Let the Mayas Speak In their old Glyphs

THE MET (Metropolitan Museum of
Art), NEW YORK –
LIVES OF THE GODS, DIVINITY IN MAYA
ART –
NOVEMBER 22, 2022
Small things are bothering the audience, the public when a prestigious museum publishes a
book going along with an exhibition in the museum and there is no mention in standard places of the
© date of the book, nor on the title- or credit-pages the reference to the exhibition and its dates. I
had to go to Amazon’s sites to find a date which is the date of publication Amazon declared which
might only be the date when they set the book in their catalogue.
The second remark that has to be made is about the systematic non-presentation of the
numerous glyphic inscriptions. The authors of the articles in the book reproduced, but totally upside
down the mistake Sir Eric Thompson – a (it should be “the” as long as he lived) leading English
Mesoamerican archaeologist, ethnohistorian, and epigrapher
(http://www.supportingevidences.net/john-eric-sidney-thompson/) – did all his life, thus blocking
research on Maya glyphic syllabic writing system. Thompson considered these glyphs as nothing
but artistic compositions, not as a writing system. Luckily, a Soviet researcher from Leningrad – at
the time – Yuri Valentinovich Knorozov was able to work on the Dresden (Deutsche Demokratische
Republik at the time) Codex and to propose as soon as the early 1950s a syllabic reading of Maya
glyphs, but his position could only expand in the USA and the world after Thompson died in 1975.
Thompson was wrong, completely wrong as for these glyphs not being a writing system. But his T-
numbers to identify, list, and classify the various glyphs Thompson collected are still used as a
standard tool to analyze the composite glyphs, and these T-numbers were and still are a very useful
tool vastly used by Mayanists, and first of all, the FAMSI organization, the Foundation for the
Advancement of Mesoamerican Studies, Inc., with an open access dictionary, and other books by
John Montgomery and Michael D. Coe, and many others. Why didn’t the MET book use these T-
numbers to identify the glyphs and their components and architecture? Why didn’t the book give for
the simple “transcriptions” of the glyphs and the various sentences or texts they provide, the glyphic
originals in clear redrawing of course? They never did in this book, and we are lost in front of the
pictures that are not that easy to decipher. The inscriptions have often been degraded by time, at
times even erased or quasi-erased. What’s more, it takes a very good specialist to identify the glyphs
because every scribe or artist who produced them had their personal style, and there are many
stylistic variations a non-specialist will not be able to deal with.
In the past, the colonial Spanish Conquistadors banned the use of this writing system and
burned all the hundred or maybe thousand books written with these glyphs, except exactly four that
were saved by pure accident. This present book does exactly the same. It only proposes a
transliteration in the Latin alphabet of the inscriptions when it does quote them. There is no
systematic transliteration. It is always done in one particular version of the Maya language that is not
the same as the one used by FAMSI with their standard use of two possible spellings corresponding
to two major Maya dialects or languages. None of that in this book. We are then lost and have to
find out the corresponding spelling used by FAMSI. We do know the spelling correspondences
between J and H, C and CH, and many others. So, we can manage. Thus, we can find the glyphs
themselves and compare them with the photos in the book. It blocks of course when the dialect of
Maya or the Maya language used in the present book is different enough to use original words that
are not listed in FAMSI tools based on T-numbers. The book only uses the transliteration of the

language and follows the principle of the Conquistadors. Thus, the negative colonial consequences
or results on Meso-American cultures and languages are continued in our genocide-conscious world.
They are glyphically eradicated or culturicided. This is fairly surprising from the Metropolitan Museum
of Art, the MET for all art lovers.
At times, in the various authors’ descriptions of the glyphs or representations of the Gods, the
authors identify the various embedded elements in the pictures, but only as some kind of props that
have no name and that only have a semiotic value, not even a linguistic nor semantic value. The
book completely misses the identification of the language spoken by the Gods and by their faithful,
the language used every day in the people’s daily life, and the ritualistic language used for various
rites and ritualized activities like blood self-sacrifice, not to speak of human sacrifice. Dennis Tedlock
translated into English the plays and the various poems and texts that have survived because some
Maya people actually transcribed the Maya versions they remembered into the Spanish alphabet. A
lot was lost with the loss of the glyphs, but a lot was saved too, even if it is far from all. Strangely
enough, the book alludes to the Popol Vuh (Popol Wuj, in this book’s dialect) but not to the translation
by Dennis Tedlock which is a lot more faithful to the Maya traditions of poetry, storytelling, and culture.
