INSCRIPTIONS OF THE EARLY PERIOD. QI 
the matter rested, may not have felt equal to such a task. At all events, it 
is not until 9.9.5.0.0 at Copan (45 to 60 years later than Stela 17) that the 
attempt first appears to have been made to mark the end of every hotun, 
and even after this the sequence is incomplete. It is also explained in 
Appendix VII that the second and fourth hotuns were frequently com- 
memorated by the erection of stele when the first and third were not, 
because the former coincided with lahuntun and katun-endings respectively, 
and were consequently of greater importance than the latter. 
This seems to have been particularly true of Copan, since none of the 
four earliest stele here, which have been surely deciphered, Stele 24, 15, 9, 
and 7, date from a first or a third hotun. On the contrary, Stele 24, 15, and 
9 date from second hotuns (lahuntuns), and Stela 7 from a fourth hotun (a 
katun). Moreover, in the cases of the three doubtfully deciphered monu- 
ments previously encountered, Altar Q’ and Stele 20 and 25, the best 
readings for these are also lahuntuns, 9.4.10.0.0, 9.1.10.0.0, and 9.4.10.0.0 
respectively; indeed, the lahuntun-sign actually appears in the first. (See 
figure 6, a3b.) Therefore, a priori, it is probable, that Stela 17 dates from 
either 9.6.0.0.0 or 9.6.10.0.0 rather than from the first and third hotuns of 
Katun 6. 
But the second one of these two dates, 9.6.10.0.0, is surely recorded 
elsewhere here at Copan, namely, on Stela 9; and rather than accept the 
conclusion that this particular hotun was commemorated by the erection 
of two stele, when so many of the earlier hotuns are known to have had none 
at all, the writer prefers to accept the other reading, 9.6.0.0.0, as the date 
of this monument. 
Moreover, this latter date has two other minor points in its favor. It 
is not only a katun-ending, but it is also within 102 days of the best date for 
Altar X, with which Stela 17 may have been formerly associated. 
In spite of its fragmentary condition, this monument may be surely 
assigned to Katun 6; and because of the fact that the great majority of all 
Maya stele record hotun-endings, it may probably be assigned to one of the 
four hotuns given above, with the first as the best possibility. 
We are now in possession of sufficient data to resume the consideration 
of the relative ages of Altars X and Y and Stele 16 and 17, the possible 
dates for which follow: 
ALTAR X ALTAR Y STELA 16 STELA 17 
O23, 0:17:18 oii 8212: 6 9.4.9.17.0 9.6.0.0.0 
O52 boiz. 1S ep. ta rey, On7, 251200 to 
eG. 122672 16 9. .14e) 2. G 9.7.0.0.0 
It is unfortunate that the exact date of Stela 17 is unknown, since it 
may have stood in the same close relation to Altar X as Stela 16 appears 
to have stood in relation to Altar Y. Indeed, the dates of the two latter 
monuments, no matter which set of readings be selected, are within two 
years of each other. 
