INSCRIPTIONS OF THE GREAT PERIOD. 267 
way in the court below, in fact only one step, Step N of section fg, being 
between them and the débris at the base of the stairway before the latter 
was cleared away. ‘The inference would appear to be that they had been 
removed from just above the steps now in situ and originally had come from 
very near this position; that is, they were the /eft ends of steps just above e 
in figure 37. That they were the left ends of three consecutive steps seems 
probable from the fact that the photograph shows them arranged one on top 
of another in front of the /eft balustrade, as well as the fact that all three 
begin with Initial Series introducing glyphs. 
The chronological evidence and the parallel in the presentation and style 
of these three dates when compared with Dates 1, 3, and 5, also Initial Series, 
are even more suggestive. We have seen that Dates 1, 3, and 5 occur on the 
left ends of three consecutive steps. Now, if the Peabody Museum photo- 
graph just mentioned shows the original arrangement of Dates 15, 16, and 
17, this arrangement ts identical with that of Dates 1, 3, and 5; and if the 
three former came from steps not far above the three latter, the chronologic 
sequence of the six is perfect and continuous, particularly between the first 
four, which then all fall in the same decade: 
(Date FR oar a 
Section ex, figure 37 oat 16.9 G51 9 er 
ALBIS) Qisth 7013-7 
(Date DiG.5. 1028 3:0 
Section ce, figure 37 pate oe fee On 
Date 351 § 9.0114) 12.5 
In this arrangement there is actually less than two years difference, 7.¢., 
1.7.13 (513 days), between Dates 15 and 1; and it gives rise to a continuously 
ascending series of dates, from top to bottom. 
The next dates, 18, 19, and 20, occur on three scattered blocks. It will 
be shown presently that, stylistically considered, they very closely resemble 
Dates 1, 3, 5, 15 16, and 17, so much so in fact that it seems probable they 
also must have come from the same part of the stairway. No. 18, the only 
one even partially datable, probably came from above Nos. 15, 16, and 17 
on the stairway, since it hardly seems likely that three or even one Initial 
Series occurred between dates so close together in point of time as Nos. 15 
and 1. ‘The best position for Nos. 18, 19, and 20, therefore, would appear 
to have been at the left ends of steps not far above the step on which Date 17 
was inscribed, Date 18 in particular almost certainly coming from such a 
position. 
It has just been shown that Dates 15, 16, and 17 probably came from 
immediately above the steps now in situ. We have also seen that of the 15 
steps now in situ, three consecutive ones begin with Initial Series which 


1 The tun coefficient of Date 17 is twice as thick as the katun coefficient, which is 5. If its numerical elements 
had the same width, therefore, it could not have been above 10, and the best reading is 10. 
2 The tun coefficient of Date 16 must be either 13 or 18. Two bars and three dots show on the piece preserved, 
there being the possibility of another bar on the adjoining piece, now lost. It would be more natural, however, to 
have carved the coefficient all on one block, and 13 therefore is the preferable reading. 