The book would have been well inspired if they had based their allusions to the Popol Vuh, and
various practices in Maya society, particularly human sacrifice, by referring to Tedlock’s Book 2000
Years of Mayan Literature, published by the University of California Press. It contains a play on the
“sacrifice of a war prisoner,” and it specifies all the stages it has to go through before ever starting,
all the wishes the sacrificer has to satisfy coming from the future sacrificee. The book actually lacks
a lot on such detailed phenomena. We have plenty of pictures of tied-up prisoners waiting for their
being sacrificed but no expansive specific elements are given. The birth and rebirth of the Maize
God is at least sketchy and sticks to some pictorial rendering on plates, cups, or walls but not what
has been codified in plain Spanish or plain English, or even in the simple Popol Vuh translated and
edited by Dennis Tedlock again. We have been speaking of shortcomings so far. But there are also
some plain mistakes.
I was expecting some reflection on the Maya language within the phylogeny of language, as the
human capability to communicate orally, and languages, as the various idioms developed for and
within this oral communication. It is not a first-articulation language of the root-family that was the
first to leave Black Africa to expand in Northern Africa. The family of root-languages are, in fact, the
consonantal languages that are only writing consonants, at times even without the vocalic diacritic
elements, but vowels cannot be words because a root contains three consonants, most of the time,
and only one vowel exists per se, “Alep” or “alef” which is /a/ when at the initial of a word like Adam
(Genesis), from Adamah (the “earth” in Hebrew, Alef DMH, ‫)אדמה‬. These languages are the Semitic
languages. In Maya all vowels, and there are at the very least five, can be autonomous words, or
can be morphological elements entering in the composition of a composite glyph. The main
characteristic is that this writing system is based on a syllabary and not so much on an alphabet.
The basic phonological elements are syllables (vowel and consonant in any order, VC or CV). In the
same way, it is not a second-articulation language, an isolating language of the Sino-Tibetan or
Tibeto-Burman families in which the words are invariable and each word corresponds to a character
that cannot change (Note some of these languages have developed syllabary or alphabetical
transliteration with various alphabets borrowed from other languages of the third-articulation family
mostly recently due to colonial or neighborly contact with other languages).
To answer the question, you have to wonder where this language and the people speaking it
come from and since they had to come from Asia, did they come via the Siberian northern route, or
via the Southeast Asian and South Pacific route? In the first case in Siberia, there are two vast
families of languages in pre-Ice-Age time: agglutinative hence Turkic, and isolating hence of the
Sino-Tibetan family.
In the South-Pacific route hypothesis, the questions are first, when did it occur, before or after
the Ice Age peak in 19,000 BCE, and second, had Turkic agglutinative languages, which arrived in
Asia around 60-50,000 BCE, reached India and even Southeast Asia then? We are working on the
hypothesis this Southeast Asian migration reached South America before the peak of the Ice Age.
Maya thus could be from a Tibeto-Burman origin, hence an isolating language, or from a third

articulation language derived from some Turkic influence, knowing the Australian Aboriginals speak
a third-articulation language and they arrived in Australia around 50,000 years ago. A third possibility
could exist: the two big Turkic and Tibeto-Burman families were in contact for a long time, and did
they produce some mixed language or languages that could have been the original linguistic source
of the South Pacific migration along with the Pure Tibeto-Burman language speaking people? There
is another mysterious fact about Southeast Asia. DNA reveals a high level (6 to 10%) of Denisovan
DNA meaning the Denisovans probably integrated the Homo Sapiens communities and we do not
know what linguistic influence they could have had on these Homo Sapiens in Southeast Asia, hence
in Latin America if this South Pacific route is kept.
