228 THE CLIMATIC FACTOR AS ILLUSTRATED IN ARID AMERICA. 



Turning now to the ancient monuments, the dates on these are all given in the full form, 

 including the cycle, katun, and tun. Hence they can be placed with precision in their 

 relation to one another. The only difficulty lies in reading them, for being inscribed chiefly 

 upon soft limestone they are in many cases so worn that it is difficult to decipher them, and 

 various authorities often disagree in this matter. Nevertheless, it is fairly easy to elucidate 

 the chronology of several centuries during which monuments are abundant. If a single 

 date recorded according to the ancient system could be unmistakably correlated with our 

 European calendar the problem of dating the monuments would be solved. In one case 

 the date of the death of a chief named Alipula, who died in 1536 a. d., has been recorded in 

 this way in a manuscript written after the coming of the Spaniards. Bowditch,* one of the 

 best authorities on the Maya calendar, considers that this is the most reliable link between 

 the European calendar and the monuments. There are various difficulties, however, and 

 the matter is by no means so simple as it appears. For example, in late Maya times the 

 position of each day in its month had somehow been slightly shifted from its position in the 

 inscriptions, and we are uncertain just what effect this may have had on the count. The 

 other chief method of determining the relation of the dates on the monuments to the 

 European calendar is that followed by Morley. On the basis of tradition he determines the 

 probable date of the two occupations of Chichen Itza. The date on the lintel there is 

 read as the second katun of the tenth cycle, or katun 3 Ahau, according to the later system. 

 The problem then becomes to find a period of occupation that includes the katun 3 Ahau. 

 Morley solves this by putting the date in the first period of occupation, which also seems 

 to be the only possible position for architectural reasons. The resulting coincidences are 

 regarded by Spinden as so remarkable that he considers that they solve the question of 

 Maya chronology, but this opinion is by no means universally shared by archaeologists. 

 To the layman it seems as if Bowditch had employed the most reliable method of deter- 

 mining the relation of the dates on the monuments to the European calendar, while tradi- 

 tional dates seem to be the only way of arriving at the chronology of the period after the 

 last monuments. The artistic sequence, on the other hand, is highly valuable at all tirnes 

 as a check upon the others and as a means of bridging the gap where no other information 

 is available. 



Leaving now this intricate problem of Maya chronology, let us briefly review the history 

 of the country. Perhaps the most convenient summary is given in Spinden's guide to the 

 Mexican Hall of the American Museum of Natural History in New York. The accuracy 

 of^his dates, as we have already indicated, can not yet be determined, but as to the general 

 sequence of events there is substantial agreement. The earUest date yet found upon any 

 piece of Maya work is recorded on the so-called Tuxtla statuette. Its decipherment is 

 doubtful. Morley makes it about 113 b. c, Bowditch about 365 b. c, and Seler nearly 1,300 

 years earUer than Bowditch. The next date is found upon the so-called Leiden plate. It 

 probably falls about 100 years after that of the Tuxtla statuette, and can be read with much 

 greater certainty. These two dates indicate that at least a century, and perhaps sixteen 

 or seventeen centuries, before the beginning of the Christian era the Mayas had reached so 

 high a state of civilization and had so long preserved exact records of the movements of the 

 sun and stars that they had framed a calendar more exact than any used in Europe or Asia 

 until the adoption of the Gregorian calendar in 1582 a. d. To accomplish this they must 

 for many years have been able to record their observations in permanent form. Hence 

 we must conclude that for centuries prior to 375 b. c, to use Bowditch's dates, the Mayas 

 had been a highly progressive and intelligent people. 



About a hundred years after the date of the Leiden plate the Maya civilization had 

 reached so high a development that important cities began to arise in the south, especially 



*C. p. Bowditoh, Memoranda on the Maya r.alendars used in the books on Chilan Bakim, Ameriran Anlliro|)oi- 

 ogist, n. s., vol. 3, 1901, pages 129 to 138. 



