| Cakal catac catul, | two score and two, 42. |
| Cakal catac oxtul, | two score and three, 43. |
3. We may count upon the next score above, as:
| Hun tu yoxkal, | one on the third score, 41. |
| Ca tu yoxkal, | two on the third score, 42. |
| Ox tu yoxkal, | three on the third score, 43. |
The last mentioned system is that advanced by Father Beltran, and is the only one formally mentioned by him. It has recently been carefully analyzed by Prof. Leon de Rosny, who has shown that it is a consistent vigesimal method.[40-1]
It might be asked, and the question is pertinent, and is left unanswered by Prof. Leon de Rosny, why hun tu kal means “one to the score,” and hun tu can kal is translated, “one on the fourth score.” This important shade of meaning may be given, I think, by the possessive u which originally belonged in the phrase, but suffered elision. Properly it should be,
Hun tu u can kal.
This seems apparent from other numbers where it has not suffered elision, but merely incorporation, as:—
| Hun tu yox kal | = | hun tu u ox kal, 41. |
| Hu tu yokal | = | hun tu u ho kal, 81. |
This system of numeration, advanced by Beltran, appears to have been adopted by all of the later writers, who may have learned the Maya largely from his Grammar. Thus, in the translation of the Gospel of St. John, published by the Baptist Bible Translation Society, chap. II, v. 20; Xupan uactuyoxkal hab utial u mental letile kulnaa, “forty and six years was this temple in building;”[41-1] and in that of the Gospel of St. Luke, said to have been the work of Father Joaquin Ruz, the same system is followed.[41-2]
Nevertheless, Beltran’s method has been severely criticised by Don Juan Pio Perez, who ranks among the ablest Yucatecan linguists of this century. He has pronounced it artificial, not in accordance with either the past or present use of the natives themselves, and built up out of an effort to assimilate the Maya to the Latin numeral system.