S04 MAYAN CALENDAR SYSTEMS [ETH. ANN. 19 
The series on the inscribed steps (5 of the list) Mr Goodman admits 
has been determined otherwise than by inspection, and hence it must 
be excluded. 
Series 6 and 7 of the above list (Stelee A and B) must be accepted as 
evidence, as the prefixed numerals are of the ordinary form, are 
distinct, and make connection with the initial date of Goodman’s 
fifty-fourth great cycle. 
The two inscriptions on Stela C (8 of above list) present one 
unusual feature, and one which seems to bear very strongly against 
Mr Goodman’s theory of 13 cycles to the great cycle, in fact is 
almost positive evidence against it. Here, following Mr Maudslay’s 
drawing—for his photograph is not sufficiently plain for satisfactory 
inspection—we notice that but one time period is given, 13 cycles, 
and that this is followed without any intervening glyphs by the date 
6 Ahau 18 Kayab. The day symbol is a face character, but is so ren- 
dered, and seemingly correctly, by Goodman. ‘This will not make 
connection with the initial date of either of the three great cycles given 
by him. The fact that the numeral in this case (balls and short 
lines) prefixed to the cycle symbol is 13 appears to stand in direct 
contradiction of this author’s theory, as ‘‘full count” is nowhere else 
given in ordinary numerals or even in a face character, but always in 
one of the symbols for full count. We never find in ordinary numer- 
als 20 days, 18 chuens, or 20 ahaus, etc., nor has Mr Goodman in any 
case rendered a face character by either of these numbers. 
The other inscription on this stela is also unusual in the same 
respect, the numeral series consisting of only one time period—13 
eycles—which is followed immediately by the date 15% Ahau 8 Cumhu. 
The 15 prefixed to Ahau is evidently an error. Mr Maudslay, though 
giving 15 in his drawing, concludes, from a subsequent examination, 
that it may be 9 or 5. However, it will not connect with the first day 
of either of Mr Goodman’s great cycles, whether we use the one or 
the other number or any other Ahau 8 Cumhu. These two initial 
series taken together present another fact difficult to account for on 
Mr Goodman’s theory. They have precisely the same counters—13 
cycles—but reach different terminal dates. This could not be true if 
the dates are in the same great cycle, and if in different ones they would 
necessarily be precisely one or two great cycles apart, as Mr Goodman 
limits the inscriptions to the fifty-third, fifty-fourth, and fifty-fifth. 
In his comment on these series he virtually confesses his inability to 
determine the number of the great cycle by the details of the glyph. 
The inscriptions on the east and west faces of Stela J are placed 

irregularly, in one case in three columns and transverse lines, and in 
the other in diagonal lines; the order, therefore, in which the glyphs 
are to be taken is very uncertain. 
According to Maudslay’s drawing of Altar K (no photograph is 
given), the initial series of the inscription as given by Goodman does 
