YALE UNIVERSlf^
LIBRARY "

NOTES ON THE REFORT

TEOBERT MALER

MEM-^TRS OF THE PEABODY MUSEUM

Vol. n. Xo. II.

BV
CHARLES P. BOWDITCH

?3r(i]attlg iirinttt)

CAMBRIDGE
THE UNIVERSITY PRESS
1903

C5Z

E RRATA.
A Method which .may have been l^ed by the Maya.s in CALCUi-vnNG
Ti.ME, Cambridge, igoi.
Page 1 1, column 3, line iS. For 2. 6. g. o. o. read 2. 7. g. o. o.
" " " ig. " 2. g. I. 13. o. " 2. 10. 1. 13. o.
Notes on the REP(jki of TEOttki Mai.er i.n .Mfmoirs of the PEA1!0^^
MusEU.M, Vol. II., N'o. I., C.imbri'lgc, igoi.
Page 3, line 26. The .sentence beginning on this line should read :
" If the date is 7 Muluc 12 Zac it^ , it occurs in Katun 10 of Cycle 9 and
its place is 54. g. 10. 4. 13. g. of (loodman's Tables, while 6 Muluc 12
Zac (2Sj occurs in 54. g. 10. 16. 16. 1;.'
Notes ox the Repoki of Teofekt MAihk in .Memoir^ "t the I'faiiody
Museum, Vol. II., No. 11.. Cdinbrniu'c. igoj.
Page 14, liiK' 2S. F'T Eg read F, ,S.
• ,5, •• 5 K.J ¦¦ i;,s.
•• 15. •• s H V •• 1: ^^¦
17. ¦' 6 Initial read Siipplen)ent.Tr\.

NOTES ON THE REPORT OF TEOBERT MALER
In continuation of my notes on Mr. Maler's report issued in
1901, I wish to call attention to the remarkable collection of
photographs published as No. 2 of Vol. II. of the Memoirs of the
Peabody Museum. Some of these photographs represent the
earlier work of Mr. Maler, but many of them are the result of
the expedition undertaken by him for the Peabody Museum.
This second volume offers nearly as many new Initial Series as
the first volume, and the inscriptions here recorded will be of very
great value to the students of Central American archaeology.
In referring to the glyphs throughout this article I shali letter
the vertical columns from left to right. A, B, C, etc., and I shall
number the horizontal rows i, 2, 3, etc., from top to bottom.
Where the plates have not been as clear as might be wished, I
have made use of casts, photographs from casts, and other photo
graphs in my possession. As it is not known whether the Initial
glyph has a numerical or historical meaning, I omit the de.-it^'na-
tion of the grand cj-cle, which I used in my previous " Notes on
the Report of Teobert Maler."
Plate XXXV. represents a large lintel found in El Ca>-o, a ruin
situated on the left bank ofthe Usumacinta River between Piedras
Negras and Yaxchilan. Here the Initial glyph is clear, as are the
following glyphs 9. 16., the cycle and katun glyphs being the nor
mal forms of these periods, that is, not represented by faces.
Then follows the tun gl\'ph with a superfix, which is clearly not a
line and dot number, but which, though somewhat injured, can be
seen to be the zero sign. The uinal, kin, and day signs are quite

2 NOTES ON THE REPORT
obliterated, e.xcept that the number of the kin is seen to be over
15. But luckily we find that the last glyph of the Supplementary
Series is very clear and that it has the number 10. This is found
in A 9, and we find also that B 8 is the last but one ofthe Supple
mentary Series. We feel sure, therefore, that B 9 must be the
month sign of the Initial Series. This is surely 9 Mol, and we
have the following basis to work upon: 9. 16. O. ?. ?., ?. ?. 9 Mol.
There is only one date which will satisfy these conditions: 9. 16.
O. 2. 16., 6 Cib 9 Mol @, since 9. 16. o. o. o. is 2 Ahau 13 Tzec,
and there is a range of but 360 days to choose from and in this
range 9 Mol occurs but once.
The succeeding glyphs of Columns A and B are, as far as they
are not worn off, familiar but unknown, but in C D i we find a
distance number, which appears to be 11. 17. 10., which counted
forward gives 13 Cimi 19 Zotz @), and in C D 3 we find this date.
In E F 3 we have what may possibly be 5 Oc 3 Yaxkin @i,
which would be 44 days from 13 Cimi 19 Zotz @), but I fail to find
a distance number of 2. 4., unless it may possibly be in E 2.
In I J I we find 9 (possibly Eb) o Zip @. The day must be
Eb, Caban, Ik, or Manik, and this date is found in 9. 17. i. 2. 12.,
just 8. 16. 2. from 5 Oc 3 Yaxkin @). On G 4 is certainly 8 tuns,
and H 3 is a glyph, which is probably 16. 2.
A great scaling of the stone follows here, which is very un
fortunate. K 13 is a distance number, but it is impossible to decipher it,
except that the number on the left is probably over 15. K L 14
give a day and month date, which looks like i Cauac 17 Tzec (S).
The other glyphs are beyond our knowledge.
On Plate XXXVI. we find Stela i of La Mar, a ruined city,
which is situated just north of latitude 17° north and a little
north of west from El Cayo. Here the dates, though somewhat
effaced, read, I think, as follows :

OF TEOBERT MALER 3
A B I, 2 Muluc 2 Uo (6). This may be 9. 17. 12. 4. 9.
B 5 A6, 2. 13. II.
B 7 A 8, 5 Ahau 3 Muan ®. This may be g. 17. 15. o. o.
A 2 is clearly the Venus sign (see Dresden Codex, pages 46-50).
On Plate XLVI. we have Lintel i of Yaxchilan, a ruined city
of great size and situated on the left bank of the Usumacint.i,
and therefore belonging to Mexico, while Piedras -Vegras is in
Guatemala. The date is clearly 1 1 Ahau S Tzec -r. The samc date is found
upon the base of Stela 11, where it appears with an Initial Series
of 9. 16. I. O. O., II Ahau 8 Tzec '".1 . The other gl\phs are gen
erally clear, but unknown. Possibly B 9 is the ni'iiith Mol and
C 9 refers to the 16 katuns which have just elapseJ, while H i
has a face with the Cimi mark on it and maj' mean i ;.
Plate XLVII. gives Lintel 2, but the on!>- date i? 4 .\hau
3 Zotz @, which may be 9. 16. 6. O. o., — 5 tuns from the date of
Lintel i.
Attention should be paid to the well defined crosses he'.d by
both the persons on this lintel. The third gl>"ph from the to on
the right-hand side seems to be 3 katuns
Plate XLVIII. shows Lintel 3. The date seems to be 8 Ahau
8 Zotz @.* We find this date in 9. 16. 5. O. o., and as thi; day
and month are not found again before 9. 18. 17. 13. o. and the last
previous occurrence of this date was 9. 13. 12. 5. o., and as Lintel
I of the same building is probably 9. 16. i. O. O., it is probable
that the date is 9. 16. 5. o. o.
In the right-hand lower corner and in the left lower glyphs are
glyphs meaning 3 katuns, but these are not probabl}' determina
tive signs. • Note that a glyph separates the dav from the month.

