94 THE INSCRIPTIONS AT COPAN. 
bar-and-dot notation. It unmistakably records the date 9.6.10.0.0 8 Ahau 
13 Pax, as follows: 
A1B2 Initial Series introducing glyph 
A3 9 cycles 
B3 6 katuns 
A4 Io tuns 
B4 © uinals 
AS o kins 
Bs 8 Ahau 
B8 13 Pax 
aio may be the hotun glyph; and the rest of the text shows other famil- 
iar signs, although of unknown meaning. The tops of both of the narrow 
faces are destroyed, and it is now difficult to say whether Initial Series intro- 
ducing glyphs had originally stood here or not. Judging from what is left 
of the top glyph (p2) on one side, they had not stood here.’ 
Assuming that the effaced side (the broad side opposite the Initial 
Series) opened with an Initial Series introducing glyph, the number of 
glyph-blocks originally carved on this monument was 19+ 19+22+22=82, 
each introducing glyph occupying the space of four glyph-blocks. 
Stela 9 is exactly 2 katuns later than Stela 15, which it closely resembled, 
and commemorated the seventh lahuntun of Cycleg. The relief, though very 
low, is elaborately executed, the glyphs showing a wealth of minute detail 
scarcely equaled, even in the Middle and Great Periods. This complexity 
appears especialy in the treatment of the numerical bars, all of which present 
interior decoration and have square corners, thus: In later times the 
bar is left undecorated, the corners are rounded, and the whole element is 
made narrower. 
As already pointed out, Stela 9 is very similar in style to Stela 15. 
Indeed, both appear to have been products of the same school, possibly 
indeed of the same hand, although the latter is hardly likely, since an interval 
of 40 years separated the two monuments. 
Both are of about the same width and thickness, Stela 9 being 69 cm. 
wide and 39 cm. thick, while Stela 15 is 76 cm. wide and 42 cm. thick. 
Stela 9 is about 2.5 to 3 meters long and the fragments of Stela 15 pre- 
served are 1.89 meters long. ‘To this latter measurement, however, must 
be added something to compensate for the missing bottom-piece, probably 
at least half a meter. 
In style the two are perhaps even more closely connected, glyphic 
details in particular being very similar. Thus, for example, the proportions 
of the different elements of the Initial Series introducing glyphs on the back 
and sides of Stela 15 are the same as those in the one on Stela 9, the comb- 
like lateral appendages in the former being almost identical with the same 
elements in-the latter. Even the variable elements in the Initial Series 

1In Maudslay, 1889-1902, vol. 1, plate 110, c, enough remains of p2 to show that it had never been an Initial 
Series introducing glyph. Had it been, it is probable that it would have occupied the same space as the Initial 
Series introducing glyph on the front, namely, A1—B2. That this was not the case on this side, p2 clearly indicates. 
