INSCRIPTIONS OF THE EARLY PERIOD. 71 
As applied to Stela 25, this postulate restricts the number of places 
where this day 3 Ahau could have occurred in the first half of Cycle 9 to 2 
places out of a possible 277, one a katun-ending, A, and the other a lahun- 
tun-ending, B, as follows: 
9.0.0.0.0 8 Ahau 13 Ceh 9.0.10.0.0 7 Ahau 3 Yax 
g.1.0.0.0 6 Ahau 13 Yaxkin g.1.10.0.0 § Ahau 3 Tzec 
g.2.0.0.0 4 Ahau 13 Uo B 9g.2.10.0.0 3 Ahau 8 Cumhu 
9.3.0.0.0 2 Ahau 18 Muan 9.3.10.0.0 1 Ahau 8 Mac 
9.4.0.0.0 13 Ahau 18 Yax 9.4.10.0.0 12 Ahau 8 Mol 
9.5.0.0.0 11 Ahau 18 Tzec 9.5.10.0.0 10 Ahau 8 Zip 
9.6.0.0.0 9 Ahau 3 Uayeb 9.6.10.0.0 8 Ahau 13 Pax 
9.7.0.0.0 7 Ahau 3 Kankin 9.7.10.0.0 6 Ahau 13 Zac 
9.8.0.0.0 5 Ahau 3 Chen g.8.10.0.0 4 Ahau 13 Xul 
A 9.9.0.0.0 3 Ahau 3 Zotz 9.9.10.0.0 2 Ahau 13 Pop 
The foregoing tabulation shows that under our postulate there are only 
two readings possible for this date in the first half of Cycle 9, namely, A, 
9.9.0.0.0 3 Ahau 3 Zotz and B, g.2.10.0.0 3 Ahau 8 Cumhu; and of these it 
can be shown that the latter is by far the better choice. 
In the first place, 9.9.0.0.0 is too late on stylistic grounds for the glyphs 
of Stela 25 to have been executed, which, as we have seen, more closely 
resemble those of Stele 24, 15, and 9 (9.2.10.0.0, 9.4.10.0.0, and 9.6.10.0.0 
respectively) than those of Stele 7, E and P (9.9.0.0.0, 9.9.5.0.0, and 
9.9.10.0.0 respectively); and in the second place, the earlier reading receives 
remarkable corroboration from the coefficient of 8in the next glyph. For in 
the event of the latter being the correct reading, the next glyph might then 
be 8 Cumhu, that is, the corresponding month part of the Initial Series 
terminal date, 9.2.10.0.0 3 Ahau 8 Cumhu. 
It is true the human head to which this 8 is attached bears little or no 
resemblance to any known form for the month Cumhu,! but it should be 
borne in mind in this connection that at the early period Stela 25 was 
carved, many glyphs had not yet developed the characteristics by which 
they were distinguished in later times, and that the glyph in question may 
therefore possibly be an early form for this month. 
The corroboration afforded by finding the appropriate month coefficient 
(7. e., 8) in the following glyph more than counterbalances the failure to 
discover in the sign itself recognizable characteristics of Cumhu, and the 
writer therefore believes that the date here recorded is probably 9.2.10.0.0 
3 Ahau 8 Cumhu. This date appears as the Initial Series on Stela 24 (see 
pp. 80, 81), and at first it seemed possible that these two fragments might 
be parts of that monument; but a comparison of their glyph-blocks immedi- 
ately showed that this never could have been the case, those on Stela 24 
being 18 to 19 cm. high and 27 to 28 cm. wide, and those on Stela 25, 30 cm. 
high and 34 cm. wide, and it was therefore necessary to recognize this piece 
as part of another stela, to which the number 25 has been given. 


1See Bowditch, 1910, plate 10, and Appendix X, p. 592. 
