Q2 THE INSCRIPTIONS AT COPAN. 
If such a relationship did exist between Stela 17 and Altar X, it is highly 
probable that the date of Altar X is the second value given above, namely, 
9.5.19.12.18, since this value would be within 6 uinals, 72. ¢., 102 days of the 
best date for Stela 17, and can not be farther off than 20 years, whereas the 
nearest that the first or third values above can be to the nearest possible 
readings of Stela 17 is 53 years before or 52 years after respectively. 
Again, on stylistic grounds, 9.5.19.12.18 1s a better date for Altar X 
than either 9.3.6.17.18 or 9.8.12.7.18. In short, all factors considered, 
9.5.19.12.18 seems to be the best date for Altar X, and 9.6.0.0.0 the best 
date for Stela 17. And finally, because these two dates are so close together, 
it is probable that Altar X was formerly associated with Stela 17. 
The real crux of this question is in regard to the dates of Stela 16 and 
Altar Y, that is, which of the two sets of values given above is to be asso- 
ciated with them, 9.4.9.17.0 and 9.4.8.12.6 or 9.7.2.12.0 and 9.7.1.7.6; and 
since either set appears to be equally possible, chronologically considered, 
it is necessary to turn to the stylistic criteria present in order to determine 
the relative sequence of these four monuments. 
Unfortunately, there is little help coming from this direction either, as 
between Altars X and Y there appears to be but little choice. The glyphs 
on Y are perhaps a shade better than those on X, but, to offset this, the 
human figures on X seem slightly more naturalistic than those on Y. Indeed, 
on stylistic grounds it is all but impossible to say which is the earlier of 
the two. 
As between Stele 16 and 17 the choice is little better, but here we have 
another avenue of approach. Since the date of Stela 17 is fixed certainly 
to Katun 6, and probably to 9.6.0.0.0, the question is to determine whether 
Stela 16 is earlier or later than this date by means of a comparison of its 
style with the styles of the next earlier and later monuments in the sequence. 
The stela next earlier than Stela 17 is Stela 15 (9.4.10.0.0), and the one next 
later, Stela 9 (9.6.10.0.0); and our next step, therefore, is to compare the 
style of Stela 16 with the styles of these two monuments. 
The Initial Series introducing glyph of Stela 16 is more like that of 
Stela 9 than that of Stela 15, and in general its closest stylistic affinities may 
be said to be later rather than earlier, 2. ¢., with Stela 9 rather than with Stela 
15, and since the date of Stela 17 can be only Io years earlier than the date of 
Stela g at the outside, and may indeed even be the same, it seems probable, 
all things considered, that the later date, 7. ¢., 9.7.2.12.0, is the better one of 
the two for Stela16. It should be remembered, however, that the earlier date 
is almost equally as good, and the sequence given below is by no means certain: 
Altar X — 9.5.19.12.18 
Stelaat 7k O.0) 0.400 
AltarsY¢ §:0:7.4ie2.0 
Stela 1G y0.7. eer eneo 
All these monuments except Altar X were found at the Main Structure, 
and all but Stela 16 were in positions clearly indicating secondary usage. 
