MORLBV] INTEODUCTION TO STUDY OF MAYA HIEEOGLYPHS 125 



closing cycle of Great Cycle 19 of Great-great Cycle 11 of Great-great- 

 great Cycle 1 was a Cycle 13, that is to say, 1. 11. 19. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 

 4 Ahau 13 Cumhu concluded a great cycle, the closing cycle of which 

 was named Cycle 13. This large number, composed of one great- 

 great-great cycle, eleven great-great cycles, and nineteen great cycles, 

 contains exactly 12,780 cycles, as below: 



I great-great-great cycle = 1 X 20 X 20 X 20 cycles = 8, 000 cycles 



II great-great cycles =11 X 20x20 cycles = 4, 400 cycles 

 19 great cycles =19x20 cycles = 380 cycles 



12, 780 cycles 

 But the closing cycle oi this number Was named Cycle 13, and by 

 deducting all the multiples of 13 possible (983) we can find the name 

 of the first cycle of Great-great-great Cycle 1, the highest Maya time 

 period of which we have any knowledge: 983x13 = 12,779. And 

 deducting this from the number of cycles involved (12,780), we 

 have — 



12, 780 



12, 779 



This counted backward from Cycle 1, brings us again to a Cycle 13 as 

 the name of the first cycle in the Maya conception of time. In 

 other words, the Maya conceived time to have commenced, in so far 

 as we can judge from the single record available, with a Cycle 13, 

 not with the beginning of a Cycle 1, as they did their chronology. 



We have still to explain Al, figure 60. This glyph is quite clearly 

 a form of the Initial-series introducing glyph, as already explained, 

 in which the five components of that glyph are present in usual form: 

 (1) Trinal superfix ; (2) pair of comb-like lateral appendages; (3) the 

 tun sign; (4) the trinal suljfix; (5) the variable central element, here 

 represented by a grotesque head. 



Of these, the first only claims our attention here. The trinal super- 

 fix in Al (fig. 60), as its name signifies, is composed of three parts, 

 but, unlike other forms of this element, the middle part seems to be 

 nothing more nor less than a numerical dot or 1 . The question at 

 once arises, can the two flanking parts be merely ornamental and 

 the whole element stand for the number 1 ? The introducing glyph 

 at the beginning of this text (not figured here) , so far as it can be 

 made out, has a trinal superfix of exactly the same character — a dot 

 with an ornamental scroll on each side. What can be the explanation 

 of this element, and indeed of the whole glyph? Is it one great- 

 great-great-great cycle — a period twenty times as great as the one 

 recorded in A2, or is it not a term of the series in glyphs A2-A9 ? 



