Mayan Count

                                                                                    Mayan Calendar Long Count Cycle

1.    In the world of Mesoamerican calendar studies, it is the Mandela form of the Aztec Sunstone, which usually initially attracts the attention of so many unsuspecting spectators, and which then finally beckons so many of them to take the chance and peer with amazement into the mathematics and the psychedelic cosmologies that come to us from out of the depths of ancient Mexican history. The Sunstone is critical for denoting the 20-day cycle in the form of a round circuit, which highlights an affiliation of the 20-day signs with the 360° of the earth’s horizon when laid flat on the ground. However, despite the appearance of the Sunstone’s intricate detail and obvious stellar symbolism, which helps to outline the astronomical premises of the Mesoamerican Calendar as a whole, the mastery of the Mesoamerican Calendar is finally more often than not, usually given over to the southern lowland tribes of the ancient Maya, whose intricately carved monuments and lengthened calendar cycles tend to leave the impression of a highly scientific, and technological society that might as well be responsible for each and every aspect of Mesoamerican Culture that is worth any amount of examination or educated appraisal. Indeed, for a time the Maya, due to the expanse of their ancient existence were thought possibly to be the forefathers of all Mesoamerican culture.

2.   While it is true that the ancient Maya are responsible for promoting, preserving, and even expanding, the lengthened calendars of the Long Count Cycle in conjunction with the cycles of Venus, they should not in any way be seen as the inventors of the Mesoamerican Calendar, nor of the other subordinate astronomical concepts (such as the Mesoamerican constellations) that collectively uphold the calendars meaning in the world of timely ancient rituals, and other human activities that outline the totality of Mesoamerican civilization. Unfortunately, because of some of the refinements that go along with their stylistically executed monuments, and highly technical astronomical timetables found within their Codices, (such as the Dresden Codex) many observers and newcomers to the scene have become comfortable and reclusive in their perspectives that the Maya were simply a superior civilization with respect to the rest of Mesoamerica, and who had succeeded in their intentions to stand apart from all the rest of the Mesoamerican tribes with the invention of a calendar that never needed to be recalibrated. This idea tends to fulfill the scientific idea of westernized perfectionism, and therefore is no doubt to some degree a projection of personal values upon an ancient culture.

3.   This enduring “Astronomic Linear Long Count Calendar,” of the Maya, which has been studied more thoroughly and intensively than any other calendar from out of Mesoamerica, has helped bring about the notions and counting practices that are further reinforced by the Goodman-Martinez-Thompson correlation. For this matter, the idea of a linear count calendar has now come to be regarded as the ‘original intention of Mesoamerica’s calendar systems’, when in fact the reality of the matter is that we are all still trying to this day to discover the true bases and astronomical principals of the original Mesoamerican Calendar Cycles, and their relationship to the passage of natural time.

1

4. For instance, it has been recently discovered by this author on March 1st of 2011 that the 1872000-day cycle of the Long Count pertains specifically to a planetary Saturn cycle of 174-sidereal revolutions of that planet around the sun. This in turn means that each 394.2 year Baktun cycle contains 13-sidereal revolutions of Saturn, just as each 365-day year contains thirteen 27.3-day cycles of the moon. Therefore these original and complex astronomic and numerological cycles, which have served to bring about the most recent scientific and linear correlations of the Mesoamerican Calendar, are indeed correct in some cases of pertinent astronomical analysis.

5. In short, however, the GMT really is not the Mesoamerican Calendar in total, but instead it is a correlation and a counting procedure that is finally based on the Aztec Surrender date of August 13th 1521 CE, and along with the premise that the Mayan Long Count is linear, and so therefore along with this assumption there then also tends to come about the notion that the Mesoamerican Calendar as a whole should be perceived to operate in just the same fashion; implying of course that this was the original intention. Many remain confused with this perspective and conclusion, since the linear rendition does not show much of a recognizable or perceivable solar cycle. However, this author’s recent discovery about the Saturn cycle may help to corroborate evidence for a linear astronomic (Saturn) cycle, which in turn may have worked in concert with a solar corrected count based on the 52-year cycle.

6. Despite the confidence with which these contemporary linear perspectives are usually expressed, the fact sorely remains that the current notion of the “Mayan Long Count Calendar,” is still only to be regarded as being within a phase of correlation with respect to the passage of natural time as we perceive it, along with the planetary physics of the solar system; meaning that it still is only an interpretation, and many continue to still seek the other side of the coin in the study of Mesoamerican Calendarictics. For that matter as well, the meaning of the year cycle has come to be very inappropriately misunderstood within the Mayan counting system, simply because the ancient Mayan scribes who encoded the stone monuments (and Codices) had for some reason insisted to leave out the year date.

2

7. This has led many to believe that the Maya did not count the years, which is a false conviction that continues to baffle the most curious of inquirers who deem to learn the respected measuring system of the Long Count Calendar. Simply put, it would appear that the ‘year bearer sign’ or tun was apparently left out to conserve artistic space in the wake of the expanded editions of the Long Count, and to spare any amount of confusion that might come about through the shared symbolism that the ‘tun-sign’ or year bearer might have had with the day-sign or kin. In other parts of Mesoamerica, such as with the Zapotecs and Mixtecs this potential confusion was eliminated by simply circling the year sign. Also it is true that much emphasis was being laid upon the Long Count form of counting, which is an advanced form of calendar that should not be confused with the normal conception of annual time within Mesoamerica as a whole. The beginning student must be wary.

8. Once again, the result of these conclusions regarding the apparent linear nature of the Long Count Calendar, has therefore led to the demise of study that goes as far to somehow imply that the 260-day count, called by the Maya tzolkin, has precedents over the whole scheme of numerological factors, which forms the basis of the Mesoamerican Calendar in its role as the premier solar system calculator of time and space. This particular conviction is tremendously reinforced by the whole notion of the corresponding Long Count Cycle, which in no way functions like the preliminary 52-actual year cycle that has principally formed the basis of the Mesoamerican Calendar Cycles, almost ever since the very beginning since the year was understood in ancient Mexico to be 365.2422-days. This understanding may have come about as a result of earlier previous linear slip cycle counts, which afforded an evolving technique in counting the year and its exact length.

9. As we finally approach the ending of the great Baktun Cycle, which is arriving soon, we might discover that such ridged conclusions and perspectives that strictly insist on a purely linear alignment are becoming quickly outlived as it appears that more and more people who begin to take interest in this subject fall far short of actually understanding it. Therefore, as a result of much needed review, we shall outline the basis of the Mayan Long Count Cycle with a follow-up of the other numerological factors (such as a possibility that allows for correction dates within the Long Count) that are currently being disqualified from the stage of scientific examination. This approach may end up helping those who need the most assistance in understanding the potential seasonal functionality of this great astronomic mystery that is the Mesoamerican Calendar, and its latent multifarious possibilities in counting, which help towards executing the ancient astrological and astronomical measurement of time.

3

10. As was earlier explained in the section on the Structure of the Calendar, the 20-day cycle was most probably primarily derived from the cycles of the moon and its nodes by dividing the sky into 18-sections representing the ‘18-years of the lunar node return cycle’ resulting in eighteen separate, 20-degree sections of time-space. It also appears as well that the 584-day cycle of Venus, which when divided by the number 29.2 (very close to a lunation of 29.5-days) results in a period of 20-days as well, although the astronomical significance of the number 18 is missing here, which would help account for the meaning of the 18-periods of the Mayan 20-day Haab cycle, which means, “Cycle of Rains,” and which are the corresponding equivalent to the 18-periods of the Aztec 20-day Metztli cycle, meaning moon. For that matter, it is usually thought that the number 18 in Mesoamerican Calendarictics was to be simply a ‘loose screw’ within the whole gamut of numerological factors, which only comes about through dividing 360-days by 20. However, we should posture ourselves to become more aware of the fact that the 18.5 year cycle of the lunar nodes is paramount in Mesoamerican Calendarictics. Indeed, 26-cycles of the 260-day Tzolkin amount to one cycle of the 18.5-year lunar node cycle.

11. Just as in the case with the later Aztec 20-day sign cycle, called the (Cempoualli), the Mayan 20-day sign cycle was also understood to be related to the 360° of the horizon, as this horizontal concept was the bases with which this 20-day cycle had initially been started with since the time of its numerological construction thousands of years ago. This horizontal conception of the signs loaned a significance to them that is equivalent to the modern day western astrological houses. Theoretically, after the 18-divisions of the year had been established, the principal aspect of the ‘20-degree-day cycle’ that is found in between these 18-parameters, was then isolated and separated to be measured against the horizon by being laid horizontally flat, and thereby creating a ‘20-fold sign mandala’, and then which in turn had divided the 360° of the horizon up into a series of “Twenty 18-degree segments.” These “20-houses” then were used to measure the risings and settings of the constellations found within their particular vicinities, which in turn served to symbolically name and label each ‘20-day sign house’ with its own particular stellar correspondence that marked the various stages of the suns 24-hour journey throughout the day, and also marked with its segments the symbolic jurisdiction to the 365-day year as well.

12. The Mayan layout for the names and meanings of the ‘20-day signs houses’ are known to have varied from region to region due to the ancient traditions that had preserved the basis of the implied meaning of this cycle since its beginning, which was used among many groups and ethnicities throughout early Mesoamerican history. The most commonly found references to the 20-day signs within the Maya world are those from out of the Yucatan region. They are as follows.

Imix – Crocodile or “Water Lily.”
Ik - Wind
Akbal – Darkness (before dawn)
Can – Ripe Maize
Chicchan – Sky Serpent
Cimi - Death
Manik – Otomanguan word meaning: To Eat (Hand or Capture) Quiche Maya: Keh – “Deer”
Lamat – Brightness (star)
Muluk – Water
Oc - Dog
Chuen –Spider Monkey
Eb – Step, Road (referring to the Milky Way) or Tooth (referring to Andromeda Galaxy)
Ben –Corn Stalk (represented by a drum as the fertile ‘container base’ or watery foundation)
Ix - Jaguar
Men – Eagle (bird)
Cib – Wax, or Bee, or Owl
Caban - Earth
Etznab –Sharp implement (Knife Point)
Cauac - Storm
Ahau - Lord

These 20-day signs of the Maya world were also multiplied by the 13-numbers called Oxlahun Ti Ku, and which were probably engendered from the 13-phases of the 27.3-days of the sidereal lunar cycle in a year. The meaning the 13-Lords of Day were spoken in the Yukatec language as listed:

13. The 13-numbers and 20-day signs were combined to create the 260-day “Tzolkin,” and which operated in a similar fashion and was to be seen all throughout Mesoamerica in conjunction to the 52-year cycle. After 73-permutations of the 260-day count had passed, the equivalent of ‘52-vague 365-day years’ would have commenced as well. It is the subject matter of these ‘vague 365-day years’ in the current study of the Maya Calendar, which has continued to baffle newcomers to the scene, and which has dismayed the logic of many experts and educators in the field as well. The earliest Mesoamerican Calendar experiments had generated a 1,507-year cycle by counting in terms of solid 365-day increments that then slipped backwards thru the stations of the year cycle, which were then to return to complete ‘one solar era’ after 1,507 years of calendrical (numerological) repetition.

14. In the case of the Mesoamerican Calendar Cycles as a whole, however, the 18,980-days that help to fulfill 52-vague years are in reality, simply the most basic ‘symbolic expression’ of the truer quantity of 18,992.5944-days that fulfills 52-complete years of 365.2422-days. In the case of the Corrected Mesoamerican Calendar, the extra days at the end of a 52-year period simply were given no chance to any kind of actual ‘symbolic’ representation. This may be in part due to the fact that ever since the basic numerological construction of the “Corrected Count Calendar,” was initiated; that it had been originally understood by the calendar priests that an altering set or ‘an uneven and inconsistent amount of days’ were to be added every 52-years in order to account for the drift of the tropical year in relation to the cycles of Venus. These extra 12 or 13-days that were to be added every 52-years were simply to have no symbolic representation despite the necessary implications of their functions to the calendar as a whole. By virtue of this author’s discovery found on September 30th 2009, there is in fact archaeological proof to back up these statements regarding these altering set of days – although they are rather to be found instead on an Aztec monument.

4

15. To account for these uneven and altering set of days that were to be added at the end of every 52-years, the specialty of calendarictic astronomer priests were then to be traditionally demanded. The calendar priests were all introduced to the correctional rules of the 52-year calendar, which probably had been initiated at its onset with the Olmec and Izapan and/or Zapotec traditions. Further calculations indeed may show, and go to demonstrate theoretically as well that it was probably this exact same Corrected Count Calendar that had been followed and maintained by the natives throughout much of Mesoamerican history, and which then had finally ended up in the hands of the Spaniards on the Julian calendar date of August 13th, 1521 AD/CE. This date was finally to be recorded as the day of 1-Serpent upon the Tonalpoualli, and as well it was also the 2nd day of the 10th Metztli of “Huey Micailhuitl,” as found within the year of 3-House upon the Mexica Azteca Calendar.

16. It is absolutely of no coincidence that the 10th Metztli of “Great Feast of the Dead,” had been taking place at that time of the year in the late summer, of the Julian month of August in the year 1521 CE, since this is also a feast, which is in fact marked by the stellar constellation of “Centaurus” within the night sky in the form of a dead man’s bundle. The area of this constellation and its relationship to the concept of inert matter, or death, may indeed be significant to the placement of Saturn here at the initiation of the 5,125.366-year Mayan Baktun cycles, along with its bright star Alpha Centauri since these stellar formations never rise high above the horizon.

17. The placement of this particular 20-day period of Huey Micailhuitl is determined just as all the rest of the 18-Aztec Metztli festivals, to be in its place with regards to the initial placement for the beginning of the traditional Aztec New Year, as taking place in the early spring of the current month of our Gregorian February. This then puts the previous 7th and 8th festivals of the “Little and Great Feasts of Kings” to always take place during the time of summer, exactly where the festivals of the royal Mesoamerican Sun Kings no doubt should always be.

