tative specimen to determine what light it may throw on these questions.
The specimen shown in pl. xxiv is No. 8713 of the Bandelier collection in the American Museum of Natural History in New York City, and is one of a number of similar specimens from Huando, on the coast north of Lima. This village was of the Chancay tribe, which was subdued by the Incas some time before the Conquest, and from which tribute was levied. The characteristics of this and the other specimens from this vicinity are: (1) the practice of using the long knot for units only and groups of single knots for the higher orders; (2) the use of the loop on the first (or last) cord of a group; and (3) the pendent cords are grouped by passing a top cord through the top loops of the group as in fig. 45. The top cord sums the numbers on the pendent cords through which it is looped, thus giving an accurate key to the numerical character of the knots. Some difficulty was experienced in reading the long knots, owing to the condition of the cord. In the accompanying table is given the first reading, followed by the probable reading in parentheses. Pl. xxiv is from a photograph of the quipu; pl. xxiii is a diagram of the arrangement of the knots, and of their numerical significances.
The following hypothesis may be made in regard to this quipu. It is possibly a record for six periods or years of four kinds of objects.
Conclusions
1. These knots were used purely for numerical purposes.
2. Distances from the main cord were used roughly to locate the orders, which were on a decimal scale.
3. The quipu was not used for counting or calculating but for record keeping. The mode of tying the knots was not adapted to counting, and there was no need of its use for such a purpose, as the Quichua language contained a complete and adequate system of numeration.
4. Other specimens examined contain the same types of knots, there being but ten variations in all, two forms for the single knot and eight long knots. These eight differ from each other and from the single knot only in the number of turns taken in tying. There
