248 BUREAU OF AMEEICAN ETHNOLOGY [bull. 57 



event would be so slight — the record of 2 dots and 1 ornamental 

 crescent instead of 3 dots — that the conclusion is almost mevitable 

 that the error here is m the tun coefficient, 12 having been recorded 

 instead of 13. In this particular case the Secondary Series and the 

 Period-ending date, which follow the Initial-series number 

 9.14.12.4.17, prove that the above reading of 13 tuns for the 12 

 actually recorded is the one correction needed to rectify the error in 

 this text. 



iVnother example indicating an error which can not be detected by 

 inspection is shown in figure 84, C. In glyphs 1 and 2 appears the 

 date 8 Eznab 16 Uo (compare glyph 1 with fig. 16, c' , and glyph 2 

 \\A\\\ fig. 19, &, c). In glyph 3 follows a number consisting of 17 kins 

 and 4 umals (4.17). Finally, in glyphs 4 and 5 is recorded the date 

 2 Men 13 Yaxkin (compare glyph 4 with fig. 16, y, and glyph 5 with 

 fig. 19, ^, T). This has every appearance of being a Secondary Series, 

 of which 8 Eznab 16 Uo is the starting point, 4.17, the number to be 

 counted, and 2 Men 13 Yaxkin the terminal date. Reducing 4.17 to 

 imits of the first order and coimting it forward from the start- 

 ing point indicated, the terminal date reached will be 1 Men 13 

 Yaxkin. This differs from the terminal date recorded in glyphs 

 4 and 5 in ha^dng a day coefficient of 1 instead of 2. Since tliis 

 involves but a very shght change in the original text, we are probably 

 justified in assuming that the day coefficient in glyph 4 should have 

 been 1 instead of 2, as recorded. 



One more example will suffice to show the kind of erroi's usually 

 encountered in the inscriptions. In plate 26 is figured the Initial 

 Series from Stela N at Copan. The introduciag glyph appears in Al 

 and is followed by the Initial-series number 9.16.10.0.0 in A2-A6, 

 all the coefficients of wliich are unusually clear. Reducing this to 

 imits of the first order and solving for the terminal date, the date 

 reached will be 1 Ahau 3 Zip. This agrees with the terminal date 

 recorded in A7-A15 except for the month coefficient, which is 8 in 

 the text instead of 3, as determined by calculation. Assuming that 

 the date recorded is correct and that the error is in the coefficient of 

 the period glyphs, the next step is to fiad the positions in Cycle 9 at 

 which the dat(> 1 Ahau 8 Zip occurred. Referring to Goodman's 

 Tables, these will be found to bo: 



9. 0. 8.11.0 1 Ahau 8 Zip 



9. 3. 1. 6.0 1 Ahau 8 Zip 



9. 5.14. 1.0 1 Ahau 8 Zip 



9. 8. 6.14.0 1 Ahau 8 Zip 



9.10.19. 9.0 1 Ahau 8 Zip 



9.13.12. 4.0 1 Ahau 8 Zip 



9.16. 4.17.0 1 Ahau 8 Zip 



9.18.17.12.0 1 Ahau 8 Zip 