Above are the images for the two stellar constellations representing the 8th and 10th, 20-day Metztli Ceremonies, of "Huey Tecuilhuitl," (Great Feast of Kings) and "Huey Micailhuitl," (Great Feast of Dead), which are seen hanging in the foreground that is meant to represent the heavenly firmament with the placement of atmospheric clouds. The first image to the left is that of the constellation of Leo, which currently can be seen just after sunset during this time of year in the summer when this ceremony was formally executed to represent the greatness of kings with the height of the summer sun. To the right in the next plate is to be seen the constellation of Centaurus in the upper left hand corner, in the form of a dead man's bundle, which is a star formation that characterizes death since these stars (which lie close to the right of Scorpio) never seem to rise far above the horizon. Furthermore, they lie within the plane of the Milky Way and therefore were the subject matter of that starry road that leads into the "Celestial Alligator Maw" to the left of the Galactic Center. The sub-ceremony of Huey Micailhuitl was known as Xocotl Huetzi or "Fall of Fruits," which was represented by a tree-pole that pointed towards the zenith. All insights from this author's discoveries, and personal renditions from out of the previous year of 1987, while at that time recognizing stellar images that are to be found within Frey Diego Duran's "Book of Gods and Rites and the Ancient Calendar."

18. These placements for the Feasts of Kings during the time of summer was not a temporary mandate, nor were any of the feasts shifted too much between cultures, or added as needed to complete the contemporary need for such ceremonies. These ceremonies and their yearly placements were inherited conservatively speaking over a period of about 1,000 years or more from the ancestral lineages of Central Mexico, and specifically as being a part of the same seasonal year cycles from which they were inherited. Furthermore, it is the first Mayan 20-day month of POP, which is generally often referred to as the ‘mat’- (of the ruler?), which takes place during the summer time of our July, appropriately for this case around the time of the Aztec Great Feast of Kings.

19. It is precisely the subject matter of the Mayan 20-day seasonal (month) cycles (generally known as the Haab), which are the subject matter of so much controversy since it is these eighteen 20-day cycles of the Maya that are understood by the specialists to be slipping backwards with regards to the seasons of the year, over a period of “1,507-years.” This would mean that if one were to consider the official starting point of the 1st Mayan 20-day period of “POP,” as principally occurring within the month of July (let’s say the exact day of July 21st Gregorian) that this 20-day period would supposedly be determined every 4-years to slip backwards by one day. What this means is that 4-years later POP now would begin on July 20th, and 4-years from then July 19th, and 4-years from then July 18th, and so-on and so-fourth. This would not stop at a 52-year interval, but instead would then continue to slip for a whole period of 1,507-years, when then finally POP would be found once again to open and occur on the Gregorian date of July 21st.

20. In truth, (for the terms of the Corrected Count) the summer months of July and sometimes August, would indeed be the official placement of POP, which can be demonstrated by the fact that this is where the 20-day period of POP was to be found at the time of the conquest; this should not be a coincidence, however it is not fully understood as yet what this might mean with regards to a larger 1,507-year Slip Cycle, and is subject to further speculations as far as proving a Corrected Count practice for the Mayan Long Count System. Factually speaking, just before the arrival of the Spanish into Mexico in the year of 1518 AD/CE, the seating of 0-POP, which opened “the New Year of 1-Manik,” had begun with the day of 1-Manik, and which had then in that year occurred on the date of August 1st of the Gregorian calendar as can be seen within the diagram below. This fact is extremely significant and important with regards to the Mayan and Mesoamerican Calendarictics collectively, and is particularly significant to the placement of the 1st sign of the Tzolkin of 1-Imix / 1-Alligator as being at the spring equinox (March 23rd) in that year of 1-Manik /1-Reed.

21. With the opening of the year of 1-Manik on August 1st of 1518 AD/CE we can easily see the subtle correlation that is brought to the surface with the opening of the Aztec year of 1-Reed only 6-months later on February 24th, 1519 AD/CE (on the Tonalpoualli date of 13-Jaguar). However, as a concerted effort of modern research, this year correlation that can be easily seen between these two counts is probably now only to be regarded as a coincidence, and perhaps only arriving out of the progress of the 1,507-Mayan year slip cycle taking its place. In fact, one wonders whether or not any kind of correlation is being perceived at all between the two counts, save and except for the assumption that the Aztec Chronology was also a Slip Cycle.

22.   However, in truth, it appears that the consecutive Aztec numbered year cycle was to have been derived specifically from this earlier Mayan year cycle. Furthermore, it has also been shown earlier within this treatise that the only way that the 20-day Metztli Feasts of the Aztec Count can keep their positions within the seasonal year is thru a correction date period, which as we have seen in the earlier chapter sections was specifically to take place at the time of the New Fire Ceremony. Furthermore again, as we had also saw earlier, ‘a 27-day count forward’ upon the 260-day Tonalpoualli / Tzolkin from any ‘0-POP seating’ that opens the Mayan year will inevitably bring us to the day-sign that marks the “Xihuitl,” or year sign, of the Central Mexican Calendars, which typically follows the Mayan (corrected) New Year afterwards by a time of just over 6-months i.e. Mayan (July) versus Aztec (February).

23. In our example above with the year 1-Manik, we can see that the sign 1-Ben (Reed) occurred 27-days after the first day of this Mayan year. Following this theory to its completion, we can then follow the day-sign 1-Ben (Reed) one cycle or 260-days (or 8-months) into the next following position, which will be in late spring when some Central Mexican Calendars were said to have initiated the year. Theoretically, this would be relevant in the case for Aztec terminal dating, which appoints the numerical year date over to the last day of the year, which is in turn always to be found upon the Tonalpoualli during a specific time of year. But, instead it might also appear that historically, the Mexica-Azteca specifically took the late spring tonalli-date (1-Reed in this case), and then initiated that named year (by moving the influence backwards) to begin the year in the early spring of our February for seasonal purposes related to planting, and the upcoming yearly Spring Equinox, just as is indicated by their inherited yearly ceremonies surrounding the opening of spring as initiating the opening of the year cycle.

24. In the case of the Maya of course, the year (from a Corrected Perspective) was to begin in the summer time just as it is to be demonstrated in the example of 1-Manik that is found in the diagram for the year of 1518 AD/CE. For this matter, there really is not too much occasion or evidence to believe that this year sign correlation between the Mayan and Aztec Calendars came about specifically as a result of an initiation of the calendar over to the Central Mexican populations, at a time that was in synchronization with a theoretical 1,507-year slip cycle. Instead, if we rather base the correlations on the principal of a constantly renewed 52-year cycle, (or even a leap year concept), which would be in sync with the nature of seasonal ritual obligations, and which would include those of the agriculture process, then there is much more occasion for a cultural osmosis to take place between many foreign relations, and during many times of the year that would help in converting many ideas regarding the delicate concepts like calendarictic chronologies and religious cosmologies as well. For that matter, it will here be included that perhaps deLanda's chronology was off by one day, (with regards to the Aztec) for the case possibility that perhaps the then current Maya of deLanda's time were to be using a leap year system, which did not get a chance to roll over yet for deLanda's records.

25. If theoretically the inheritance of this cycle took place sometime within ‘the supposed 1,507- year cycle’, than this could imply somehow that the Central Mexican 20-day Metztli dates were being shifted radically with regards to their calendarictic and seasonal correlations; implying that certain 20-day periods were perhaps dropped in order to account for the seasonal functionality of other more important 20-day ceremonies, or that simply put, the Metztli /Haab did not have any seasonal correlation anyway. This idea is put forward by Edmonson, who insists on dropping 1-twenty-day period every 83-year’s. Unfortunately, it might at a glance appear that this would destroy the numerical functionality of the Mesoamerican Calendar Cycles, since they were fixed in relation to the 52-year cycle. Furthermore, no one has been able to show willfully, (including Edmonson.1988:) how this might have been executed in literal practical terms. We need more than simply the written mathematical terms, and I am personally open to anyone and everyone who can show me just exactly how such a calendar concept would have worked in the case of Mesoamerica.

5

26. Also, it might be included that in Susan Milbrath’s “Star Gods of the Maya,” that a fixed relationship to the Haab and the natural year had been observed among the Tzeltal of the highlands of the Chiapas. Whether, this relationship would, or might demonstrate a fixed or ‘frozen date’ is subordinate to the fact that it can be willfully achieved; therefore showing that such a relationship is not only desirable but necessary among the natives of the regions. (Milbrath.1999:13)

27. One of the challenges in demonstrating that this theoretical 1,507-year to date correlation scenario between the Mayan and Aztec calendar was generally not the case, specifically lies within the inheritance of a 20-day seasonal Haab cycle from the Maya, which is currently not known or understood to have any stellar correspondences with regards to its iconographic symbolism, for which would in turn serve to tie their seasonal significances to the meaning of the passage of each seasonal year. The result that we have is a 20-day month and/or 365-day year cycle called the Haab, which nobody really pretends to understand. Thanks to the likeness of Spanish priests, and to the inaccessible secrecy of the more astronomically competent natives, we simply just don’t have enough information to adjudge the stellar perspectives of the Maya in relation to their year count and calendar as a whole.

28. For this reason, the whole concept of the Mayan Calendar has been given over to modern science, which principally does not acknowledge stellar constellations outside of our Old World Greek, and Babylonian inheritances; nor is any connection applied to an implicit iconography with the stars and their natural formations. Thus, for the usual reasons, which are subject to the consistent lack of available evidence, we now have our current demise and misunderstandings about the latent iconography of the Mayan Haab cycle and the seasonal functionality of those 18-symbols.
6

The Haab

29. The Mayan Haab cycle just as in the case of the Aztec Metztli has eighteen partitions of 20-days each, which account for a cycle of 360-days when completed. After a small set of 5-days called the Uayab, (which are the equivalent of the Nahuatl Nemontemi) have taken their place, then the year has officially ended to once again commence and re-open in the form of the Mayan New Year that begins with the 20-day month of POP. The Maya Haab dates are numbered 0 to 19, instead of 1 to 20, therefore of course the first day of the year is 0-POP. As we had earlier seen in the illustrated example of the calendar plate above, which demonstrates the time of 1518 CE, we are able to see that the Mayan year is in turn named after the 260-day Tzolkin date, which happens to come about in the wake of 0-POP since it is well known that the 365-day Haab Calendar, and the 260-day Tzolkin ran concurrently and were inextricably interconnected as they were in all of the finalized historic Mesoamerican regions.

30. Because of the nature of the 5-extra Uayab, the placement of the 260-day Tzolkin, which is to open the New Year, would always be 6-day signs ahead of the last opening year sign. This would mean that just as in the case of the Aztec Calendar that there were only to be four of the 20-day signs that could open any given year. In the Mayan Calendar chronology these signs were generally to be recognized as: Ik (Wind), Manik (“Deer”), Eb (Grass), and Caban (Movement). These were the principal 4-year bearers that historically opened the years with their affiliated number companions, which brought forth the cycles of the Tzolkin.

The list of eighteen 20-day periods that were opened with these 4-year bearer signs are as follows as they take place within the counting procedure of the 52-year Mayan Corrected Count:

0. Uayab – Short period of 5-empty days, bridging the ending of one year over to the next.

Pop – “Mat,” (of the Ruler?) Theoretically opens the Year with the monsoon rains of summer
Wo – “Frog,” (Black Conjunction)
Sip – “Red,” (Red Conjunction)
Sots’ – “Bat.” Symbol of Darkness and the decreasing light of autumn
Sek – “Skull.” Symbol of the autumn finality; ending of the 52-year cycle in autumn?
Xul – “Dog.”
Yaxkin – “First Sun,” (or Green Sun). Suns relationship to Galactic Center
Mol – “Collection,” (implying water and jade).
Chen – “Black Storm,” (Cave or Well?)
Yax – “Green Storm.”
Sak – “White Storm.”
Keh – “Red Storm.”
Mak – “Enclosure.”
Kankin – “Yellow Sun.” or Yellow Time (Indicating Late Spring)
Muwan – “Muan Bird,” (Relative of the Owl and bringer of the rains).
Pax – “Planting Time.” (Represented by a Drum perhaps signifying the drops of beating rain).
Kayab – “Turtle.” Turtle of the Gemini / Orion constellation where the sun is found in the summer.
Kumku – “Grainery.” (Also called ‘dark being’ as a symbol of “Soul of the Universe,” i.e. Cancer).

31. The illustrated example above demonstrates the positions of the Haab cycle within "an as early as - or - as late as," progressive framework, after the theoretical imposition of a 12 and 13-fold correction period added every 52 years. Thus, in order to explain the principal of these annual stellar positions in relation to the (corrected) Mayan Haab cycle, we must first therefore give a few examples with regards to this seasonal alignment of stellar constellations, which are often found being represented during their night positions, but are also depicted as symbols derived from the relative solar position among the constellations as well during the time of the particular 20-day Haab month in question. However, of course conventionally speaking, it is trure that the typical Slip Cycle Theory of the Mayan Calendar does not grant the 18-periods of the Haab any definite identity within the cyclic periods of the seasonal year.

32. Number one, in the case of the first month of POP, it has recently come to be understood by the author that the particular symbol for POP, which is represented by a ‘twisted lightning zigzag’ and a ‘jade quincunx’ actually turns out to represent an area just within the realm of the Galactic Center. The diamond shaped constellation of “Aquila,” would appear to sit almost just within the center triangle of the ‘twisted lighting zigzag design’. The jade quincunx symbol is the Galactic Center itself, which is a fact that is also reflected in the “quincunx glyph of “Yaxkin,” which denotes the position of the sun around the Galactic Center – but instead in the month of December. The position of the Galactic Center during the opening of the year represents the stars that were revealed in the south as the sun set within the summer months of POP, and which probably referred specifically to the rains that fell during those times.

33. Secondly, the well-recognized 20-day month of ‘SOTS’ which was represented by a bat symbol relating to the god “Camazotz,” (and perhaps related to Itzpapalotl in the Aztec) is to be seen stretching out its wings in the form of the Milky Way band, with the Galactic Center in this case representing the decapitated head, which the Mesoamerican bat is usually seen as to be wielding in the codices. A particular feature of this bat is of course its pointed nose. This particular stellar feature of the pointed nose turns out to be the constellation of “Bootes,” the point of the nose is represented by a red star called Arcturus, which the sun transits in the month of October during the time of SOTS’. The fall position of this 20-day month is reinforced by the darkness that comes about at this time, and representing the principal of the darkening night is reminiscent of the sight of bats, which principally reveal themselves in the evening twilight. (Be sure to observe the diagram of the "Stellar Camazotz Bat," discovered by this author below under the section of "The Dresden Codice and the Tradition of Conflicting Calendar Correlations.")

