INSCRIPTIONS OF THE GREAT PERIOD. 235 
only tuns which fulfill the above conditions are 9.12.5.0.0 3 Ahau 3 Xul and 
g.15.17.0.0 1 Ahau 8 Xul. Since the latter is within 12 years of the date on 
Stela D, and since the former is 60 years earlier, the writer accepts the latter 
as the best reading of this date, in spite of the fact that the other possibility 
is a hotun-ending as well. 
Several points about M, moreover, support this reading. In the first 
place, there is room only for three bars, or two bars and one row of dots, 
above the katun head, and from what remains, it seems probable that the 
upper element was a bar rather than one or more dots. This would make 
Ma read “Katun 15.” The day-sign coefficient (upper part of mb) was 
placed provisionally at 1, 2, or 3. A close study, however, seems to show 
that the left and right hand dots are ornamental: ~ \= and that only the 
central dot is numerical. If this is so, the day coefficient is 1, which would 
agree with the above reading. 
It seems that we have recorded here, but in a very irregular fashion, the 
following date: Initial Series introducing glyph, Katun 15 1 Ahau 8 Xul 
(9.15.17.0.0), in which the date 1 Ahau 8 Xul is not to be regarded as ending 
Katun 15, the period actually recorded, but as occurring some time in the 
following katun, 7. ¢., in the katun-ending in 9.16.0.0.0. 
Unusual as such a procedure is, an exact parallel is found on Altar Q, 
also here at Copan. At co in this latter text is recorded “‘Katun 17” and 
immediately following, in pe, £1, the date 6 Ahau 13 Kayab. Ordinarily it 
would be assumed that Katun 17 ended on the date 6 Ahau 13 Kayab, but 
referring to Goodman’s tables, this date is found to have been 9.17.5.0.0 or 
the hotun-ending after Katun 17. The procedure is identical in both cases. 
First is recorded the number of the preceding katun, 15 in one case and 17 in 
the other, and following in each case is the terminal date of a tun in the 
next succeeding katun, Tun 17 here and Tun 5 on Altar Q. 
It is to be noted, moreover, that neither of the katun-signs in these two 
texts has an ending prefix or superfix. This, however, is corroboratory 
rather than otherwise, since the ends of these katuns are not recorded, but 
instead the ends of subdivisions of the following katuns. It seems probable, 
therefore, that the bottom step records the date 9.15.17.0.0 1 Ahau 8 Xul. 
Although the remaining glyph-blocks, o-s, are fairly clear, particularly the 
last three, Q-s, none of their glyphs can be deciphered. 
Returning to the Calendar Round date on the upper step, 1, 2, or 3 
Lamat 16 Zotz, let us find where these occurred in the Long Count nearest 
9.15.17.0.0 1 Ahau 8 Xul. By referring to Goodman’s tables these occur- 
rences will be found to have been as follows: 
9.14.16.11.8 1 Lamat 16 Zotz 
O16.,8..0.5. 4 uamateo Lotz 
9.16.17. 3.8 2 Lamat 16 Zotz 
Unfortunately not one of these shows any particularly close relations 
either with the reading suggested for the date on the lower step, 9.15.17.0.0, 
or for the date on the associated stela, 9.15.5.0.0. 
