[Aztlan] 819day Count

Sun Jun 22 22:38:28 CDT 2008

Dear list members, the question of an 819d cycle.

The 819d cycle is also 9*91d which makes it a most interesting solar 
sub-cycle. It is more likely the 819d cycle was synchronized with other 
cycles, the most important being the 18980d calendar round. The 819-day 
cycle synchronized with the 18,980 day calendar round period yields an 
E-cycle period of 1,195,740 days or (8.6.1.9.0) in base 20, and an E-cycle 
zero station occurs at 1-Kaban-0-Pohp. This is a 3,276 haab year or 63 
calendar round period, and is the combination of two sub-cycles of 63 
tzolkin and 819 haab (i.e. ET and EH cycles respectively). A 1-Kaban 
5-Kumk'u station is significant only because this is also an 819d cycle zero 
station that occurs 3d prior to the Long Count's epoch beginning, however, 
it is not an E-cycle zero station. A 1-Kaban 0-Pohp CR station occurs 365d 
prior to the CR zero station of 2-Ik' 0-Pohp. The smallest Venus calibration 
span of (1.5.5.0) on page F24 of the Dresden Codex marks an 819d zero cycle. 
The nearest E-cycle zero station occurs at (11.18.17.8.17) or [1719897] in 
base 10.

It is more likely the three stations refer to the three regions over the 
course of the 13-baktun cycle which are delimited with E-cycle zero stations 
(which are also 819d zero stations). The Great Cycle starts at a CR index of 
7283 (Tikal New Year origin) and position 159 within the tzolkin calendar 
(4-Ahaw basis 1-Imix scale origin). Of great interest is that 640 such 
819-day stations after the 13-baktun-cycle start (assuming -3 day reference 
point) gives the date (3.12.15.17.17) 1-Kaban-0-Pohp G6 as the coincidence 
between 819-day and CR zero stations. An alternative CR zero station at 
1-Kaban 0-Pohp, 365d prior to 2-Ik' 0-Pohp, appears to be the primary clue 
in resolving the 819d mystery.

Combining the Maya Super Number (MSN) of (9.9.16.0.0) or 1,366,560 days with 
the E-cycle yields the Larger Calendar Round (LCR) period of 18 traditional 
calendar rounds (i.e. 936 haab years) such that:

2 * (MSN - E) = LCR, where LCR = 584*585 Venus cycles. Note further that 
13*9 = 117 and 117*5 = 585 which is a calculational period for the Venus 
cycle, just as a 4*91 = 364d year is a calculational period for the vulgar 
year of 365d, and the 819d cycle serves for both of these calculational 
periods. Also 7*117 = 819d. A 16,380 k'in period is primarily of interest as 
a sub-cycle of the E-cycle as mentioned earlier.

4 * LCR = MSN. The 72 calendar round period or (9.9.16.0.0) is of great 
significance in Mayan calendrics, and the 819d cycle would be intertwined 
with this significant Venus reference marker event and period.

It is worth noting here that the Tikal Calendar Round zero station is 
aligned to a 1-Kaban 0-Pohp ending 263d prior to the end of the 13-baktun 
cycle. A 260d offset combined with the 3d offset of the 819d cycle at the 
start of the great 5200 tun cycle. This significant date of 12.19.19.4.17 
(1871737), 1-Kaban 0-Pohp is not however an E_cycle zero station or an 819d 
zero cycle. The Tikal calendar round adopted a 1-Kaban 0-Pohp CR new-year 
instead of the traditional 2-Ik 0-Pohp CR new-year, and one reason for this 
is possibly that the E_cycle's zero station occurs at 1-Kaban 0-Pohp. There 
is no direct evidence for this in the extant record however.

There is much more to this mystery of the 819d cycle, in particular a strong 
lunar and eclipse cycle element. Such investigations may yield clues as to 
why the Maya adopted certain numerical practices.

Is this cycle a calendar - NO, not in the strictest sense. But it is a 
foundational calendric element as demonstrated above. I do not believe 
1-Ahaw 5-Kumk'u forms the base for the E-cycle or the 819d cycle, but merely 
a point of reference 3d prior to the great cycle that also happens to be an 
819d cycle zero station. The Long Count dates of (11.18.17.8.17) 1-Kaban 
0-Pohp G6 and (3.12.15.17.17) 1-Kaban-0-Pohp G6 mark the E-cycle zero 
stations, splitting the great cycle into three unequal regions.

Thompson I suspect referred to the date three days prior to the great 
cycle's start at 1-Ahaw 5-Kumk'u as a base date, because that is indeed an 
819d cycle zero-station, and one closest to the start of the great cycle. In 
terms of the 819d cycle alone, and its proximity to the great cycle's start, 
that is a good choice for an 819d cycle zero-station base-date. A grander 
calendric perspective however, goes beyond this 819d cycle itself, to 
encapsulate it into a larger calendric structure. Why stop at 16,380 days? I 
suspect the Mayans went far beyond this in their calendric musings.

I do not know what to make of a date (12.19.19.17.17) three days prior to 
the start of the current great cycle, which is deemed to be a station 3 
event. Possibly station 0 is only 819*3 days prior, given the Maya often 
toyed with zero based references. If a 63 tzolkin cycle was contemplated in 
reference to the 819d cycle, then most assuredly an E-cycle must also have 
been contemplated in regards to a companion synchronization with the 
calendar round period. So again why stop at 16,380 k'in. The Maya provide 
ample evidence for a preference for very large numbers.

Cheers Cliff

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Sid Hollander" <sid.hollander at gmail.com>
To: "AZATLAN" <aztlan at lists.famsi.org>
Sent: Sunday, June 22, 2008 7:05 AM
Subject: [Aztlan] 819day Count

> Please help me out Mr.Georges, I am missing something here.  You say in 
> your
> last post,
>
> "I know that Eric Thompson has taken 1 Kaban 5 Kumk'u as the base date for
> this "counting". That was 12.19.19.17.17, Red East, 3days before 4 Ahaw 8
> Kumk'u, 13.0.0.0.0, but that was Station 3. I think it is a very logical
> conclusion, that if it was Station 3, than there must have been 3 Stations
> before."
>
>
> I see the part where Thompson says (and I do know that all that he said is
> not so) said "1 Kaban 5 Kumk'u" was the base date. Then there is the part
> "but that was Station 3."  Obviously Thompson was not aware of that 'fact'
> or he would never have said that 1 Kaban 5 Kumk'u was the base date. So my
> confusion is where did the "but that was Station 3" come from? The words 
> you
> use to introduce the concept come with such finality (Do you have a
> reference for it?) it struck me strangely that the next words you write 
> draw
> a logical conclusion from it ".."if it was true...".
> I say that if it was the fifth station then the 4 or 5 before it 
> (depending
> on if you use a start of 1 or 0) would NOT be 1 Ahau.
>
> I also have a problem with your statement "that if it was Station 3, than
> there must have been 3 Stations before." Doesn't that force the reader 
> into
> using a base of zero in counting stations? I wasn't aware that the Maya
> counted or numbered 819 Stations based upon elapsed stations. Do you have 
> a
> reference for this?
>
> Your statement:
>
> "The main structure however was based upon a cycle going from 1 Ahaw to 1
> Ahaw, or 16380 k'in."
>
> reads so factual.
>
> If you stated it as:
>
> If 1 Kaban 5 Kumk'u
>
> Any Tzolkin portion of any 819 day station will repeat every 20 stations
> i.e. 20 x 819 = 16,380
>
> would be sufficient but if you wanted to add starting points to it I think
> you need to say something like:
>
> If 12.19.19.17.17 1 Kaban 5 Kumk'u
>
> 1.  was not the base date as stated by Thompson  and
> 2.  was the 3 rd station as stated by ____________  and
> 3.  we assume 819 stations are numbered from 0
>
> then
>
> The main structure however was based upon a cycle going from 1 Ahaw to 1
> Ahaw, or 16380 k'in.
>
> If that was the case I'd still have a problem with the words "main
> structure" because it sounds so structured.  After all, it's a cycle just
> like the days of the week!
>
> -- 
> Sid Hollander
> Merida, Yucatan
> _______________________________________________
> Aztlan mailing list
> http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/aztlan
> Click here to post a message Aztlan at lists.famsi.org
> Click to view Calendar of Events 
> http://research.famsi.org/events/events.php
>
>
> 