[Aztlan] The "13" is anomalous in Maya

[ECOLING at aol.com]

There must be some simple misunderstanding.
I was not arguing that Maya are different from us.
Rather something quite different:
It is one Maya practice which sticks out as anomalous 
*within the Maya pattern* which I am signaling.   
What to make of it is a different question,
but I am most definitely *not* trying to hold them to any pattern of ours.

Sid writes:

<<The fact that the Maya did
what they did in the Winals position speaks to the fact that they did not
follow OUR rules so we must give them the latitude of being 'different' in
other positions as well.>>

This is just the reverse of the case.
In the respect that I was discussing,
the Maya did in the K'in and Winals and Tun and K'atun positions,
all of them, just the same as what we do.   And more importantly,
all of those positions work the same as the other ones of those positions.
The Maya system is consistent within itself.

What is *anomalous* is the "13" in Baktuns position
*if* as is being suggested there were 13 Baktuns in a Pictun.
That is one of the reasons why there has been so much discussion
of this problem of 13 Baktuns (vs. 20 Baktuns).
The fact is that the Maya treated it differently from their other positions
both in sometimes carrying to the Pictuns position after 12,
sometimes after 19, and also in having an overt "13" which should
have led to a carry under the rules they followed elsewhere,
*if* the larger unit were a number of days equivalent to 13 Baktuns.
Why not in this single unique context?

Here it is laid out very simply.

In our system:
In "ones" position digits 0 ... 9 (no "10", there is no such digit)
In "tens" position digits 0...9 (no "10", there is no such digit)
and so on uniformly.

In the Maya system:
In K'ins position digits 0 ... 19 (no "20", there is no such digit,
      although there are very rare uses in contexts other than the long count 
(?)
      of "seating" (of the *next* Winal, so effectively a "0" not a "20" 
there,
      and of "edge", more like an "end" perhaps but functionally close to 
"20"?)
In the Winals position digits 0...17 (no "18", no such digit is normally used 
here)
In the Tuuns position digits 0...19 (no "20", there is no such digit)
In the K'atuns position digits 0...19 (no "20", there is no such digit)
In the Baktuns position there are two systems:
In system (a) (like the other positions)
      digits 0...19 (no "20", there is no such digit, only a 1 Pictun after 
carry)
In system (b) (this is the anomaly, what makes it unlike other *Maya* 
practice)
     digits 0...12 (BUT there is a "13" which some take to mean the same 
thing
     as a carry to 1 Pictun, but which "13" also is well known to have other 
uses
     which cannot be verified (very easily or at all?) as equalling a carry 
of "1"
     to the next higher unit. 

So the generalization (purely Maya) is that the digit which would correspond
to the carry of a "1" to the next higher position does not occur.
With the single exception of this "13" we are talking about.

That is why it is reasonable for me to *raise the question* whether this
"13" is counting in the same sense that we understand the Maya to do 
elsewhere.
And the long series of 13's (Coba, Yaxchilan) only reinforce the concern
that there may be something going on more different than we yet understand.

Asking a question about things taken for granted is often the first step
towards a new understanding.   I hope to have contributed to that here.

Best wishes,
Lloyd

Lloyd Anderson
Ecological Linguistics
PO Box 15156
Washington DC 20003
ecoling at aol.com
202-547-7683



**************
Gas prices getting you down? Search AOL Autos for 
fuel-efficient used cars.
      (http://autos.aol.com/used?ncid=aolaut00050000000007)