128 



BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY 



[BULL. 57 



and the uiiuil coefficient stands on the leftoi the innal sign, while the 

 kin coefficient stands above. This interchange in certain cases prob- 

 ably resulted from the needs of glyphic balance and symmetry. 

 For example, in figure 62, a, liad the kin coefficient 19 been placed on 

 the left of the uinal sign, the uinal coefficient 4 would have been 

 insufficient to fill the space above the period glyph, and consequently 

 the corner of the glyph block would have appeared ragged. The 

 use of the 19 above and the 4 to the left, on the other hand, properly 

 fills this space, making a symmetrical glyph. Such cases, however, 

 are unusual, and the customary position of the kin coefficient, when 

 the kin sign is omitted, is on the left of the uinal sign, not above 

 it. This practice, namely, omitting the kin sign in numerical series, 



oooo 



OOP 





OC^iS) 



Fig. 02. Glyphs showing inisplai-eineut of the kin coefficieut (o) or elimination of a period glyph (6, c): 

 a, Stela E, Qiiirigua; 6, Altar U, Copan; c, Stela J, Copan. 



seems to have prevailed extensively in connection with both Initial 

 Series and Secondary Series; indeed, in the latter it is the rule to 

 which there are but few exceptions. 



The omission of the kin sign, while by far the most common, is not 

 the only example of glyph omission found in numerical series in the 

 inscriptions. Sometimes, thougli very rarely, numbers occur in which 

 periods other than the kin are wanting. A case in point is figure 62, b. 

 Here a tun sign appears with the coefhcient 13 above and 3 to the left. 

 Since there are only two coefficients (13 and 3) and three time periods 

 (tun, uinal, and kin), it is clear that the signs of both the lower periods 

 have been omitted as well as the coefficient of one of them. In c of the 

 last-mentioned figure a somewhat different practice was followed. 

 Here, altliough three time periods f^re recorded — tuns,uinals and kins — 

 one period (the uinal) and its coefficient have been omitted, and there 

 is nothing between the kins and 10 tuns. Such cases are exceed- 

 ingly rare, however, and may be disregarded by the beginner. 



We have seen that the order of the periods in the numbers in figure 

 56 was just the reverse of that in the numbers shown in figures 58 

 and 59 ; that in one place the kins stand at tlie top and in the other 

 at the bottom; and finally, tliat this difference was not a vital one, 

 since it had no effect on the values of the numbei-s. This is true, 

 because in the first method of expressing the higher numbers, it 

 matters not which end of the number comes first, the highest or the 



