INSCRIPTIONS OF THE GREAT PERIOD. 361 
Stela H (9.17.12.0.0) is like Stele D and M again, having but a single 
main figure. Here again, however, the feather-work of the head-dress and 
clothing of the single figure are so elaborate as to occupy all of the space on 
the adjacent sides, and have thus crowded the inscription onto the back. 
This shows that the reason Stele N and C had inscriptions on their narrow 
faces was because there was no other place to put them, and not through 
lack of desire to continue the fashion inaugurated with Stela D. The gro- 
tesque bird and head and the panel of glyphs on the back are again sur- 
rounded on three sides with feather-work tassels and rosettes. 
Stela F (9.17.12.13.0) follows Stele D, M, and H in arrangement, 
having a single main figure, the ramifications of whose head-dress and 
clothing extend around and completely occupy the adjacent sides, as in the 
case of D, M, and H. The glyph-blocks on the back are inclosed in the 
loops of a rope design, the rope being just like the one on Stela C. This is 
surrounded by feathers, and on the outside by the same feather-tassel and 
rosette border as on Stela M. 
Stela 4 (9.17.12.13.0), the last of the series, is just like Stele D, M, H, 
and F intype. ‘There is but one main figure, and here, as in the other cases, 
the ramifications of the head-dress and clothing extend around and com- 
pletely cover the adjacent sides. The panel of glyphs on the back is sur- 
rounded on three sides with feather-work tassels and rosettes, almost ex- 
actly like those on Stele M, H, and F. 
Throughout this series of monuments stylistic progress is consistent and 
sustained, reaching its finest expression in Stela 4. By 9.15.5.0.0 (Stela D) 
the treatment of the main figure had become so natural, 1.¢., stood so free 
from the plinth, that the sides had shrunk to almost nothing and there was 
no longer space enough on them to carve the inscription, which was con- 
sequently restricted to the back. ‘This fashion persisted to the end, more- 
over, as Stele N and C can not be regarded as exceptions, since each has two 
figures instead of one, and there was no other place to carve their inscriptions 
except on their sides. 
The writer believes it is sufficiently clear from what has been said that 
the stylistic criteria present justify the following sequence for the last four 
stele, C, H, F, and 4. Let us next examine the several dates inscribed 
upon them and see whether or not the chronological data present corro- 
borate this arrangement. 
Stela C, it will be remembered, has six dates, one in the remote past 
and five at or near the contemporaneous date of the monument. Stela H 
has but one date. Stela F has two actually recorded and one more, the 
contemporaneous date demanded by the stylistic criteria. Finally, Stela 4 
has three actually recorded and a fourth, the contemporaneous date de- 
manded by the stylistic criteria. Inthe table at the top of page 362, these 
dates have been arranged in their proper chronological sequence, the dates 
of each monument appearing in a separate column. 
