MORLET] INTEODUCTION TO STUDY OF MAYA HIEROGLYPHS 85 



at all, the knowledge of it came only from lialf-forgotten records the 

 understandmg of which was gradually passing from the minds of men. 



It is clear from the foregoing that an important change in recording 

 the passage of time took place sometime between the epoch of the 

 great southern cities and the much later period when the northern cities 

 flourished. In the former, time was reckoned and dates were recorded 

 by Initial Series; in the latter, in so far as we can judge from post- 

 Conquest sources, the u kahlay katunob and Calendar-round dating 

 were the only systems used. As to when this change took place, 

 we are not entirely in the dark. It is certain that the use of the 

 Initial Series extended to Yucatan, since monuments presenting this 

 method of dating have been found at a few of the northern cities, 

 namely, at Chichen Itza, Holactun, and Tuluum. On the other 

 hand, it is equally certain that Initial Series could not have been 

 used very extensively in the north, since they have been discovered 

 in only these three cities in Yucatan up to the present time. More- 

 over, the latest, that is, the most recent of these three, was probably 

 contemporaneous with the rise of the Triple Alliance, a fairly early 

 event of Northern Maya history. Taking these two points into con- 

 sideration, the limited use of Initial Series m the north and the early 

 dates recorded in the few Initial Series known, it seems likely that 

 Initial-series dating did not long survive the transplanting of the 

 Maya civilization in Yucatan. 



Why this change came about is uncertain. It could hardly have 

 been due to the desire for greater acciu-acy, since the u kahlay katunob 

 was far less exact than Initial-series dating; not only could dates 

 satisfpng all given conditions recur much more frequently in the 

 u kahlay katunob, but, as generally used, this method fixed a date 

 merely as occurring somewhere within a period of about 20 years. 



The writer believes the change under consideration arose from a 

 very different cause; that it was in fact the result of a tendency 

 toward greater brevity, which was present in the glyphic writing 

 from the very earliest times, and which is to be noted on some of the 

 earliest monuments that have survived the ravages of the passing 

 centuries. At first, when but a single date was recorded on a monu- 

 ment, an Initial Series was used. Later, however, when the need or 

 desire had arisen to inscribe more than one date on the same monument, 

 additional dates were not expressed as Initial Series, each of which, 

 as we have seen, involves the use of 8 glyphs, but as a Secondary 

 Series, which for the record of short periods necessitated the use of 

 fewer glyphs than were employed in Initial Series. It would seem 

 almost as though Secondary Series had been invented to avoid the 

 use of Initial Series when more than one date had to be recorded on 

 the same monument. But this tendency toward brevity in dating 

 did not cease with the invention of Secondary Series. Somewhat 

 later, dating by period-endings was introduced, obviating the neces- 



