We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings. Learn more about our Privacy Notice... [opens in a new tab]

Astronomical numbers contained in the extension of Mayan monuments associated with the 1,872,000-day Cycle

19 December 2024, Version 1
This content is an early or alternative research output and has not been peer-reviewed by Cambridge University Press at the time of posting.

Abstract

At the beginning of the 20th century, the American archaeologist Sylvanus Morley discovered in different Mayan stelae what he recognized as the Mayan Cycle of 1,872,000 days. He noted that it was made with units of the Long Count by multiplying a Baktun of 144,000 days by 13, or by the product of a ritual year of 260 days by a Katun of 7,200 days. He did not realize that the cycle contains all the Mesoamerican calendars, each one in product with integers. Of the cycle, a “solar year” of 365,625 days stands out, since 1,872=365.625x5,120 as well as the synodic average periods of Mars, of 780 days, Venus, 585 days, Mercury, 117 days, Moon, 384 days, among others, such as the of Jupiter of 400 days. This numerical structure is also obtained from the dimensions of length, area and volume of the Mesoamerican temples, since its extension determines a numerical system, of a calendrical nature, used by these cultures. The volumetric magnitude constituted by the three longitudes defines a “box-parallelepiped”, whose “calendrical” measure establishes a cosmological representation of the planetary movement. We will demonstrate the latter with the metrological analysis of three iconic temples of the Mesoamerican region. Empirical evidence determines results of two symbolic languages that represent calendrical magnitudes arranged in days.

Keywords

Calendar
Synodic cycle
Correlation
Geographic cubit
Mayan Cycle

Comments

Comments are not moderated before they are posted, but they can be removed by the site moderators if they are found to be in contravention of our Commenting and Discussion Policy [opens in a new tab] - please read this policy before you post. Comments should be used for scholarly discussion of the content in question. You can find more information about how to use the commenting feature here [opens in a new tab] .
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy [opens in a new tab] and Terms of Service [opens in a new tab] apply.
Comment number 1, Diana del Carmen Torres-Corrales: Jan 09, 2025, 20:07

The article shows clarity and methodological consistency in the interpretation of the calendarical measurement systems of both the Mesoamerican calendars and the measurement of Mayan monuments; the level of detail presented in the calculations and how the author recalls them throughout the document to explain his analysis is enough to corroborate these calculations. Also, the results of the two symbolic languages that represent the calendar figures provide valuable information for a broader understanding of the Mayan cosmovision, which can be used for modern construction and architectural works with the support of information and communication technologies.