S00 MAYAN CALENDAR SYSTEMS [ETH. ANN. 19 
in the lower order of units, Ben as the first day of the chuens. and 
5 Eb as the first day of the series. While these examples do not 
furnish positive proof in regard to the question at issue, they at 
least, in connection with what has been presented concerning the 
plan and object of these reckonings, do indicate that the so-called 
time periods are merely orders of units and not chronologic periods 
always coming in regular order from a fixed point in time.’ Never- 
theless, it must be admitted that most of the initial series in the 
inscriptions, as will clearly appear when their reckoning is presented, 
begin with Ahau, which fact must receive a satisfactory explanation 
before this question can be considered settled. 
Another fact to be borne in mind is that according to Mr Good- 
man’s idea, if a katun begins with Ahau, all the chuens or 20-day 
periods must commence with the same day, though not the same day 
number, and this would continue indefinitely. The same thing, how- 
eyer, would be true in this scheme were any other day selected as 
the initial date; all that will apply in any respect to Ahau will, until 
the year count comes into play, apply in every particular to any 
other day, a statement which admits of positive demonstration. The 
only reason for preferring Ahau, if there be any, is historic, or rather 
mythologic, as many of the series cover too great lapses of time to be 
historic. 
If the two ahau symbols in the inscription in the Temple of Inscrip 
tions of Palenque, referred to above on page 774, be counters in the 
time series with which they are connected, they certainly occupy the 
katun place. As they present the true ahau form, it may be possible 
that they bear some relation to the name of the period for which they 
stand. This, however, is at best but a mere guess, and the names are 
of but minor importance in the discussion. 
INITIAL SERIES 
Taking up now the initial series of the inscriptions, I shall give the 
beginning day of each and briefly discuss its bearing on Goodman’s 
theory of the Mayan time system. The list so far as noticed by this 
author is as follows, using his notation, but substituting naught for 
full count: 
Pali nue Inscriptions. 
(1) Tablet of the Cross—53-12-19-13-0 to 8 Ahau 18 Tzec. This 
connects, by counting back, with 4 Ahaw 8 Zotz, the beginning day 
of Goodman’s fifty-third great cycle. Here the numerals pretixed to 
the time periods are face characters for which we must take Mar Good- 
man’s rendering (see what has been said above on pp. 773-760). 
1 After this paper was in print I discovered the connections of the high series ranning up through 
the serpent figures on plates 61, 62, and 69. These prove beyond question that 20 cycles (or 20 units 
of the fifth order) are counted to the great evecle (or unit of the sixth order), and that the initial 
date of these is in some instances Kan. It is my intention to discuss these series in the supplemental 
piper mentioned above. 
