THOMAS] TABLET OF THE SUN 63 
chuen sign than any other, but the numeral ix unmistakably 13. It is more rea- 
sonable to suppose that the sculptor madea mistake in the kin sign, than that the 
chuen symbol should have been used to represent both 13 and 15. 
The third number series is found (in reverse order) in glyphs C7, 
D7, C8, Ds, the ahau and cycle symbols—D7 and D8—being face 
characters. 
The fourth series, 9-12-18-5-16, or 9 cycles, 12 katuns, 18 ahaus, 
5 chuens, 16 days, is found (in reverse order) in glyphs Cl4 to C16, 
inclusive. Here the days are not joined to the chuen symbolas usual, 
but have a separate symbol (C14), a face character with the number 
prefixed. The chuen symbol (D14) is also a face character. The series 
reduced to days is 1,388,996, from which subtracting 73 calendar 
rounds leaves 3,456 days to be counted. Counting forward this num- 
ber of days from 4 Ahau 8 Cumhu (8 Ben) the beginning of Goodman’s 
fifty-fourth great cycle, we reach 2 Cib 14 Mol (5 Akbal). Both dates 
in this instance are found after the numeral series and on the right 
slab—4 Ahau (P2) 8 Cumhu (O03); 2 Cib (O4) 14 Mol (P4.). Placing 
the dates together before or after a numeral series which denotes the 
lapse of time between them is unusual, but not without precedent. 
Using the last result, we may perhaps find the proper connection 
with 13 Cimi 19 Ceh, the first given date. Subtracting the third series 
(275,466 days) from the fourth series (1,888,996 days) leaves 1,113,530 
days, a which subtracting 58 calendar rounds (1,100,840 days) 
leaves 12,690 days to be counted. Reckoning back this number of 
days 7 ,690) from 2 Cib 14 Mol (5 Akbal) we reach 13 Cimi 19 Ceh 
(9 Lamat) the first date of the left slab. Of course it follows that 
counting forward from 13 Cimi 19 Ceh (9 Lamat), the difference 
between the third and fourth series, we reach 2 Cib 14 Mol (5 Akbal). 
Subtracting the third series from the fourth in order to get back to 13 
Cimi 19 Ceh is certainly proper, as the former is included in the latter. 
These results would seem to be correct, and if so, justify Goodman’s 
interpretation 13” of the face numeral joined to Cimi, and form 
a second connection between the inscriptions of the left and right 
slabs. However, using the last number, 12,690 less 411 (12,279), and 
counting back from 2 Cib 14 Mol, we reach 8 Caban 5 Muan (10 
Ben) instead of 1 Caban 10 Tzee. As this is, as it should be, also the 
date reached by counting forward 411 days from 13 Cimi 19 Ceh (9 
Lamat), I am inclined to believe that it is correct, and that here the 
original artist has by mistake given an erroneous date. It is apparent 
that to use 411 days in counting forward from 13 Cimi 19 Ceh, year 
9 Lamat, must of necessity bring us into the year 10 Ben, therefore, 
as 1 Caban 10 Tzee can not be connected with any other date by sub- 
traction, addition, or skipping, and the date 8 Caban 5 Muan will 
connect both backward and forward, it may be accepted as probably 
correct. 
As there is no numeral series in the middle space, these may he leit 
