MOiiLEY] INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OP MAYA HIEEOGLYPHS 155 



have been given under step 2, page 135, and step 4, page 138. If 

 after applying these to the case in point it seems certain that the 

 starting point and terminal date used in the calculations both be- 

 long to the given number, we have to fall back on the second of 

 the above alternatives, that is, that there is an error in the original 

 text. 



Although very unusual, particularly in the inscriptions, errors in 

 the original texts are by no means entirely unknown. These seem 

 to be restricted chiefly to errors in numerals, as the record of 7 for 

 8, or 7 for 12 or 17, that is, the omission or insertion of one or more 

 bars or dots. In a very few instances there seem to be errors in the 

 month glyph. Such errors usually are obvious, as will be pointed out 

 in connection with the texts in which they are found (see Chapters 

 Vand VI). 



If both of the above alternatives are found not to apply, that is, 

 if both our calculations and the original texts are free from error, 

 we are obliged to accept the third alternative as the source of 

 trouble, namely, that the case in point lies without the operation of 

 our rules. In such cases it is obviously impossible to go further in 

 the present state of our knowledge. Special conditions presented by 

 glyphs whose meanings are unknown may govern such cases. At 

 all events, the failure of the rules under 1-4 to reach the terminal 

 dates recorded as under 5 introduces a new phase of glyph study — 

 the meaning of unknown forms with which the beginner has no con- 

 cern. Consequently, when a text falls without the operation of the 

 rules given in this chapter — a very rare contingency — the beginner 

 should turn his attention elsewhere. 



