THOMAS] TIME SERIES IN THE INSCRIPTIONS 761 
TABLET OF THE SUN 
We turn to the inscription on the Tablet of the Sun—of which we 
also have a photograph by Mr Maudslay, shown in our plate x~1—and 
to Mr Goodman*: comment, which is as follows (page 136): 

Initial date: 54-1-18-5-3 x 6-13 Cimi 19 Ceh. The month symbol comes after one 
of the glyphs of the initial directive series. A reckoning of 1-211, with three 
unintelligible glyphs following, points to a date which appears to be 1 Caban 10 
Tzec; but as that is not the date to which the intelligible part of the reckoning 
would lead, both the date and direction are uncertain. Thirteen glyphs follow, 
some of them of recognizable purport, but the exact meaning of which in this con- 
nection I do not know. Then comes a restatement of the initial reckoning, 
1-18-5-3 «6, from the beginning of the great cycle, followed by nine glyphs whose 
use here is unintelligible, though four of them are signs with whose meaning we 
are acquainted. Next in order comes a reckoning of 9-12-18-516 (followed by 
four glyphs nearly identical with a series in the preceding inscription), from 4 
Ahau 8 Cumhu, the beginning of the great cycle, to 2 Cib 14 Mol. This is correct. 
After five incomprehensible glyphs occurs the date 3 Caban 15 Mol. In the annual 
calendar the last two dates adjoin each other, but whether the latter is here intended 
to be the succeeding day, or whether some calendar rounds are indicated by the 
characters preceding it, is something we are at present unable to determine. 
Sixteen baffling glyphs follow, and then there is a reckoning of 7-6-123-12 Ahau 
8 Ceh. There are no recognizable directive signs here, but by trial we discover that 
the reckoning is the distance between 12 Ahau 8 Ceh and 9 Akbal 6 Xul, a date that 
comes after six intervening glyphs. Eight more unintelligible glyphs occur, and 
then a reckoning of 6-218 (the 18 should be 17), 2 Cimi19 Zotz. The directive 
signs are unfamiliar, but as the reckoning is backward to 9 Akbal 6 Xul, they 
probably denote that fact. Next is 1-817, 13 Ahau 18 Kankin, which is declared 
to be a 10th ahau, the reckoning being the distance from 9 Akbal 6 Nul to that 
date. Both of these dates are subsequently repeated for some reason, and the record 
ends with 8 Oc 3 Kayab, followed by ten glyphs whose meaning is not apparent. 
This is a puzzling inscription so far as its numeral or time series are 
concerned, a fact apparent from the comment which Mr Goodman 
makes on it. Although there are several series with sufficient data for 
the purpose of tracing them, but few of the dates can be connected, 
and these not satisfactorily. 
The series and dates in the order in which they come in the insecrip- 
tion are as follows, adopting Goodman’s interpretation of the initial 
series: 
Left slab 
Days 
Gel Gl ls, BO 13 Cimi 19Ceh (9 Lamat) 
2 2 abl ieCalban2alOekzecke (Syuam at) eee ee 411 
3 [eeSueDroi. (6: (Noxdate)ian(27.0;466)) seasee ees eee eee o = 9, 746 
4 9 12 18 5 16 @e Ghia) (GUEBAOIS) siseeseecsssdoosee 3, 456 
Middle space 
9 Akbal 6 Xul (8 Ezanab) 
1 (Unintelligible ) 13 Ahau 18 Kankin (9 Akbal) 
8 Oc? 3 Kayab? (11 Lamat?) 
