INSCRIPTIONS OF THE GREAT PERIOD. 323 
8 is at the bottom. Can it represent some new count of which nothing is 
yet known? The glyphs on the top of the pier a2, a3 are indecipherable, but 
A4 is very clearly the day 8 Ahau, both the coefficient and head being 
reversed in position, as noted above. 
The next glyph is very puzzling. The tun-sign appears very clearly 
as the main element with a coefficient of 10! to the left. It is evident that 
some coefficient and period-glyph have been suppressed here, since there are 
only two coefficients present, and the single period-glyph recorded is the tun- 
sign. Unfortunately, the writer has been unable to connect this number 
with any other date in the text. 
In B1 is recorded 13 Zip, and this doubtless belongs with the day 8 Ahau 
in A4, giving the date 8 Ahau 13 Zip. There are no other decipherable glyphs 
on this side of the central ornament, although a few are of familiar form, like 
ji, which is the Zotz head. At gi, r1, to the right of the central ornament, is 
the date 13 Ahau 18 Cumhu, and following this in u1, vi, the date 8 Ahau 
13 Zip, repeated again. Finally, the last two glyphs in the text, £’4, g's, 
record the date 13 Ahau 18 Cumhu. 
We have here, then, four Calendar Round dates, 4, B1, 01d, R1, U1, V1, 
and £4, E's, without, however, the accompanying record of where any one 
belongs in the Long Count. The second and fourth are the familiar date 
13 Ahau 18 Cumhu, which we have already seen is almost certainly 
g.17.0.0.0 13 Ahau 18 Cumhu, and we may feel sure that wherever the 
other two dates may be, the second and fourth are the contemporaneous 
and probably the dedicatory date of the stand. 
The third date is probably 8 Ahau 13 Zip, the month being the unusual 
variant found only in two other inscriptions, namely, Altar L and Stela N, 
already described. ‘The fact that the first date is also almost certainly 8 
Ahau 13 Zip—the month in B1 1s surely 13 Zip—strongly corroborates this 
identification of the month-sign in v1 as Zip. 
The next question is, where did the latter date occur in the Long Count 
nearest 9.17.0.0.0 13 Ahau 18 Cumhu. It can be shown by calculation that 
8 Ahau 13 Zip occurred only 3 uinals (60 days) later than the above katun- 
ending, namely, at 9.17.0.3.0 8 Ahau 13 Zip, and this, therefore, is probably 
the Initial Series value corresponding with the first and third dates, although 
the number 3.0 appears nowhere in the inscription. We will see in the de- 
scription of Altar Q (p. 328) that a similar condition prevailed on this monu- 
ment also. In the case of Altar Q the count overlaps the hotun-ending the 
altar was erected to commemorate, 9.17.5.0.0, by only 4 days more, 1. ¢., 3.4. 


1 An inaccuracy should be noted here in the drawing of the four glyphs on the faces of these two piers, A4, A5 
and x’4,8’s5, in plate 30. The two upper glyphs, aq and k&’4, the days 8 Ahau and 13 Ahau respectively com- 
pletely fill the face of the pier in each case, leaving no unsculptured band, at the left and right respectively, as 
shown in plate 30, in which respect they differ from the three glyphs above and the one below in each case, AI, A2, 
A3,and as on the left-hand pier, and k’1, £’2, £’3,and £’5 on the right-hand pier. The two bottom glyphs, a5 and 
Es’ have this plain unsculptured band on their left and right sides respectively, the right and left sides being the 
plain back of the second seat. As shown in plate 30, a5 has a coefficient of 15. From the photograph, however, 
it is apparent that the left bar is not numerical, but is this plain, unsculptured band. The coefficient here, there- 
fore, is 10 instead of 15, as shown in plate 30. 
