I have given in my former paper[17] my reasons for believing that Cauac was referred to the south, Kan to the east, Muluc to the north, and Ix to the west, from which I quote the following as a basis for further argument:
"Landa, Cogulludo, and Perez tell us that each of the four dominical days was referred by the Indians to one of the four cardinal points. As the statements of these three authorities appear at first sight to conflict with each other, let us see if we can bring them into harmony without resorting to a violent construction of the language used. Perez' statement is clear and distinct, and as it was made by one thoroughly conversant with the manners and customs of the natives, and also with all the older authorities, it is doubtless correct.
"He says, 'The Indians made a little wheel in which they placed the initial days of the year. _Kan_ at the _east_, _Muluc_ at the _north_, _Gix_ or _Hix_ at the _west_, and _Cauac_ at the _south_, to be counted in the same order.'
"The statement of Cogulludo, which agrees substantially with this, is as follows: 'They fixed the first year at the east, to which they gave the name _Cuch-haab;_ the second at the west, and called it _Hiix;_ the the third at the south, named _Cauac_, and the fourth, _Muluc_, at the north.'
"Turning now to Landa's work (_Relac. de las Cosas_, §§ XXXIV), we are somewhat surprised to find the following language: 'The first of these dominical letters is _Kan_. * * * They placed this on the south, side. * * * The second letter is _Muluc_, which is placed on the eastern side. * * * The third of these letters is _Yx_, * * * and it signified the northern side. The fourth letter is _Cauac_, which is assigned to the-western side.'
"This, as we see, places Kan at the south, Muluc at the east, Ix at the north, and Cauac at the west, conflicting directly with the statements made by Cogulludo and Perez. If we turn now to the description of the four feasts as given by Landa, and heretofore quoted, I think we shall find an explanation of this difference. From his account of the feast at the commencement of the Kan year (the intercalated days of the Cauac year) we learn that first they made an idol called _Kan-u-uayeyab_, which they bore to the heap of stones on the south side of the Village; next they made a statue of the god _Bolon-Zacab_, which they placed in the house of the elected chief, or chief chosen for the occasion. This done they returned to the idol on the southern stone heap, where certain religious ceremonies were performed, after which they returned with the idol to the house, where they placed it _vis-a-vis_ with the other, just as we see in the lower division of Plates XX-XXIII of the Manuscript Troano. Here they kept constant vigil until the unlucky days (_Uayeyab-haab_) had expired and the new Kan year appeared; then they took the statue of _Bolon-Zacab_ to the temple and the other idol to the heap of stones at the _east_ side of the village, where it was to remain during the year, doubtless intended as a constant reminder to the common people of what year was passing.
