116 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [bull. 57 



great cycle ==2,880,000; therefore the great-great cycle = twenty times 

 this number, or 57,600,000. Om- text shows, however, that seven of 

 these g^reat-great cycles are used in the number in question, therefore 

 our first term = 403,200,000. The rest may be reduced by means of 

 Table Ylll as follows : B3, 1 8 great cycles = 51 ,840,000 ; A3, 2 cycles = 

 288.000; B2, 9 katuns = 64,800; A2, 1 tun = 360; Bl, 12 uinals = 240; 

 Bl, 1 kin = 1 . The sum of these (403,200,000 + 51 ,840,000 + 288,000 + 

 64,800 + 360 4- 240 + 1 ) = 455,393,401 . 



The thu'd of these numbers (see fig. 60), if all of its terms belong to 

 one and the same number, equals 1,841,639,800. Commencing with 

 A2, this has a coefficient of 1. Smce it immediately follows the 

 great-great cycle, which we found above consisted of 57,600,000, we 

 may assume that it is the great-great-great cycle, and that it Con- 

 sisted of 20 great-great cycles, or 1,152,000,000. Since its coefficient 

 is only 1, this large number itself will be the first term in our series. 

 The rest may readily be reduced as follows: A3, 11 great-great 

 cycles = 633,600,000 ; A4, 19 great cycles = 54,720,000 ; A5, 9 cycles = 

 1,296,000; A6, 3 katuns = 21,600; A7, 6 tuns = 2,160; A8, 2 uinals = 

 40; A9, kins = 0.^ Tl^e sum of these (1,152,000,000 + 633,600,000 + 

 54,720,000 + 1,296,000 + 21,600 + 2, 160 + 40 + 0) = 1,841,639,800, the 

 highest number found anywhere in the Maya writings, equivalent to 

 about 5,000,000 years. 



Whether these three numbers are actually recorded in the inscrip- 

 tions under discussion depends solely on the question whether or not 

 the terms above the cycle in each belong to one and the same series. 

 If it could be determined with certainty that these higher periods in 

 each text were all parts of the same number, there would be no further 

 doubt as to the accurac3^ of the figures given above; and more impor- 

 tant still, the 17 cycles of the first number (see A5, fig. 58) would 

 then prove conclusively that more than 13 cycles were required to 

 make a great cycle in the inscriptions as well as in the codices. And 

 furthermore, the 14 great cycles in A6, figure 58, the 18 in B3, figure 

 59, and the 19 hi A4, figure 60, would also prove that more than 13 

 great C3^cles were required to make one of the period next higher — 

 that is, the great-great cycle. It is needless to say that this point 

 has not been universally admitted. Mr. Goodman (1897: p. 132) has 

 suggested in the case of the Copan mscription (fig. 58) that only the 

 lowest four periods — the 19 katuns, the 10 tuns, the uinals, and the 

 kins— A2, A3, and A4,2 here form the number; and that if this 

 immber is counted backward from the Initial Series of the inscription, 

 it will reach a Katun 1 7 of the i)receding cycle. Finally, Mr. Goodman 



' The kins are missing from this number (see A9, fig. 60). At the maximum, however, they could in- 

 crease this large number only by 19. They have been used here as at 0. 



2 As will be explained presently, the kin sign is frequently omitted and its coefficient attached to the 

 uinal glyph. See p. 127. 