In Maya, the words are composed of elements, not only in alphabetic transcribing but also and
essentially in glyphic writing. The name of the Maize God, “Jun nal Ye” as it is mostly transcribed, is
not similar to a Chinese, Korean, or Vietnamese name generally written with three characters and
transcribed in three syllabic items of the CV or CVC types, not always, just mostly. In Maya, the
name is one composite glyph composed of several glyphic elements connected in the composition
according to a clear architecture with a semicolon for a relation from top dominant to bottom
dominated and a simple point for a relation from left dominant to right dominated. Let’s try to be more
specific and consider the name of the Maize God, Jun Nal Ye. What we are going to say now is
totally absent from this book.
JUN NAL YE (Ju Nal Ye) (TI.84:512a) > noun deity name; proper name of the Maize God.
(Peter Matthew) JUN NAL YE (Jun Nal Ye)
JUN (jun) (TI) > noun "one"; cardinal number. <> (Jacques Coulardeau) It corresponds to the
plain white bubble of the three bubbles vertically attached on the left to the other two glyphs. This
ternary structure is very important in Maya, like for example, in this glyph.
ma (ma) (T142) > phonetic sign. These three beads are not attached and are generally
used horizontally at the bottom of a composite glyph. It is the reinforcement of a final /m/. But in a
more abstract pictorial use of such three bubbles, empty or black is a reference to blood self-sacrifice
This structure added to the /jun/ we have just seen adds a blood, or sacrificial connection to the /jun/
single black bubble.
NAL (nal) (T84) 1> noun "maize," "maize curl" 2> noun part of the proper name of the
Maize God 3> locative determinative suffix meaning "place." <> (Jacques Coulardeau) Note the
ternary structure: the “face” (two eyes, one mouth, one bead on the forehead, making it four, but with
the two eyes being one as well as two. We will see other cases of four elements being, in fact, three
because one element is supported by another as some kind of sidekick, like one eye supported by
the other eye.) and on the right two elements (a small one on top and the bigger one on the bottom
and behind the second. We could also consider the double-line bubble inside the third element as
being signifying and significant with one curved line crossing it inside.
NAL (nal) (T86) 1> noun "maize," "maize curl" 2> noun part of the proper name of the
Maize God 3> locative determinative suffix meaning "place." <> (Jacques Coulardeau) The same
structure as T84, but this time you can see the three bubbles inside the third element, and this is a
generic allusion to self-sacrifice, blood offering. This glyph is attached to the top of another glyph. In
our case, to T512a, Ye, with the “face” on the left borrowed from the previous glyph, T84, in the
composite glyph. One of the elements in this composite glyph can be composite itself. We should
wonder if there is a difference in the semantic or semiotic value of the two NAL we have seen and if
a third one is created with part of the first one and part of the second one, what is the change in
meaning, if any?

NAL (nal) (T86) 1> noun "maize," "maize curl" 2> noun part of the proper name of the Maize
God 3> locative determinative suffix meaning "place." <> (Jacques Coulardeau) Exactly the same
remark as for the previous glyph, but this time it is attached to the vertical left side of another glyph,
and thus comes first followed by the other glyph it may be attached to. This is not the case here.
ye/YE (ye/yej) (T512) 1> phonetic sign 2> 3rd person prevocalic pronoun used with words
beginning in e: "he/she/it" 3> 3rd person prevocalic possessive pronoun used with words beginning
in e: "his/her/its" 4> adjective "revealed." (Peter Matthew) ye/YE' (ye/ye') <> (Jacques Coulardeau)
Third person pronoun that is prevocalic at the beginning of a composite glyph. The use at the
beginning or the end of a composite glyph changes the connection to the main semantic or
morphological element from possessive to assertive of the person designated by the composite
glyph, hence this “revealed” value. Jun Nal Ye is a first-entity by the use of the number JUN at the
beginning and he is reasserting himself as superior with this person-assertive YE, and it is all
centered on the maize of NAL in the middle, though visually this Maize is small and hence not central.
But YE is visually fundamental. This person-assertive element makes me think of the English phrase
“me-myself-and-I” which could become in the third person “He-his-and-himself,” or “He-himself-and
his.”
