Corrections and Notes about Maya Papers


Previous Topic Previous Next Topic Next
Maya Info

Other Xoc managed sites:
https://mayacalendar.xoc.net
http://www.mayameetings.org
http://www.xoc.net
http://www.986faq.com
http://grr.xoc.net
http://www.yachtslog.com

These are notes and corrections for various papers about the Maya, as noted by Greg Reddick

This is meant to be a place for me to note various things I've noted in other peoples' papers. Mainly corrections to the Maya date math.

Texas Note 47 Tonina Dates I: A Glyph for the Period of 260 Days? by Peter Mathews, page 1

The first distance number in the math should be 5.15, not 5.1.5. This is noted correctly in the text. The rest of the math appears correct.

I think 13 Zac (Sak') is more likely referring to one of these dates:

  • 9.17.4.12.0 3 Ajaw 13 Sak' 6 August 25, 0775 CE
  • 9.17.5.12.5 4 Chikchan 13 Sak' 2 August 24, 0776 CE

The first is 5 days before the first date listed in the article (9.17.4.12.5). The second is 100 days after the last date listed (9.17.5.7.5). I think it is more likely that there is a shift to another date without an intervening distance number or a full date given than it is for 13 Zac (Sak') to mean 260 days.

Texas Note 54 Naranjo Altar 1 and Rituals of Death and Burials by Nikolai Grube and Linda Schele

The chronology they list is

12 Ok 18 K'ank'in
+2.13.12.15.8.4 (7723964)
7.4.17.0.14  13 Ix 12 Xul
+2.2.6.3.3 (304623)
9.7.3.3.17  7 Kab'an 5 K'ayab
+19.10.7 (7047)
9.8.2.14.3  7 Ak'b'al 11 Sotz'

The distance number 19.10.7 does not connect the last two dates. 19.10.6 does. I believe that the drawing of the glyph is at G10, and if so, it clearly a 7. That means something is wrong elsewhere. I have yet to work out how it could be corrected to make it all work, but it can't stand as it is.

David Stuart's Drawing of the Temple 19 Bench from Xultun

This is included in Marc Zender and Joel Skidmore's paper "Unearthing the Heavens: Classic Maya Murals and Astronomical Tables at Xultun, Guatemala". (http://www.mesoweb.com/reports/Xultun.pdf)

David has a drawing of an 819 day count with the distance number 1.16.17. The last 17 is shown with a filler. This should be an 18, not a 17, and what is drawn with the filler is actually a dot. Zender and Skidmore's text follows the drawing, so is incorrect as well.


Top