[Aztlan] Azatlan: Mayan chronology not cyclical

[Sid Hollander]

 "Mayan chronology not cyclical" is a very strong statement and drew my
immediate attention.  I would argue that "Mayan chronology is more cyclical
than not" I do not know enough about " world ages" to argue that point so I
will not. Maya Katun names are cyclic.  Just as Monday through Sunday is
cyclic. Nothing strange in that because the nature of the beast. Jan 1
2009fell on a Thursday, and so will Jan 1 of 2037.
Of course they are not the same Thursday, just like the 60's of Sputnik were
not the same as the 60's of Lincoln.  And if you were born on Xday then your
28th birthday will be celebrated on Xday! That is the nature of cycles.


"More generally, the stereotyping of Mesoamerica as an exotic other, having
cyclical calendars and cyclical sense of time, different from our own linear
sense of time, is enormously exaggerated or even in large part outright
false."



I think that we must separate the mechanics of the calendar from any
supposed reason or religion/philosophy connected to it. Certainly, without
exaggeration  there are more examples of cycles in the Maya reckoning of
time than straight linear aspects. By saying "There are some cyclical
components, such as the "count of K'atuns" " tends to minimize the cyclic
nature of their by hinting that cycles are mentioned infrequently.  This
does not mean that the cycles are not present (as they are in most ever
calendar system made by man. But to say "count of K'atuns" are supposedly
cyclic because there are not enough or are limited is incorrect at best.  It
is limited by the fact that the Tzolkin is limited! Ahau Must show up on ANY
ending date (Uinal, Tun, katun or Batun) i.e. where Kins position is zero.
So the Ahau portion is not a mystery.  Upon sucessive Katuns (the addition
of 7200 days) the coefficient will increase by 11.  This is because when
7200 is divided by 13 the remainde is 11.  There fore 11 will be added to
the prior Katun Count.  And since adding 11 to a cycle of 13 is the same as
subtracting 2, we obtain the count of Katuns.  No mystery, just a cyccle.  A
cycle that must happen given the nature of their calendar.  Kind of like
adding 11 hours to your 12 hour watch—go back 1 hour instead.




"It is only the leap day which makes our calendric cycles less useful,"  I
fail to see where a leap day makes our calendar less useful.  It appears to
me that the leap day makes it more accurate.  I believe the intent of same
was in measuring where we are relative to the sun. There are many ways to do
this. The Russians have two leap days every 9 years which serves them better
(i.e more accurate than oursi.e. their adjustment will come well after ours
in 5000 years.)

 "Long Counts (Mayan continuous for days, ours continuous for years) are the
greater framework,
and these are in no way cyclical. "



I am not convinced one way or the other.  But to say "these are in no way
cyclical" is a bit 'strong' for me unless you can explain
"12.19.19.17.17"  Some
would say this date is approaching in our 2012.  Yet the May recorded this
as the first 819 day station, i.e 3 days before 13.0.0.0.0  4-Ahau 8-Cumku.
If you could explain the existence of these two dates without the LC being
cyclical I would be very much interested.




Even the Central Mexican 52-year cycle is less cyclical than one might
suppose.   The Central Mexican year counts were of course linear, and
graphically represented in linear fashion, with the sequence of year names
following after each other.

 This is the same argument as you tried to use with Katuns. It didn't work
then and will not here for the same reason. You refer to it as "the Central
Mexican 52-year cycle"  and then say it is not. Just because you lay out are
months in a vertical column this does not negate the fact that are months
are cyclic.



Nowhere have I attributed cyclic thinking to the Maya.   But I do not say "They
knew perfectly
well that time is linear.   Their histories make this completely clear."  In
not a single place have you given an example where "they knew time was
linear" nor have you cite a "histories" that demonstrates this.  Gears work
well in explaining/demonstrating the Maya calendar system and do not work
well in explaining ours.  The gears are a method to explain.  It is up to us
to tell the folks that the gears were not found under some pyramid or in the
Milky Way.

 I don't know the answer to the following but since you say "Careful
research shows that there is no 13-Baktun cycle at all,"   perhaps you will
tell me the Long Count date:



1 day before 13.0.0.0.0    4-Ahau  8-Cumku __________________  and

1 day After 13.0.0.0.0    4-Ahau 3-Kankin ____________________.




The Maya also did not practice subtraction.

 I am sorry but I can not imagine anyone saying this.  I can see the cartoon
now.  Typical Maya class. "Scribe, if today is 8 Chicchan, what was the
Tzolkin date 5 days ago" Scribe replies, That question is beyond the scope
of this class.


-- 
Sid Hollander
Merida, Yucatan