INSCRIPTIONS OF THE GREAT PERIOD. 259 
ment 2, upon which the Initial Series introducing glyph and the cycle 
coefficient were recorded. Fragment 2 has a part of the cycle-sign and the 
katun coefficient and sign. The period-glyph appears as an eagle which is 
overwhelming a human figure, the katun coefficient. Unfortunately the 
identity of this numeral is not as clear as it might be, except that it is 10 
more than the tun coefficient; that is, the tun and katun coefficients have 
exactly the same kind of head-dress, the only difference between the two 
numbers being that the fleshless lower jaw, present in the katun coefficient, 
is wanting in the tun coefficient. A close study of these two head-dresses 
shows that they resemble somewhat the banded head-dress, characteristic 
of the head-variant for 3; and the head and body of the katun coefficient 
show death characteristics peculiar only to the number 10. Note the 
fleshless lower jaw already mentioned, and the exposed ribs. All things con- 
sidered, the best readings for these two coefficients are 13 and 3 respectively, 
although owing to the loss of the month, and the failure to identify the day 
coefficient, exact proof thereof is not possible. 
Fragment 3 presents the tun-sign and coefficient and the uinal coefficient, 
all of which are perfectly clear. The tun-sign is represented by a grotesque 
bird with fleshless lower jaw, and head-dress composed of the normal form 
of the tun-sign clinching the identification. The tun coefficient is just like 
the katun coefficient, as already noted, except for the absence of the fleshless 
lower jaw, and the best reading, as we have already seen, is probably 3. 
The uinal coefficient most closely resembles 7; the scroll passing under the 
eye and in front of the nose appears clearly at the right edge of Fragment 3. 
The uinal-sign in Fragment 4 may not belong to this Initial Series at all. 
The toad shown is a little large as compared with the other figures in this 
date. At its right there is very clearly a beveled edge, indicating that this 
block was at the right end of a step. However, since the left edge of the next 
piece in order, Fragment 5, was similarly beveled, this latter may have been 
the first block on the next step. 
Fragment 5 has the kin-sign and coefficient. The latter resembles the 
head for the number 8 rather closely, and since the day-sign on the next 
glyph-block is surely Lamat, this reading is certain. 
Fragment 6 has the day-sign and coefficient. The former is a large 
grotesque head, at first sight quite devoid of resemblance to any of the 
known day-signs; but upon closer examination it will be noticed that the 
ear of this head is the Venus variant for Lamat.1 The day-sign coefficient, 



1 This practice is not uncommon. As the writer has explained elsewhere (Morley, 1915, pp. 23-25), every 
Maya glyph seems to have had its essential characteristic, its determining element, without which it is not. Pro- 
cesses of glyph conventionalization and concessions to harmony of design frequently eliminate one element or another, 
but the essential characteristic is always retained. It isthei1reducible minimum without which the sign loses its dis- 
tinctivemeaning. Thusinthe Initial Series on Structure 1 at Quirigua, the month-sign of the terminal date appears as 
the head-dress of a grotesque head. Again, in the Initial Series on Stela D, also at Quirigua, the essential charac- 
teristic of the day-sign is applied to the cheek of a gorgeously panoplied human figure, and it is almost lost sight of 
amidst the splendor of the head-dress. Here at Copan on Altar T the outline of the day-sign for Caban is changed 
to resemble the profile of an animal head which is attached to an animal body, without at all changing the signifi- 
cance of the glyph, which records simply the day 4 Caban, the 4 being expressed by 4 dots in the head-dress just 
above the head. See also the month-sign on Stela D. This practice is familiar and seems to have been particu- 
larly common at Copan and Quirigua. (See Morley, 1915, figure 11 and pp. 24, 25.) 
