MORLEY] INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF MAYA HIEEOGLYPHS 117 



believes this Katun 17 is declared in the glyph followmg the 19 katuns 

 (A5), which the writer identifies as 17 cycles, and consequently 

 according to the Goodman interpretation the whole passage is a 

 Period-ending date. Mr. Bowditch (1910: p. 321) also offers the same 

 interpretation as a possible reading of this passage. Even granting 

 the truth of the above, this interpretation still leaves unexplained 

 the lowest glyph of the number, which has a coefficient of 14 (A6). 



The strongest proof that this passage will not bear the construction 

 placed on it by Mr. Goodman is afforded by the very glyph upon which 

 his reading depends for its verification, namely, the glyph which he 

 interprets Katun 17. This glyph (A5) bears no resemblance to the 

 katun sign standmg immediately above it, but on the contrary has 

 for its lower jaw the clasping hand (*), which, as we have seen, is /^-^^ 

 the determinhig chai-acteristic of the cycle head. Indeed, this * 

 element is so clearly portrayed in the glyph in question that its identi- 

 fication as a head variant for the cycle follows almost of necessity. 

 A comparison of this glyph with the head variant of the cycle given in 

 figure 25, d-f, shows that the two forms are practically identical. 

 This correction deprives Mr. Goodman's readmg of its chief support, 

 and at the same time increases the probability that all the 6 terms 

 here recorded belong to one and the same number. That is, since 

 the first five are the kin, uinal, tim, katmi, and cycle, respectively, it 

 is probable that the sixth and last, which follows immediatel3> the 

 fifth, without a break or interiuption of an\ kind, belongs to the 

 same series also, in which event this gh^^h would be most likely to 

 represent the miits of the sixth order, or the so-called great cycles. 



The passages in the Palenque and Tikal texts (figs. 59 and 60, 

 respectively) have never been satisfactorily explained. In default of 

 calendric checks, as the known distance between two dates, for 

 example, which may be apphed to these three numbers to test their 

 accuracy, the writer knows of no bett(>r chock than to study the char- 

 acteristics of this possible great-cycle glyph in all three, and of the 

 possible great-great-cycle glyph in the last two. 



Passing over the kins, tlie normal form of the uinal glyph appears 

 in figures 58, A2, and 59, Bl (see fig. 31, a, h), and the head variant 

 in figure 60, A8. (Sec fig. 31, d-f.) Below the uinal sign in A3, fig- 

 ure 58, and A2, figure 59, and above A7, in figure 60 the tuns are re- 

 corded as head variants, in all three of which the fleshless lower jaw, 

 the determining characteristic of the tun head, appears. Compare 

 these three head variants with the head variant for the tun in figure 29, 

 d-g. In the Copan inscription (fig. 58) the katun glyph, A4, appears 

 as a head variant, the essential elements of which seem to be the oval 

 in the top part of the head and the curling fang protruding from the 

 back part of the mouth. Compare this head with the head variant 

 for the katun in figure 27, e-h. In the Palenque and Tikal texts (see 