This simple example of the name of this Maize God shows all that is lost in the transliteration
and/or translation. We need the glyphs to understand that in this language the syntagmatic is mostly
a semiotic architecture of glyphic elements. But the paradigmatic is always understood, not actually
uttered in discourse, hence is mentally included in an ordinary phonetic writing system typical of a
third-articulation language, agglutinative or synthetic-analytical like Turkic languages in the first case,
and Indo-Iranian languages that produced Indo-European languages in the west and Indo-Aryan
languages in the east when they left Iran. The question then is to know whether Maya is an
agglutinative or synthetic-analytical language. In the case of the composite glyph of Jun Nal Ye, we
have the morphological side of the semiotic composition of a composite “name.” We need a case of
a composite glyph for a composite clause to choose between agglutinative and synthetic-analytical.
We must start with and from glyphs to be sure the synthetic-analytical third-articulation characteristic
was not imposed by the transliteration into the Spanish alphabet onto the glyphs themselves. What
I am hinting at is the fact that this obligation to drop glyphic writing to adopt Spanish transliteration
is a case of a calligraphic genocide, part of a cultural genocide. Unluckily it is too late to repair this
situation which is, and that has to be noted very strongly today, a crime against humanity, but at the
time it was the right of the stronger, plain Darwinian survival. But to get into the syntax of a clause
within one composite glyph would lead us too far. We can see already with this first-level case of the
morphology of a composite name how some visual elements are erased, like the ternary bubbles
and circles, or the binary cartouches, by the transliteration. Without the glyphs, we are speaking of
Maya as if it had no etymology, like trying to understand “the Tower of London’s Beefeaters” without
knowing the word and the function come from its French name ten centuries ago, i.e., “buffetier.”
But despite the reference to the Popol Vuh concerning the death and rebirth of the Maize God,
we are far from the insistence on the dual nature of this Maize God’s fate by traditional versions of
the Hero Twins.
We must consider not one but three pairs of twins, and this number is the clear announcement
of their dramatic fate, even though the binary nature of the twins is in some way a symbol of stability,
at least stability within the twins, and this stability creates a third entity, the twins as an independent
entity, hence TWIN 1 + TWIN 2 = META-TWIN(s). This Meta-Twin(s) is the fact that they cannot
function, hence have any value, if they are not together, alert, attentive, and fully cooperative. The
case of Hunahpu and Xbalanque is typical: the last test in the last house in Xibalba is fatal because
one twin does not pay attention enough, and he is killed. Then the remaining Twin is doomed.

The first pair of male twins, Jun Hunahpu and Vucub Hunahpu. Jun/Hun = ONE or THAT
COMES FIRST. Ahpu or Aj-po or Ajaw = LORD, MASTER or FIRST-RANK NOBILITY. Vucub/wuk
= SEVEN, an essential structural number since it is the four cardinal directions, plus the center,
hence the quincunx, in that center the axis of the world connected to and connecting the underworld,
Xibalba, and the upper celestial world, Chaan/Kaan. Let’s consider the glyphic elements we need
here.
AJAW (ajaw) (T168, or T584.687a) > noun "lord"; royal title, office; designates status of
first-rank nobility of both sexes. <> (Christophe Helmke) represents a stylized royal throne and its
typical cushion (cf. research by Erik Boot, https://independent.academia.edu/BootErik). <> (Jacques
Coulardeau) Note the very important dual nature of these glyphic elements: two elements; the one
on the left is cut in two by a horizontal curved line, and in the lower half it has two sets of two parallel
lines; the one on the right contains a figure with four corners and four curved sides. It is the
composition of two separate glyphs: T584 and T687a. Let’s be more precise.
