796 MAYAN CALENDAR SYSTEMS [BTH. ANN. 19 
the fact that there is an inscription running around the base which 
may or may not be a part of the whole, it is by no means certain 
that the aboriginal artist intended to connect these two dates by this 
numeral series; and, in the second place, it is possible and eyen prob- 
able that this long series was intended to connect the following date 
with some preceding initial date, as Mr Goodman insists is true with 
regard to series in several other inscriptions. Nor is it a rare oceur- 
rence that the first following date does not connect with the terminal 
date of the initial series. We think, therefore, that it is more reason- 
able and more in accordance with the rule in other inscriptions to 
conclude that this numeral series was intended to connect the date 
which follows with some initial date, and this, unless the count was 
forward, which Mr Goodman does not admit, would be far back of 4 
Ahau 8 Cumhu, the first day of his fifty-fourth great cycle, to which 
he has commonly referred. As will be seen by reference to the quo- 
tation given above from his remarks on this series, he accepts as 
correct the 14 great cycles, places the date 1 Ahau 8 Chen in his 
fifty-fourth great cycle, and carries back the count from that date, 
reaching the fortieth great cycle. It is evident, therefore, on his 
theory, that it was not the intention to connect the two dates 1 Ahau 
8 Zip and 1 Ahau 8 Chen by this series, as both, according to his own 
showing, fall in the fifty-fourth great cycle. As proof that this is his 
view, we quote his words: “I think it should be 14-8-15-10-18 x 20. 
If so, the reckoning goes back to the fortieth great cycle; if it went 
forward it would extend to the sixty-ninth.” As he says (p. 148) 
that the latest date of the inscriptions is ‘*55-8-19-2-18 x 20,” and 
in another place that Mayan count always related to past time, it is 
clear that he carries this count back 14 great cycles from the fifty- 
fourth. 
It follows, from the conclusion reached in the preceding paragraph, 
and from Mr Goodman’s scheme, that, counting back from 1 Ahau 
8 Chen, the ‘* 8-15-10-18 x 20” of the series ‘* 14-8-15-10-18 x 20,” as 
he corrects it, should bring us to+ Ahau 8 Cumhu, the commencement 
of his fifty-fourth great cycle; but it does not bring this result. It 
must also be admitted that, counting back, the 17-19-10-0-0 of the series 
as it stands in the inscription will not bring us to 4 Ahau 8 Cumhu. 
But it must be borne in mind, as has been stated, that counting 20 cycles 
to the great cycle or sixth order of units (as there are good reasons 
for believing is the proper method) would break up the order of 
Goodman’s tables so far as they relate to the great cycles and the 
numbering of the cycles, though it would not affect the order of the 
katuns. The cycles, katuns, and lower periods would follow in regu- 
lar order, the initial days of each depending on the day with which the 
count begins. As 17 is given as the number of cycles, it seems clear 
(unless evidence to the contrary be presented, which Mr Goodman 
