MORLEY] INTEODUCTION TO STUDY OF MAYA HIEROGLYPHS 249 



The number in the above list coming nearest to the number recorded 

 in this text (9.16.10.0.0) is the next to the last, 9.16.4.17.0. But in 

 order to reach this value of the date 1 Ahau 8 Zip (9.16.4.17.0) with 

 the number actually recorded, two considerable changes in it are first 

 necessary, (1) replacing the 10 tims in A4 by 4 tuns, that is, changuig 



2 bars to 4 dots, and (2) replacing uinals in A5 by 17 uinals, that is, 

 changing the sign to 3 bars and 2 dots. But these changes involve 

 a very considerable alteration of the original, and it seems highly 

 improbable, therefore, that the date here intended was 9.16.4.17.0 

 1 Ahau 8 Zip. Moreover, as any other number in the above list 

 involves at least three changes of the number recorded in order to 

 reach 1 Ahau 8 Zip, we are forced to the conclusion that the error 

 must be in the terminal date, not in one of the coefficients of the 

 period glyphs. Let us therefore assimae in our next trial that 

 the Initial-series number is correct as it stands, and that the error 

 lies somewhere in the terminal date. But the terminal date reached 

 in counting 9.16.10.0.0 forward in the Long Count will be 1 Ahau 



3 Zip, as we have seen on the preceding page, and this date differs 

 from, the terminal date recorded by 5 — 1 bar in the month coefficient. 

 It would seem probable, therefore, that the bar to the left of the month 

 sign in Al5 should have been omitted, in wliich case the text would 

 correctly record the date 9.16.10.0.0 1 Ahau 3 Zip. 



The student will note that in all the examples above given the 

 errors have been in the numerical coefficients, and not in the signs 

 to which they are attached; in other words, that although the 

 numerals are sometimes incorrectly recorded, the period, day, and 

 month glyphs never are. 



Throughout the inscriptions, the exceptions to this rule are so 

 very rare that the beginner is strongly advised to disregard them al- 

 together, and to assume when he finds an incorrect text that the error 

 is in one of the numerical coefficients. It should be remembered 

 also in this connection that errors in the inscriptions are exceed- 

 ingly rare, and a glyph must not be condemned as incorrect until 

 every effort has been made to explain it in some other way. 



This concludes the presentation of texts from the inscriptions. 

 The student will have noted in the foregoing examples, as was stated 

 in Chapter II, that practically the only advances made looking toward 

 the decipherment of the glyphs have been on the chronological side. 

 It is now generally admitted that the relative ages ^ of most Maya 

 monuments can be determined from the dates recorded upon them, 

 and that the foial date in almost every inscription indicates the time 

 at or near which the monument bearing it was erected, or at least 

 formally dedicated. The writer has endeavored to show, moreover, 



1 That is, the age of one compared with the age of another, without reference to their actual age as 

 expressed in terms of our own chronology. 