34. Thirdly, we shall now demonstrate ‘the stellar yardstick of the (corrected) Mayan Haab cycle’, which is the symbol of Kankin. The symbol of Kankin is of a tree or of a corn stalk. The base of this tree in fact turns out to be the Galactic Center, and there is a sun symbol located specifically in the area where the sun is to be found within the early spring around the month of April. This season represents specifically the “Yellow Time” of KANKIN.*

35. Fourth, a great deal of attention has been given over to the symbol of the Turtle in Mayan mythology. This animal is usually projected on the constellation of Orion, however traditionally the stars of Gemini have always had a specific relationship to the form of the Turtle within many ancient civilizations. The constellation of Orion lies within the same general area of Gemini, and therefore they may both be considered as one, and therefore demonstrating at least one of the pertinent traditional locations of the stellar Turtle. Actually there are others to be found, including one in the area of the stars of Pisces, which in that case can in fact be alternatively represented in the symbol for the 20-day period of MAC. When the sun passes through this area of stars just before the summer solstice, it is the time of the Mayan 20-day month of KAYAB, which is represented by a turtle head.

36. These stellar correlations should go to show that the Mayan Haab is in fact seasonal and connected to the passage of the seasonal year, and therefore by default we must to some extent except that these positions represent the official calibration of these symbols with the flow of natural time. Other Mayan glyphs relating to the Haab and the 20-day count have been deciphered by the author, but are being reserved for their publishing value.
7

                                                                                            Long Count Counting

37. The Mayan Calendar is most well-known for both its preservation, and rectification of the original concept of the Mesoamerican Calendar, which included the addition of a corresponding linear count now referred to in our modern times as the Long Count. The Long Count consists of 5-positions or rows that were numbered 0 thru 19, except for the Unial, which was numbered 0 to 17, and the Baktun, which was theoretically only originally given 13 places of multiplication. These numbers served to tally the various days of the 52-year cycle in the form of a separate and even greater mounting numeric multiplication cycle that amounted to a kind of linear feasibility. These 5-positions were to be given the names as:

                        1. Kin (day) 2.Unial (20-days) 3.Tun (360-days) 4. Katun (7200-days) and 5. Baktun (144,000-days).

                                  x20                      x18                        x20                             x20                                           x13

38. As mentioned, these 5-figures in at least one variation of the original system were in turn multiplied 20 times, or 18-times in the case of the Unial, and 13-times for the 144,000-day Baktun row period. After the 13-repetitions of 144,000 days had taken place, this finally resulted in a condensed period of “1872000-symbolically numbered days.” This whole process of the Long Count came about as a result of being a tally that follows the ongoing multiples of 20-day progressions for the 20th day sign of Ahau, which are in turn to be found specifically within the progression of the 52-year count. At the end of ‘1872000-symbolic days’ of time’, as it is now theoretically supposed, (or as it was initially intended) the Long Count Cycle would then start over to begin the next set of ‘1872000-vague symbolic days’ in order to repeat for a total of at least 5-times within the vague period of the great 26,000-year astronomic precession cycle of the earth’s polar axis; 25,626.83-years is more specific in this case.

39.  Again, it has been recently discovered by this author (since no one else seems to have pointed this out) that the 1872000-day cycle pertains specifically to 174-sidereal cycles of Saturn around the sun, meaning that each 144,000-day Baktun period holds just over 13.3-cycles of Saturn around the sun. This amounts to the 870-sideral orbits of Saturn around the sun in a vague period of 26,000-years. Also, it is obvious that the 1872000-day cycle is a handy “astronomical caliper” that keeps the planets in their positions over long periods of time, which accounts for the correct notion of this 5125.366-year cycle as being a linear astronomic count that pertains to the features of planetary cycles specifically.

8

40. For instance, in the case of Jupiter, the planet is seen within this period to progress eastward along the ecliptic by 10-degrees in every 5125.366-year’s. The sidereal cycle of the planet Mars also seems to be creeping eastward along the ecliptic by 10-degrees in every 5125.366-year’s as well, but perhaps is moving just a bit faster in this cycle. Venus seems to be moving eastward along the ecliptic in 30-degree increments in the 5125.366-year time frame, while the sun of course is progressing along at an even 60-degree’s in this time. In all of this time however, Saturn would predictably remain seated within its initial ecliptical station within the zodiac throughout many of these 1872000-day cycles.

41. The ‘1872000-symbolic number’ also turns out to be specifically commensurate to simply: 5200 x 360 = (1872000), meaning as well that the conceptual legacy of the Mesoamerican 52-year cycle may indeed owe something to this enduring Sun/Saturn relationship, since it can be seen that the Saturn sidereal cycle is so prevalent within this 5125.366-Long Count Time frame. It can be observed that the 1872000-day period had also been developed to operate within a close simulacrum to the actual period of “1,000-Fifty-two year cycles.” The Mesoamerican’s were well aware of the power of 10, and they applied the number 10 to the concept of their 52-year cycles, for multiples of time resembling 520-actual years, and as well as 5,200-actual years.

42. For that matter, we can also see that by Multiplying 5200 x 365 that we get the figure of 1898000-vague days. But being even more specific about the equation, and multiplying 5200 x 365.2422-days, we get 1,899,259.44-days, or 1,000 times the actual 52-year cycle. But because the Long Count was invented as a numerological tally pertaining to planetary cycles within the vague 52-year cycle, it was not meant therefore to imitate that period wholly or completely, since it was only to mimic the cycle by riding over the surface of the actual 52-year cycle as an astronomical tally that could distract the uneven interruptions of the actual tropical earth year cycle. With it we get the perfect distribution of a sidereal Saturn cycle. (Personal discovery by the author as of March 1st 2011).

43. However, it is also true theoretically that when this Long Count Cycle of 1872000-days, or 5125.366-years is further imbued with the 12.6 intercalary days gained in every 52-actual years, the equation falls closer to within a specific conjunction to those of a quantity of 3,208-planetary Venus synodic cycles of 583.92-days each, even more specifically then when it is measured in a period of 5125.366-years. When the extra 1,234-extra days are added to this Long Count Cycle, it is allowed to behave more like a 104-year period, wherein the Venus conjunctions are seen in that time to be more stabilized by being polarized to a specific aspect of that planets’ phase, with regards to the position of the sun. In the case of this particular theoretically (corrected) Baktun cycle, which we are now about to see the closing of in the upcoming year of 2013, the phase of Venus is in its inferior conjunction phase (when the 1,234-intercalery days are added) and can in fact be seen as being set to both begin and end with an inferior conjunction of Venus. (See Diagram Below).

44. Interestingly, this (corrected) 13-fold Baktun cycle of 5128.744-years, would end up outlining what is in fact to be just “1-degree” short of true current astronomical precession, for what is rather just under 71 ½ -years short of 5,200-actual years. Furthermore, the “1,234-intercalery days” which take place in the complete cycle of 5128.744-years, also turn out to mirror the “12.34-synodic cycles of Venus,” in a (corrected) or imbued Katun period of 7204-days. As demonstrated in the diagrams below, when working backwards in 5128.744-year increments, it would show that in a cycle from 20,514.976-years ago (4 x 5128.744) that Venus had begun that cycle at an inferior conjunction, via the (previously morning star phase), and progressively after 25,643.72-years will eventually, after the 5th-cycle reach what will on January 8th, 7142 CE become its evening star phase. This would show that this Corrected Count functions specifically with respect to the Venus synodic cycle. In fact, the year dates below in particular were in actuality, located on the astronomical software via the positions of Venus. The dates in turn were to be refined in accordance with a 94-day interval with respect to the 5128.744-year cycle, and the common 365-day calendar year. This amounts to 4-distinct different dates, which then on the 4th-interval of a 5128.744-year cycle then occurs some 10 or 11-dates earlier / later on the common 365-day calendar. This can be observed below by the two April dates of 4-12-2013 CE, and 4-23-18,502 BCE.

45. The Long Count was not created before the 52-year cycle, and most researchers surely actually acknowledge this fact at least intuitively, due to the fact that there is more weight to the numerological cycles of the 52-year count, which includes all other aspects of the Mesoamerican Calendar Cycles, from which the Long Count obviously derives its own numerical cycles as a complimentary linear tally. However, it is to be acknowledged that originally a slip cycle had probably determined the outcome of astronomical experiments that measured the year in ancient Mesoamerica, and therefore a 52-year slip cycle probably was part of the first realization for the cycle, and related to the sidereal and synodic cycles of Saturn with respect to the sun.

46. For this reason, however the true length of the year was soon to be determined as 365.2422-days, and therefore some of these so-called Mayan Long Counts also might have (at least theoretically) come around to include beneath their progressions the concluding moments of the “Blank White Days,” as discussed earlier, which help to complete the Mesoamerican Calendar Cycles at the end of each actual 52-year period. These theoretical “Corrected 52-year Mayan Counts” may have run alongside the traditional astronomical linear counts as a kind of community companion that guided the common people in their agricultural duties. For that matter, the CC acronym, which describes the Corrected Count, could also be applied to the idea of a “Common Count,” for the common duties of the common people; (for the “day”). Where area’s the SC acronym for the Slip Cycle can be applied to the idea of a “Specialized Count,” designed for the astronomical elite (for the “night”). (For that matter, it should also be noted that the researcher Bohumil Bohm has discovered evidence of a leap year system taking place within the "Codex Madrid," showing that indeed some form of seasonal functionality was invited within various Mayan Counts, with some form of correction procedure or another.)

47. After the time when the need for these “126-Blank White Days in 520-years,” (a specific discovery of the author found on 2-21-2009) had been numerologically established, they were then to be added within every 52-years of the “Corrected Mesoamerican Calendar,” at the time when the Pleiades reach the zenith, which is found in our time of autumn, and within the Mayan Calendar on the day of 4-Ahau, in the specific year of 2-Manik. This ancient Mayan New Fire Ceremony, or Tunben Kak, (as the Mayan elder Hunbatz Men calls it), therefore would have helped to establish the important creation date of 4-Ahau, or “Can Ahau,” as the end date for all of the Mayan Calendar Cycles by providing the end date for the 52-year cycle. This creation date for the 52-year cycle would then have been "cross-engineered," over to a linear count or Slip Cycle of 5125.366-years, which was traditionally maintained to account for the accumulating Saturn cycles occurring with respect to the annual progressions of the sun.

48. The ongoing Long Count Cycle of ‘1872000-symbolic days’ (mandated by the Linear Long Count) can be for this case of analysis then be simply paused along with all the other Mayan Calendar Cycles for the 12, 13, or 14-days that are necessary to realign the calendar with the tropical year at the end of a 52-year period, which then is to reopen with the day 5-Imix. After the ultimate addition of the “1,234-Blank White Days” has finally commenced with the passage of some Ninety-eight 52-year cycles, or 5128.744 actual years later, (or just 1° of precession short of 5,200-years) theoretically, the (corrected) Long Count should then finally read as 13.0.0.0.0. - on the day of April 12th, 2013 CE when the sun sits within the area of the Milky Way, which also reflects the nature of the Kankin glyph.

   Above on the calendar plate to the left is shown where the division consisting of the "12-Blank White Days" had occurred within the year of 1974 CE, which was the year "2-Manik," and had helped to close the 52-year cycle with the date 4-Ahau on October 22nd, within the Theoretical Mayan Corrected Count. This measure that was then to be taken in 1974, will now lead to the conclusion of the last Baktun on the date of April 12th, 2013 (theoretically) as 13.0.0.0.0. with the passage of the date-sign-tonalli of 4-Ahau occurring while the sun is literally to be stationed just within the area below the Milky Way Arm, which is to be seen represented by the "Cosmic Tree," of the Kankin Glyph. This glyph demonstrates a solar disk to the left of the Milky Way Cosmic Tree, which is horizontal during the night during this time of year, and then as the sun rises, the "Milky Way Arm / Cosmic Tree" then becomes more vertical throughout the day, just as the sun reaches the zenith. This of course, is also to be seen above as the Kankin Glyph is being used here to demonstrate the suns position with regards to the Milky Way in the calendar chart (found to the right), where the green filling shows the position of 4-Ahau / 3-Kankin; the base of the Kankin Glyph is the Galactic Center. On this date the sun will be within the mouth of the stars of Pisces, generally corresponding to the position of the solar symbol upon the Kankin glyph. In more ancient times due to precession, within this particular year the sun was to be found on the day 4-Ahau further east upon the ecliptic within the stars of Aries, and even further within the stars of Taurus back in extremely ancient times of this 52-year corrected period of "Hun Caban," or 1-Caban.

49.   Indeed, the most enigmatic aspect of the 52-year correction cycle would be exactly why this correction ceremony was to happen within the year of 2-Manik, which corresponds to the Central Mexican year of 1-Rabbit, and therefore showing the basis of this 52-year cross-cultural correlation. The evidence seems most certainly to point to the fact that the date sign of 4-Ahau comes about specifically at just the right moment when the Pleiades reach the zenith in the autumn within the 52-year period of the year 2-Manik.

50. As to why the date sign of 4-Ahau was chosen as the “creation date” for the Mayan Calendar, and as well serving as the counting bases of the extended Long Count Cycle, is probably to be outlined best by the position of the 20th symbol of Ahau or (Lord), as historically being the last symbol of the 20-day cycle, and which therefore could also represent the 360-degrees of space. Also, the number four is significant as being a symbol of the sun since the number four has traditionally in Mesoamerica, always absorbed the notion of 'the sun being within its underworld home of midnight', which is found suspended in the atmosphere of the “Four-Directions of Time and Space,” and therefore is also a symbol of the completion of the 360-degrees of space. These facts of course, might also hinge on the hidden stellar bases of the Ahau "Lord Symbol" which can be found in the heavens in the form of a massive circular head constellation, and which then could have demonstrated the totality and completion of the planetary cycles throughout the 360-degrees of the ecliptic or (zodiac) at the various junctures of intense light such as within the realm of the Galactic Center.

51. Moreover, speculation might also invite the possibility that the significance of the date of “4-Ahau,” specifically may have come about through certain calculations relating the 260-day cycle, in relation to calculations that multiply that cycle further with the year cycle of 365-days. In other words, through repeating calculations of the 260-day cycle, such as in the equation of (260 x 3.65 = 949) as relating to the amount of days in the precession of the equinoxes - they may have come to the conclusion that since 13-Muluk is the 949th sign of tzolkin in this case, and as a result of being the 13th sign of the week of 1-Caban, (which has 4-Ahau in the 4th place as the 940th sign) that this inherent numerical calculation would be the most appropriate place within the tzolkin (as it permutates within the 52-year cycle) to make the correction. Then, after the sign 4-Ahau was located within the week of 1-Caban, other stellar factors were considered concerning the Pleiades, and still further along with other planetary cycles that pertain to Venus. Although highly volatile for any kind of certain conclusion, a great deal more research on these intricate aspects of the Mesoamerican Calendar now must be allowed for, in order that we may move further with the study and the understanding of its symbolism.

