspond with this arbitrary selection. I therefore give here a brief table of cycles, with the corresponding years of our era, running backward:
| | Years. |
| Fourth grand cycle | 1519-1830 |
| Third grand cycle | 1207-1518 |
| Second grand cycle | 895-1206 |
| First grand cycle | 583-894 |
The numbers given the grand cycles are (for the present, at least) arbitrary, given simply as a means of reference. We see from this table that the year 935 would fall in the grand cycle numbered 2, and, as before stated, in the 11th Ahau. Referring to this manuscript again, we see that Mayapan is first mentioned in the 7th paragraph, where it is stated that "the 2d Ahau, 13th, 11th, 9th, 7th, 5th, 3d, 1st, 12th, and 10th Ahau, 200 years, they [the Tutul Xiu] governed in Uxmal with the governors of Chichen-Itza and Mayapan."
Here we find our 11th with but two Ahaues preceding it, or, as we judge from the preceding clause—"In this Katun of the 2d Ahau"—but one and part of another. Supposing Mayapan to have been in existence at the commencement of the periods here named, it would carry us back only some forty or fifty years beyond Herrera's general statement; but this is more than accounted for by the difference in the estimated length of the Ahau.
If we count the Ahaues necessary to complete the number from the 2d in the commencement of the seventh paragraph to the 2d in the eleventh paragraph when the Spaniards first appeared, filling up the lacunæ and making the correction in the eighth paragraph suggested by Dr. Valentini, we shall find the number to be as follows:
2, 13, 11, 9, 7, 5, 3, 1, 12, 10, 8, 6, 4, 2. :
* 13, 11, 9, 7, 6, 3, 1, 12, 10, 8, 6, 4, 2.
Making 27 Ahaues, or 648 years. ​Deducting this from 1518, the time when the Spaniards appeared on the coast, it carries us back to the year 870. If carried back only to the first year of the 11th of the first series, it gives the year 918, which differs but 17 years from the date (935) given above from Herrera's statement, a difference less than one Ahau. I am inclined, therefore, to believe the first line of the 8th paragraph properly belongs to the 7th, and that it was the intention of the writer to say that "with the governors of Chichen-Itza and Mayapan these Katunes, 11th, 9th to the 6th." In the 8th Ahau trouble arose between the parties to the compact, but the war did not end until in the 6th. It is probable, therefore, that the chronicler's data mentioned the 1 1th Ahau as the beginning of the compact, and that this was near the time when Mayapan was built.
According to Herrera, Chichen-Itza was already in existence when Cuculkan appeared and founded Mayapan. He further states that "whilst the Cocomes [who were given authority immediately after Cuculkan's departure] lived in this regular manner, there came from the southward, and the foot of the mountains of Lacando, great numbers of people, looked upon for certain to have been of the province of Chiapa, who traveled forty years about the deserts of Yucatan, and at length arrived at the mountains that are almost opposite to the city of Mayapan, where they settled and raised good structures, and the people of Mayapan some years after, liking their way of living, sent to invite them to build houses for their lords in the city. The Tutul-Xiu, so the strangers were called, accepting of their courtesy, came into the city, and their people spread about the country, submitting themselves to the laws and customs of Mayapan, in such peaceable manner that they had no sort of weapons, killing their game with gins and traps." (Loc. cit.)
This agrees precisely with the order of events in the Manuscript, except that nothing is mentioned corresponding with the 40 years of the 6th paragraph
In the prophecy by Nahau Pech, preserved in Lizana's work and copied by Brasseur into the chrestomathy of his Maya grammar, these passages occur:
"We have come now to the fourth period," or perhaps more correctly, ​3. "The time to the fourth series of epochs draws to a close,"
4. "In which shall be ushered in the day of the true God." Also,
8. "Such is the prophecy of Nahau Pech, the priest,
9. "At the time of the fourth great cycle (Ahau Katun).
10. "In the commencement actual of the series of epochs."
The rendering of Katunil, here translated "series of epochs," is uncertain. In Stephens's translation of the Perez Manuscript it is sometimes rendered "Katunes," sometimes "Katun"; in Brasseur's translation, "periods," "cycle," and in Lizana's, "edades" or ages The definition of the word as given in Brasseur's lexicon (it is not found in full in Perez's lexicon) is "Ensemble des époques ou cycles."
