256 MAYAN OALElSfDAR SYSTEMS [eth. axn. 22 



great cycle as numbered above. The first da^s of the great cycles 

 would then be as follows: 



1st great cycle 11 Ahau 13 Zotz, year 4 Larnat 



3iid great cycle 4 Ahau 3 Ceh, year 3 Ezanab 



Srrl great cycle 10 Ahau 8 Pop, year 3 Ben 



4th great cycle 3 Ahau IS Mol. year 3 Akbal 



5111 great cycle 9 Ahau 8 Pax. year 1 Beu 



6th great cycle 2 Ahau 13 Tzec, year 1 Lamat 



Tth great cycle 8 Ahau 3 Mac, year 13 Ezanab 



8th great cycle 1 Ahau 8 Uo, year 13 Ben 



9th great cycle 7 Ahau 18 Chen, year 13 Akbal 



10th great cycle 13 Ahau 8 Kayab, year 11 Ben 



11th great cycle 6 Ahau 13 Xul, year 11 Lamat 



13th great cycle 13 Ahau 3 Kankin, year 10 Ezanab 



13th great cycle 5 Ahau 8 Zip. year 10 Ben 



1 4th great cycle 11 Ahau 1 8 Yax , year 9 Akbal 



15th great cycle 4 Ahau 8 Cumhu, year 8 Ben 



The method of unmberiiig the great cycles must be understood as 

 wholly arbitrary, given merely for convenience, and to include the 15 

 that are referred to in the count. I do not believe that there was any 

 consecutive numbering of these supposed time periods in the sense 

 indicated bj' Goodman; in fact, as I expect to show, they were not 

 time periods in any true sense of the term. 



The reason for believing that the date following the inscription 

 should be 13 Ahau 8 Chen instead of 1 Aliau 8 Chen is tliat -t Ahau 8 

 Cumhu, as appeal's from the inscriptions at Coj)an and Quirigua, 

 was the favorite initial date, most of the initial series going back 

 to it, and that counting back the minor periods of the series from 

 13 Ahau 8 Chen brings us to 4 Ahau 8 Cumhu. If we turn to 

 Goodman's "Archaic Chronological Calendar" and count forward, 

 from the beginning of his 54th great cycle, 17 cycles, it will bring us 

 to the 4th cycle of his 55tli great cycle, and to the 10th katun of tliis 

 cycle and the 10th ahau of this katun, where we find the day to be 

 13 Ahau 8 Chen. We are therefore of the opinion that the terminal 

 day of the long series should be 13 Ahau 8 Chen, and that Goodman 

 is wrong in rejecting it. As there are 17 cycles, it proves, as it stands, 

 that the authors of the inscriptions counted 20 cycles to the great 

 cycle, which is consistent with their system of numeration. I have 

 shown in my previous paper why 1 Ahau 8 Zip can not be tlie initial 

 date of this series. 



As bearing on the explanation of this series, the following facts in 

 regard to the symbols are worthy of special notice. It will be seen 

 bj' an inspection of the series shown in figure 158 that the gi-eat cycle 

 symbol (glyph 5) is a face character very much like that of the cycle, 

 except that it has a superfix, wliicli unfortunately is too nearly oblit- 

 erated to be traced. However, it is noticeable that in both it and the 

 cycle symbol the hand figure is across the lower jaw. According to 

 Goodman, "the hand on the cheek, the thumb or wrist foi'ming the 