4 NOTES ON THE REPORT
Plate XLIX. Lintel 5. The date below is probably 12 Ahau
8 Yaxkin (g), which may be 9. 16. X. 2. O. The other glyphs are
not yet understood.
Plate L. Lintel 6. A 1-2 is 8 Cimi 14 Mac @ probably. This
may be 9. 16. i. 8. 6. A 6 is probably Katun 3 with Ben-Ik over
it. I have conjectured that Ben-Ik might mean 13 and that this
glyph might declare it to be in Katun 16 = 13 -f 3. The other
glyphs are unknown. The discussion of the value of Ben-Ik must
be reserved for another paper.
Plate LI. Lintel 7. The date is surely here with the numbers
10 ?. 16 ?. The day must be Lamat, Ben, Eznab, or Akbal,
probably the latter. 10 Akbal 16 Uo (§) is found in 9. 15. 19- I5-
3., just 57 days before Katun 16. The date may be 10 Akbal
16 Mac (3), which might be 9. 15. 8. 5. 3., or 9. 18. i. O. 3.
Plate LIL Lintel 8. Nothing can be made of these glyphs,
except that probably the numbers are 9 ?. 14 ?., or 7 ?. 14 ?•
As the day of the month is 14, the day would be Cimi, Chuen,
Cib, or Ymix.
Plate LIII. Lintel 9. A i is 3 ?., with the probability that it
is Cimi, while A 7 may declare it to be in Katun 16. A 2 has the
appearance of Pax, but the number is uncertain. But 3 Cimi is
found about 27 or 28 tirnes in Katun 16. If the date is 3 Cimi
9 Pax @ it would be found in 9. 16. 6. 12. 6.
Plate LIV. Lintel 10. In this plate we have one of the longest
inscriptions which we know of in Yaxchilan, and yet the glyphs,
though clear, are so archaic in form that we can hardly even
make a beginning with them. The structure to which it belonged
has almost entirely disappeared. This lintel offers a very good
evidence of the way in which the inscriptions were carved from
left to right, as here it is clear that the sculptor began with large
glyphs and gradually reduced the size as his space became less
and less. The date is 7 Cimi 14 Zip or Yaxkin or Ceh. The

OF TEOBERT .MALER

s

former is found in year 31 ; the second in year 3, and the last in
year 7.
A 6 looks like 7 kins and A 7 resembles 16 uinals, while A 4
is possibly the Venus sign. The number 7 and the Kayab, Zotz,
and " completion " signs are frequent.
Lintel 13 given by A. P. Maudslay in Plate 81, " Biologia Cen-
trali-Americana," Volume II., shows a date, which may be i Chic-
chan or i Oc 13 Xul (?), but nothing can be deciphered with
certainty. Plate LV. Lintel 14 has 4 Ymix 4 Mol @, which would be the
day after 3 Ahau 3 Mol (Te), which we found twice in Tikal. There
it was in Cycle 10 — say 10. O. 15. 8. O. Here 4 \'mix 4 Mol •^
might be 9. 15. 10. o. i. Lintel 39 has also this date.
Plate LVI. Lintel 21 here given is one of the most important
of the inscriptions found in Yaxchilan. It is in an admirable
state of preservation and the gl>-phs are normal. The Initial
Series is 9. O. 19. 2. 4, 2 Kan 2 \'ax n and is the earliest date found
in Cycle 9 in all the Central American ruins. If this is an his
torical date, it would be about 300 years before the date which
we shall see later on Stela 11, and which we found represented
on Lintel i. The Initial Series is ver\' like those found elsewhere,
while the cjcle, katun, tun and uinal glyphs are normal, that jf
kin being a head. And so ofthe rest.
A I, Initial glyph.
B i-A 4, 9. o. 19. 2. 4., 2 Kan
A 7, 2 Yax ^.
B 4-6 give the Supplementary Series. B 6 is the usual final
glyph with 9, preceded by the crossed legs. Compare Stela K
of Quirigua and Temple of the Sun of Palenque.

6 NOTES ON THE REPORT
B I-A 7, 9. o. 19. 2. 4., 2 Kan 2 Yax @.
C 3-4, IS- I- 16. 5.,
9. 16. I. o. 9.,
C D 5, 7 Muluc 17 Tzec @.
On C 8 we have 3 with the katun sign and Ben-Ik over it. If
I am correct, this vvould mean " in Katun 16," as is really the
case. Plate LVII. Lintel 22 has also been well preserved and its
glyphs are mostly clear, but not a single one has been recognized
with certainty. The kin sign appears in A 4 and 8, in the latter
case accompanied with a face which means 8 or i. C 3 looks like
the face for 3, while the frontal of B 2 is that of 3 also.
Lintel 26 on Plate LVIII. is one of the most striking of the
many striking carvings of Yaxchilan. It represents the under side
of the lintel and has no glyphs which are known. The front of
this lintel, however, is given on Plate LIX., and here we find in
the first glyph, the Initial glyph, the remains of the 9 belonging
to the cycle and the number 14 of the katun. In Glyph 2 we
find the 10 of the uinal clear, though the number may be 10 or
over. We thus have 9. 14. ?. 10. ?. Each of the large glyphs
is composed of four small ones. I letter the large glyphs A, B, C,
&c., from left to right, and I number the small glyphs thus
We know A 1-4 and B 2. B 3 must be the kin with its number
and B 4 is probably the day with its number. C I-4 is composed
of the Supplementary Series, while D 1-2 are respectively the
next to the last and the last glyph of this series. D 3 will then
be the month sign with its number, and here we find 8 or 13
Yaxkin. It is probably 8 Yaxkin. As the number ofthe month is
8 (or 13), the day must be Chicchan, Oc, Men, or Ahau. Of these
Ahau alone is found in any Initial Series, except once in Lintel

OF TEOBERT MALER y
29 of Yaxchilan, where Oc appears. If we call the day Ahau, the
kin number must be o and we have 9. 14. ?. 10. o., ? Ahau
8 Yaxkin. The tun number is probably 4 or over, as seen from
the Glyph B i.
This gives us a choice of 9. 14. o. 10. o., 11 Ahau 8 Yaxkin @
9- 14- 4- II- o., 2 " 8 " @
9. 14. 8. 12. o., 6 " 8 " (gl
9. 14. 12. 13. o., 10 "8 •¦ @
9. 14. 16. 14. o., I " 8 " (3>
The photograph of the front of Lintel 27 on Pl.Ttc LIX. was
taken under such a strong light, and the shadows and lights are
so contrasted, that it is difficult to decipher it. I give the fol
lowing as a probable solution.
A B I = 6 Chicchan 8 Zac (32).
If D I is Katun 8, and means that the date is found in this katun,
we should have A B I = 9. 8. 8. 4. 5., 6 Chicchan S Zac zjj
E F I = I. 17. 5. 9.
E 2 = 9. 10. 5. 9. 14., 6 Ix 12 Yaxkin @
H 2 may possibly be 6. 13. 10.,
which would give 9. 10. 12. 5. 4., 5 Kan 7 Pop ,24.
But if D I is not Katun 8, the dates may be
9. 16. 6. 7. 5., 6 Chicchan 8 Zac 32
9. 18. 3. 12. 14., 6 Lx 12 Ya.xkin (g)
and 9. 18. 10. 8. 4., 5 Kan 7 Pop (^.
The fact, however, that the building (Structure 24) is quite
destroyed, might lead us to assign the earlier period to these
dates.