It is true that "Ahau Katun" is sometimes used as equivalent to "Ahau," but this is very rarely, if ever, found in the few Maya documents that remain to us. The true rendering appears to be "Grand or Great Cycle," as given in the 9th line of Nahau Pech's prophecy. If this interpretation, which is that given by Abbe Brasseur, is the correct one, we then find here the number of one of the great cycles. To suppose that the number here refers to the Ahau will carry this prophecy back to the year 1470-'71, which is improbable.
The prophecy of Chilam Balam commences with Ox lahun ahau u hedzinil katun, the literal translation of which is, according to Brasseur, "The thirteenth Ahau its foundation of the Katun"; probably equivalent to Lizana's Spanish "In the end of the thirteenth age."
It is obvious from the contents of this prophecy that it was made after the arrival of the Spaniards in that country, and after their appearance and religion became known; hence, as it was delivered in the 13th Ahau, it must have been between the years 1518 and 1541. It is not probable that ​the one by Nahau Pech (a well-known family at the time of Montejo's arrival) is many years older, probably dating the first year of the 13th Ahau, which would, according to his statement, be the first of the 4th great cycle.
If we assume that these great periods were numbered in regular order, 1, 2, 3, 4, which is more than probable, as they were but seldom referred to, then we have evidence here that the Itzae record ran back three great cycles—936 years before the year A. D. 1519, that is to the year 583 of the Christian era. In order that we may compare this calculation with the manuscript, I will give here a list of the Ahaues, commencing with number 8, previous to the beginning of the 1st great cycle as counted after Nahau Pech, with the years of the Christian era corresponding to their last years.
The three great cycles completed at the time of Nahau Pech's prophecy (if such be the proper interpretation of his words) I presume beign ​with the founding of Chichen Itza, which, according to my calculation, would be about 583-606 (the 13th Ahau). It is a little remarkable that the first mention of this city occurs in the close of the third paragraph, exactly where the 13th Ahau must be inserted to fill a hiatus.
The number of years given and periods mentioned in the first three paragraphs cannot by any possible explanation be made to agree with each other. This part of the history of the Tutul-Xiu race is doubtless made up from a dim tradition in reference to which no chronological statement could be made. As any attempt to determine the length of time they were wandering, from the date of their departure from Tulapan until they settled at Chichen-Itza, would be wholly conjectural, we will, perhaps, be as near right as any other guess, if we assume that the 8th Ahau of the second paragraph is the same as the 8th of the first, in other words, that the numbers in the second are but a recapitulation of those in the first, and that the 13th in the latter is the one which precedes the 11th in the fourth paragraph. Supposing they started on their travels in the 8th Ahau, this would bring this event between the years 486-510.
As the author of this manuscript counted twenty years to an Ahau and I count twenty-four, our lists cannot possibly agree. If there are any numbers given, connected with particular and noted events, which numbers were given in the author's data, with these my enumeration, if correct, might coincide. The fall of Mayapan in the 8th Ahau, the appearance of the Spaniards on the coast in the 2d, and the death of Ajpula in the 13th, I think may be relied upon as events correctly dated.
If we count the years enumerated from the 2d Ahau in the seventh paragraph, where Mayapan is first mentioned, to the 8th, in the eleventh paragraph, when the second destruction of this city occurred, we find the number to be 367; adding in the missing epochs at twenty years each, we have 527, which agrees very well with Herrera's statement. But this gives us something over twenty-six of these periods, whereas the correct number would be twenty-two. The exact numbers (of years) given in the ninth and tenth paragraphs render it possible that these were obtained from the author's data.
* ↑ Hist, des Nat. Civ., II, 594, note 1.
* ↑ Dec. III, lib. vi, cap. 3.
* ↑ II, 593.
* ↑ Dr. Brinton, following Lizana, translates the whole prophecy as follows: 1. "What time the sun shall brightest shine, 2. Tearful will be the eyes of the king. 3. Four ages yet shall be inscribed, 4. Then shall come the holy priest, the holy god. 5. With grief I speak what now I see. 6. Watch well the road ye dwellers in Itza. 7. The master of the earth shall come to us. 8. Thus prophecies Nahau Pech, the seer, 9. In the days of the fourth age, 10. At the time of its beginning."