9

                                                                        The Beginning of the GMT Correlation

52. In order to understand the current misunderstood conundrum of the Mayan Long Count Calendar, and the notion that it was the original intention of an ongoing uninterrupted linear count (or slip cycle) that lasts throughout the time of eternity, we must therefore examine when and where the Goodman-Martinez-Thompson Correlation (or GMT) had initially emerged from, as this correlation has generally reinforced this basic notion that has now been applied to the Mesoamerican Calendar as a whole. The first name in the sequence of the G.M.T. acronym is that of Joseph Goodman, who of which was a journalist and newspaper editor from Virginia City, Nevada in the late 1800’s. It is well known that Goodman was Mark Twain’s friend and first editor. As a puzzle buff, and therefore being something of a mathematician, Joseph Goodman was to have eventually come across the Mayan Creation Date of “4-Ahau,” and its relationship to the opening and closing of the Great Baktun Cycle.

53. In 1905, he published a short article where in which he was to put forth the initial renderings of his computations. This of course, was not to be done without the help of the work that was first put forth earlier by Bishop Diego de Landa, the first Spanish Bishop of Yucatan who first wrote about the correlations between the Christian and Mayan Calendars in his 1566 “Relacion de las Cosas en Yucatan.” In that document, deLanda had recorded that the year in which Merida was first established, 1541, was also to be the first year of the Katun of 11-Ahau. From this piece of information it is then to be automatically gathered that the previous 19.72 year Katun cycle of 13-Ahau, was to have ended sometime in the previous year of 1540. These facts pertaining to information on the Katun cycles are paramount in establishing a firm correlation between Mayan and Christian Calendars, which cannot be excused.

54. Also in another section of Diego deLanda’s Relacion, he was to record the passage of the first day of the Mayan year that fell on the tzolkin date of 12-Kan, and also on the Haab date of 1-Pop, which he tied to Sunday July 16th, 1553. Unfortunately, although this date serves as one of the most legitimate references to the factors relating to the Mayan Christian calendar correlations, it suffers in more than just one way.

55.   First of all, and most importantly, it is apparent that there had been some changes in the “Year Bearer Dates,” which in turn establish the numbering of the Haab date and the seating of 0-Pop, which is the first day of each Mayan New Year. It has been acknowledged by scholars that perhaps there had been some Central Mexican influence by this time in the Maya lowlands, which had led them to make some changes in their calendars. Or that a change had been made much earlier with the Maya historically, which will be noted below. In any case, if the day 12-Kan was the 1st day of Pop, then that would mean theoretically that 11-Akbal was the date 0-Pop, and therefore serving as the official opening of the Mayan New Year in the seating of 0-Pop.

56.   However, as ancient tradition would have it, and in order to make any sense of the unfoldment of the now current Great Baktun Cycle, the year’s must all flow uniformly with the seating of 0-Pop as only ever happening on one of the four primary year bearer dates of: IK, MANIK, EB, and CABAN. Following this traditional rule is the only way to make any sense of the Great Baktun Cycle, and the Long Count in general, and this is what is currently being displayed within all current computer software displaying Mayan to Gregorian calendar dates. For that matter, it probably would have never dawned on Bishop deLanda that the ‘traditional’ seating of 0-Pop actually happened on the Julian Calendar Date of July 13th 1553, with the tzolkin date of 10-Ik, which was to establish the name of that particular Mayan New Year as in fact being: “10-Ik.”

10

57. The inconvenience of this Mayan Calendar discrepancy has been treated somewhat mildly by specialists in the field. However, Thompson had earlier in Maya Hieroglyphic Writing (1960:127) reminded us about these facts; stating in fact that the Maya of Campeche had changed the numbered Haab month positions on which the given date of Ahau had fallen. This meant that the Haab-day positions had advanced simply by one day, while all other aspects of the calendar had remained unchanged. The reason why this had taken place was not to be fully understood by Thompson, who nonetheless stated that there was no loss of time within the calendar from this change.

58. Also, secondly as was to be seen above, there is a well-known discrepancy between what should have been the Julian date of July 15th 1553, for the correlating Mayan tzolkin date found in deLanda’s Relacion of 12-Kan / 1-Pop, and which instead was officially recorded by deLanda as being July 16th 1553. The idea put forth here by most scholars is that perhaps deLanda collected his information years earlier, and simply forgot to account for the adjustment for the extra day in the previous Julian Leap Year of 1552. The result of this historical glitch would amount to naming the well documented date of the surrender of the Aztec Emperor Cuahatemoc, to the surrounding Spanish forces on the Julian Date of August 13th 1521, as being called 2-Cimi (Death) in the count of the Mayan Calendar that was made official by deLanda. But instead, the sheer weight of documentation of this date as being named within the Aztec Chronology as 1-Coatl (Mayan 1-Chicchan) has led scholars to confirm and support the Aztec-Christian Date over Bishop deLanda’s correlation, which now in turn has now been given over to the dossier of human error.

59. However, despite these discrepancies and others, it was primarily the information pertaining to the opening and closing of the Katun Cycles, which would eventually help focus attention towards an appropriate correlation of the Mayan and Gregorian calendars. In particular were certain fragments of calendrical information found in the Chronicle of Oxkutzcab, a Mayan-language historical document of the Xiu family of Yucatan, which includes the day of the Maya month on which a Katun ends for a sequence of twelve years; those being from 1533-1544 to 1544-1545. The Maya year covering parts of 1533 and 1540, contained a Katun ending on a tzolkin day of 13-Ahau, and a Haab date of 7-Xul. This is taken to be the end of the Katun 13-Ahau mentioned in other documents.

11

60. Keep in mind however that here once again we are confronted with the inconvenience of the fact that the change had been already made, which would figuratively put the opening of the seating of 0-Pop upon the tzolkin dates of: AKBAL, LAMAT, BEN, and ETZNAB, instead of on the dates that come before those four tzolkin symbols. Therefore, unofficially but in reality, the true ending of that Katun date from a traditional perspective is not 13-Ahau / 7 Xul, but rather is in fact: 13-Ahau / 8 Xul, which is the equivalent of the Gregorian calendar date of: November 12th 1539; and from a Julian date perspective this is November 2nd 1539 (November 3rd deLanda). The beginning of this particular Mayan New Year, which carries that Katun ending of 13-Ahau / 8 Xul, opened with the seating of the Haab date 0-Pop on the tzolkin date of 9-Eb, and indeed happened on July 17th of 1539 (Gregorian), just as is currently recorded, and thus named the beginning of that Mayan New Year that fell in July of 1539 CE as 9-Eb.

61. As an expert puzzle specialist and mathematician, Joseph Goodman was somehow able to make his way past this labyrinth of compounded Mayan Calendar discrepancies, which are afforded to of us all through the ancient documentation provided primarily by Bishop Diego deLanda and his Relacion’s. Despite the provided confusion, we are lucky to have even that much to go by, and for Goodman’s day his accomplishment stands out to show a uniformity that would be the foundation of future studies to come forth in the following century. As a matter of practicality, what Joseph Goodman did after getting past the discrepancies, and finding the underpinnings that link the Julian and Gregorian correlations in relation to the Mayan Calendar Cycles, was to simply count backwards with the cycles all the way back to a time of the 1st opening Katun of 4-Ahau, which put that tzolkin date in accord with the Haab date of 8-Kumku. Somehow, he must have been able to corroborate the information pertaining to the cycles of the Long Count as well, and for this reason he has been accused of emulating upon the work of Ernst Forestmann. Otherwise some must insist, that he would have never been able to leave us with his careful masterpiece for the beginning of the Great Baktun Cycle as happening within the month of August within 3114 BCE; (September -3113 BCE Julian). The reality of the matter that concerns Goodmans original correlation has been shown to actually have been contracted to August 8th, 3114 BCE for a JDN of 584,280.

62. However, reasonably for all of his practicality and foresight, he forgot to do one thing…he forgot to consider to add the correction dates – or at least to make mention of their possibilities. Of course, it is the matter of these correction dates, which are still a subject of great controversy, therefore Goodman should not be blamed for this discrepancy. In fact, it no doubt stands out as a great matter of practicality that we should indeed have a Linear Mayan Correlation that is based on the Julian August 13th 1521 "1-Serpent" date that does not include any correction dates – just so that there is at least one to consider, and one with which to weigh and measure against any other considerations for the case of a numerological pertinence of the astronomical linear count. For that matter, as it now stands Goodman’s (revised) correlation, which is based on, and verified by the Surrender date of Cuetemoc to the Spanish in 1521 CE, has now since through the work of Thompson's revision of the correlation come to be regarded as ‘the pure bona fide linear count equivalent’ of what would be the beginning of the Great Mayan Baktun Cycle of 5125.366-years, which began with the principal solar date of 4-Ahau, and within the Haab cycle 8-Kumku.

12

63. But, it is in fact small discrepancies such as the one above that names the year, which Goodman and others did not emphasize in their renderings, which has led to so much confusion in recent times about the nature of the Mayan Calendar and how it is counted within the true passage of natural time. If Goodman forced himself to explain the reasons for the placement of a ‘year-date’ of 7-Eb, and why these were not emphasized by the Maya in their great works, then perhaps he would have demanded an explanation on the nature of the Mayan year. Instead, the apparent Mayan concept of a year in relation to the actual transaction of the natural year was ignored for the sake of the times, and to dismiss lingering uncertainties, the unanswered enigma was used to establish at least a firm grounding with a linear count that could not be contended against. To this day for that matter, the GMT-correlation in many cases is almost impossible to oppose, due to the information available in deLanda’s Relacion’s.

64. However, as it stands, the linear count which currently acknowledges for instance, the opening of the year 9-Eb as being July 27th, of the year 1539 really may only be correct by only some amount of luck, in so much as a correctional procedure had taken place 32-years earlier within the Mexica 52-year corrected count, in autumn of the year 2-Reed 1507 CE, which in fact included 13-days plus ‘one extra 14th-day’ (personal discovery of the author) as being part of the end of a great 520-year cycle. For this reason, if that extra day was not added at that time, the beginning of that year date of 9-Eb in 1539 would then currently have to be acknowledged to have occurred one day earlier, and would have been July 26th, Gregorian. Indeed, as we know, as far as deLanda’s assumed to be incorrect records are concerned, the official date for the opening of that year was indeed to be statistically recorded as July 16th 1539 Julian (which is the 26th for the Gregorian).

65. Therefore, it might be a good time to realize that when we stop to recognize that a unique one extra day had been added in the Mexica New Fire Ceremony of 1507; that it might then also serve well to observe the possibility that maybe deLanda’s records were in fact correct after all. That is at least as far as his contributions were concerned. And that perhaps instead, for some great error in calendar management on the part of the Maya in the year 1506, when initiating their “2-Manik New Fire Correction Ceremony,” they might have then at that time forgot to add the one extra 14th-day, next to the usual 13 that were to be added at that time. Although theoretical, finally at last this would give us at least one more good possibility to help assess the 1-day discrepancy between the Mexica day count, and the one deLanda recorded. However, this would imply that the Maya were the ones who had made the mistake, which is of course much, much worse than blaming it on deLanda. Then for in this case, one then must wonder: “Why would the Maya forget?” Aside from some possibilities in human error, or even a leap year correction that may have not rolled over in deLandas time, we are then left to examine the possibility that this is simply where the Mayan Count was at during that time, which would put it one day ahead of the Mexica Count.

13

66. For the reason of the one extra-day as well, we can see in the example found above within the “1518 CE year of 1-Manik diagram” (found above) that the sign 1-Imix is then to be pushed forward by 1-day from the spring equinox to come about on the Gregorian date of March 23rd 1519, instead of the 22nd. In another corresponding corrected 52-year cycle, the date could also fall on March 21st. When Goodman did his linear count, he marched right passed that kind of a consideration to end up following the interesting 1,507-year linear cycle, which reflects 1,508-vague symbolic years, or 29-permutuations of the Mesoamerican 52-year Calendar Cycles that would once again in the case of this linear count theory, put the sign 1-Imix in the ‘vague year of 1-Manik’ on the Gregorian date of March 22nd, but only in 12 CE. This is the result of 52 x 28 = 1,456 + 51 = 1,507-actual years. Within this stretch of actual time are collectively 1,508-vague symbolic years of 365-days each.

67. On the other hand this would not reflect the true seasonal nature of the 29-sets of actual 52-year cycles, which a (corrected count) would show to bring this tzolkin date of 1-Imix to happen one year earlier in the time of 11 CE, and on March 22nd, Gregorian, which then goes further to represent the years 1-Manik and 1-Reed as pertaining to solid actual 365.2422-day years. As far as the linear count is concerned, and in as much as the Mexica Count reflects this correctional procedure with its seasonal allocations for the Metztli and the Tonalpoualli, so to the corresponding Mayan Count may have been a (corrected) seasonal alignment as well, otherwise perhaps theoretically deLanda’s dates would not have been so close to the recorded Mexica dates from 1521 CE.

68. In any case, after the advent of Goodman’s bona fide linear count correlation, the next participant in the contribution of the GMT correlation came about within the second part of the acronym in the name of Juan “Martinez” Hernandez. In 1926 Martinez came up with a date which placed the beginning of the Mayan Calendar as falling one day later on August 9th 3114 BCE. The reason for this conclusion is not so obvious. However, despite the deficiency of the date, and for the matter of the times and the availability of all involved within the prevailing study of correlation constants, the difference was to be that Martinez was a trained academic and therefore people were now listening; where as in the case of Goodman, many still had not heard his documented thesis, partly since he still was not accepted as a trained professional in the field.

14

69. Yet despite the 29-years that were to stand between the two correlations created by Goodman and Martinez, it was from the earlier work of Goodman, for which Martinez was finally able to derive most of the information that he needed to create his version of the starting point for the Mayan Long Count Calendar. Apparently though, despite Martinez’ support for Goodman’s work, Juan seemed determined nonetheless to stick to the task of what he probably conceived of as a legitimate astronomic starting point for the Mayan Long Count, and created what was then in 1926 recognized as the JDN 584,281 corresponding to August 9th 3114 BCE.

