132 THE ARCHAIC MAYA INSCRIPTIONS. 



Altar K. 

 Initial date: 5-4 — 9 — 12 — 16 — 7xS — 3 Lamat-16 Yax. The initial directive series 

 runs with this date, but is almost obliterated. Little can be made out of the remainder 

 of the glyphs, as they are unusual and fantastic. I think, however, that the reckoning 

 is carried forward to the beginning of the 15 th katun, as, apart from the katun 

 symbols near the end, the few recognizable glyphs occur mostly in connection with 

 that date. 



Altar L. 

 A most extraordinary day symbol occurs here, but as the hand below is one of the 

 signs employed at Palenque to denote the beginning of a katun the day is probably 

 Ahau. The only place this date could occur anywhere within reasonable range would 

 be 55—2—6—20—18x20. 



Stela M. 



Initial date: 54- — 9 — 16 — 5 — 18x20 — 8 Ahau-8 Zotz. The initial directive series 

 succeeds, but beyond that the glyphs are too uncertain and interrupted to make 

 anything out of them. 



Stela N. 



Initial date: 54—9—16—10—18x20—1 Ahau-8 Zip. The month numeral is 

 wrong ; it should be 3 Zip. The initial directive series and five other unintelligible 

 glyphs complete the first column. At the top of the second column occurs the sign 

 that indicates a reckoning backwards. It is followed by seven glyphs, which I think 

 give in another form the substance of the subsequent reckoning, which is the longest 

 that occurs in any of the inscriptions, embracing a period of 75,264 years. It is given 

 as 14 — 17 — 19—10 — 18x20, from the initial date to 1 Ahau-8 Chen, the beginning 

 of a katun, etc. The reckoning is not only wrong but is absurd as well. The cycles 

 run only to 13, aud no such reckoning backward or forward from the initial date 

 would reach a 1 Ahau-8 Chen. But fortunately, despite all the blundering, we can 

 see what the intention was. I Ahau-8 Chen begins the 17th katun of the 8th cycle, 

 and thence to the initial date is just 19 katuns and 10 ahaus. The fact that these are 

 the numbers of katuns and ahaus expressed in the reckoning would lead us to suspect 

 that it was to go backward even if the directive sign had not already so informed us, 

 for that would do away with the odd katuns and ahaus and leave the reckoning in 

 even katun rounds. If it were to have gone forward, the odd numbers would have 

 been 3 great cycles, 7 cycles, 9 katuns and 10 ahaus. A little figuring will show the 

 difference. For the sake of clearness I omit all but the great cycle, cycle, katun 

 and ahau periods. It will be borne in mind that 3 great cycles, 8 cycles and 9 katuns 



