rHOMAS] MAYA NUMERALS $93 
350 lahu-tu-uaxaclahukal=10 on the eighteenth score. 
360 uaxaclahukal=18 x 20. 
370 lahu-bolonlahukal=10 on the nineteenth score. 
380 bolonlahu-kal=19 x 20. 
390 lahu-hunbak=10 on 1 bak. 
400 hun-bak=one 400. 
500 ho-tu-bak [hokal-tu-bak?]=100+-400? 
600 lahu-tu-bak [lahun-kal-tu-bak?]=200+-400? 
700 holhu-tu-bak [holhu-kal-tu-bak?] =300-+400? 
800 ca-bak=2> 400. 
900 ho-tu-yoxbak [hokal-tu-yoxbak]=100 on the third bak, or third 400. 
1,000 lohu-yoxbak, or hunpic (modern). 
2,000 capic (modern). 
8,000 hun-pic (former and correct use of the term). 
So far I have followed Beltran’s list, as it is that on which the 
numbers as given by subsequent writers and lexicographers are based, 
but it carries the numeration only to 8,000. The names for 500, 
600, and 700 appear to be abbreviated; I have therefore added in 
brackets the supposed complete terms. These, however, as will be 
seen by comparison, follow the rule which prevails from 20 to 39, that 
is, the additions are to the last preceding basal number, and not toward 
that which is to follow; the first rule holds good from 41 to 399, but 
the second is followed after passing 800 or ca-bah, as 900 is ho-tu-youbak, 
or, complete, hokal-tu-yorbah, which is equivalent to 100 on the third 
bak. The use of hunpic for 1,000 was adopted after the arrival of the 
Spaniards. One reason mentioned by Beltran for the change was to 
prevent confusion and to facilitate the numbering of the century in giy- 
ing dates. The proper native expression for 1,000 was /ahu-yoxbak, 
or, complete, /ahunkal-tu-yorbak, equivalent to 200 on the 3d_bak. 
Capic—2,000—is in accordance with modern usage; according to native 
usage 2,000 would be hobak, or 5400. In counting the minor num- 
bers above 400 the particle catac, *tand,” was inserted, thus: 450, Aunbak 
catae lahuyorkal. Wowever, in counting the added hundreds, fw, and 
not catac, was inserted, as is seen above in 500, 600, and 700; hence, as 
Beltran indicates, the latter was only prefixed or preposed to the minor 
numbers. 
Bak as a numeral is supposed to be derived from the verb dak, 
bakah, **to roll wp,” *‘to tie around,” and hence presumably refers to 
a bundle or package. /%c signifies ** cotton cloth,” also a kind of petti- 
coat, which appears to have been the original meaning; as this article 
of dress was occasionally used as a sack the numeral term probably 
refers to it in this sense; and Henderson, in his manuscript dictionary, 
gives as one signification **a bag made out of a petticoat.” This inter- 
pretation corresponds with the Mexican term for 8,000. 
The count from 400, or one bak, when carried out regularly, would 
be 2 bak, 3 bak, and so on to 19 bak; 20 bak, or 8,000, forming a new 