70. The fact that Juan Martinez was an academic of course did not necessarily make his version right. At this point in 1927, one year after the introduction of Juan Martinez’s August 9th 3114 BCE rendition of the calendar, the now well-known British archeologist, Sir John Eric Sydney Thompson put his mind to the task to see if he could establish a correlation based more squarely upon the ethnohistoric data, which was to be based firstly on deLanda's Relacions, and then secondly and most importantly upon the Surrender date of the Aztec King Cuauhatemoc to Spanish forces, which took place on the date 1-Serpent; or August 23rd 1521 CE. Matching this second historic reference point necessitated the further incrementation of 2-days that were to be added to Martinez's initial 584,281 correlation. (Alanda. http://www.mesoweb.com/features/aldana/Implications.pdf ) With this addition of the 2-days that were to be finally added by Thompson, we then were given the currently most accepted end date for the Mayan Calendar as being December 21, 2012, and for this reason the date is in actuality, to be recognized as wholly a Thompson creation. The other two participant's in the GMT Family of Correlations simply gave Thompson the focus and foundation, which then amounted to Thompson finally crediting the two others with correlations that weren't even really theirs. A symbol of Thompson's generosity actually. However, ultimately it was Thompson who would end up inadvertently aligning 13.0.0.0.0. to the winter solstice.

71. One year later, after Thompsons JDN 584,283 correlation creation, the contributions of chemical engineer John Teeple on the eclipse cycles found in the Dresden Codex would make an impact on Thompson's latest conclusion. Based on information found within the Dresden Codex eclipse tables by Teeple, Thompson then temporally went as far to reset the date of the beginning of the Great Baktun Cycle of 4-Ahau / 8-Kumku, but this time only yet still pushing the date forward by two more days later in the calendar, and now over to August 13th, 3114 BCE. This effort went to establish yet another surviving version of the GMT Family Correlation, and which is now called the GMT-3, being marked with the Astronomic JDN of 584,285. Because of Thompsons standing in the field of archeology, and also due to this correlations more scientific reassessment, this GMT-3 soon in that time became the most popular and trusted version of the correlation constant available. However, as fate would have it, eight years later in 1935, Thompson would then retract his statements and change his mind, due to doubtful second thoughts that were brought about through the earlier collaboration efforts that had been made between him and John Teeple. For this matter, Thompson once again turned to support his own earlier ethnohistoric JDN 584,283 correlation, which would place the beginning of the Great Baktun Cycle at August 11th 3114 BCE. Finally in 1937, some forty years after Goodman’s initial efforts, Thompson then proposed the concept of the Goodman-Martinez-Thompson Correlation, which was then to be crowned with the “GMT-Correlation Acronym,” and which identifies the three main contributors of the essential 'ethnohistoric correlation constants' with three differing dates. These dates were not however, to reflect the true efforts that were made by the first two contributors of Goodman and Martinez. Instead, Thompson simply set out to amend the whole series of initial correlations by including his own latest JDN 584,285 correlation, (which helped to recognize Teeple) in conjunction with his earlier JDN correlation of 584,283. Out of generosity and principal, Thompson crowned the 'right' correlation of JDN 584,283 with Goodman's name. The immediate person who had brought the original data to Thompson's attention was given a middle ground that bridged the gap between the Teeple contribution of JDN 584,285. This middle ground or 'link' was to become the ever negligible JDN 584,284. Despite this last enigmatic date correlation, in 1992 John Teeple claimed that the 584,284 could have some significant astronomical implications.

15

72. This Julian Date Number counting system, which is used to brand the various correlations, is not to be confused with the Julian calendar, although it is said that Scaliger named the calendar system after his father whose name was also Julius Caesar Scaliger, thus the confusion. Another reference sites the possibility that instead, Joseph Scaliger himself called it “Julian,” simply because it accommodates to the Julian year, for in which case the current confusion would have been inadvertently compounded by its author. Also, for that matter, this same reference goes to show this date system was originally specifically designed by Joseph Salinger to be used in conjunction with the years of the historical Julian calendar. (See Wikipedia). This Astronomic Count System begins on January 1st 4713 BCE, as day 1, and according to current scientific theory now goes on into the future endlessly or at least until 9999 CE, while at the same time the International Astronomic Union now recommends that all Julian Dates be specified in numeric Terrestrial Time, which begins the day at noon.

73. The reasoning behind this chronology is that Scaliger had discovered thru his research that in the year 4713 BCE that a 28-year solar cycle, (which relates to the 7-days of the week, and the difference in leap years every four-years = 28-years) and the 19-year lunar Metonic cycle, and a ‘15-year indiction cycle’ all turn out to have a common multiple of 7,980-years. With this any day could be somehow identified with specificity in that span of time. The latter of these three periods turns out to be a tax cycle, which is said to have nothing to do with astronomy, despite the occurrence of the planet Mars’ 15-year cycle, which eventually brings the planet back into a perfect conjunction with the sun with every 615-year’s. Therefore, interestingly, just about thirteen of these 615-year Mars cycles can easily fit into a 7,980-year period.

74. The Julian Date Number System does this all, by just simply ignoring the 365-day year and it seasonal frequency. For this matter however, it does nonetheless make a great astronomic measuring tool for the planetary cycles, and for those who are familiar with planetary integers. Also, it should be mentioned that an apparent numeric integer seems to show up in the three JDN numbers principally exemplified by 584,283, which resembles the Venus synodic cycle of 583.92-days. However, of course there is no real known connection between the two, and this coincidence is usually only confusing to beginners of the study.

75. It was initially the need to identify, and squarely secure the position of such distant historical time periods, which accounted for any benefit in marking the accumulated results for research that garnered Mayan Chronological time periods with their corresponding Julian Date Numbers. In essence, the JDN correlations first became a quaint short hand to deal with what was becoming such a numerous catalog count of chronological possibilities being delivered from so many contributors, and principally as well to help to discourage discrepancies that are to be found between the differences of the Gregorian and Julian counts. The short hand numerical reference for the chronological data was and is fine. However, the error in perspective came along shortly afterwards when the functional differences found between the two calendars of the Mesoamerican (Mayan Long Count) Calendar, and the linear Julian Date Number began to be blurred, and therefore leaving no afterthought to additional inquiry of any intercalary dates or seasonal correlations concerning Mesoamerica’s enduring calendar traditions.

76. It would appear that because a linear correlation was successfully executed by first Ernst Forstmann, and then by Goodman that soon the impervious notion and idea that the Mayan Long Count must be linear by way of its very foundational principal was eventually to be sustained, and then further maintained and scientifically reinforced through the example set forth by the principals of the Julian Date Number. In truth, if reliance was set more securely on other ancient religious calendars of similar astrologic principal, such as for instance those that are to be found with the Chinese calendar, which emphasizes a year to year cycle, (despite its lunar chronology) then perhaps further research would have been carried out to show the inherent correlations that could and do exist between other year calendars and the Mesoamerican Calendar Cycles.

16

77. Instead, the Julian Date Number was used inadvertently to stratify the scientific linear notion of the Mayan Long Count, wherein the 5-various positions of the Long Count Cycle were to be seen as the foundation pegs that guaranteed the calendars endurance over the long course of historic time. It’s allot like saying: “Sunday, Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, Friday, and Saturday, all prove that the Gregorian calendar is linear in its principal, and guarantee the calendars endurance over the course of the years.” But when in fact the truth is that the guarantee of the Gregorian calendars endurance is based on a correctional leap year date, which keeps it in step with the seasons. The 4-seasons were acknowledged as sacred to all Native American civilizations, along with the implications of the 4-astronomical directions therefore there is no need to negate the plausibility of a seasonally functional calendar being posed at the foundations of Mesoamerican civilization, since a knowledge of astronomy automatically grants such a notion.

78. On the other hand, the linear notion of the Long Count could have indeed functioned in the same way as the modern JDN number for the ancient Mayan astronomers. This is a highly mathematical resolution to the notion of the Mesoamerican Calendar however, and would imply specific mathematical skills to manipulate the linear cycles to the degree that apparently had come about in the ancient practice, which is exemplified in so many of the extended calendar cycles found in the Long Count. Again, this would seem to be owing to what is more of a “Specialist Count,” for the cult of the elite ancient Maya astronomers. For that matter, this linear cycle with its planetary function is indeed related more to the cycles of night, more so than those of the day, especially in the case of the 5125.366-year cycle actually being a "Saturn Caliper," which specifically marks that planets position among the stars.

79. Currently, part of the conundrum of the linear count discrepancy becomes reinforced with the implied notion that the “Natives of the contemporary Mayan Villages have always been using this count.” This is extremely hard to prove, but easy to dissuade since there are plenty of examples of conquered Natives all throughout Mexico who were forced to entertain deteriorated calendar chronologies, contaminated with fixed Julian year dates, and other erroneous principals that amounted to the eventual confusion and ultimate disintegration of ancient calendar tradition. Basically, just as in the case of Goodman’s executed task, with the information available pertaining to the basic principles of the Mesoamerican Calendar Cycles, a linear count could indeed show to be somehow reestablished (or even continued in the aftermath of the conquest) without the correction dates, especially with the help of corresponding European calendars that in fact, were used for all civil and agricultural purposes after the conquest.

17

80. That having been said, what is the plausibility and priority of a linear calendar within the ceremonial activities that were to be found throughout all of ancient Mexico? Whatever the case may be, the truth is that the ancient calendar keepers who oversaw maintaining the count were to always be culturally and mathematically dexterous. Many of them possessed the ability to add and subtract various calendarictic functions in order to bring about numerous quantities and products from one single equation. They explored them all, and they over turned each and every stone on every important calendarictic equation both in the name of their mathematical interest, and as well as in the game of collective personal competition with their peers. For this matter, it may be very possible that a linear version of the Mesoamerican Calendar Cycles were being implemented in practice alongside a corrected version, (or leap year version) even if this was to take place among separate tribes, or within specific encampments only.

81. For that matter, with the example cited above that shows the 1-Imix spring equinox alignment over a period of 1,507-actual years to come about in 12 CE, I would insist that the calendar specialists were indeed aware of this ‘linear cycle’ but more than likely used it for the cultic purposes of astronomy, and then converted their calculations back over to the corrected ceremonial civil count when equations demanded a tally. Therefore, it is plausible that there was some sort of astronomic linear recognition of time that was tallied with respect to the known functions of the seasonal year. With this ability of theirs, they moved back and forth thru linear equations, which involved calculations pertaining to the Mesoamerican Calendar Cycles, which are based on the function of 52-actual years and the of cycles Venus with respect to the natural year, and which would put the Pleiades at the zenith in the autumn on the day 4-Ahau, within a given ending of the 52-year cycle.

Also, with regards to Mesoamerican Calendar Cycles, are the additional Long Count computations derived from the carved monuments and Codices of the Maya, which display calculations going into the billions of years. The further cycles are listed as follows:

Piktun        20 Baktuns        8000 Tuns            2,880,000 days

Kalabtun    20 Piktuns         160,000 Tuns       57,600,000 days

Kinichiltun 20 Kalabtuns     3,200,000 Tuns    1,152,000,000 days

Alautun      20 Kinichiltuns   64,000,000 Tuns 23,040,000,000 days

18

82. The observation and study of these numerical cycles has led to the controversy of challenging the meaning of the 13-fold Baktun cycle that is made up of 1,872,000-symbolicly named days. It is evident that the Maya no doubt had made great progress with their skills, and sought to expand their concepts of time while increasing the notion of their artistic achievement as well, with the display of such exaggerated calculations that are found throughout their works. Thompson argued that the initial 13-fold Baktun cycle was then eventually replaced to function within a 20-fold vigesimal count that continued the cycle from 1,872,000-days, over to 2,880,000-days.

83. True as it is that the Maya had sought to expand their notions of time, this monumental progression in counting ends up disguising the fact that the initial 13-fold Baktun count had been originally derived from the principals of the 174-orbital Saturn cycle, and all other astronomical calculations that are to be derived from that constant.

84. A great deal more research needs to be carried out with regards to these longer time periods, and many researchers have insisted that a great deal of these numerological meanderings were a kind of artistic speculation involving higher mathematics. Indeed, for any of this material to manifest the ancient Maya must have been using the gifts of their imagination. The only other conviction that could justify such long time periods would lean towards the probability that the Maya were masters of the geologic earth cycles…or that in other words they understood the concept of the Ice Ages; thus making the Maya Long Count a kind of conceptual outline for an “Ancient Milankovich Cycle Notation,” if you will.

85. For that matter, it is also evident that these longer cycles have helped contribute to the idea and rightful notion that the Mayan Long Count is in fact linear within some of its foundational principals. After all, how could such massive calculations be tainted with awkward correctional procedures, which are principally designed for the calculation of the solar year? Yet, on the other hand, who could ever live to see the outcome of such long spans of time anyway? Therefore, the monumental calculations must be considered to have been employed in an approximate sense, which then were designed to loan an expanded notion of time and transformation to the observer, who could then further emulate more upon those cycles with their own inherent mathematical skills to bring about more conclusions and insights of their own. This amounted to an expanded notion of culture as a whole, which manipulated how time was to be perceived.
19

                                                         The Linear Long Count Mayan Cycle of 1,507-years

86. Despite the great amount of confusion to the general public that has resulted from the linear Mayan Long Count concept, many researchers and explores of the field of course remain justified in entertaining and integrating the veracity for a linear Mesoamerican Count, which would in turn justify the pursuit of Goodman’s 584,283 date correlation (inspired by deLanda) that puts the Great Baktun Cycle ending on the solstice date of December 21st, 2012. For that matter though, we must also admit for the matter of the current modern social obsession with this date that it really only seems to employ a great deal of its importance with its many ‘psychological charms’ brought forth with its 2’s and 12’s that succeed in intoning the sounds of the mind, and which then tends to go along stridently with the fact that December is the 12th month; again, only seeming to reinforce the rhyming quality of this date that also contains one of the most important solar positions of the year…the Winter Solstice.

87. For that matter as well, as sighted above, many people from many walks of life remain interested in exploring the possibilities for a linear rendition of a Mesoamerican Calendar that does not include any correction dates or pauses, which would seem to mirror our current scientific technologies, which can demand precision out of anything mathematical in nature. We have now found this solution all over the Internet, in the form of convenient Mayan date calculators that can take us just about anywhere in time we want to go. We can also adjust some of these calculators via the option of an alternative JDN number for a different perspective…but only for any given linear date.

88. What we still don’t have, is an understanding on just what that linear GMT alignment arrangement is based on. Intuition and foresight guarantees us that it is not based on the opening of the 1st Baktun / Katun of 4-Ahau / 8-Kumku, because this would seem to be a projection made in the past thousands of years beforehand, when it is doubted that there was ever any kind of Mesoamerican Civilization that could be aware of such a date. For this reason, it is understood that this date was simply meant to serve as the initiation for the 5-placements of the Long Count, and the beginning of the Great Baktun Cycle at that time in the distant past, which in turn then ends automatically on a given date in the future. For that matter though, what must be realized is that it is not necessarily the opening date, or the closing date of the Baktun cycle that is to stand as the essential key, but rather it would now seem most practical to regard the 1872000-day cycle as a planetary caliper, and even more specifically as a “Saturn Caliper,” which can be aligned to various positions of the ecliptic at varying initiations of linear time.

20

89. Therefore the question also truly hinges on what exactly this 1,507-year linear cycle is, and why it is said to be found in so many ancient Mayan sources? The truth is that the Maya as well as any other inquiring Mesoamerican culture could not have discovered this cycle without a firm understanding of the natural year of 365-days, in the way that such an equation for the natural year was mathematically feasible to them. Therefore, what had eventually come about was an understanding at some point in their times within the toil of the ongoing mathematical extrapolations made by the astronomer priests, which recognized that within the timeframe of 1,507-actual years that there are as many Hours, Minutes, and Seconds that pertain to the extra .2422 days found in a total of 1,507-years, which when isolated would then serve to add up to the amount of 1,508-vague symbolic years of 365-days. The idea behind this period is that after 28-cycles of 52-years + 51-more years of 365.2422 days, the mounting equation of “1,507-actual years,” ends up being equal to 1,508-vague years of 365 days.

90. Therefore this equation is in actuality one of the many profound mathematical bleed-throughs, which are to be traditionally found throughout the Mesoamerican Calendar Cosmologies that perhaps included the faculty of many other planetary cycles as well. This particular calculation hinges on the cycle of the natural year and may even include aspects of a planetary Saturn cycle in the wake of the absence of Venus cycles, which so regularly outline the Mesoamerican Calendar Cycles in general. Within a given period of 1,507-actual years the planet Saturn with its 29.45-year cycle will circle the sun 51.171-times. Also, Mars will circle the sun just over 801-times. But the more relevant aspects of this cycle are to be found between the regular occurrences of the actual 52-year cycle, and the enduring 1,507-year linear count. Below are the results for the 52-year period of 1-Reed, as it is measured from the day 1-Alligator / 1-Imix from the vantage point of its passage during the spring equinox. Positions for the Corrected Count have been verified through various ephemerides, in conjunction with the standard rule now being reinitiated by this author as my own personal discovery that applies the “126-intercalery days in every 520-year’s,” of the Corrected Count. Results for the Mayan Slip Cycle were derived from Dr. Ed Barnharts "Maya Date Conversion Calculator," which is to be found currently on the Internet.

21

11 3-22 AD CC=1 Alligator   SC=12 Men / 13 Keh (1508 alignment from the year 1519 CE.)

12 AD 1,507 from 1519 SC= 1 Imix / 14 Keh (March 22, 12 CE) 1,507-Year Mayan Slip Cycle

  63 3-22 AD CC=1 Alligator   SC=12 Lamat / 6 Mac

115 3-21 AD CC=1 Alligator   SC=10 Cauac / 17 Mac

167 3-22 AD CC=1 Alligator   SC=11 Ben / 11 Kankin

219 3-21 AD CC=1 Alligator   SC= 9 Kan / 2 Muan

271 3-22 AD CC=1 Alligator   SC=10 Etznab / 16 Muan

323 3-21 AD CC=1 Alligator   SC= 8 Muluk / 7 Pax

375 3-22 AD CC=1 Alligator   SC= 9 Akbal / 1 Kayab

427 3-21 AD CC=1 Alligator   SC= 8 Men / 13 Kayab

479 3-22 AD CC=1 Alligator   SC= 9 Muluk / 7 Kumku

531 3-22 AD CC=1 Alligator   SC= 8 Imix / 19 Kumku

583 3-22 AD CC=1 Alligator   SC= 8 Ix / 7 Pop

635 3-21 AD CC=1 Alligator   SC= 6 Chicchan / 18 Pop

687 3-22 AD CC=1 Alligator   SC= 7 Cauac / 12 Uo

739 3-21 AD CC=1 Alligator   SC= 5 Oc / 3 Zip

  791 3-22 AD CC=1 Alligator   SC= 6 Kan / 17 Zip

843 3-21 AD CC=1 Alligator   SC= 5 Cib / 9 Zotz

895 3-22 AD CC=1 Alligator   SC= 6 Oc / 3 Sec

947 3-21 AD CC=1 Alligator   SC= 4 Imix / 14 Sec

999 3-22 AD CC=1 Alligator   SC= 5 Men / 10 Xul

1051 3-22 AD CC=1 Alligator   SC= 4 Manik / 0 Yaxkin

1103 3-22 AD CC=1 Alligator   SC= 3 Cauac / 12 Yaxkin

1155 3-21 AD CC=1 Alligator   SC= 2 Chuen / 4 Mol

1207 3-22 AD CC=1 Alligator   SC= 3 Chicchan / 18 Mol

1259 3-21 AD CC=1 Alligator   SC= 2 Caban / 10 Chen

1311 3-22 AD CC=1 Alligator   SC= 2 Oc / 3 Yax

1363 3-21 AD CC=1 Alligator   SC= 1 Ik / 15 Yax*

1415 3-22 AD CC=1 Alligator   SC= 1 Men / 8 Sac

1467 3-21 AD CC=1 Alligator   SC= 13 Manik / 0 Keh

1519 3-23 AD CC=1 Alligator SC= 1 Imix / 14 Keh (March 23rd 1519)

1571 3-22 AD CC=1 Alligator   SC= 13 Ben / 5 Mac

1623 3-22 AD CC=1 Alligator   SC= 13 Cimi / 19 Mac

1675 3-21 AD CC=1 Alligator   SC= 12 Etznab / 11 Kankin

1727 3-22 AD CC=1 Alligator   SC= 12 Chuen / 4 Muan

1779 3-21 AD CC=1 Alligator   SC= 11 Akbal / 16 Muan

1831 3-22 AD CC=1 Alligator   SC= 11 Cib / 9 Pax

1883 3-21 AD CC=1 Alligator   SC= 10 Lamat / 1 Kayab

1935 3-22 AD CC=1 Alligator   SC= 10 Imix / 14 Kayab

1987 3-21 AD CC=1 Alligator   SC= 9 Ben / 6 Kumku

2039 3-22* AD CC=1 Alligator   SC= 10 Manik / 0 Wayeb (*Due to leap year being added in 2000 CE.)

2091 3-21 AD CC=1 Alligator   SC= 9 Cauac / 7 Pop

2143 3-21 AD CC=1 Alligator   SC= 8 Chuen / 18 Pop

2195 3-20 AD CC=1 Alligator   SC= 7 Akbal / 11 Uo

2247 3-21 AD CC=1 Alligator   SC= 6 Men / 3 Zip

2299 3-20 AD CC=1 Alligator   SC= 6 Lamat / 16 Zip

2351 3-21 AD CC=1 Alligator   SC= 6 Imix / 9 Zotz

2403 3-20 AD CC=1 Alligator   SC= 5 Ben / 3 Sec

2455 3-21 AD CC=1 Alligator   SC= 6 Manik / 15 Sec

2507 3-20 AD CC=1 Alligator   SC= 4 Etznab / 6 Xul

2559 3-22 AD CC=1 Alligator   SC= 6 Ben / 1 Yaxkin

2611 3-21 AD CC=1 Alligator   SC= 4 Kan / 12 Yaxkin

2663 3-21 AD CC=1 Alligator   SC= 4 Caban / 5 Mol

2715 3-20 AD CC=1 Alligator   SC= 2 Lamat / 16 Mol

2767 3-21 AD CC=1 Alligator   SC= 3 Ik / 10 Chen*

2819 3-20 AD CC=1 Alligator   SC= 2 Ix / 2 Yax

2871 3-21 AD CC=1 Alligator   SC= 2 Manik / 15 Yax

2923 3-20 AD CC=1 Alligator   SC= 1 Cauac / 7 Sac

2975 3-21 AD CC=1 Alligator   SC= 2 Ben / 1 Keh

3026 1,507 of year 1519 SC= 1 Imix / 14 Keh (March 22nd 3026 CE) 1,507-Year Mayan Slip Cycle

3027 3-20 AD CC=1 Alligator   SC= 13 Kan / 12 Keh (1508 alignment from the year 1519 CE)

22

91.   As can be seen from the example above, the 1,507-year Slip Cycle would end up calling March 22nd of the year 12 AD/CE as being 1-Imix / 14 Keh, which can only happen in the Mayan vague year of 1-Manik. However, this calculation is only the result of counting backwards from the advent of the 1519 CE March 23rd spring equinox intersection of the first day of the Tonalpoualli / Tzolkin called 1-Alligator / 1-Imix, as is recorded for both calendars of the Corrected Count, and what is here being referred to as the Mayan Slip Cycle. Therefore, it stands to show that the 1,507-year equation is a calculation that is relevant from where it is being made, and might only pertain as well, as to exactly why it is being made as in the case of some specific astronomical calculation, (such as the annual solar zenithal passage) or a sidereal position of Saturn, which then might demand this cycle as a tool. In the case of the “Corrected Count Calendar Theory,” it is the autumnal realignment with the Pleiades in either one of the years of 2-Reed (Aztec) or 2-Manik (Mayan) which guarantees these positions throughout time.

92.  When counting forwards from the date of March 23rd 1519 CE, we soon after 468-years (or 9 x 52-year cycles) come upon the date of March 22nd 1935 CE, at which time we can see that this particular recent Gregorian date is crowned with a “Mesoamerican Alligator / Imix Date,” for both the Corrected Count, and as well for the linear Slip Cycle. Respectively, at this time it is 1-Alligator for the Corrected Count and 10-Imix for the Slip Cycle. This fortunate alignment of our times has resulted in the astrological studies, which pertain to the nature of the human personality to result in positive outcome for interpretations regarding the 20-day signs which establish the Mesoamerican Calendar. This is to say that within the 52-year period between 1923 and 1975 (or the year’s 2-Reed in the Aztec 52-year count) that the 20-day signs (only) will at least read as similar for people born in between those years of that particular 52-year cycle. However, because of the 12-day correction that was to take place in autumn of 1975, the 20-day count between the two then separates, and by 1987 we see a 13-day separation occurring for the 20-day signs between the two differing counts of the Mayan Slip Cycle, and the Aztec 52-year Corrected Count.

93. Because when counting forward or backwards with this 1507-year cycle with respect to the actual 52-year cycle, we then see that automatically the 1,507-year cycle comes to exactly 1,456-years + 51-years, or 1-year short of an actual 1,508-year cycle, which is usually 29 x 52-years. Therefore, in order for these two cycles to come together it will take the time of literally 1,507-years x 52 = (78,364-years) in order to get the two within the same alignment as in what the year 1519 CE had previously dictated on March 23rd of that year, but of course which was originally brought about with the Aztec correction ceremony some 12-years earlier. Interestingly, this lengthily cycle of 78,364-years, outlines just over three 26,000-year precession cycles, and holds within it just over 2,660-orbital Saturn cycles of 29.45-years each. But in fact, it may also be true that the various additions of the increments of the intercalary dates for the Corrected Count would throw this 78,364-year cycle off by some amount, causing the need for a periodic realignment between the two counts.

94.   The result of these two cycles vaguely coming together after 468-years in the year of 1923 after the 2-Reed realignment immediately brought these two differing cycles together within the 20-day cycle only, on November 17th 1923 CE. This happened with the 1st day of the renewed 52-year cycle on “5 Flint,” while at that time the linear Mayan count registered “1-Eztnab / 6 Sac.” This kind of alignment lasted a whole 52-years until November 3rd 1975, which was the last day of that particular 52-year cycle, and ended on the date “4-Movement,” in that Aztec year of 2-Reed; while the linear Mayan count registered as 13-Caban / 5 Sac. This kind of alignment forces the 13-numbers of the two differing cycles to come together for their own particular alignment within that 52-year period as well. In the section on Mesoamerican Astrology is given the standard legend for the cross referencing of the 13-day cycles that are to be found between the Corrected Count and the Wandering Year Slip Cycle, in between the years of 1923 and 1975.

23

The Dresden Codex and the Tradition of Conflicting Calendar Correlations

95. Recently, just within the wake of the uprising of the “2012-GMT theory,” and with its following of the end of the world prophecies, which some feel tend to cripple a legitimate study of the Mesoamerican Calendar Cycles, the long awaited interpretations of the Dresden Codex have at least now begun to blossom outwards, and are now beginning to be found more typically on the Internet, and distributed in other publications. Behind them now are often the scholars or experts in the field, who since now having found a different correlation date with which to base their investigations on, have been able to find a way out of the typical and usual obsession with the GMT-correlation; as it is characteristically used as the deciding factor for most all Mesoamerican dating techniques, including the Aztec Calendar Correlations.

96. A recent correlation constant has shown that the JDN of 622,261 correlating to August 29th, 3010 BCE of the Julian calendar, and (August 4th Gregorian) had been discovered by B. Bohm, and has proved to be successful in converting most all aspects of astronomical dating found in the Mayan Script of the Dresden Codice. In the wake of studies conducted under the GMT-1 & 3 constants of 584,283 and 584,285 the authors of Bohme and Bohme, had found the results to be inconclusive. However, what remains true in the wake of these astronomical extrapolations, which reaches across the boundaries of the centuries, is that the procedure which the astronomical Dresden Codice covers appears to be in fact linear in its nature.

Working with the Mayan data of the Dresden Codex we found out, that the Goodman-Martínez-Thompson correlation is unusable, even for the dates evidently concerning certain astronomical phenomena, as the observations of Venus visibility, or Sun and Moon eclipses. We have obtained a brand new coefficient of 622,261 days for the calculation of the Mayan dates to our dating system by a complete analysis of the mutual relations between the time intervals of all the Mayan dates in the Dresden Codex and 400 inscriptions from the cathedral cities. Using the so called Böhm coefficient, we were successful in proving, that all in the Dresden Codex contained data are concerning astronomical phenomena.

