THOMAS] 



INITIAL SERIES OF PALENQUE INSCRIPTIONS 



221 



In addition to tlie suggestions offered l)y Goodman and tliose pre- 

 sented in 7ny iirevious paper in regard to correcting the manifest 

 error somewhere iu these series, the following is added as a jjossible 

 solution: Change the terminal date of the initial series from 8 Aliau 

 18 Tzec to 1 Ahau 8 3Iuan, and the following numeral series will then 

 connect the succeeding dates with it, and the 1 Aliau 18 Zotz will come 

 l_8-0 (1 ahaii 8 chuens) or 520 days after the terminal dutf of tlie 

 initial series, instead of being placed back of it as 

 Goodman's correction re(iuires. This, however, will 

 slightly change the initial series from the numbers 

 given by Goodman. By referring to the inscription 

 as given in Maudslay's drawing, we notice at Co the 

 sj^mbol for 13 cycles (figure 148). As this is not 

 connected with a series, and follows immediately 

 after the date 4 Ahau 8 Cumhu, we are justified in 

 interpreting it as an indication that up to this point 

 13 cycles have been passed over from the initial date 

 of the inscription, which must be 4 Ahau 8 Zotz. 



Fig. !«. Symbol for 

 13 cycles. Mauds- 

 lay, part 10, plate 

 LX.xv. glnih C -5. 



The calculation 



is correct. Subtracting the series 8 

 remainder is 12-19-11-13-0. 



13-0-0-0-0 

 8-5-0 



(ID 2C) from 13 cycles the 



10-19-11-13-0 



If tills correction be justified the initial series will be 53-12-10-11- 

 13-0, 1 Ahau 8 Muan, which will fit into Goodman's tables. The chief 

 objection to this is that it compels us to assume that the aboriginal 

 artist made a mistake in his calculation, as the month symbol is 

 clearly Tzec and the face numeral shows the skeleton jaw, indicating 

 that the number as given is above 10. However, we must admit that 

 the error has not, as yet, been satisfactorily explained, and conse- 

 quently the value of but two of the face numerals — those attached to 

 the cj-cle and katun glyphs — can be determined by the inscription. 

 Twelve (see figure 135 o) for the cycle and 19 (figure 142 o) for the 

 katun, as given bj' Goodman, must apparently be accepted on any 

 theorj- as to the corriction. It will be observed th ;t the symbol 

 attached to the ahau glyph, which Goodman interprets 13 (figure 136 d), 

 is widely different from any of the other symbols for 13 given bj' 

 him, as is seen bj' reference to our figure 130, which is a copy of the 

 examples given bj' him on page 49 of his work. So far, therefoi'e, 

 as comparison shows, it may as well be inteipreted 11 as 13; but, in 

 fact, is more like 19 (see figure 142) than either. Nor can his inter- 

 pretation (4) of the character attached to the chuen symbol be clearly 

 sustained by comparison, though it must be conceded that it does not 

 resemble the determined types of 13. 



The initial series on Stela D of the Copan inscriptions (Maudslay, 

 plate XLViii, part 2, our plates LXXVi and LXXVii) is peculiar in 



