Mayan Nomenclature

This work delves into the complex ways the ancient Maya counted time, contrasting their familiar vigesimal (base‑20) schemes with the distinct calendar system that mixes multiples of twenty and eighteen. By tracing how scholars such as Brinton, Seler, and Thomas have interpreted the Maya’s units—uinal, tun, katun, and beyond—the author reveals why the “twentieth‑day” and “three‑hundred‑sixty‑day” periods have been sources of lively debate.

Drawing on early Spanish accounts, especially Bishop Landa, and on the often‑overlooked Books of Chilam Balam, the study re‑examines the primary evidence that underlies modern understandings. It argues that many of the conflicting terminologies stem from gaps in the surviving records rather than from the Maya themselves, and it proposes a clearer framework for naming the calendar’s cycles. Listeners will gain a grounded appreciation of how ancient time‑keeping meets modern scholarship, setting the stage for further exploration of Maya chronology.