There are compelling historiographical arguments that can be brought forward in favor of both dates. Yuknoom Ch'een is known to have waged war against Dos Pilas in 650 and Tikal in 657, so an attack on Palenque in this period seems well within the reach of this powerful and expansive Snake monarch. Placing this event in 654 might also cause us to revisit Bonampak Lintel 4, the Calendar Round of which is not anchored in the Long Count. Instead of happening during the reign of Lady Yohl Ik'nal, the downing of the flint-shield of He of Lakam Ha' might plausibly have taken place one Calendar Round cycle later, in 655 (see note 3 below).

On the other hand, the Hieroglyphic Stairway inscription refers to an Itzamnaaj B'ahlam of Yaxchilan, and whereas Bird Jaguar is known to have occupied the throne of that kingdom in 654, evidence from a carved panel at Bonampak suggests that there may have been a ruler of Yaxchilan named Itzamnaaj B'ahlam in 599 (as Peter Mathews, Stanley Guenter and Armando Anaya will be discussing in a forthcoming paper).

David Stuart elucidated yet another of the inscription's mysteries when he pointed out that Nuun Ujol Chaak, also named in the text, was not the king of Tikal paying a royal visit to Palenque as had been theorized by Linda Schele and Peter Mathews (1998), but rather the king of Santa Elena, a site that played a pivotal role in the contest between Palenque and Snake for control of the Tabasco region. It is possible that a previous king of Santa Elena had joined with Snake in the attack on Palenque and that Pakal now achieved his revenge by capturing Nuun Ujol Chaak. (There is a Nuun Hix Lakam Chaak named in the inscription without an emblem glyph; Stanley Guenter [personal communication 2002] points out that Hix and Chaak appear in a name on Santa Elena Monument 1, suggesting that a ruler of that site might well have carried a name like Nuun Hix Lakam Chaak.)

This would go a long way toward explaining the rhetoric by which a humiliating defeat at the hands of Snake seems to be contrasted with military success against some other polity or polities. But, ultimately, arguments from rhetoric or historiography are less satisfactory than letting the stone speak for itself. Unfortunately there is no photograph to aid in in pinning down the month sign as Yax or Sip. And in the photograph above, the day sign has been read as Ak'bal in support of the 654 date or Lamat in support of 599.

The epigraphical problem is that the glyph seems to show the upper point of the Lamat "star" with two characteristic circles on either side, but otherwise it has the basic appearance of Ak'bal. And whereas Ak'bal does sometimes have circular elements in its upper right and left halves, there is no attested instance of Lamat with a solid-looking lower half. Thus the most compelling solution is a "starry" version of Ak'bal (Simon Martin, personal communication, 2003). That this solution is supported in its implications by both rhetoric and historiography would seem to redound greatly to the benefit of the reputation of Palenque's queen, Lady Yohl Ik'nal.

Note 1: In recapitulating the evidence in favor of the "starry" Ak'bal solution, Simon Martin (personal communication 2003) points to an Ak'bal glyph from the "K'awiil Mo' Panel" in the Tonina site museum. Martin reviews the components of the House C conundrum at issue:

As regards the Distance Number counting from Pakal's accession, the 3 Winal and the 3 K'in are beyond debate. The Haab head looks like 1; certainly the infixed "sky" necessary for 12 is not visible either in the photograph or the cast in the British Museum (which Martin has personally examined). The K'atun is 1 or 2 but hard to make as 3 given the uneven sizes. The photo makes the top one look like a filler, but no surface detail was apparent when Martin examined the cast.

With regard to the Calendar Round, Ak'bal should be favored despite the starriness. Not only is the Tonina sign fairly similar, but the solid-looking lower half has no precedent in Lamat. For the month (which can only be examined in the British Museum cast), Martin felt he saw a dimple at one end of the superfix, consistent with Sip (an important factor for him at the time), but it could be a chance piece of erosion. There is insufficient internal detail to distinguish the crossed bars of "Aat" (diagnostic of the month Sip) from the Kawak of "Sihom" (diagnostic of Yax).

As for the scribal rhetoric, Martin feels that we must add the syntactical likelihood of a connection to an earlier, stated date in the text — not some loose unresolved trip into the past and future. Then there is the likelihood that the event should be of direct relevance to Pakal and the campaign of 659. On a point score, Martin concludes, 654 should win out.

He adds that, as the name of a reigning Snake monarch, Sky Witness does not fit any better in 599 than in 654, as David Stuart pointed out in his email to epigraphers (March 2003).

Note 2: Also adverted to in David Stuart's email was the suspicion that the credit for first working out the 9.11.1.16.3, 6 Akbal 1 Yax date actually goes to J. Eric S. Thompson. In his 1954 Memoranda on Some Dates at Palenque, Chiapas, Thompson wrote: