756 MAYAN CALENDAR SYSTEMS [erH. ANN. 19 
reading it 1 Kan 2 Kankin, connection can be made in the manner 
mentioned above. If the date of the fifth series, left slab, be con- 
strued to be 9 Ik 20 Mol, which it may as well be as 5 Mol, by counting 
forward 4,542 days we reach 1 Kan 2 Kayab 5 Akbal, the apparently 
correct date, according to the inscription. If this reckoning be 
accepted it will form a connection between the inscriptions of the 
right and left slabs. ‘ 
The second date following the first numeral series on this slab is 
found in glyphs S10, T10. This is 11 Lamat 6 Xul, year 10 Akbal; 
following this, at 512, T12, is the numeral series 9 days, 3 chuens, 13 
ahaus, which equal 4,749 days, and following this series, at S14, T14, 
is the date 2 Caban 10 Xul, year 10 Lamat. The two last-mentioned 
dates make connection, as by counting forward 4,749 days from 11 
Lamat 6 Xul 10 Akbal we reach 2 Caban 10 Xul in the year 10 Lamat. 
Immediately following the last-mentioned date, at 515, is the short 
numeral series (3, right slab), 3 days, 6 chuens, or 123 days, which, count- 
ing forward, bring us to 8 Ahau 13 Ceh, year 10 Lamat, the date which 
followsat T17, U1. The rule therefore holds good as to these dates and 
the two intervening numeral series. It would seem to follow, there- 
fore, that the arrangement or plan of the series on this slab, when 
found, should coincide with the determination as to these two series; 
but from this point to the end of the inscription there is no connection 
of dates—with possibly one exception—without some change in dates 
or numbers from what they appear to be by inspection, or change in 
the direction of the reckoning. I shall therefore note the position 
of the dates and series which have been mentioned in the preceding 
list, and then add some remarks in regard to the relation of the dates 
and series to one another. I do this because Mr Goodman has left 
unnoticed the series of the inscription on this right slab, possibly 
because of the difficulty and seeming impossibility of bringing them 
into harmony with his theory. 
Immediately following the last date mentioned there is at U2 a 
symbol denoting 9 cycles, or ninth cycle, but judging by the rule 
adopted by Mr. Goodman this is not to be considered a part of the 
numeral series (4) which follows immediately after at U8 to U4, viz, 
18 days, 1 chuen, 8 ahaus, 1 katun=10,118 days. At U7, V7 is the 
date 8 Ezanab 11 Xul, the day somewhat indistinct, but so rendered, 
apparently correctly, by Maudslay. Following this at U8, U9 is the 
numeral series (5), 18% (or 17%) days, 10? (or 87) chuens, 16 ahaus, 14 
katun. The numbers of this series in the inscription have been injured 
to such an extent as to render uncertain those marked as doubtful; the 
number of days is assumed to be 13,138, which is probably correct, 
but the error, if there be one, is such that it should be readily discoy- 
ered by means of connecting series, if these be correct. 
Following the last series, at U10, V10 is a date so nearly obliterated 
