-
58. The Initial and Supplementary Series of Stela 5 at Altar de Sacrificios, Guatemala (1945)
- University Press of Colorado
- Chapter
- Additional Information
224 N o t e s o f M i d d l e A m e r i c a n A r c h a e o l o g y a n d E t h n o l o g y Carnegie Institution of Washington Division of Historical Research No. 58 October 23, 1945 The Initial and Supplementary Series of Stela 5 at Altar de Sacrificios, Guatemala Sylvanus G. Morley A4. 10 katuns. The coefficient is certain as 10, although the same fracture line continues down between the upper halves of the two bars before turning off toward the right. A5. 11 tuns. The single numerical dot and the lower of the two non-numerical, flanking crescents show clearly. Furthermore there is dust-enough space between the foregoing and the badly eroded period glyph to the right for two thin numerical bars of exactly the same width as those in the uinal coefficient immediately below. Indeed the uinal coefficient , which is surely 12, is of exactly the same width, i.e., that of a line of dots and two bars, as the tun coefficient of 11, i.e., one dot flanked by two crescents and followed by two bars. It was my original misreading of the tun coefficient as 1 which led to my error in deciphering this date. A6. 12 uinals. The coefficient is certain as 12, although the corresponding period glyph is effaced. A7. 17 kins. The coefficient is practically certain as 17, the only alternative being 18. A8. 6, 7, 8, 9, or 10 Caban, or Eznab. The coefficient here is surely over 5 and under 11. As the kin coefficient is 17 or 18 the day sign must have been Caban or Eznab. In 1914 I observed in my notes: “the coefficient of the day (A8), or what I believe to be the day here, is surely between 6 and 10 (inclusive).” I first saw Stela 5 at Altar de Sacrificios in the spring of 1914, when the drawing of its corresponding Initial Series shown in Figure 58.1 was made. Beyer had not then discovered the meaning of the variable central element of the Initial Series introducing glyph, and there was no reason for doubting the reading that I then suggested: 9.10.1.13.18 6 Eznab 16 Ceh. In 1931 Beyer (1931) announced his decipherment of the variable central element of the Initial Series introducing glyph as “the month-sign indicator .” This formula, the accuracy of which is now universally recognized by Maya epigraphers, showed that the above reading was incorrect. The terminal date is Ceh, whereas the variable central element of the Initial Series introducing glyph (Fig. 58.1a) is very clearly the moon sign, which corresponds to the month Chen. In the spring of 1944 I visited Altar de Sacrificios a second time and obtained a photograph of this inscription (Fig.58.1b). This appears to warrant the following identifications: A1-B2. The variable central element of the Initial Series introducing glyph is surely, as originally drawn by me in 1914, the moon sign, thus indicating that the corresponding month in the Initial Series terminal date must be Chen. A3. 9 baktuns. The coefficient is certain as 9, although a fracture line runs vertically through the four dots. The Initial and Supplementary Series of Stela 5 at Altar de Sacrificios, Guatemala 225 58.1. Stela 5, Altar de Sacrificios: (a) drawing of the Initial Series made in 1914; (b) photograph of front taken in 1944. A9. Effaced. Probably Glyph G5 or G6 of the Supplementary Series, depending on the kin coefficient , but more probably the former than the latter. A10. Glyph F of the Supplementary Series. Identification is certain. A11. Glyph 3D of the Supplementary Series. The coefficient here is best as 3, although 1 and 2 are possible readings. The corresponding moon age recorded is either 3, 2, or 1 day in that order of probability. [23.22.236.90] Project MUSE (2024-03-29 07:26 GMT) SylVanuS g. Morley 226 A12. Glyph 5C of the Supplementary Series. Coefficient and C variant of the moon sign are certain. B3. Not clear, but probably not Glyph X5 or X6 of the Supplementary Series, one or other of the two forms of Glyph X required by a coefficient of 5 in Glyph C. C3. Not clear, but probably not Glyph B of the Supplementary Series. B4. Not clear, but probably not Glyph A9 or A10 of the...