THOMAS] MAYA NUMERALS 891 
exception, the numbers from 10 to 19 are formed by the addition of 
1, 2, 3, ete., to 10, the decimal system applying here. Twenty has a 
distinct name—/a/. From 21 to 39 the numbers are formed by the 
addition to 20 of the numbers from 1 to 19; and 40 is twice 20. 
Before alluding to the change which occurs in the next step, atten- 
tion is called to /ahwn, the name tor 10. Dr Brinton! says it is appar- 
ently a compound of /ah and Aun, and gives as the probable significa- 
tion, ‘* it finishes one (man).” As to its derivation, I think he is cor- 
rect, as /ah, as a substantive, signifies ‘* end, limit, all, or the whole,” 
and jun *‘ one.” The signification of the term would therefore seem 
to be *‘ one finish,” or *‘ ending,” or ‘‘ all of one count,” but not ** one 
man.” Henderson, in his manuscript Maya-English Dictionary, under 
lah, says, ** whole hands,” and this is doubtless the true rendering 
when used in this connection. A@/, 20, as a verb signifies ** to fasten, 
shut, close,” as a substantive, ‘‘a fastening together, a closing or 
shutting up.” 
Calling 20 a score, for the sake of simplicity, the count from 21 to 
39 may be illustrated thus: Awn-tu-kal, 1 on the score, or first score; 
ca-tu-kal, 2 on the score, ete. Here the addition is to the score already 
reached, but the additions to 40—ca-ha/—or second score are counted 
differently, for +1, instead of being Awn-tu-cakal, is hun-tu-yorkal, the 
latter—yorkal or oxkal—hbeing the term for 60, or third score (3 x 20). 
As it is evident that this can not signify 1 added to 60, there has been 
a difference of opinion as to the true meaning of the expression and 
as to its correctness. Perez, as quoted by Dr Brinton, says, in an 
unpublished essay in the latter’s possession, that Beltran’s method of 
expressing the numbers is erroneous; that 41 should be hwn-tu-cakal ; 
42. ca-tu-cakal ; 83, ox-tu-cankal, ete. Nevertheless, as Dr Brinton 
has pointed out, the numerals above +0 are given in Perez’s Dictionary 
of the Maya Language according to Beltran’s system, which appears 
from other evidence to be correct. 
Léon de Rosny” suggests that hwn-tu-yorkal should be explained 
thus: 60—20+1. However, the correct rendering appears to be 1 on 
the third score, or third 20. It is possible that an old and a new reck- 
oning prevailed among the Mayas, as apparently among the Cakchi- 
quels. According to Stoll* the latter people had an old and a more 
recent method of enumerating, which may be represented as follows: 
\ 
Old New 
| 41 hun-r-oxe’al ca-vinak-hun 
42 cai-r-oxc’al ca-vinak-cai, ete 
| 

1 Maya Chronicles, p. 88. 
*Numération des Anciens Mayas, in Compte-Rendu Cong. Internat. Américanistes, p. 449; Nancy, 
1875. 
3 Zur. Ethn. der Guatemala, p. 136. 
