INSCRIPTIONS OF THE EARLY PERIOD. 87 
to this house to buy cheese and remembers distinctly when the stone wall 
in question was being built by the husband of Ana Carlos Orellano, Domingo 
de Aguilar. She recalls the laborers carrying the stone that went into it, 
but not the fragments of Stela 15 specifically, although she remembers 
them afterwards as having been in the wall. 
When questioned as to her age at this time, she replied that she was still 
a little girl. If she is now 75, and her grandchildren believe she can be no 
less, and if she were about 10 when the wall was being built, it would make 
the wall date from about 1854 or, allowing a slight leeway either way, roughly 
from the decade 1850-1860. 
However, even this does not establish the original provenance of Stela 
15, and indeed it was only by the chance discovery of a third fragment of 
this monument in 1915 that it has been possible to establish its former posi- 
tion at all. 
In examining the mound of Stela 7 in that year, the writer discovered a 
small fragment having only one glyph on it, which looked as though it might 
be a part of Stela 15. He had this carried over to the cabildo, where frag- 
ments 1 and 2 of this monument had already been deposited, and it was 
found to fit against the lower end of fragment 2. (See figure 22, 7.) 
This discovery was important as establishing beyond much doubt that 
the original provenance of Stela 15 had been the mound of Stela 7; that 
fragments 1 and 2 had been removed from here some time between 1850 
and 1860 for use in the foundations of the stone wall above described; and 
finally, that because it was only a small and irregularly shaped piece, frag- 
ment 3 had been left undisturbed at the mound of Stela 7 practically an situ. 
When these three fragments were assembled they measured 1.89 meters 
long, 76 cm. wide, and 42 cm. thick. 
The inscription covers all four sides, each side opening with an Initial 
Series introducing glyph. The variable element in all of these except the 
one above the single Initial Series number is the same, : the 
variable element in the other being a grotesque head. On ALE) the 
basis of arrangement of design, therefore, Stela 15 may be assigned to Class 3. 
Spinden was the first to call attention to the early character of this monu- 
ment. He suggested as its probable date 9.4.10.0.0 12 Ahau 8 Mol.' After 
a close study of fragments 1, 2, and 3, the last not seen by Spinden, the 
writer was able to corroborate this reading.” 
The single Initial Series opens with an introducing glyph in ai-s2 
(plate 12). This is followed by 9 cycles in a3—B3 and 4 katuns in a4—B4. 
Here occurs the break described above, and then follows on fragment 2, 


1Spinden, 1913, pp. 160, 163, 164. 
2Since Spinden’s conclusions regarding the archaic character of Stela 15 were based largely upon stylistic 
criteria, it is significant that the date actually recorded on this monument indicates a corresponding antiquity. 
This is but one of the many agreements between the chronological sequence and the stylistic sequence of the 
monuments throughout the Maya area, an agreement so complete in fact as to prove beyond all doubt the chrono- 
logical sequence of Maya art. 
