Lower number series:
Absence of all 178’s that occur in upper series.
Column 23. Presence of 178.
Column 26. 177 instead of 148.
Column 50. 157 “ “ 177.
Upper number series:
Column 1. 157 instead of 177.
Column 2. 353 “ “ 354.
Column 4. 674 “ “ 679.
Column 10. 1748 “ “ 1742.
Column 12. 2016 “ “ 2096.
Column 14. 3142. “ “ 2422.
Column 15. 2598 “ “ 2599.
Column 24. 4164 “ “ 4163.
Day series:
Column 5. 4 Chicchan instead of 11 Chicchan.
Column 11. Omission of 1/2 _tonalamatl_.
Column 17. 1 Ik instead of 2 Ik.
Column 36. 4 Ben instead of 4 Ahau.
Column 47. 10 Eznab instead of 11 Eznab.
Column 49. 11 Kan instead of 12 Kan.
Columns:
Columns 6 and 7 are reversed.
Columns 58 and 59 are reversed.
Totals:
Upper number series totals 11,958 instead of 11,960.
Day series totals 11,959 instead of 11,960.
In Table II, pp. 6, 7, both the corrected and the uncorrected series are
given. In the centre of the table are three columns containing the
actual table. The third column contains the uncorrected upper number;
the fourth the lower number; and the fifth the first day sign and its
number. Since the other two day series agree, except in a very few cases
which will be mentioned later, with the first series, they have been
omitted from the table. The sixth column contains the day signs as they
probably should occur, and the second contains the corrected upper
number. The first column gives the pages of the manuscript and the
number of the columns on each in order to facilitate reference to the
manuscript. Each column of Table II, with the exception of the first and
fourth, is composed of two series of numbers, since each interval
between the numbers of the manuscript has been placed in parentheses
after the last of the pair of numbers it deals with, in order to
facilitate comparison with the lower numbers. The names and numbers in
the fifth column which have parentheses have been obliterated in the
manuscript, but are easily inferred from the other two rows of day signs
and numbers.
The most prominent irregularity is the absence of the number 178 in the
lower numbers when the differences in both the day series and the upper
numbers show that 178 should be the difference. This occurs in columns
7, 14, 29, 37, 52 and 60 of the manuscript. The only place in which 178
does occur in the lower number is in column 23, when it agrees with the
difference in the day series, but not with that of the upper number. In
other words, the six occurrences of the 178-day group in the upper
numbers are neglected in the lower numbers, and the only occurrence of
178 in the lower numbers does not agree with the upper numbers. This
implies that it is of deeper significance than a mere error. There is
another disagreement between the upper and lower numbers which could
very well be the result of carelessness. In column 26, the lower number
is 177, while both the upper number and the day series give a difference
of 148. This is the only case in which the differences of 148 are not
found at the same place in all series, and, consequently, is probably an
error of the scribe. Again in the lower number of column 50, the
careless omission of one dot in the Uinal place has resulted in the
record of 157 instead of the correct number, 177.
With one exception all of the errors in the upper numbers occur in the
first third of the series. That exception, i.e., the writing of 4164 for
4163 in the column 24, may be explained by the fact that the writer of
the series had just added in column 23 the extra day to the day series,
which threw it out of agreement with the upper numbers. For the moment
this fact slipped his mind, but he corrected the mistake by subtracting
one day from the difference between the upper numbers of columns 24 and
25.