This still doesn't tell us much.

>...burnt hundreds if not thousands of Mayan codices, in a tragedy for the study of history that's comparable to the fire at the libary of Alexanderia.

Some overstatement here? Was this Mayan language capable of informing on their way of life? Could it reference law, history, philosophy, important historical figures, as historical western languages could? Or did the destruction you speak of eradicate our ability to answer that Q?

>A source discussing a second way of Mayan communication:

>The Incas did not have a written language. Nonetheless, they adopted a unique system of recording information from their predecessors. This ancient “operating system,” called quipus, dates back to 2600 BCE. “They were like early computers, early counting machines,” says author and four-time Emmy-award winning documentary filmmaker Kim MacQuarrie...

>A quipu, also spelled khipu, qipu or kipu, is an intricate system of knotted strings of various colors that store and convey information. Quipu literally translates to “knot” in Quechua. Many ancient Andean cultures used this knot system, including the Inca. Sometimes referred to as “talking knots,” they served as a writing system. This was crucial since there was no formal written language. Though just strings and knots, the arrangement was extremely precise and sophisticated, communicating everything from accounting to genealogy. Made from cotton or camelid fibers, quipus were portable making it easy to transfer information over distances and store over time.

Weren't quipu primarily used for accounting by taxation purposes by officials, and perhaps census information, and similarly could not convey information on law, history, customs....? Or is that wrong also?