512 THE INSCRIPTIONS AT COPAN. 
then, is the explanation of this apparent paradox, a chronological system known to 
have been in use at the time of the Spanish Conquest which nevertheless can not be 
made to fit the u kahlay katunob and the monuments? 
The writer believes the correct explanation of this apparently irreconcilable 
difference is that at the time of the Spanish Conquest there were two systems in 
use in Yucatan, one, which we may call the Itza, the direct descendant, as it were, 
of the Old Empire chronology, and the other, which we may call the Xiu, a mongrel 
system which had arisen not more than three centuries earlier at the outside, and 
possibly not more than a century, and was the result of grafting a system of current 
time-periods like the Nahua 365-day years on to a system of elapsed time-periods 
like the Maya katuns and tuns. This latter system, which could not have been 
introduced in Yucatan prior to 1200 A. D., is that used in the Chronicle of Oxkutzcab, 
and thus does not afford an unbroken line back to the Old Empire, as does the first in 
which the sequence of the katuns had been preserved intact in the u kahlay katunob back 
to the beginnings of those records. 
Let us examine this evidence somewhat further. As has been pointed out 
_ frequently in the foregoing pages, the positions of the days in the months underwent 
a change some time during the New Empire, shifting forward one position. Thus, 
for example, in the Old Empire, Ahau always has a corresponding month-coeficient 
of 3, 8, 13, or 18, but at the close of the New Empire in the u kahlay katunob we 
find it used with a month coefficient of 2, 7, 12, or 17, one day earlier. Again, in 
the Old Empire, Imix always has a month coefficient of 4, 9, 14, or 19, but in the 
u kahlay katunob it appears with 3, 8, 13, or 18, one day earlier; and so on through- 
out the 20 day-signs. 
It is our first task, then, to find out when this shift occurred. Throughout 
all known Old Empire texts, and in most New Empire ones as well, as will appear 
shortly, the month coefficients of Ahau are always 3, 8, 13, or 18; hence this shift 
did not take place until after the Maya had reached Yucatan. 
During the field season of 1918 the writer collected a dozen or more texts 
bearing upon this point from New Empire sites; 14 are enumerated below, and in 
all save 2 the month coefficients follow the Old Empire positions: 


No. Site. Monument. Day-sign. Month-position. System. 
15) Usemalcerare Balt Court. cco tia. tone oe LXes cnn $7 OD. Sara Old. 
2\\eUsxinal ee ee Ball. Coarti eee ee eee Lx. ca Oe 16 Pops. ee New. 
2) | sUxmal aes Monjas Quadrangle East Range..| Imix......... 18 Kankin...... New. 
4‘) Uxnial pene: Monjas Quadrangle North Range| Eb...........| 5 Ceh.......... Old. 
5 | opilaate er ieee eels: Coc. iets ly poe eee Mubus itch. 
6 | Holactun....} Temple of Initial Series......... TL Xce eee ee ee Rnd oe 
7 | Holactun....| Temple of Initial Series......... Cib or Cahanty ta toe cee eae 
8 | Chichen Itza.| Temple of Initial Series......... Mulues.), 4 ext! (9 Zates seer eee 
g | Chichen Itza.} Lintel at care rata silsis aincacf ) AM kde ne ey ae SoG eee 
10 | Chichen Itza.}| High Priest’s Grave............ Ahiathess sue atayi Poel ee ee 
11 | Chichen Itza.| Temple of Two Lintels......... Fanabiciceee| Al) Yana gees 
12-| Chichen l¢zas|s.lemplerat.Ula qe tee eee Jitix, i4d.cdecl) nh Lees han anak 
13 |] Chichen Teza.) Temple at Ula... ..<.. ... sagen EB... 55.05 :sane of kOok OD eee oe 
i4:| Tuluum?. Scelacdgh. Pesos eee eee ee Ahau.. te oecleks Pax eee 

Further exploration and excavation would doubtless bring others to light, but 
on the basis of the evidence now available, we see that only two of the above 
fourteen texts, Nos. 2 and 3, both from Uxmal, surely follow the New Empire usage, 
one (No. 7) being doubtful. In this last case the day-sign may be either Cib or 
Caban, and, if it is the former, the corresponding month-coefficient, which is 4, agrees 
with the Old Empire usage; if it is the latter, the New Empire usage is indicated. 
However, as Ix occurs in this same text with a corresponding month-coefiicient of 2 
(No. 6), the Old Empire usage probably obtained here. 
— 1 eo 
