ee ae 
‘ 
920 NUMERAL SYSTEMS [ETR. ANN. 19 
pass from the number to the measure! To illustrate, if we say 3 
barleycorns make 1 inch; 12 inches 1 foot; 3 feet 1 yard; and 1,760 
yards 1 mile, do we in speaking of 1 mile have in view the 190,080 
barleyeorns! When the Mexicans spoke of xiguip/lli they alluded, 
according to Clavigero, to sacks or bags. He says, as above quoted, 
“They counted the cacao by xiguipilli (this, as we have before 
observed, was equal to 8,000), and to save the trouble of counting 
them when the merchandise was of great value [probably quantity] 
they reckoned them by sacks, every sack having been reckoned to 
contain 3 xignipilli, or 24,000 nuts.” Now, are we to suppose that 
in counting the sacks the number of nuts was kept in view! Did the 
merchant who purchased a Zz0nt/¢ of sacks (400) have in mind or pur- 
pose buying 9.600.000 nuts! This will suffice to make clear the 
thought intended to be presented, and will, it seems, justify the ques- 
tion—have the high numbers in these lists been added in accordance 
with the computation of the recorder, or were they in actual use 
among the native Mexicans! 
As contact with Europeans and their decimal system for nearly four 
centuries has modified to a greater or less extent the original native 
method of counting, it is doubtful whether direct reference to the sur- 
Viving natives of the present day would settle the question. The Maya 
pic has, as we have seen, been changed from 8,000 to 1,000, and the 
signification of other numeral terms has been changed in similar man- 
ner, Our only appeal is therefore to the native records, and here, 
possibly from our inability to interpret the Mexican symbols, we are 
limited to the Mayan codices and inscriptions. Here, however, as 
has been clearly shown in another paper, and as has been proved by 
Forstemann and Goodman, the evidence is clear that the Maya, or at 
least the priests or authors of the Dresden codex and the inscriptions, 
could and actually did carry their computations to the millions, in 
terms where the number element was necessarily retained, where the 
primary unit—in these instances the day—had to be kept in view. Of 
course they made use of the higher units to facilitate counting. as we 
do at the present day. If the Maya were capable of counting intel- 
ligently to this figure, it is not unreasonable to suppose that the more 
advanced among the surrounding tribes may have made similar, though 
possibly not so great, progress in their numerical systems. That the 
Mexicans had symbols for high numbers is asserted by the early his- 
torians, and is evident from their remaining codices, but no means of 
testing these, as the Maya manuscripts and inscriptions have been 
tested, has yet been found; however, the explanation of symbols 
carrying the count to the tens of thousands has been given. 
Notwithstanding this conclusion, it is apparent that the influence of 
the European decimal system has been felt in some of the native 
