INSCRIPTIONS OF THE MIDDLE PERIOD. 187 
large. The southeastern corner, as the altar now stands, is missing. Altar 
H’ is in every way the companion piece of Altar I’, which stands at the 
northwestern corner of this same mound, and, as will appear later, the two 
are not only practically identical in size, shape, and treatment, but are also 
connected by the subject-matter of their respective inscriptions. 
Galindo was the first to describe both Altars H’ and I’, as follows: 
“Near to the corner of this pyramid of sacrifice [Mound 16] there is found a 
rectangular table or stone [Altar H’], elevated above the ground like that already 
described [Altar Q] by smaller stone supports; it is 2 varas 21 inches long, and 1 
vara 20 inches wide, and 13 inches thick or high; three sides of its edge contain 
characters, which are in squares (casillas) four to a block; figure 17 represents one 
of these rectangular groups; the edges of the stone thus contain 24 squares on the 
long side, and 16 on the smaller sides; the other long side, which faces south, and the 
top and bottom are plain. At the other side of the canoe’ there is a stone, or table, 
similar to the last described, but very broken [Altar I’].’” 
Maudslay, in describing these two altars, says: 
‘ 
‘7 and 7 are two flat stone slabs, each about the same size, 7 feet 6 inches X 
4 feet 6 inches X I foot; both are broken, one has indistinct remains of hieroglyphic 
carving on the narrow sides and ends. Excavations have been made beneath each 
of these slabs at some former time.’” 
Fortunately, in spite of this indistinctness, the writer was able to 
decipher the calculations recorded. It should be noted that both of these 
altars have inscriptions, and not one only, as stated by Maudslay. 
The inscription is presented on the ends and one of the sides; the 
remaining side, top, and bottom are plain. There is no decoration of any 
sort other than the single band of glyphs just mentioned, and as one of the 
long sides is plain, we may assume that this was the back. If so, the inscrip- 
tion on Altar H’ began on the left or east side with the Initial Series intro- 
ducing glyph, the left half of which is missing. (See a, plate 23, a.) 
The Initial Series of this altar is expressed by head-variant period- 
glyphs and numerals, the order of reading within the glyph-blocks being from 
left to right and top to bottom. The coefficients unfortunately are not only 
indistinct in some places, but of unusual form. Thus, although the cycle 
and uinal coefficients are readily identifiable as 9 and 3 respectively, the 
katun, tun, and kin coefficients are irregular. A better way, therefore, to 
decipher this date is to continue the inspection of the text before attempting 
to assign values to these doubtful numerals. 
The day of the Initial Series terminal date appears in pa |. h., 
and is either 6, 7, 8, 9, or 10 Muluc. Following along through £ and F 
(plate 23, b) the last glyph of the Supplementary Series is reached in Ga u. h.; 
and in Gb u. h. is the month of the Initial Series terminal date, 17 Mol. 
The first Secondary Series, 2.13.4.4, 1s recorded at Jb 1. h., Ka; and at 
Kb u. h. there is a non-calendric glyph, very irregularly standing between the 



1 Galindo thus fancifully describes one of the sculptures at the northern base of mound 14. 
2 Galindo, 1834, Appendix XI, p. 597. 
3 Maudslay, 1889-1902, vol. 1 of text p. 24. 
