personage, and we must decline to admit him as the result of deductive
reasoning. In this so-called "young god", we miss, first of all, a
characteristic mark, a distinct peculiarity such as belongs to all the
figures of gods in the manuscripts without exception and by which he
could be recognized. Except his so-called youthfulness, however, no such
definite marks are to be found. Furthermore there is no figure of a god
in the manuscripts which would not be designated by a definite
characteristic hieroglyph. No such hieroglyph can be proved as belonging
to the "young god". The figures, which are supposed to have a "youthful
appearance" in the Madrid manuscript, often convey this impression merely
in consequence of their smallness and of the pitiful, squatting attitude
in which they are represented. Furthermore real _children_ do occur here
and there, thus, for example, in the Dresden manuscript in connection
with the pictures of women in the first part and in Tro. 20*c in the
representation of the so-called "infant baptism."

That god H has some relation to the serpent must be conjectured from what
has been said. Thus, for example, on Dr. 15b, we see his hieroglyph
belonging to the figure of a woman with the knotted serpent on her head,
in Dr. 4a to the god P, who there bears a serpent in his hand, and in
Dr. 35b in connection with a serpent with B's head. What this relation
is, cannot now be stated.

The day dedicated to god H is Chicchan, and the sign for this day is his
distinguishing hieroglyph.


I. The Water-Goddess.

[Illustration: Fig. 41]