8 NOTES ON TIIE REPORT
Lintels 27 and 28 were parts of the same building, and it is not
at all improbable that they should have some relation to each
other. On A 2 of Lintel 28 we find a distance number, which is
9 kin at least, and the uinal has a number as much as 15, while
the tun is 4 or over. On B 2 is a day sign with 10 and on C I is
a month sign which looks like 16 Uo. On F i E 2 is a distance
number, which is probably 4. 9. 14, and on F 2 is a date, which
is 6 .^ 10 Zac. The day of this last date must be Manik, Eb,
Caban, or Ik, and looks more like Caban than any of the others.
The following selections of dates and numbers seem admissible.
Lintel 27, E 2, 6 Ix 12 Yaxkin @, 9. 10. 5. 9. 14.
28, A 2, 8. 15. 9.
B 2 C I, 10 Akbal 16 Uo %,* 9. 10. 14. 7. 3.
E 2 F I, 4. 9. 14.
6 Caban 10 Zac @, 9. 10. 18. 16. 17.
The only objection to this decipherment is that there is appar
ently another distance number in Lintel 27, H 2, viz. : 6. 13. 10.,
but no date there follows it. 6 Ix 12 Yaxkin is found on Stela 12,
A B I, and there it has been considered as 9. 18. 3. 12. 14., three
calendar rounds later than this.
Lintel 29 is found in the text on page 131. It is unfortunate
that we have no photograph of this inscription, as the Initial
Series is clear, and yet the month glyph is uncertain. In the
first place the Initial glyph has the Venus sign as in Quirigua,
Stela K, which would lead us to think that the revolutions of
that planet might be treated of here. The date is clearly 9. 13.
17. 12. 10. in the drawing, which fixes the day as 8 Oc 13 Yax (g).
8 Oc is found in A 4, but 13 Yax is not found anywhere. It
would naturally be in B 4, or in C 4 after the last of the Supple-
* This date was suggested as the date of Lintel 7 with a position of 9. 15. 19. 15. 3.

OF TEOBERT MALER g
mentary Series, but the former is not a month sign, while C 4 is 6
with an unknown glyph. If the drawing is not accurate, the num
ber of C 4 might be 13, but no such glyph for Ya.x is known.
The close connection between Lintels 29, 30, and 31 is shown from
the fact that the Initial date of Lintel 29 is
8 Oc 13 Yax (§, 9. 13. 17. 12. 10., while that on Lintel 30 is
I Oc 13 Chen <%, 9. 13. 17. 11. 10., one month earlier.
Lintels 30 and 31 on Plates LX. and LXI. are rough carvings
compared with many others, but are not necessarily of a greater
age. In fact they are probably not of a greater age, since, as we
shall see, there is a date at the very end of Lintel 31, which is
9. 17. O. O. o., though Mr. Maler reports that he thinks the part of
the building where these lintels are found is older than the rest.
Taking up Lintel 31 first, and working backwards we find a date
which is clear and e.xact. Premising that the vertical columns A-D
are to be read together from the top downwards, and then the
four columns E-H, we find on E-H 4, 13 Ahau 18 Cumhu v> ,
and on G H 5, completion of 17 katuns.
Now this date is actually 9. 17. o. o. o.
Counting back from this date the distance
number, which we find on E-G 3, or 7. o. O.
we reach 9. 16. 13. 0.0.
which is 2 .Ahau S L'o .sh ;
and in C D 3 A B 4 we find 2 Ahau S Uo.
This seems satisfactory, and on F 2 we find the katun symbol
with 3 ov'er it, and between the three and the katun the Ben-Ik
symbol. This may be considered a declaration that the date
2 Ahau 8 Uo is in Katun 16.
On C D 2 A 3 we find the distance number 12. o. o. This sub-

IO NOTES ON THE REPORT
tracted from the last date gives 9. 16. i. o. o., 11 Ahau 8 Tzec @,
which is the last date on Lintel 30, D 4 C 5, again declared to be
in Katun 16 by D i of Lintel 31, where a glyph similar to F 2 is
found. That this date is 11 Ahau and not 13 Ahau is clear, as the
left-hand dot is ornamented. See the same date on Stela 11,
bottom, where the Initial Series states it as 9. 16. i. O. O., and on
Lintel i.
The ne.xt preceding date is B 5 C i, which looks like 1 .'. 13
Yax, but as Yax and Chen are very similar, it may be the latter.
Between 1 1 Ahau 8 Tzec and i ?. 1 3 Ya.x or Chen lies a distance
number in D 3 C 4. This seems to be 2. 3. 5. 10., except that the
uinal number has a peculiar drooping line between the 5 and the
uinal which may alter the value. But starting with D 4 C 5 as
9. 16. I. O. 0., II Ahau 8 Tzec (g), and adding and deducting the
various possible values, we find that the only number 2. 3. ?. 10
which gives i ?. 13 Yax or Chen is 2. 3. 6. 10, and thus that the
uinal superfix does alter the value, as we supposed might be the
case.* By deducting this number we get i Oc 13 Chen (|g) in B 5
C I, which falls in 9. 13. 17. 11. 10. i Ben i Chen @ is the next
preceding number, which falls in 9. 13. 16. 10. 13, just i. O. 17 be
fore I Oc 13 Chen and this number of i. o. 17 we find in A B i.
Here, then, we have the full statement of these two lintels, thus :
Lintel 30, A B i, i. q. 17.
A B 2, I Ben i Chen %. 9. 13. 16. 10. 13.
B 5 C I, I Oc 13 Chen %., 9. 13. 17. n. 10.
D 3 C 4, 2. 3. 6. 10.
D 4 C 5, 1 1 Ahau 8 Tzec ©, 9.16. i. o. o.

* I do not consider this as settled, for in Maudslay's " Biologia Centrali-Americana "
vol. ii., plate 78, this drooping line looks as if it were a part of the uinal glyph. Pos
sibly there may be an error of i uinal in the sculpture.

OF TEOBERT MALER II
Lintel 31, D i, Katun 16.
C D 2 A 3, 12. o. o.

C D 3 A B 4, 2 Ahau 8 Uo %, 9. 16. 13. o. o.
F 2, Katun 16.
E-G 3, 7. o. o.
E-H 4, 13 Ahau i8 Cumhu %, 9. 17. o. o. o.
G H 5, Completion of 17 katuns.
Lintel 32 on Plate LXII. has the left upper corner defaced, so
that it is impossible to clearly make out the date. B i is prob
ably 18 Mac, and A i is very like 11 Ahau. Now 11 Ahau 18
Mac @ is 9. 18. o. o. o. and in C i we have a glyph which looks
like " completion " or " during a katun,' while A 8 seems to be the
katun symbol with Ben-Ik as a superfix and 5 as a prefix. This
would also mean "in Katun 18." I think this date can be put
down, therefore, safely as 11 Ahau 18 Mac n .
Lintel 33 on Plate LXIII. has a date, which is probably 5 Cimi
14 Yaxkin @, which is declared to be in Katun 16 in A 8 (pro
vided that the valuation of Ben-Ik is 13^ This date is found in
9. 16. 1. 2. 6.
Lintel 37 (Plate LXIV.) is entirely beyond our present knowl
edge. We can onlj' say that in certain cases similar glvphs are 12
glyphs apart, thus: A i, with the number 8, is like A 7 with the
number 9, and the first is followed in B i and B 2 bv two glyphs,
which are repeated in B 7 and B 8. .A 2, which is a head with
tiger spots and with the number i, is quite unlike .A 8, however.
B 5, however, is repeated in D 2 (loth glyph therefrom) and in
C 5 (iSth glyph therefrom). Ymix appears in B 3. Q6 may be
I Cauac 7 Yaxkin i43^. This is found in Katuns 16 and 19.
A similar tablet, taken by Maudsla)' to the British Museum," is
* See " Biologia Centrali-Americana, Archeology," vol. ii., plate 80.

