Introduction

In this essay we shall examine the perceived divisions of space created by the concentric circles (or rings) of the Aztec Calendar. The complexity of the Aztec Calendar's design stands out immediately.

One may view the calendar's component elements from different perspectives. The rings may be, and have been, grouped together in different ways as the following drawing shows:

The rings of the Aztec Calendar have been ordered in many other ways. In a later essay we shall analyze some of those distinct possibilities in an attempt to comprehend their meaning. However, in this essay, we are concerned with the way in which space is divided in the overall design of the Aztec Calendar. The precise meaning of the rings and their different elements is unknown. In order to be able to discern their meaning, we must first examine the logic of the general design of the Aztec Calendar, and for that reason we have chosen the theme of spatial division.

The Aztec Calendar appears to be divided into an 8-segment circle. Note the eight pointers (or lunar-solar rays as they are generally referred to), and the eight towers (or merlones). Also, there are other elements that for multiples of eight, such as the chalchihuitliques ().

Some authors, such as Raul Noriega, have viewed the 8 dividers (the pointers and the towers) as being instrumental in calculating the cycles of Venus' rotations around the sun:

121 .5 8 105 .5 8 243 years

Early on, De Leon y Gama stated that the eight lunar-solar rays represented the hours of the day by which the day was divided into four parts: Yquiza Tonatiuh; Nepantla Tonatiuh; Onaqui Tonatiuh; and Yohualnepantla.

Since the "discovery" of the Aztec Calendar in 1790, in Mexico City, the numerical interpretations have been numerous and imaginative, some building upon the counting systems of long ago; others apparently assigning random quantities to the calendar's elements without further explanation. Almost all of them have had one goal in mind: to identify the 260-day count and the 360-day count (or 365 count) in the Aztec Calendar as of the number of elements on its rings. There have been two outstanding versions of these interpretations, with a third of lesser significance.

One interpretation relates the visible elements on the face of the calendar to the different day-counts. Other interpretations attempt to visualize elements on the rings that are not actually there, but are considered to be logically represented there or implied therein in order to be able to achieve the distinct day-counts of 260 and 360 days. There was an attempt to relate the elements of another stone sculpture, the Tizoc sculpture, with the elements of the Aztec Calendar in order to attain combined sums which would equal the day-counts. We shall offer only one example. In the following illustration, the ring of quincunxes has been considered as representing the 40 visible shaded elements, or as representing 52 elements, taking into consideration 12 hidden elements under the solar rays. Given that each quincunx contains five dots, then this ring has been considered to represent the 260-day count (5 x 52 = 260)

The ring of "feathers", immediately encircling the quincunx ring, is said to represent the complementary 104 days required to reach the 364-day count, if one takes into consideration the hidden elements under the lunar-solar rays. One would add the 80 visible elements to the perceived 24 hidden elements.

As one may observe, it is possible to conceive almost any number or combination of numbers regarding the elements on the rings of the Aztec Calendar. Such efforts, however, seem to be based on the idea that ancient artwork is purely representational, that is, with a fixed symbolic and non-functional meaning. By seeking to visualize specific numbers, it would appear that the interpretational value would be reduced to considering that the calendar merely registers fixed values.

There is another way of viewing the Aztec Calendar: as an instrument of analysis, as a calculator. In this sense, the sculpture would be symbolic and representational, but with its elements being used for making calculations. One could then envisage it as representing units of quantities which might undergo a mathematical process. Some authors have suggested this possibility by identifying there in constant numbers, multipliers, dividers, etc. Observe the factoring signs identified by Raul Noriega:

In this manner, the sculpture would not simply register or record the products and results of the calculations, but would constitute the method for deriving the results on an on-going basis.

Therefore, expecting to find every relevant date chiseled onto the stone sculpture (such as 13 acatl), would be a limited way of conceiving its design, while conceiving the calendar to be a method of calculation would make its concept more dynamic. We do know that the ancient peoples were extremely symbolic in their logic; the stone's very image is an example of this. It is this fact that produces the search for specific dates and information on the calendar; such as, the search for the number relating to the equinoctial precession of the planet earth (i.e., 26,000 calendar round of the 365-day count).

When the number 5 is distinguished on the calendar's face, as in the elements of the quincunx ring (), the all kinds of interpretations arise: the 5 represents kernels of corn; the number of days of a week; the number of orbits of Venus; etc. In fact, all of these interpretations may be correct, even though each author generally proposes his or her interpretation to be the interpretation that the ancient peoples gave to that five-unit element. Nonetheless, ancient artwork teaches us that a single element may have many different meanings, depending upon how those elements are related among themselves.