"Adding 3 years and 160 days to the last date, 4 Cimi 14 Uo, brings us to 11 Ymix 14 Yax in the thirty-eighth year of the annual calendar; this is the date we find expressed in the glyphs E 2 and F 2 of the inscription.
"It is true that the sign in the glyph E 2 is not the sign usually employed for the day Ymix, but that it is a day-sign we know from the fact that it is included in a cartouche, and I am inclined to think that the more usual Ymix sign (something like an open hand with the fingers extended) was inclosed in the oval on the top of the grotesque head, but it is too much worn for identification.
"Passing over seven glyphs, the next reckoning occurs at F 6, which gives:—
| 4 Chuens | 80 days. |
| 19 Days | 19 days.„ |
| 99 days. |
"Adding 99 days to the last date, 11 Ymix 14 Yax, brings us to 6 Ahau 13 Muan in the same year, and we find this date expressed in F 7 and F 8.
"The last glyph in the inscription is a Katun sign with the numeral 14 above it, and a sign for beginning in front of it, and indicates that the last date is the beginning of a 14th Katun. If we turn to the Table for the 9th Cycle of the 54th Great Cycle, from which we started, it will be seen that the 14th Katun of that cycle does commence with the date 6 Ahau 13 Muan."
It is beyond the limits of possibility that the identity of the dates and intervals found in this inscription with those shown in the Calendars is the result of chance, and we may now fairly assume that the essential features of the dates and computations of time found on the carved inscriptions have passed from the region of mystery into that of established fact. This is, indeed, only one step in the elucidation of the meaning of the inscriptions, but it is one of the greatest importance. The next step, it is to be hoped, will be the collation of the dates on the Maya monuments with those of our own system of reckoning time. And although this step is beset with many difficulties, it should not be looked upon as impossible.
I regret to say that I am frequently asked, What is the good of labouring at the collection and interpretation of inscriptions which promise to add little or nothing to our historical knowledge and have no connection with the development of our own civilization? This question seems to me to imply a narrow view both of Anthropology and History. If the study of Egyptology and Assyriology possesses an especial interest to us through its connection with our ideas of religion, philosophy, and art filtered through Palestine,