12 NOTES ON THE REPORT
a continuation of the inscription of Lintel 37. It is probably the
lintel numbered 35 by Maler and, of course, not found by him.
The glyph which occurs in Lintel 37, A i, with 8, or in A 7 with
9, occurs this time in A i with 10. B i and B 2 of Lintel 37 are
the same as B I and B 2 of Lintel 35 ; while the glyph which
occurs on B 5, D 2, and C 5 of Lintel 37 reappears in B 7, D 2
of Lintel 35. C 4 D 4 may be i Cimi 14 Muan @.
I give a list of glyphs which are practically the same in both
lintels :

Lintel 37.

Lintel 35.

A I,

A I.

B I, B7,

B I.

B 2, B 8,

B 2.
BS,D2,
C5-
B 7, D 2.
A 2,
C3-
Ci,
C I.
D3,
D3.
Lintels 38, 39, and 40, Plate LXV., belong to the three door
ways on one building, and we should therefore expect to find
some connection between them. Although the glyphs are not
very clear, it is easy to see that each lintel has a date at the upper
left-hand corner, and on the casts in the Peabody Museum these
dates can be made out. That of 38 seems to be 12 Ben 16 Uo @,
and may be 9. 16. i. 15. ,13, — within a year, as will be seen, of
II Ahau 8 Tzec @, which has appeared several times.
The date of Lintel 39 seems to be 4 Cimi 4 Mol @. On C 3
we find the katun with the Ben-Ik and 3, which would seem to
place the date in Katun x6. If the date is 4 Cimi 4 Mol @, it
would be 9. 16. 3. 3. 6.
The date of Lintel 40 seems to be i Cauac 7 Mol (g), which
might be 9. 15. 17. I. 19, or else 3 Ix 7 I\Iol ®, which might be
9. 16. 12. 5. 14.
OP TEOBERT MALER jj
The former date would bring all the lintels within 6 years of
each other, thus :
Lintel 38, 12 Ben 16 Uo @, 9. 16. i. 15. 13.
" 39, 4 Cimi 4 Mol @, 9. 16. 3. 3. 6.
" 40, I Cauac 7Mol(§), 9. 15. 17. 1. 19.
If, however, we choose the date, 3 Ix 7 Mol %. the four dates
would be brought within about 11 years of each other.
Plate LXVI. shows Lintel 42. The inscription is generallv
clear, though in low relief The date is surely 13 .Ahau S ?., but
the month glyph is somewhat injured. It might be Yaxkin, Yax,
Chen, or Zac. These would give respectively :
13 Ahau 8 Yaxkin @. 13 Ahau 8 Zac 39.
13 Ahau 8 Yax (7K 13 Ahau 8 Chen ~-qj.
Of these the first two are not in Katun 16, while
13 Ahau 8 Zac may be 9. 16. 13. 9. o.
and 13 Ahau 8 Chen may be 9. i6. i. 4. o.
In the right-hand lower corner is the katun sign with Ben-Ik
and 3, which, as has been said, may mean Katun 16, but may not
refer to the date in A B i.
Plate LXVII. gives a remarkabl)- clear carving of Lintel 43,
but, unfortunately, the left-hand side is broken and all that we
can make out of the date is ?. Cimi 14 Mac. If the date is in
Katun 16, it may be 8 Cimi 14 Mac iij\
12 Cimi 14 Mac v3i .
3 Cimi 14 Mac i35\
7 Cimi 14 Mac i3|.
1 1 Cimi 14 Mac @.

14 NOTES ON THE REPORT
Lintels 42 and 43 are from the same building. It may, there
fore, be considered that these dates are in the same katun.
Plate LXVIII. shows Lintel 46, which is so badly damaged that
it is impossible to determine the date. On the left upper portion
a group of 9 glyphs was arranged as follows: A i B i, A 2 B 2,
A 3 B 3, C I C 2 C 3. Of these A i B i is the Initial glyph, A 2
is the cycle, B 2 is the katun, A 3 the tun, and B 3 is the uinal,
while C I is clear as the kin sign with the number 14, and C 2
the day sign Ix with the number 5, and a prefix, which in a
number of other cases seems to have no numerical meaning.
In C 3, D I-H I, and G 2 is the Supplementary Series, then
follows in H 2 the month sign, probably Mac, with the number
17. Of the Supplementary Series the second in C 3 is like the
first Supplementary glyph of the Palace Steps of Palenque, and
several other Supplementary glyphs of Palenque. The sixth
glyph, H I, is like the next to the last in several of these series,
while G 2 is the well known last Supplementary glyph with the
number 10. In spite of what we can decipher, there are too
many details wanting to enable us to decide with any certaintj'
what this date may be.
On Plate LXIX. begins the series of stelae, and here Stela i is
shown. Again the Initial Series is injured, in this case by the
break in the stone, but the inscription can be made out with some
definiteness. On the right-hand side of the upper fragment, we
find on E i-F 3, the Initial glyph followed by 9. 11. 10. ?. 0.,
3 Ahau. Then follows the Supplementary Series. The two
glyphs E F 7 seem to be the next to the last and the last of the
Supplementary Series. This would make the Glyph E 9 the month
sign. As it has the number 6 attached to it, the day would have
to be Akbal, Lamat, Ben, or Eznab, but the day certainly looks
like Ahau and the number ofthe kin sign looks more like o than 3,
8, 13, or 18, as would have to be the case if either of these days

OF TEOBERT MALER I 5
were correct. It certainly cannot be 8, 13, or iS, and the day is
not Lamat, Ben, or Eznab. If it is 3, we might have 3 Akbal 6 ?.
But there is no 3 Akbal 6 of any month from 9. 11. 10. o. o. to
9. 1 1. II. O. O. and the first three periods are pretty clearly 9. 1 1.
ID. Again, if the number of the month on E 9 is 8, we cannot
find 3 Ahau 8 of any month in the same period. 3 Oc 8 Mac
appears as 9. 11. 10. 3. 10, but the kin number is surely not 10.
It is probable, therefore, that E 9 is not the month and its ntmi-
ber. It is possible that the count goes over to the left, 'vhere on
A I, we find 13 Pop or 18 Pop. Now, wc find 9. 11. 10. 10. o.,
3 Ahau 13 Pop @, 3 Ahau iS Pop {.17 would be 9. n. 5.9..".,
which is an impossible date. The great objection t. the ¦ h ctlin
of the former date is that the uinal number, which is like zero, is
read as 10, although the duuble bar might mean 10. 1 do n.'l
consider that this date is surely made out, but wc can at Icist fix
it between 9. 1 1. 10 and 9. 11. 11, that is, within one year, provided
the artist has made no error. This makes it an carl}- date.
There is another explanation. It is possible that the top .^
the stela, as photographed, does not belong to the bottom. Evi
dence to this effect is given bv Maler, who s.iys, first, that the
top was found so far off from the bottom that it would seem that
some pne had tried to carry it off iov\ards tlie ri\er, and, second,
that there is a great piece wanting, which hc thinks has been
broken into splinters. This would seem to be unlikel)' to happen,
vvhere the rest ofthe stone is so well preserved.
On B 5 A 6 vve find a date, vYhich looks like i Oc 3 Zip (v\.
As the month number is 3, the da)- must be Oc, Men, .Ahau, or
Chicchan. Ifit were i Ahau 3 Zip -w, it might be 9. 11. 4. 10. O.
or 9. 16. 10. O. o. I Oc 3 Zip io is not found in Katun 1 1, nor is
I Men 3 Zip .j?"- i Chicchan 3 Zip 49 mav be 9. 11. 17. 13. 5.,
but is not in Katun 16. In B 9, however, is found the katun sign
vvith Ben-Ik and three dots. This mav mean, as has been said

1 6 NOTES ON THE REPORT
before, Katun i6, and may lead us to decide that the katun num
ber in the Initial Series ought to have had another line to it,
making it i6. In this case
3 Ahau 13 Pop @ would be 9. 16. 16. o. O.
or 3 Ahau 18 Pop (g) would be 9. 16. 10. 17. O.
But it seems pretty clear that the tun number is not 16 and that
the uinal number is not 17. On the other hand i Ahau 3 Zip .§
might be 9. 16. 10. o. O., while i Chicchan 3 Zip @,
I Oc 3 Zip (10),
I Men 3 Zip ^,
are not found in Katun 16.
It is probable, however, that the two parts of the stone do not
belong together.
The dates of Stelse 2. 9. and 13. on Plate LXXII. are not clear
enough to allow us to speculate upon them.
Stela 4, Plate LXX., has no glyphs which can be recognized,
unless the large glyph on the upper part can be the Venus sign.
The glyphs of the Initial date of Stela 6, Plate LXXI., are nearly
effaced. This is unfortunate, for we can just see enough to show
that the period numbers were expressed by faces. The Initial
glyph is fairly clear, and the face number of the cycle and katun
can be detected, while the tun, uinal, and kin periods vvith their
numbers are practically obliterated. The day sign is partly left
and looks like Ben, while the month number is probably on the
right in C 5, following the last ofthe Supplementary Series, and it
looks like i. ?. This would agree with the day's being Ben and
the kin number would necessarily be 13.
The lower part of Stela 10, Plate LXXIII., furnishes in C D i a
possible date with faces. It looks like i or 8 Ymix 9 Tzec. The
latter date is found in 9. 18. 9. 12. i. and in year 23, and G i gives
us the katun sign with the Ben-Ik and 5, vvhich vvould show
Katun 18.

OF TEOBERT MALER 1 7
On Plate LXXIV. we find the two sides of Stela 1 1, but vve will
pass over to Plate LXXV., where the lower part of the so-called
"human side" is given. Here is an excellently preserved Initial
Series, about which there can be no doubt. A B i is the Initial
glyph, followed in A 2-B 4 by 9. 16. i. o. O., 11 Ahau, and in D 3
by 8 Tzec @. The month follows the last of the Initial Scries of
9 glyphs. It is to be noted that a form separates the i from the
tun in A 3 and the 8 from the Tzec in C 3. This form does not
change the numerical meaning, since the uinal and kin numbers
are clearly o, and the only other places where the month Tzec is
found in Katun 16 with complete tuns arc
9. 16. O. O. 0., 2 Ahau 13 Tzec •¦!.<&)
9. 16. 2. o. 0., 7 Ahau 3 Tzec -2^'
The Ahau number here is neither 2 nor 7, but 11. The date of
II Ahau 8 Tzec @ occurs elsewhere in the \'axchiian hi' mglyphs,
and is the last date on Lintel 30, while Katun i6appcar^ on Lintel
31, where the katun sign vvi'h Ben-Ik and three dots is found.
This is in Structure 10, vvhich is near the river, while Structure 40,
where Stela 11 is found, is high up on the hill.
In F 2 E 3 vve have probably a distance number, which may
carry the count on from Katun 16 t'l Katun iS, which appears in
H 4, where the katun sign vvith Ben-Ik and 5 apparently means
Katun 18.
On the same side but on the upper part of Stela 1 1 on Plate
LXXIV., vve find the date in A B i, 9 Ahau 18 Xul 21, which,
considering the date found below, may vvell be thought to be
9. 15. 15. O. 0., just 6 tuns before 9. 16. i. O. o. ofthe date below.
On E 7 we find the Katun 16 sign, to vvhich the count may have
run, by adding a number of days shown in some of the glyphs be
tween B I and E 7. Near the feet in C D 10 is the date 12 Cib
19 Yaxkin @, which is found in 9. iS. 2. 12. 16, while a little be-

1 8 NOTES ON THE REPORT
low is the sign for Katun i8. This indicates a lapse of 46 or 47
years between the two dates. Katun 18 is also found in I*" i.
On the back of Stela 1 1 we find in A B 5, the date i Ymix 19
Xul (25), which may be 9. 15. 19. x. i., just four years and one
day after 9 Ahau 18 Xul (21) on the other side. Here on E 5 we
find Katun 16 after one or two glyphs, which may well carry the
count over 339 days from the last date. F 4 looks like a distance
number. Stela 12, Plate LXX VI. , gives us 24 glyphs on one side and 20
(four of them partially destroyed) on the other. On the so-called
" deity side," we find a date in A B i of 6 Ix 12 Yaxkin @, vvhich
may be 9. 18. 3. X2. 14., as in B 3 we see the sign for Katun x8.
This date appeared on Lintel 27 in 9. 10. 5. 9. 14.
In A 6 we have an interesting number-glyph. It is well known
that the kins in a distance number are often denoted by way of
brevity by a number placed at one side or sometimes on top ofthe
uinal glyph, while the uinal number occupies the other position.
Novv on A 6 the same plan is used with the tun sign. We find the
tun sign vvith tvvo lines on top and 6 on the left. This means 10
tuns and 6 days, or 10. o. 6., no mention being made of the uinals.
Calling A B I, 6 Ix 12 Yaxkin @, 9. 18. 3. 12. 14.
and then adding A 6, which is 10. o. 6.

we reach CD i, 11 Ahau 8 Tzec (27), or 9. 18. 13. 13. o.
This date has been found several times already as 9. 16. i. o. c,
just one calendar round before the present date.
No dates appear on the reverse, but on A 3 is the glyph for
Katun 18, which repeats the Glyph B 3 of the deity side. Again
on C I and C 4 is the sign for Katun 5 or 5 katuns.
Stela 15 on Plate LXXIX. has the katun glyph with Ben-Ik with
the number 5 thus marking Katun ig.

