In plate 8, _B_, is figured the Initial Series from Stela 9 at Copan.[139] The introducing glyph stands in A1-B2 and is followed by the five period glyphs in A3-A5. The cycle is very clearly recorded in A3, the clasped hand being of a particularly realistic form. Although {172} the coefficient is partially effaced, enough remains to show that it was above 5, having had originally more than the one bar which remains, and less than 11, there being space for only one more bar or row of dots. In all the previous Initial Series the cycle coefficient was 9, consequently it is reasonable to assume that 4 dots originally occupied the effaced part of this glyph. If the use of 9 cycles in this number gives a terminal date which agrees with the terminal date recorded, the above assumption becomes a certainty. In B3 six katuns are recorded. Note the ornamental dotted ovals on each side of the dot in the numeral 6. Although the head for the tun in A4 is partially effaced, we are warranted in assuming that this was the period originally recorded here. The coefficient 10 appears clearly. The uinal head in B4 is totally unfamiliar and seems to have the fleshless lower jaw properly belonging to the tun head; from its position, however, the 4th in the number, we are justified in calling this glyph the uinal sign. Its coefficient denotes that 0 uinals are recorded here. Although the period glyph in A5 is also entirely effaced, the coefficient appears clearly as 0, and from position again, 5th in the number, we are justified once more in assuming that 0 kins were originally recorded, here. It seems at first glance that the above reading of the number A3-A5 rests on several assumptions: 1. That the cycle coefficient was originally 9. 2. That the effaced glyph in A4 was a tun head. 3. That the irregular head in B4 is a uinal head. 4. That the effaced glyph in A5 was a kin sign. The last three are really certainties, since the Maya practice in recording Initial Series demanded that the five period glyphs requisite--the cycle, katun, tun, uinal, and kin--should follow each other in this order, and in no other. Hence, although the 3d, 4th, and 5th glyphs are either irregular or effaced, they must have been the tun, uinal, and kin signs, respectively. Indeed, the only important assumption consisted in arbitrarily designating the cycle coefficient 9, when, so far as the appearance of A3 is concerned, it might have been either 6, 7, 8, 9, or 10. The reason for choosing 9 rests on the overwhelming evidence of antecedent probability. Moreover, as stated above, if the terminal date recorded agrees with the terminal date determined by calculation, using the cycle coefficient as 9, our assumption becomes a certainty. Designating the above number as 9.6.10.0.0 then and reducing this by means of Table XIII, we obtain: