Equipped with the foregoing knowledge of the sort of memorial it was customary for the Mayas to erect, let us now see whether the ruins of Copan furnish any monuments which would answer to the description and purpose of “amay-tés” and “ka-tuns.” Referring the reader to parts I-III of Mr. A. P. Maudslay’s work already cited, I draw special attention to the following stelæ and altars which are so admirably figured therein. Stela F, which stands at the east side of the Great Plaza at Copan and faces west, is in a particularly bad state of preservation. It exhibits a standing figure on one side whose head is surmounted by an indescribable combination of a mask, a seated figure and much elaborate feather-work. A noteworthy feature, which recurs on other stelæ in Copan and Quirigua, is an appendage which appears like an artificial beard attached to the chin of the personage. At the sides of the stela serpents’ heads alternate with diminutive grotesque figures. On the back, or east side of the stela, two cords are represented which appear to have been brought over from the front and which are tied together so as to form five open loops, in each of which, as in a frame, there is a group consisting of four calculiform glyphs. The cord, which is knotted together at the base of the stela, appears to pass around it. It is impossible not to recognize that this representation of twenty glyphs, as divided into five groups of four, exactly agrees with Cogolludo’s records that the Mayas employed 20-year and 4-year eras and that when five of the 4-year periods had passed they called it a ka-tun, and made a carved memorial of it. As Landa tells us that they erected stelæ to commemorate the 20-year period, the inference to which the Copan Stela F leads us is that it is a katun and that the twenty glyphs carved on it are year-signs. Examination, however, shows that, whereas the Maya Calendar had but four year-signs which would naturally be bound to repeat themselves in each group of four years, no two glyphs on the Stela F are alike. It is obvious, therefore, that the glyphs are not the four calendar year-signs and reflection shows, indeed, that it would have been quite superfluous to carve these repeatedly on a stela. As each year-sign was identified with a cardinal point and an element and was permanently associated with a particular color, the mere employment of the latter would suffice to convey this association of ideas. What is more, the relative positions of the four glyphs composing each group would also indicate the four year-signs and thus the sculptor of the stela would have been at liberty to record by the shape of his glyphs any fact he chose to connect with each year of the era. A curious linguistic fact must also be taken into consideration: The Maya name for the four year-signs was Ah-cuch-haab and the title for a chief or ruler of a town was Ah-cuch-cab. The mere presence on the stela, of the figure of