OF TEOBERT MALER 19
Stela 18 on Plate LXXVII. has an abundance of glyphs, but few
can be satisfactorily made out. \ 2-3 is apparently 3 Cimi 14
Mol (g), which may be 9. 18. 17. 17. 6., if E i is the sign for Katun
18, as it appears to be, though it is possible that the date may be
9. 16. 5. 4. 6. and that the time is carried forward by the interven
ing glyphs to Katun 18.
Stela 19 on Plate LXXVII. has its date clear. It is in front of
the same building as Stela 18, yet its date is not found in Katun
18, if, as seems clear, it is 11 Ahau 3 Pop (^. This may be 9. 17.
14. 4. O. Here is another case where the number and the month
sign are separated by a form, vvhich we found in tlie case of Stela
1 1 had no numerical meaning. But even if this form meant 5 or
10 so as to make this date 11 Ahau 8 Pop 3^ or 11 Ahau 13
Pop (^\ it vvould not bring the date within Katun 18. The sign
for this katun, however, does not appear on this Stela.
Stela 20 on Plate LXXVIII. gives a date, but it is not clear
what it is. The month number is ii or 16 and the da}- must,
therefore, be Lamat, Ben, Eznab, or Akbal. The day has the
number 6 and looks somewhat like Lamat of Altar K of Copan,
and the month may be Zotz.
6Eamat 11 Zotz (02) may be 9. 17. 6. 5. 8.
&nd 6 Lamat 16 Zotz lir^ may be 9. 17. i. 4. 8.
The photograph of the altar near Structure 44 is for the most
part a fine example of Maya carving. The Initial Series is clear
and is surely A i B 4, 9. 12. S. 14. i., 12 Ymix
D 21,, 4 Pop (-^
C 9.,,  12- o-
giving C lOa, 9. 12 ^. 8. I., 5 Ymix 4 Mac ^
This places the date of this structure built on the lovver hill
five or six katuns, or over 100 years, earlier than the stelse vve have
been considering.

20 NOTES ON THE REFORT
On the top of the altar shown in Plate LXXX., there is evi
dently an Initial Scries, vvhich, however, is too much worn to
enable it to be deciphered with any certainty. It seems, however,
to have an Initial glyph, a cycle sign with 9, a katun sign over 15,
a uinal sign with 9, a kin sign with a number which is possibly
zero, and a day sign, with 12. It might be 9. 16. 10. 9. 0., X2 Ahau
3 Ceh (@, which would be just nine tuns after i Ahau 3 Zip (^,
vvhich is 9. 16. 10. O. o. It also might be many other dates.
We have now finished the discussion of the plates contained in
this Memoir. In the course of this discussion we have referred
in several cases to the great vvork of Maudslay called " Biologia
Centrali-Americana, Archseologj''," in vvhich a number of other
lintels from Yaxchilan are treated of Maudslay visited Yaxchilan,
and several of the inscribed lintels are now in the British Museum
as the result of his labors. We will novv take up these lintels as
far as they have not been spoken of already.
Lintel 25 or 23, according to Maler's notation (Maudslay, Plate
98) was shipped to the Museum in Berlin by mistake, but vvas
allovved to remain there by Maudslay. The date is clearly 9. 15.
6. 14. I., 7 Ymix 19 Zip @, but, though the glyphs are plainly
carved, there would seem to be some error, for the numbers of
the periods would certainly carry us to i Ymix 19 Zotz (3), just
one uinal or 20 days after the day and month given. If the day
and month are right, the numbers should be 9. 15. 6. 13. i. If
the numbers are right the day and month must be i Ymix
19 Zotz @. At all events the period relatively to the other dates
is sure, and vve can use this date in our discussion of this subject.
Maudslay calls this the only Initial Series in Yaxchilan, as it was
the only one known at the time vvhen he made his explorations,
but this Memoir contains six other series.
On Glj'ph 20 we find the katun symbol with 5, and over the
katun is a superfix which may mean Ben-Ik though it is somewhat

OF TEOBERT MALER 2 1
defaced. In this case the date would be in Katun i8. But
neither of the dates of which we have been speaking is found in
Katun 18. I am inclined to think that if Glyph 20 means Katun
18, the glyphs intervening betvveen the Initial Series and this
katun glyph must carry along the count by at least 2. 13. 4. 19.
Lintel 15 (Plate 83) begins with 4 Muluc 12 Uo iS) or 4 Ix
12 Uo @. These dates may be
4 Muluc 12 Uo %, 9. 15. 17. 14. 9
4 Ix 12 Uo (g), 9. 16. 10. 17. 14,
either of which would be nearly contemporarj- with the dates of
Lintels 16 and 17 from the same building.
Lintel 16 (Plate 84) has a date, which is identified by Maud
slay as 6 Caban 5 Pop @. This may well be 9. \u. o. 13. 17, On
Glyph 12 we find Katun 16 as before.
Lintel 17 (Plate 85) has no glj'phs which can be deciphered
with an approach to certainty, except that Glyph 9 is Katun 16
as before.
Lintel 24 (Plate 86) was reproduced by Charnay on page 450
of "The ancient Cities ofthe New World," New \'ork, 1887. The
date seems clear, though it is easy to misread the numbers. It
seems to be 5 (?) Eb 15 Mac @. I think that the month and
its number are 15 Mac, but the day number may be 5,6, 7, or 8.
Assuming that a katun sign with the Ben-Ik sign and the num
ber 3 refers to Katun 16, it follows that the same sign w-ith the
number 4 means Katun 17. This we find on Glvph 5. 5 Eb
15 Mac is in year 36; 6 Eb 15 Mac in year 24, 7 Eb 15 Alac in
year 12, and 8 Eb 15 Mac in year 52. The first two of these dates
are not found in Katun 17, while the last tvvo may be as follov\-s:
7 Eb IS Mac (|2^, 9. 17. iS. 17. 12.
8 Eb 1$ Mac (g), 9. 17. 6. 14. 12.

22 NOTES ON THE REPORT
The " completion " signs arc frequent here, but we do not know
vvhat they refer to.
The underside of Lintel 23 (or 25) Plate 87, was also reproduced
by Charnay on page 457 of the vvork cited above. It is probable
that the negative of this lintel vvas reversed in making this plate,
as all the faces are turned to the right — a position vvhich is seldom,
if ever, seen in the inscriptions. Moreover the inscription begins
with the Katun glyph instead of vvith the date, the glyphs of vvhich
are found on the right, and are reversed in relation to each other.
The date is 5 Ymix 4 Mac (?". This may be 9. 17. 14. 16. i. if,
as seems probable. Glyph i means Katun 17. The altar of Struc
ture 44 showed this date 5 Ymi.x 4 Mac (Ti as 9. 12. 9. 8. i. just two
calendar rounds before the date ofthe lintel.
The front of this lintel, Plate 89, is very clear. First, in B i-C i,
the distance number 2. 2. 7. o. is given, followed in F i E 2 by
3 Ymix 14 Zac. This date may be
3 Ymix 14 Zac @, 9. 17. 16. 15. i.
If vve deduct 2. 2. 7. o.

we have 5 Ymix 4 Muan @j, 9. 15. 14. 8. i.

while if vve add 2. 2. 7. o.
vve have i Ymix 4 Mol @, 9. 19. 19. 4. i.
But we find neither ofthe last two dates on the lintel.
Lintel 41, Plate 95^ has the date 7 Ymix 14 Tzec @), vvhich ma)-
be 9. 16. 4. I. I. org. 18. 16. 14. i. We find the Venus sign in
A 2.
A lintel vvhich may have come from Structure 44 appears to
have a date 7 Ymix 19 Kaj-ab 45), but the glyphs are too indis
tinct to be deciphered with certaint)', and vve can get no assistance
from the other glyphs.
On the supposition that the dates of the inscriptions refer to the

OF TEOBERT MALER

23

erection of the buildings in or near which the lintels and stelae are
found, wc must decide which of the dates, where there are more
than one, is to be taken. In the case of lintels it is not probable
that the carving would have been done after the stone was in place
and therefore it is probable that the final date vvas carved before
the building vvas built. This may not be the case in the stelae,
but on the stelae there are but few cases vvhere the dates are far
apart. The earliest final dates are found on Lintels 27 and 28 on
Structure 24, a building completely in ruins, situated on the first
rise from the flat ground near the river. This is, as one would
naturally expect the oldest building would be, in the most com
plete ruins. The dates here are
Lintel 27 (that over the southerly door) 9. 8. S. 4. ^. tc, 9. 10. 3. 9. 14.
Lintel 28 (that over the northerly door)
9. 10. 14. 7. 3. to 9. 10. 18. 16. 17.
These dates are fixed by a month and day date appearing on Lin
tel 27 in connection with " Katun 8," while the other dates are
found by calculation from the first one.
The east doorway of Structure 23, vvhich adjoins Structure 24
on the southeast, has an Initial Series 9. 14. ?. ?. ?., vvhich, though
defaced, shows the 9 cycles 14 katuns very clearly and fixes the
time beyond a peradventure. The lintels from the other tvvo
doorways of Structure 23 show a much later date.
The date ne.xt in time is an Initial Series on the so-called altar
found in front of Structure 44 high up on the hill. The date is
clearly 9. 12. 8. 14. i., 12 Ymix 4 Pop ? ;
and the date 9. 12. 9. 8. i., 5 Ymix 4 Mac J"

24 NOTES ON THE REPORT
is calculated from this by the distance number. Further evidence
must be furnished that this was an altar, for, as Maler says, no
such altar has ever been found before in Central America. It
looks like a stela and the only objection to its being so classed is
that the glyphs on its front edge as it lies run horizontally. May
it not be that the indistinctness of the glyphs has caused the ex
plorer to be mistaken in this } Or even if he is correct, may it not
be that this was an old stela,- which was brought from some other
part of the city and placed in its position on what Maler calls the
" lesser acropolis," and that vvhen it was so placed, further glyphs
were carved on its edge? This seems probable as the fairly good
condition of Structure 44 and the later dates of Lintel 42 in the
adjoining building vvould seem to assign a late date to the struc
ture in front of which this stone was found. It is true, however,
that on this " lesser acropolis," the many masses of rubbish shown
on Maler's sketch-map attest the presence of seven buildings, and
it may well be that this stone may have come from one of these
ruined buildings.
The final dates next in time are those found on Lintel 29 of
Structure 10 (which also contains Lintels 30, 31, 32, and 33), situ
ated on the " curved embankment," or flat ground near the river.
This structure is thus referred to by Maler: "This pile vvas built
at different periods. The oldest part had only two chambers —
very broad ones for this style of architecture, one vvith three en
trances, and the other with tvvo." He refers to the tvvo chambers
vvith Lintels 29, 30, and 31.
Maler is right in regard to Lintel 29, where the Initial Series
gives (see the drawing, page 131) 9. 13. 17. 12. 10.; but Lintel
30, although it has the dates 9. 13. 16. 10. 13. and 9. 13. 17. 11. 10.,
also carries forward the time to 9. 16. I. o. O., and Lintel 31 carries
the time forward first to 9. 16. 13. o. o. and then to 9. 17. o. O. o.
Lintel 33 (adjoining Lintel 29) has a date found in 9. 16. i. 2. 6.,

OF TEOBERT MALER 25
while Lintel 32 at the southwest end seems to be 9. iS. O. O. o.
It would seem, then, as if the two chambers spoken of by Maler
were built simultaneously, but not at a very early date, or as if the
chamber on the north corner was built first, having an entrance at
the door over which was Lintel 29. The building was afterwards
extended in a southeast and in a southwest direction, and later
was carried farther in the latter direction, and latest of all the long
southeast rooms were built.
About the same time that the chamber of Structure 10, which
contains the Lintels 30 and 31 vvas built, many other buildings and
stelae were erected. This must have been an era of great pros
perity. At this time Stela i was set up — the centre of the lower
group of buildings — with its Initial Scries referring to the date
9. XI. 10. O. 0., IGG years past, but carrying forward the time to
9. 16. IG. G. G. The earlier date vvas ncarl>' coincident with the
time of the first erection of the lintels in Structure 24.
It vvould appear, then, that the buildings first erected vvere Struc
ture 24, with possibly part of Structure 23, upon the terrace built
up from the "curved embankment," while it is also possible that
buildings were erected on the " lesser acropolis " shortly after. It
would have been natural that hill-tops should be selected for de
fence. Then followed the building of the northwest part of Struc
ture IG between Structure 24 and the river. About the time when
x6 katuns had been completed, the plan of the city was laid out
on a scale of greater magnificence. Structure 22 on the same ter
race as Structures 23 and 24, e.xtended to the southeast, was built
vvith its Initial Series referring back to 9. G. 19. 2. 4., but with the
date, proved by the distance number and by the glyph for Katun
16, of 9. 16. I. O. 9. This indicates a lapse of 300 years, and the
earlier date may possibly refer to the original arrival at Yaxchilan.
About this time too was erected the great Structure H, with its
three Lintels l to 3, with Stela i standing directly in front of its

26 NOTES ON THE REPORT
imposing fagade and between it and the river. This period also
savv the erection of Structure x over on the side-hill to the south-
cast. Structure 3, now a pile of stone, with its Lintel 10, and Struc
ture 20 on the extension of the terrace which holds Structures 22,
23, and 24, with Lintels 12-14. Indeed this Structure 2G was
probably one ofthe earliest of these later buildings, judging from
the date of Lintel 14, vvhich is probably 9. 15. 10. O. i. To this
period belongs also Structure 16 situated on the "curved embank
ment" to the northwest of Structure 10, and containing Lintels
38-40. Here too belongs Structure 42 on the " lesser acropolis,"
with its Lintels 41 and 42. At this time was built Structure 21
between Structures 20 and 22, with Lintels x6 and 17.
It would appear that in a period twenty to forty years later, the
buildings on the so-called " greater acropolis" were erected. Here
we find no sculptured lintels, but a great number of stela;, having
dates vvhich show them to have been erected about 9. iS. o. o. o.
Stela II has indeed an Initial Series of 9. 16. x. O. 0., but this was
the date when the great extension of the buildings occurred, and
which may have been of great significance, possibly owing to a
great immigration from abroad, but the same stela carries the time
forward by another date to 9. 18. 2. 12. 16. At this later date
Structure 23, which had been begun earlier, vvas completed.
This assignment of dates to the different parts of the cit}' is
based, as will be seen, on the supposition that the Ben-Ik symbol
in connection with a katun has the value 13, and that the long
buildings may in some cases have been built in parts at different
times; and this vvould appear to be true at least of Structure 10.
If it is proper to believe that each of these long buildings was all
built at one time, some modification would be necessary in the
above opinion.
A list of the dates in Yaxchilan, both in relation to the separate
inscriptions and to the Structures, is given.

EARLIEST AND LATEST DATES IN THE STRUCTURES OF YAXCHILAN.

STR. 24.
44. 20. 21. 22. I.
16.
42. 33-
S.I. 23- 10.39- 40. 41.

Altar.

old. new.

EARLIEST DATE.
9. S. 8. 4. 5. 6 Chicchan 8 Zac @.
g. 12. 8.14. I. 12 Ymix 4 Pop (i).
g. 16. 0.13. 17. 6 Caban 5 Pop @.
9. o. 19. 2. 4. 2 Kan 2 Yax @.
9.16. I. 2. o. 12 Ahau 8 Yaxkin @.
9. 16. I. 15. 13. 12 lien 16 Uo %'.
9.16. I. 4. o. 13 Ahau 8 Chen 127).
9.16. I. o. o. 1 1 Ahau 8 Tzec @.
g. 1 1. 10. ?. ?.
9. T4. ?. ?¦ ?•
9. 13. 16. 10. 13. I Ben I Chen @.

9- ^S' '5- °- °' 9 .Miau 18 Xul 21:
9.17. ?. ?. '.

LATEST DATE.
g. 10. 18. 16. 17. 6 Caban 10 Zac <^.
g. 12. 9. 8. I. 5 Ymix 4 Mac (8).
9. 15. 10. o. I. 4 Ymix 4 Mol ( ?) (@.
9. 16. ?. ?. ?.
9.16. I. o. 9. 7 Muluc 17 Tzec (J7).
g. 16. I. S. 6. 8 Cimi 14 Mac @.
9.16. 3. 3. 6. 4 Cimi 4 Mol @).
9. 16. 4. I. I. 7 Ymix 14 Tzec @.
9. 16. 6. o. o. 4 Ahau 3 Zotz (32).
9. 16. ?. ?. ?.
g. 17. ?. ?. ?. Eb Mac
g. 17. o. o. o. 13 Ahau 18 Cumhu @.
9. tR. o. o. o. t I Ahau 18 Mac @.
9.18. 9.12. I. 8 Ymix g Tzec (2:).
9. 1?.. 13. 13. o. 1 1 .Miau 8 Tzec (27).
9. I.". 17. 17. 6. 3 Cimi 14 Mol @.

LIST OF LINTELS

STR. 24.
44. 10.

23- ?
20.

33-

L. 27
28
Altar. L. 2g
30
31'33'
32-
L. 26.
24
25 ?
L. 12
13
14
L. 16
17
L. I
2
3
L. 21

AND STEL^ IN YAXCHILAN: ARRANGED IN THE APPARENT ORDER
OF CONSTRUCTION.

00

(K) 9.
(C) 9.
(I.S) 9.
(C) g.
(K.C) 9-

EARLIEST DATE.
8. 8. 4. 5. 6 Chicchan 8 Zac (g).
10. 14. 7. 3. 10 Akbal 16 Uo @.
12. 8. 14. I. 12 Ymix 4 Pop (s).
13. 16. 10. 13. I Ben I Chen @.
16. 13. o. o. 2 Ahau 8 Uo @).

(C) (C)(C)

LATEST DATE.
5. g. 14. 6 Ix 12 Yaxkin @.

(I.S) 9. o. 19. 2. 4. 2 Kan 2 Yax @.

9. 10.
9. 10. i8. 16. 17. 6 Caban 10 Zac @).
9.12. 9. 8. I. 5 Ymix 4 Mac (8).
(I.S) g. 13. 17. 12. 10. 8 0ci3Yax@.
(K.C) g. 16. I. o. o. II Ahau 8 Tzec @.
(K.F) 9. 17. o. o. o. 13 Ahau 18 Cumhu (g).
(K) 9.16. I. 2. 6. 5 Cimi 14 Yaxkin (27).
(K.F) 9. 18. o. o. o. II Ahau i8 Mac (n).
(I.S) 9. 14. ?. ?. ?.
(K) 9.17. ?. ?. ?. Eb Mac
(I.S) 9. 15. 6. 13. I. 7 Ymix 19 Zip @.

9. 15. 10. o. I. 4 Ymix 4 Mol. ( ?) (g).
(K) 9.16. 0.13. 17. 6 Caban 5 Pop @.
(K) 9. 16. ?. ?. ?.
9. 16. I. o. o. 1 1 .Vhau 8 Tzec @.
9. 16. 6. o. o. 4 Ahau 3 Zotz @.
9. 16. 5. o. o. 8 Ahau 8 Zotz (g).
(K.C) 9.16. I. o. g. 7 Muluc 1 7 Tzec @.

hi

42. L. 41. 42.
I. L. 5- 6. 7. ?
16. L. 38.39.
? S I. (I.S) 9. II. 10. ?. ?. (K) 9-i6- ?¦ ?• ?•
40. S^ii. ? 9.15.15- o. o. 9 Ahau 18 Xul @. (K) 9. iS. 2. i.. 16. 12 Cib ig Yaxkm (g). ^
(I.S) 9.16. I. o. o. 1 1 Ahau 8 Tzec @. "»i
12. (K) 9.18. 3. I.. 14. 6 1x12 Yaxkin®. (K) 9. iS. 13. 13. o. 1 1 Ahau 8 Tzec (27). j.

9. 16. 4. I. I- 7 Ymix 14 Tzec ^.
(K) 9. 16. I. 4- o- 13 Ahau 8 Chen @.
g. 16. I. 2. o. 12 Ahau 8 Yaxkin @.
(K) 9. 16. I. 8. 6. 8 Cimi 14 Mac @.
9. 16. I. 15. 13. 12 Ben 16 Uo(g).
(K) 9.16. 3. 3. 6. 4Cimi4Mol(§).

(K) 9. 18. ?. ?. ?.
(K) 9.18.17.17- 6. 3 Cimi 14 Mol (§).
9. 17. 14. 4- o- II Ahau 3 Pop ®.
9.17. ?. ?. ?•

41. S. IS- 18. 19.
,, ^°' (K) 9.18. 9.12. I. 8 Ymix 9 Tzec (§). ^
39. b. 10. >3
C = n.ilc fixed bv ralrul.ation from some other known il.Uc.
\t Z SUlLaUof the number of the k.Uun m wh„:h the d.Uc orrurs ; gcncr.Uly in the form
with the Ron-Ik glyph.
K.C = C'Dmbni.ilioii ol Iv ami ('..
K.F = Statement th.U the date occurs at the completion of a katun.
L. = Lintel.
S. = Stela. ,j
Str. = Structure.

Date Due
All books are subject to recall after two weeks.

YALE UNIVERSrrY UBRAHY

3 9002 03235 9011