Bohumil Böhm, Vladimir Böhm. THE DRESDEN CODEX.mht

97. As an advocate of the Corrected Count Theory, I am not too surprised or disappointed at this kind of conclusion, or kind of discovery for the matter of the Dresden Codex, since in reality there are in fact systematic approaches of adding intercalary days to bring about the intended astronomical functions within this ancient document. Also, it is apparent to me that indeed the matter of a linear kind of calendar or numeration system (or astronomical calculation system) had been originally experimented with in ancient Mexico, and was no doubt used systematically to bring about the eventual realization of an actual year count that was to be 365.2422-days long. Indeed, it is probably from the arguments of a linear continual 365-day count, and 260-day count that the eventual bases of a corrected count had then followed some time shortly after - although not in some of many centuries later with the Aztec Civilizations. I would instead insist that from the onset with the ancient Olmec’s, and the Zapotecs that a corrected count had developed along with all of its attendant celestial concepts as well, which pertain to the observances of the constellations with regards to the 365-day cycle and the 20-day cycles within it.

98. What is not so impressive about this Dresden Codice 622,261 correlation is an astrological correspondence that is practically to all intents and purposes…well, yes - disprovable. When using the 622,261 we simply end up in the figurative backwaters of the GMT-3 (584,285) astrological correlation misconception that shows the tonalli date to be two days behind of the real 20-day tonalli-sign, as is demonstrated in the case for what can be exemplified between the Corrected Count, and the GMT-linear count, between the years of 1923 to 1975. However, in the case of the 662,261 correlation, we now are found wandering two days ahead of a person’s actual 20-day tonalli sign. I for one have had the ability and talent to demonstrate that the tonalli is vital, through the outright prediction of the tonalli-sign as I perceive the tonalli influence upon the face of many individuals – even to this very day. This doesn’t mean that I haven’t been disappointed in the past when the prediction was off by a matter of days, or even specifically a year, (which is 6-Tonalli positions), or found it completely irrelevant when I just couldn’t tell at all.

99. However, the implications of the tonalli are that it often tends to be stronger and more presentable for certain signs, and also for the matter of certain individuals as well. Simply put, some individuals just do not ware their tonalli uniform as intensely as others. I have always noticed that the 5th, 6th, and 7th signs of the Serpent, the Turtle (Death), and the Deer, are usually the most prominent in their physical features. I have also found the sign of the Deer to be participating preeminently in the mass community rituals that pertain to public performances; contributing to the most basic of services, to extended show business, and other more important social political meetings. It would just seem that many of these people born under the Deer Tonalli would need so strongly to be participating to the very degree that they actually end up reinforcing their social station within the community. It is indeed for that matter a common sign.

100. For the reasons provided by personal experience, it can be said that many times the tonalli features of any one of the 20-day signs is unmistakable, and really cannot be altered, or moved, or reinterpreted. It is what it is, and it is to be observed. This is one of the inherent meanings of the ancient Mesoamerican Astrological Mysticism.

101. Thus, the question now becomes, what is this 622,261 astronomical correlation? Apart from astronomical synthesis, there is the question of the chronology which puts the beginning of its Baktun cycle as occurring some 104-years later than the most popularly purposed GMT-correlation of 584,283; this also equates to 107-years over past from my Corrected Count Correlation of 583,161. But in the meantime, the records of deLanda specifically account for the observances pertaining to the beginnings and endings of the Katun cycles in the years just before the conquest, (which my 583,161 corrected correlation can indeed, and does very easily blend in with). Further, it has been plainly observed that deLanda’s dates are way too close to the Mexica-Azteca Count Correlation to be ignored; it is in fact the Aztec Surrender Date Count of August 13th 1521 CE (Julian) that the 584,283 correlation actually turns out to be ‘chronologically’ based on.

102. So now, are we saying that with the 622,261-correlation that the surrender of Cuauhtémoc to the Spanish actually happened on the date “9-Deer?”(Dresden). Why not, for years some scholars and experts in the field who have insisted on the superfluous 584,285 correlation have deemed that event as being “12-House,” despite the evidence, and as well as the advice of its creator, Thompson, who repudiated his own work! Montezuma must have been off in his count? As it turns out however, with evidence supplied by the Dresden Codice it would appear that there indeed was to be more than one count, and even more than one Mayan Long Count that was to be taking place in the realms of ancient Mexico – intercalary dates or none.

103. Therefore, what is needed now is a systematic pathway to ‘correlation corroboration’, which would succeed in recognizing the differences in the conflicting correlations and why perhaps they are there. This may be possible when limiting the amount of correlations to be judged, and of course this is the precise problem because there is simply too many. There needs to be a consortium of Mesoamerican Calendar counting procedures, and a moratorium on Mesoamerican Calendar chronologies. Currently there are far too many correlations pertaining to what is thought to be the linear count of Mesoamerica.

104. In closing the section on the Mayan Long Count, this author will therefore make an attempt to corroborate the 3-most important correlations of the day: The GMT-584,283, The Bohm-622,261, and of course, finally this authors Corrected Count, which hinges on the JDN of 583,161 or July 15th, 3117 BCE, and which ends up 1873234-days later to commence on JDN: 2,456,395 or April 12th, 2013. The process will be achieved through the revelation of the stellar Kumku glyph and the ancient principal of rectifying Long Count initiations from the stellar brain/temple of that “dark being.”

Official Map of the Universe. Copyright. Courtesy of: Tomas J. Filsinger
105. The inherent principal in the stellar Kumku Glyph is simple, and in fact serves as the basis for so many other Mesoamerican concepts as well. Quite simply, the realm of the zodialogical Pisces is the watery underworld, or “mouth.” While the opposite realm of the zodialogical Virgo is the “pinnacle of intelligence,” or the brain, and / or the location of the tonalli energy. Therefore, it is to be understood that in Mesoamerica the image of the face was perceived within the outline of the 360° realm of the heavens, a fact that was discovered by this author through the archeological vestiges of Mesoamerican ceremonial masks. This iconographic stellar facet pertaining to the 360-degrees of the heavens may also be related to the concept of "Ahau," or Lord, and its stellar symbolism.

106. Obviously, the Kumku glyph represents a face, and is therefore by default the head of a full-fledged living being. In this case, this being is a stellar spirit, and the position of this beings head is top side up. Therefore, the Virgo constellation or (the pinnacle of intelligence) is positioned top side up, and represents the summer zenith sun of 3117 BCE. Given this stellar description of the glyph, it is easy to see therefore that this summer position of the 20-day Haab month of Kumku is the official placement for this time period, while at the same time the epithet for this deity is often referred to as the ‘dark being’, which is very fitting for the zodialogical Cancer, and which is to be the zodiac sign that the sun resides in during this 20-day period – within the Corrected Count. On July 15th, 3117 BCE, the sun was on the 22nd degree of the Tropical orientation of Cancer, while at the same time being stationed within the stellar pinnacle of the constellation of Virgo.

107. Given this astronomical fact, in the case of the Corrected Count procedure, the 20-day Haab therefore will follow along with the slipping passage of the 26,000-year westward motion of the topical year. In this sense, to view the positions of the 20-day Haab within the procession of the Corrected Count procedure against the image of the heavens, would be similar to viewing a clock on the wall with its single hour-hand moving backwards slowly over a period of 26,000-years. For this reason, it is obvious why the beginning of the cycle, (and / or the end of the cycle) of “8-Kumku,” would start at the top, or at the pinnacle, or zenith of this stellar beings intelligence, which is the location of the tonalli, or soul.

108. In the image above, it can be seen where the autumnal equinox currently resides in our times by way of the vertical green line that runs up through the zodialogical Virgo. This is exactly where the sun was within its precise conjunction with the two planets of Saturn and Venus, on the day of July 15th, 3117 BCE or, JDN: 583,161. This author is suggesting that possibly the objective of this Corrected Count version of the Mayan Long Count was to locate this 3-fold planetary conjunction at a specific point in stellar space that corresponded with the 18th (or the 17th) Haab of Kumku, while in a correspondence with an already established 52-year Corrected Count date of 4-Ahau, which was then projected backwards into time and space, to land within to as close a proximity as possible to the pinnacle point of Virgo within that area, which we now call the stars of “Coma Bernice’s.” Within the cosmologies of Mesoamerica, this star cluster may have had something to do with the concept of a resurrected tonalli, and / or as well, the ‘captured knot of hair’ caught within the fist of a competing warrior, which presumes defeat in the field of battle, which is a battle tradition that has its origins beyond Mesoamerica, and which instead can also be found in the iconography of ancient Sumer as well.

109. In the case of the linear count procedures, the alignment for the cycle of initiation of the Great Baktun Cycle, which also starts with the sun at the pinnacle of Coma Bernice’s for the Bohm Correlation of 622,261, the calendar (not the sun) will then flow with the precession of the 1,507-year cycle…for a total of “17-times,” in a period of 25,626-years or (5 x 5125.366-years) for the precession of the equinoxes. The number 17 is significant here as the Kumku glyph actually bears a conceptual and structural resemblance to the 17th sign of the Nahuatl glyph for “Movement,” which in that culture is referred to as “Ollin.”

110. Indeed, as reiterated by Prudence M. Rice in her “Mayan Calendar Origins,” it is to be well noted that in the ancient Mayan Chole culture that the Kumku glyph was referred to as “Ol,” meaning ‘round’, and referring also to ‘heart’. (Rice.2007:65). In the opinion of this author, it would seem somewhat obvious that a part of the Nahuatl etymology was in fact derived from this ancient Mayan source, as the Nahuatl word for round is “olotic,” and which in turn became the further extension of ‘rolling motion’ referring to something that is round, and even then further becoming the definition for the rolling liquidity of rubber, and then to the round rubber ball (symbolizing motion). Taken even further, this might have also evolved into the Nahuatl word for heart, which is “yollotl,” and which of course is also a preeminent symbol of movement.

111. This author also realizes that the Kumku glyph is specifically related to the fourth “Kan glyph,” and for that matter it should be included that the massive 360-degree stellar Kumku glyph is actually an expanded version of a more “condensed core,” (like a seed) which constitutes the essential symbolism of the more massive version that outlines the totality of the northern celestial hemisphere.

112. Note here as well, that the Central Mexican glyph for Movement, also specifically (in one version) has a pinnacle upon it. For that matter, it should be noted that the functionality of the two stellar glyphs of Kumku, and Ollin, fulfill the same astronomic purpose as providing a graphic outline for the precession of the equinoxes, and or the precession of the 1,507-year cycle, or both simultaneously.

113. Upon the Aztec Sunstone, this of course is spelled out symbolically in the form of the 5-ages of the sun. The fifth or current sun, stands at the center of the diagram as the 5th and final sun of 4-Movement or “Nauhui Ollin.” The numerological essence of the Ollin glyph as being the 17th, in the complete cycle of twenty day signs, seems more and more to refer to the structural role of the planet Saturn, which demonstrates 174-sideral orbital cycles in the Great Baktun Cycle, and which in turn seems to hold a delicate simulacrum with the seventeen 1,507-year cycles in a period of 25,262-years. The Sun/Saturn relationship deems a specific relationship in the synchronization of the solar system, which is showing itself to be more and more related to the 52-year period of the Mesoamerican Calendar Cycles. In the case of the Mayan version of this glyph referred to as “Caban,” meaning ‘earth’, indeed it seems that we can be sure to find the graphic essence of this Mayan day-sign glyph in precisely the same area of the firmament where we see the Andromeda Galaxy Spiral beneath the Milky Way. This places emphasis on its terrestrial aspect as relating to the earth, and the movements that take place there in the form of earthquakes. The "crooked eye brow formation" above the spiral actually indicates the position of the Milky Arm overhead in the area of Perseus.

114. Within this glyph are featured two distinct dark balls presumably representing two various positions of the sun around the time of the summer solstice at the beginning of the Great Baktun Cycle. The first dark ball to the left of the observer probably represents just that; the position of the summer solstice in around the time of 3114 BCE; Mayan Count. This possibility is being emphasized due to the extended squiggly line that wiggles its way down towards what appears to be the then current North Star, creating in turn the obscure form of a ‘question mark’. The second dark ball to the right is no doubt probably the position of the sun at the moment of the day of the shadow-less zenithal passage, which was said to have occurred on August 10th 3114 BCE, a day before the opening of the linear GMT- Mayan Baktun Cycle of 5125.366-years. However, as was indicated in the case of the stellar Kumku Glyph concept, it might also be suggested that the Caban Glyph has a smaller core as well, which can be understood as expanding outwards to correspond to a larger 360-degree circumference.

115. It was on the early midnight morning of March 1st 2011 that this author had noticed that the planet Saturn, (which has been awfully red in color lately), was in a significant alignment with the red star of Arcturus, which lies very close to the ecliptic. This observation was significant on more than one level, but first was the confounding realization that the position of Saturn actually mirrored that of its initial position at the opening of the current linear Great Baktun Cycle! For this author, this was news, despite anyone else’s previous knowledge of this fact.

116. Following in the wake of this realization is the notion of course that this linear cycle actually pertains to the dark forces of the “Nine levels of Night,” which traditionally referring to the black obscurity of night is universally throughout most all ancient world cosmologies, to be the realm of the planet Saturn’s domain. This aspect formed between Arcturus and Saturn invites further speculations towards the meaning of the Great Baktun Cycle, and its relationship to the concept of “darkness,” in the Mayan world; when the realization of this author, which took place in September of 2010, is finally considered.

Finally, on September 21, 2010 it was realized that the leaf nosed bat of the Mayan month of Zotz, is in fact the massive crucifix in the sky that extends its bat wings as the arms of the Milky Way. The leaf nose “point” is the point made by the constellation of Bootes with Arcturus at the tip.
Noted Date and Discovery of the author.

                                                                                                                                                                   Official Map of the Universe. Copyright. Courtesy of: Tomas J. Filsinger
In the Mayan mythology, this bat is named collectively “Camazotz,” meaning ‘death bat’ in the K’iche language. The cult of Camazotz is said to have begun around 100 BCE, among the Zapotec Indians, and the deity soon found its way into K’iche pantheon, and who then associated this being with their god Zoztzilaha Chamalcan, the god of fire. It might also be noted that this animal is particularly notorious for taking nose dives around the heads of humans below.

In the Popol Vuh, Camazotz are the bat-like monsters encountered by the Maya Hero Twins Hunahpu and Xbalanque during their trials in the underworld of Xibalba. The twins had to spend the night in the House of Bats where they squeeze themselves into their own blowguns in order to defend themselves from the circling bats. Hunahpu stuck his head out of his blowgun to see if the sun had risen and Camazotz immediately snatched off his head and carried it to the ballcourt to be hung up as the ball to be used by the gods in their next ballgame.

                                                                                                                                                                                              Wikipedia

117. On the Corrected Count, the helical setting of this red star Arcturus occurs usually within the 20-day Haab of Zotz. The significance of this bats pointed stellar nose, and the yearly solar (Haab) cycle is therefore spelled out efficiently in this case. On the other hand, in the case of the linear count, it appears that indeed the passage of the sun in relation to the position of the star Arcturus contributes significantly to the invention of the Long Count Chronology, which is the one that is meted out by the GMT-584,283 correlation. In this particular vision of the stellar Camazotz, the ‘knife point pinnacle’ created by the constellation of Bootes, marks approximately where the sun was on the date of the shadow-less day of Aug 10th, 3114 BCE. This alignment may contribute to the idea that the ‘linear Haab date of 8-Kumku’ was deliberately established for this solar position, and which in turn would by default end on the date of December 21, 2012; while at the same time principally fulfilling the role of the 1872000-day period as being a 174-orbital Saturn caliper. The planet Saturn is seen in this case of the 584,283 correlation as being aligned with the 3rd brightest star in the sky Alpha Centauri, which does not elevate far from the south-west horizon.

118. When the stellar identification of the Camazotz death bat put forth here is considered, we now can see that the Galactic Center is the decapitated head of Hun-Ahpu, or “1-Hunter Lord,” or (1-Blowgunner) and therefore represents the vestiges of the previous old cycle of 5125.366-years now having finally come to an end, with the location of the sun at the rift of the Galactic Center on the date of December 21st, 2012 as then symbolizing the closing of the linear aspect of the great Baktun Cycle. For this reason, concerning the mythology and astronomy of the liner cycle of 5125.366-years and its connection to the dark lord of night Saturn, we can see that this cycle is preeminently connected to the forces of night, and of death, and destruction; which are an aspect of the winter solstice found throughout all astral mysticism's of the ancient world religions. This is perhaps why in the Popol Vuh, Hun-Ahpu is not revived, since he is in reality the sun of the current 5125.366-year cycle whose head has been turned into a ball that was to be used in the underworld ball game of the planetary night cycles ruled by Saturn.

119. The count of the linear version of the Long Count continues after the end date of December 21st, 2012, however the preeminent mythological theme of death, and then finally of “resurrection,” or rebirth, is perhaps to be continued - not on December 22nd, 2012 – but perhaps theoretically in an expanded edition of Mesoamerican Calendarictics and Cosmologies, is rather to take place later around the spring equinox of 2013, since the spring is where the sun is reborn in a 'counter astral mythology' that accounts for the significance of the rising daily sun of 365.2422-days in a year (Venus), as opposed to the 360-degrees of the sidereal sky (Saturn) that the sun traverses in the time of a year. Therefore in this case, it is the tropical year (Spring Equinox) [Corrected Count] versus the sidereal year (Winter Solstice) [Mayan Slip Cycle] which is (or can be) seen to be in an orchrestrated convergence at this time of the closing of the 5,200 year cycle.

120. Apparently, there had been traditionally two versions of the Hun-Ahpu myth: One in which he is revived by his sons the “hero twins,” and one in which he is not. Obviously, the version in which 1-Hunter Lord is revived represents the resurrection of the sun, and pertains to the ‘renewed forces of day’ and could by default refer to, or imply the ‘Seasonal Haab Cycle’. Therefore in theory, the conflict that exists between the various versions of the Mesoamerican Calendar in the form of a linear count, and conversely a renewed Corrected Count can help amend the conflict that exists between the two versions of the Hun-Ahpu’s life and death cycle.

121. In the version of Hun-Ahpu’s resurrection by his two son’s known as the hero twins, 1-Hunter Lord is to be seen rising out of the vestiges of a turtle carcass with assistance of his two sons at the service of his eminent resurrection. Because there is indeed to be found a literal turtle constellation beneath the Milky Way in the area of Pisces, (authors personal discovery: 2001), which is the location of the current spring equinox, this then can become (and is) the location of 1-Hunter Lord’s resurrection in the time of spring, and taking place in the form of the new formed corn stalk that reaches upward symbolically thru the north star and up towards the stellar pinnacle of Virgo, he now becomes “Hun Nal Ye,” or god of the new corn. Although, it is also true that the Galactic Center is to be considered as a Turtle Shell as well, where the vestiges of 1-Hunter Lord can be seen vertically arising from the ashes of the shell in the form of the emerging vertical spiral arms, which extend from the top and bottom of the Galactic Center, this light source might instead be viewed as the spirit or tonalli evacuating the “skull,” and thereby creating a bridge between the Galactic Center and the glyph for the 5th Haab of “Sec,” which means skull.

122. However, in the wake of the progression of the year, there is yet another cross that is created with respect to the angle of the Andromeda Galaxy, which squares the Galactic Center with a 90-degree orientation, this is the cross created between the winter solstice and the spring equinox – at the center of this cross is the North Star. The Andromeda Galaxy is the vertical progression of pure spirit, while the Galactic Center represents the dead inert horizontal body – of the north and the winter solstice, which becomes the fertile foundation that the new corn (spirit) emerges from.

123. The duality and gravitational battle between these two massive stellar bodies of the Andromeda Galaxy and the Milky Way is well known, and is advertised in modern astronomy. Therefore, we are pursuing the previous notion of this battle in the ancient Mesoamerican Astronomical Cosmologies, which inadvertently unites these two light sources. The knowledge of this 2nd Galactic light source was well known in Mesoamerica, and as well the knowledge of the Andromeda Galaxy served as the esoteric foundation referring to the theme of so many resurrected beings all throughout the ancient world. For that matter, the Andromeda Galaxy is (esoterically) also mythologically related to Venus.

124.  Of course, on the Corrected Count the last day of the cycle occurs on April 12, 2013, and not on the spring equinox of March 21st, 2013. In this Corrected Count, the sign “10-Ahau,” occurs on March 23rd of 2013, as the sign 4-Ahau is always to be either occurring within 22, 21, or 20-days after the spring equinox in the 52-year (corrected) period of 1-Caban. These facts are a result of the Corrected Count pertaining to an astronomical and astrological solar order, for which our current limited understanding of the Mesoamerican Calendar has not yet completely helped to reestablish.

The stellar constellation from which this iconographic scene is principally derived from, is actually to be found at the area of the current Spring Equinox, in around the stars of Pisces. The crucifix symbol created by the resurrected Hun Nal Ye is in fact the horizontal Milky Way; to the right would be the Galactic Center, to the left would be Gemini or the star Sirius.

125. In the case of the Corrected Count, the seasonal Haab of Kankin is principally a mid-spring 20-day month, and as has been outlined earlier above, and as a symbol of the horizontal Milky Way (midnight spring alignment) it here serves at this time of the year as the cosmic tree that was marked as the glyph of Kankin, via a solar symbol within the upper branches of the horizontal Milky Way glyph; where the base of that glyph finally serves as a representation of the Galactic Center.

126. For that matter as well, we also have a constellation of Pisces in this area of yearly time, which resembles an "Alligator Maw" that can best represent the renewed date of 5-Alligator, which arrives with 4-Kankin and that can in effect represent the ‘ejection of the new spring sun’ from out of the underworld of the underwater “Alligator Maw Caves,” via the westward precession of the equinox’s. The December 21st 2012 date with the sun at the winter solstice in the area of the “Milky Way Alligator Maw Cave,” represents the arrival or initiation of the old sun (via westward precession) into the underworld of the Saturn cycle, represented by the horizontal Milky Way arms. Also, if indeed we need to take the presence of the two hero twins literally at the rebirth of Hun-Ahpu’s resurrection, than perhaps this can also be done with the presence of the two planets of Venus, and Mars, in their conjunction with the sun on April 12th, 2013, and how these two planets continue to serve the sun as companions in the following month afterward. But perhaps such a literal interpretation is not too necessary.

127. The truth about the form and the very existence of these two conceptual beings is probably as well linked up to the matter of the extra-terrestrial stellar constellations, which are not normally perceived in our day and age. Therefore, the planetary identity of these two beings can probably be deemed as variable. In fact, the stellar identity of the mother of these two beings who is “Xquic,” was in the presence of the decapitated head of Hun-Ahpu when the he spit on her hand, and impregnated her. It can be seen in the diagram above that the constellation of the bat basically encapsulates the stellar identity of the mother Xquic, since it can be observed that the Galactic Center seems to be spitting on 'The Hand of the Milky Way'. This should demonstrate the interchangeable nature of the heavenly bodies, and constellations, within their roles demonstrated in many of the ancient myths.

128. Finally, in closing it was seen above how the plausibility for the linear count, and the Corrected Count came to an intersection at the time of the conquest in 1519 CE, which was noted on the day March 23rd in that year on the tonalli signs of 1 Alligator / 1-Imix. It should be noted at that time as well that the 4-quarters of the tropical year were occurring on the top of the 4-stellar quarters of the year, marked by the Galactic Center (winter solstice), the Andromeda Galaxy (spring equinox), the star Sirius (summer solstice), and Coma Bernice’s (fall equinox). For this matter, we have an interesting intersection of astronomical coincidences for this 52-year period during the Spanish Conquest of the Mesoamerican Calendar, when considering the both theories for the linear GMT and Corrected Counts.

129. While it may seem to some that the relationship of the Corrected Count, to the linear Mayan Long Count Cycle is here being overemphasized, the bleed-through here is obvious and challenging to anyone who is familiar with the counting procedures of the Mesoamerican Calendar Cycles, and who is somewhat competent in basic math. For that matter, what we have here is a crossroads in perception, and a duality in perspective that must be accounted for. The outstanding theory here is that these two Mesoamerican Calendars were cross-engineered. By default, this author tends to feel that the Corrected Count became the standard due to its seasonal characteristics, which had then served to help format the basis of the linear slip cycles, which could be initiated almost anywhere. Indeed for this matter, what we have here is two calendars that are resonating as one. Is the intersection of the liner GMT- Mayan Long Count, with the Aztec Corrected Count in the year 1519 CE a cosmic coincidence, or a sham? Only you can say.

130. But as far as this author is concerned, if the date 4-Flower falls on April 12th 2013 of the Corrected Count, which is only 112-days after the linear version of that date, and is simply just under 10-Corrected 52-year Cycles since the New Fire Ceremony of 1507 CE, then perhaps there needs to be a further reconsideration and study of actual astrological /astronomical solar cycles and their inherent mathematics, versus the typical end of calendar-time theories, which only turn into “end of the world theories.” For this reason, the duality of ancient Mesoamerica must be considered, as we deal with so much duality in our own civilization as well.

131. Unfortunately, we turn to the ancient civilizations to avoid this duality – and to create a personalized form of private religion with the tools of the one-sided conclusions about these ancient sources that verify our own personal perspectives. In the ancient world this kind of activity was indeed a source of warfare among religious tribes. What is needed here is the ability to perceive two realities at once, just so long as there is indeed some form of coherent bases for the perception of those dualistic correlations.

132. In our modern times, the “GMT-Mayan Long Count 2012 Legacy,” has quickly become subscribed to as a form of informative religion, due to the inherent lack of spirituality in the western civilizations, which denies so much freedom from the intuitive bases of the human intellect. For this reason, we have what has now become an overt focus on the 2012 date and its meaning. Unfortunately, the date is due to pass soon, and only those who are truly interested in the diversity of the mathematics that forms the bases of Mesoamerican Calendars will truly ever be fulfilled in their understanding about the subject - and so therefore we all still have allot to learn about the subject, and how it should be applied.

133. In the wake of the “GMT-2012 Religion,” the looming crises that is exemplified by the Bohm 622,261 Correlation for the Dresden Codex, tends to nip at the heels of the conclusions rendered by the GMT, since many are now finding that the 584,283 Correlation just does not fit the Dresden, which only fuels the voices of opposition for those that have become increasingly impatient with the GMT. Because, however that the two correlations for the GMT, and the Dresden Bohm Correlation, are in fact almost precisely separated by 104-years (which is also indicative of a Venus cycle that retrogrades across the ecliptic within that time) we find that when using the Bohm 622,261 that the end of that 5125.366-year cycle occurs on December 14, 2116 CE, once again putting the sun within the boundaries of the Galactic Center, though not within the dark rift of that light source.

.

134. For the reason of this 104-vague year cycle, which separates those two correlations, we once again in the case of the Bohm Correlation, and the Corrected Count, coincidentally come to discover the same reoccurrence of the new corn god of “Hun Nal Ye,” emerging from the turtle shell at the spring equinox, though this time 121-days later on the date of April 12th, 2117; which is the Mexica-Aztec date of: 4-Flower, in the Year: 1-House, of the Month: 17-Tozoztontli; just as formally in the case of the year of 2013 CE when that sort of collusion had happened 104-years earlier with the GMT 584,283. Let it also be known to the reader that the Aztec stellar symbol of Tozoztontli turns out to be the path of the Milky Way that can be seen as being represented as the spread wings of a bird, which has been pierced by the vertical angle of the Andromeda Galaxy, representing in this case a bone. See above Chapter on "Quetzalcoatl," for diagram found there on page 9 that shows diagram and explanation. (Coincidentally, at that time of 2117 CE, the Bohm correlation and the Corrected Count will be off by one day within the 20-day cycle. Meaning that April 12th, 2117 CE will be the day-sign tonalli of 6-Cahuac / Rain for (Bohm), while for the Corrected Count it is to be 4-Flower / Ahau.)

135. This Metztli Symbolism-to-constellation correspondence is good over thousands of years for the case of the precession of the equinoxes, which puts the stars out of alignment with the seasons. This particular astronomic station, which represents the 20-day month of Tozoztontli in the form of a pierced bird is possibly a symbol of the late spring shadow-less day of the zenithal passage, and of self-sacrifice, and is esoterically by default related to the mythology of Quetzalcoatl. The date of April 12, 13, 14, and 15th also pertains to an important crossroads section of the “Astronomical Analemma,” which surely for all of Mesoamerica’s astronomical measurement experiments was to be considered as an observable fact. What we don’t know, is exactly how important the day of 4-Flower was within the mythology, or memory of the Central Mexican Civilizations, despite the fact that the Corrected Count is not specifically a Central Mexican creation. However, for the case of the astrological endurance of the Corrected Count over into the next century, I can assure the reader that the system just like now, will be working just fine…you can probably take my word for it.

The Analemma. The figure-8 image of the Astronomical Analemma is the result of observing the sun from a fixed point of the horizon every day throughout the 365-days of the year. Such kinds of experiments were indigenous to Mesoamerican astronomical practices, and it can be safely assumed that indeed this pattern was observed by the earliest astronomers of the regions within ancient Mexico.

All original information Copyright. 2011 Matlactli Omome Cuauhtli / Tonal Inquiry Mesoamerican Experiences