ces are frequently
represented; and that we do see them piled up in vessels, see them putting
forth shoots and leaves, and see birds and quadrupeds devouring thorn. Dr
Brinton himself (p. 123, E. No. 29) gives one of these sprouting _kan_
symbols, which he says "is a picture of the maize plant from Cod. Tro., p.
29." That it is not used ikonomatically here is evident, as _kan_ in Maya
is not a name for maize or grain of maize.

[232-1] First Ann. Rep. Bur. Ethn., p. 386.

[232-2] Dr Brinton (Primer, p. 65) says: "Former students have been unable
to explain this design" and suggests that it is a maggot.

[232-3] Brinton follows Brasseur in supposing it represents the "grasping
hand," and thinks it is a rebus of _mach_, "asir, tomar con los manos."

[236-1] Page 66.

[237-1] Notwithstanding his definition given above, Dr Brinton suggests in
his late work that the symbols of the day bear a close resemblance to some
of the sun signs.

[238-1] For explanation of the inclosed comb-like characters, Landa's
_ca_, see Sixth Annual Report of the Bureau of Ethnology, page 355.

[239-1] Brinton thinks that in some of the forms it indicates "a trail" or
"footprints," which are meanings of _oc_.

[240-1] I was not aware that _oc_ had the signification "dog" in any of
the Mayan languages, nor do I find that Seler or Brinton appeal to this
fact in their efforts to explain the day name in the Maya calendar.
However, Dr Brinton remarks that Brasseur and Seler think that some forms
of the symbol "portray the ears of a dog, as in some of the Mayan dialects
the dog is called _oc_."

[240-2] Dr Brinton (Primer, p. 95) says that this is called "an article of
food, by Thomas." While this is correct in the sense that I speak of the
turkey (_kutz_ or _cuitz_) as food, it is incorrect in giving the
impression that I interpret the symbol by "article of food," as I have
always interpreted it "turkey."

[245-1] Dr Brinton says it is the face of an old woman with a peculiar
pointed earmark.

[248-1] Brinton says the _ben_ symbol looks to him "like a wooden bridge,
the two supports of which are shown and which was sometimes covered with a
straw mat." If so, it must be shown in profile, and the hanging marks
above (see LXVI, 16, 17, 19) would seem to be without signification;
moreover, in LXVI, 18, the supports hang from above, which would, on this
theory, imply a hanging bridge.

[250-1] Cong. Inter. Americanistes, 1881, tom. 2.

[250-