[Aztlan] 3M-day year

[Elaine Day Schele]

Hi Martha,

Out of curiosity, I looked up the Thompson reference ("A commentary on the 
Dresden Codex") used by Lounsbury and found that on page 21, Thompson wrote 
the following: "Very frequently the LR is a multiple of the 260-day count or 
it may be a multiple of the 364-day year or both."  Loundsbury has 
apparently substituted "3M" for the number "364".  Perhaps someone out there 
can tell us why.

Elaine

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "martha noyes" <marthanoyes at hawaii.rr.com>
To: <Aztlan at lists.famsi.org>
Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 2007 1:49 PM
Subject: [Aztlan] 3M-day year


>
> The Lounsbury article is available at:
> www.mesoweb.com/pari/publications/RT03/Rationale.pdf
>
> 3M appears several times in the paper - p.2 - quoting Thompson, "Very
> frequently the LR [long reckonings] is a multiple of the 260-day
> count, or it may be a multiple of the 3M-day year",  p.3 - "As
> already mentioned . . .divisible by 260 or by 3M", p.3  "the
> 'computing year' of 3M days", p. 4 - Unlike many of the CN [companion
> numbers], the one in this instance is not evenly divisible by 260 or
> 780, but it is by 3M", p. 8 - "Condition No. 2 may have involved . . .
> 3M or 117", "we may surmise . . .same position in the 3M-day cycle
> (the so-called computing year), or else that it have the same
> position in the 819-day cycle", "Whether the 3M-day cycle . . . or
> the 1820-day cycle . . . were ends in themselves or were only
> reckoning devices"
>
> Thanks
> _______________________________________________
> Aztlan mailing list
> http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/aztlan
> Click here to post a message Aztlan at lists.famsi.org
> Click to view Calendar of Events 
> http://research.famsi.org/events/events.php
>