ON THE AGE OF MAYA RUINS

BY

CHARLES P. BOWDITCH

(From the American Anthropologist (N. S.), Vol. 3, October-December, 1901)

NEW YORK
G. P. PUTNAM'S SONS
1901

[697]

ON THE AGE OF MAYA RUINS

By CHARLES P. BOWDITCH

The inscription lately discovered in Chichen Itza by Edward H. Thompson,United States Consul at Merida, is of more than passing interest. Itcontains an Initial Series of glyphs, which, so far as I know, gives theonly initial date that has been found in the northern part of Yucatan.

Although it may be a matter of doubt on what date the long countdeclared by the Initial Series began, yet, if we assume that themajority of the initial dates refer to the time when the buildings orstelæ on which the dates occur were erected (and this assumption seemsaltogether probable), we can at least decide on the relative age of theruined cities in which the buildings or stelæ are found.

The great cycle glyph in the Chichen Itza date is somewhat injured, butit is apparently of the same character as those found elsewhere. Thenumbers of the cycle, katun, tun, and uinal periods are 10, 2, 9, and 1,respectively. The number of the kin period is a face which, from thecircle of dots around the mouth, is pretty surely 9. The day number is 9and the month number is 7. The day glyph is somewhat obscure, butcontains a circular frame supported by a knot, while the month glyph ispretty surely Zac. We can then be sure of the following:?. 10. 2. 9.1. ?, 9. ?. 7. ?., with the probability that the second ? should be replacedby 9 and the last ? should be replaced by Zac. Assuming for the momentthat the great cycle sign is what Goodman calls 54, we find from thetables that 54. 10. 2. 9. 0. 0. is 6 Ahau 18 Chen (49), and that 54. 10.2. 9. 1. 0. is 13 Ahau 18 Yax (49). Now, in order to reach a day withthe number[698] 9 and a month day with the number 7 from 13 Ahau 18 Yax, wemust add 9 days. This makes the date necessarily 54. 10. 2. 9. 1. 9., 9Muluc 7 Zac (49). The day sign, though rubbed, has the characteristicsof Muluc, and the month is shown to be surely Zac; the kin number isalso proved to be 9.

There is just a possibility that the great cycle may not be 54. If it is53, the date must be 9 Muluc 12 Muan; if it is 55, the date must be 9Muluc 2 Yaxkin; but the month number is clearly 7, which eliminates boththese great cycle numbers. In order to find a great cycle with thenumbers ?. 10. 2. 9. 1. 9, 9. ?. 7. ?, we should have to go back orforward from Great Cycle 54 at least five great cycles, which means over25,000 years. This is such an enormous distance that it can practicallybe thrown out of consideration, and we may be well satisfied that thegreat cycle is really the same period in which almost every one of theother dates occurs, viz., 54.

It will be interesting to compare this date with the first and lastknown dates of the other ruined cities of Chiapas and Guatemala. I givea list of these dates: