That the upper part of plate [LXVI], 25 and 26, and of other similar figures in the codices which might be shown, do make a close approach in form to the ben symbol, must be admitted. But there is one break in the chain which needs to be closed before the evidence is entirely satisfactory. Does the upper part of these house symbols (25-26) indicate roof mats or thatching? An examination of the house figures shows these supposed mat figures to be something standing on the top of the roof—something rising, as it were, perpendicularly along and above the comb or crest. Now, precisely such battlements or elevated crests appear to have been common on the roofs of the temples or structures which have been preserved to modern times. We see them in the figures given by Charnay, Stevens, and other explorers; and what is worthy of special notice in this connection is, that they sometimes consist of openwork or trellis-like figures. Therefore, if we connect the upper part of the house symbols with the ben glyph, it is still by no means certain that it is derived from, or bears any relation to, the mat character. We notice further that in the figures of houses this supposed mat figure is not used to indicate the thatching, but is clearly distinguished from it. Again, if the upper characters of [LXVI], 25, 26, are intended to signify the thatching, roof matting, or roof, and are simple ideograms drawn from the thing represented, then the lower characters in these symbols might well be supposed to represent the wall or framework of the house. But the widely different relations in which we find this lower character forbid this conclusion. That the wall may be indicated is true, but if so it must be ikonomatically or by the phonetic value of the symbol. I have therefore found it very difficult to reach any entirely satisfactory conclusion in regard to these house symbols. That the lower character is phonetic in the true or rebus sense can, I think, be shown, but, notwithstanding the objections I have presented, the most satisfactory interpretation of the upper part is that it represents the roof, as we see in the upper figure of [LXVI], 25, the crosshatching and the double ben lines. Hence it would seem satisfactory to consider it merely an ideogram or picture but for the prefix, which can not be readily accounted for on the idea of a pictorial representation.
As we have found that the lower character of plate [LXVI], 26, has the phonetic value of ch usually combined with o or u (see remarks above on [LXV], 44), we may find in this glyph otoch, “house,” though the full signification of the entire compound symbol appears to embrace more than this. Possibly the upper part is a determinative. The lower part, however, of [LXVI], 25 and 27, is found, as before remarked, where it can have no reference to a building. As it has the two heavy lines indicative of the p sound (see explanation of [LXIV], 11), and also of the guttural, it is probable that the signification, where a structure is referred to, is pak (pakal), “a building, wall, fortification.” But when it is found in an entirely different relation, as in Tro. 17b, where it is over an individual tying a deer, it must have an entirely different signification. It is possible that it may be consistently rendered by pacoc (paccah), “to cord, fasten, bind” (Henderson), or some derivative thereof. We find it again on Tro. 19*d and 20*d, and Dres. 18c, 19c, and 20c, where females are represented as bearing burdens on their backs. Now, cuch signifies “to bear, to carry,” and also “a load, a burden,” and cuch-pach, “a carrier, a porter” (literally “to carry on the back,” pach denoting “back”).
In this instance also the phonetic value assigned it holds good. On Tro. 17b the same glyph stands above an individual who is in the act of striking a snake which is biting his foot. In this case it has a suffix like that to [LXVI], 3, which, as we have stated, probably represents the sound ah, ha, or hal, and indicates that the word is a verb. There are several words containing the phonetic value assigned the character, which are applicable, as pokchetah, which Perez interprets “pisar, poner el pie sobre algo;” puchah, “despachurran, machucar;” pachah, “to scatter, break” (H.); pech, “to crush” (H.); pacez (paczah), “to squeeze, press, crush” (H.).
It seems, therefore, quite probable that the lower part of these compound symbols is phonetic.
If Dr Seler is correct in his supposition that the symbol is derived from the plaited mat, then it is most likely simply ideographic or a mere conventional pictograph. Possibly this is the correct conclusion, as I can find no evidence tending to show that it is phonetic. If we could suppose the form was intended to represent a “road” or “pathway”—be, beil, and bel in Maya, and beel in Zotzil—we might assume it to be phonetic.
The combinations shown in plate [LXVI], 28, 29, 30, and 55, in which the symbol of this day appears, have as yet received no satisfactory explanation. Those shown in [LXVI], 28, and 55, are of very frequent occurrence and probably indicate some common ceremony, order, or direction in the religious ceremonies. I have a strong suspicion that the first indicates exorcism or driving away the evil spirits, but I find no appropriate Maya word unless it be pekokalil, given by Henderson. This, however, does not agree with the interpretation Kinichkakmo, given by Seler to [LXVI], 29, above referred to. Seler gives to [LXVI], 30, the apparently strained interpretation, “he who is conquered in war and brought home prisoner.” I have no interpretation to offer.[248-1]
Maya, ix or hix; Tzental, hix; Quiche-Cakchiquel, balam, yiz, or hix; Zapotec, eche; Nahuatl, ocelotl.
The symbol of this day is found in quite a number of different forms, some of which are wide variations from the prevailing type.
Landa’s figure is shown in plate [LXVI], 31. The usual forms found in the Tro. Codex are [LXVI], 32 to 37; 36 is somewhat rare. That shown at 38 is found only on plate 30*c, and that showing the animal head (39) on plate 12c. No essential variations from these are found in either the Codex Peresianus or Cortesianus. Those shown in [LXVI], 40-42, are from the Dresden Codex.