THOMAS] TABLET OF THE CROSS 743 
Tzec—which the inscription requires—is 9 Ahau 8 Tzec, which 
requires a numeral series of 3,180 days, or 8 ahaus 15 months. As 
Mr Goodman concludes that the face numeral prefixed to the symbol 
for the month Tzec should be interpreted 18, the nearest position in 
which a day Ahau the 18th of the month Tzec can be found, is in the 
thirteenth ahau of this katun. From this date to 4 Ahau 8 Cumhu is 
6 ahaus 14 chuens; hence his proposed change in the numeral series. 
The question therefore to be answered before we can give full 
assent to his conclusion is this, Are his renderings of the face char- 
acters reliable? That they represent numbers seems to be evident, 
as I show elsewhere, but the data presented in his work are not entirely 
satisfactory. That the initial series now under consideration contains 
one or more cycles, one or more katuns, one or more ahaus, and one or 
more chuens—or, as I term them, units of the fifth, fourth, third, and 
second orders—is certain; and that the terminal date is a day Ahau in 
the month Tzec is also true if the inscription be correct. The language 
used by Mr Goodman in defining the face numerals indicates that 
he has relied to some extent on his system of interpretation rather 
than on the details of the glyphs in determining their value, but this 
can be decided only by a careful examination of all the inscriptions in 
this respect, which it is my purpose to make in a supplemental paper 
when Maudslay’s figures of the Quirigua inscriptions are received. 
When the count can be based on the glyphs his scheme will not inter- 
fere with a correct count. For example, 4 Ahau 8 Cumhu of this 
series may or may not be the first day of his fifty-fourth grand cycle, 
for in either case the count will bring the same result; nor will the 
fact that there are probably 20 cycles to the great cycle change the 
result. However, the subject will be further discussed when we con- 
sider the initial series, and for the present we will accept Mr Good- 
man’s determination of the face numerals with the above implied 
reservation. 
I have dwelt somewhat at length on this example in order to show 
some of the methods of determining positively that there is an error 
in the original, and the seeming impossibility in some cases of cor- 
recting it. Occasionally this can be done by means of a connected 
preceding or following series; or, where a single minor change will 
bring all the members of the series into harmony, this change is some- 
times justified, but such changes as those suggested above by Mr Good- 
man in regard to the example under consideration, especially where 
the value of a sign is also in dispute, are not warranted without proof. 
The next date is found in glyphs C9, D9, and is 13 Ik —? Mol. 
Here the numeral attached to the month is not a regular number 
symbol (dots and bars) and is interpreted 5 by Mr Goodman. In this 
I am inclined to think he is wrong, as the symbol appears to be the 

