A Possible Solution of the Number Series on Pages 51 to 58 of the Dresden CodexGuthe, Carl E. (Carl Eugen)
Science
A Possible Solution of the Number Series on Pages 51 to 58 of the Dresden Codex
Guthe, Carl E. (Carl Eugen)
Codex Dresdensis Maya
59 10216 (177) 10216 (177) 177 10 Kan (177) 10 Kan (177)
60 10394 (178) 10394 (178) 177 6 Ik (178) 6 Ik (178)
61 10571 (177) 10571 (177) 177 1 Cauac (177) 1 Cauac (177)
62 10748 (177) 10748 (177) 177 9 Cib (177) 9 Cib (177)
57b 63 10925 (177) 10925 (177) 177 4 Ben (177) 4 Ben (177)
64 11102 (177) 11102 (177) 177 12 Oc (177) 12 Oc (177)
65 11250 (148) 11250 (148) 148 4 Eznab (148) 4 Eznab (148)
PICTURE
66 11427 (177) 11427 (177) 177 12 Men (177) 12 Men (177)
67 11604 (177) 11604 (177) 177 7 Eb (177) 7 Eb (177)
58b 68 11781 (177) 11781 (177) 177 2 Muluc (177) 2 Muluc (177)
69 11958 (177) 11958 (177) 177 10 Cimi (177) 10 Cimi (177)
PICTURE
The apparent error due to the addition of two dots in the Tun place in
the upper number of column 14 is more the result of an error than an
error in itself. This number shows a very clear case of erasure. The
writer of this section of the manuscript in copying from the older
source, at first overlooked column 14, and placed 7.3.18, the upper
number in column 15 in this place. Realizing his mistake he erased the
three dots in the Uinal place, but utilized two of the bars and the
three dots in the Kin place as the 13 needed in the Uinal in column 14,
and erased the lower bar of the original 18. This procedure of the
writer’s threw the upper number of column 14 out of alignment, for the
two dots of the Kin appear below the 13, somewhat below the line of Kins
of the other columns. The seven in the Tun place should have been a six,
so the scribe inserted an extra dot between the two of the original 7,
neglecting, however, to erase the other two dots. As a result the upper
number of column 14 records the number 3142, which is 720 greater than
it should be, namely, 2422.
In column 10, 1748 was recorded instead of 1742, for a bar and three
dots were written in the Kin place instead of only two dots. This is a
very peculiar and unexpected form of carelessness, which is, however,
corrected in the next column. The remaining irregularities in the upper
numbers are all due to the omission of a part of the number. In columns
2 and 15, one dot was omitted in the Kin place, thus recording 353
instead of 354 in the former, and 2598 instead of 2599 in the latter. In
column 4 one bar was omitted in the Kin place, making the number 674,
five less than it should be, namely, 679. In column 1, one dot was
omitted in the Uinal place, and in column 12, four dots of the same
denomination, recording, respectively, 157 and 2016 instead of 177 and
2096.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account