B'EN (B'en) (T584) > noun, day sign, within a cartouche; thirteenth day of the Maya
Tzolk'in calendar. <> (Christophe Helmke) > ? (? ) ? ~ noun logogram of unknown value, day
sign, thirteenth day of the Tzolkin calendar. The reading “b’en” is the 16th-century value that
was attributed to this logogram by the Yucatec Maya and is not the value of the sign during the
Classic period. <> represents a side view of a stylized royal throne. <> (Jacques Coulardeau)
Note the fact that the sign itself has two circular peripheries, which makes three such peripheries
with the cartouche itself. It’s the reference again to self-sacrifice, hence to the divine obligation
to provide Gods with blood, and yet all the elements inside the glyph go two-by-two. If we
consider it as a throne, that means the stability of the world is in the blood of the secular lord
that sits on this throne and has to self-sacrifice in public and in a ritualized procedure regularly
to maintain this stability.
po (po) (T687a) > phonetic sign <> (John Montgomery) May represent an ear flare. <>
(Jacques Coulardeau) An ear flare is part of a noble attire. Note that “b’en.po” becomes a third
entity “ajaw.” Note too the reference with “b’en” to the THIRTEENTH day of the Tzolk’in calendar,
the ritualistic calendar. The number thirteen is the fundamental ritualistic number since a Tzolk’in
calendrical cycle is thirteen times the twenty days of one month, hence two hundred and sixty
days. The glyph for “po” is the object of a lot of discussions. The pattern, and we could actually
call it a Gestalt, can be traced in the Maya vision of the cardinal points and the center of the
world, hence the quincunx of the Mayas. It is a cultural and mental meta-form, some would say
a philosophical concept.
We could spend pages on this illustration of the cardinal quincunx amplified with two more
cardinal directions dictated by the Ceiba tree that is growing in the center of the quincunx, with
the zenith of its branches which is the sky, Chaan or Kaan (T561c), and the nadir which is
Xibalba (T736v.501:534:501, see below). We reach seven. The couple Jun – Wuk/Vucub (One
– Seven) that we find in many places, like the two dominant Death Lords of Xibalba. If T510
stands for “Ek’” (star), the center is extended into a four-pointed star that is exactly the central
element of the glyph “po,” on the other hand, T585 means “the road” but it reveals that what is

keeping the world standing is not the central Ceiba tree, but the four pillars that are positioned
in the middle point between each pair of cardinal points. These ambiguous foursome patterns,
one on the four cardinal points and one on the middle points between each pair of them, thus
with a rotation of 45 degrees, show how permanently urgent it is to feed the gods with blood and
to support the ritualistic Tzolk’in calendar.
We should provide a global representation of this cardinal vision. I borrow it from El Que No
Habla, Disos No Lo Oye, The Mayan Cosmovision & Learning a New Language,
https://quediostebendiga.wordpress.com/2013/06/28/the-mayan-cosmovision-learning-a-new-
language/
Every single element should be analyzed and explored. Just be curious and look for more
substance, and remember curiosity never kills the researcher. The fact North is on the left and
East is on top, etc., is a choice of the author of this illustration and it does not really matter if you
accept the idea that the Mayas looked at the cosmos starting from the East and the rising sun,
moving to the South, then the West and the setting sun, thus following the cycle of, the Sun.
The North was sunless, but it is crucial in the perspective of life after death, traveling through
Xibalba and its numerous tests, and emerging up North to ascend the sacred tree to reach the
heavens. CHAAN/KAAN (chaan/kaan) (T561c) 1> noun "sky"; chaan in Ch'olan, kaan
in Yucatec 2> noun "captor" <> (John Montgomery) Homophonous or semi-homophonous with
chan/kan "four" and "snake." (Peter Mathews) CHAN/KA'AN (chan/ka'an) (T561) 1> noun "sky";
chan in Ch'olan, ka'an in Yucatec 2> noun "captor" <> Homophonous or semi-homophonous
with chan/kan "four" and "snake." <> (Jacques Coulardeau) This vision of the cosmos is fully
solar. The Tzolk’in calendar of 260 days is neither lunar (about 265;5 days for nine moon cycles,
close but not quite) nor the menstrual cycle of a woman (about 280 days). The solar cycle is not
compatible with the lunar cycle. Despite the enormous presence of the Moon and Venus, these

two planets are not dictating the calendars of the Mayas, at least the two essential Tzolk’in and
Haab calendars.
Let’s go back to “ajaw,” and we encounter this next glyph that brings in a lot of questions.
AJAW (Ajaw) (T533) > noun, day sign; twentieth or last day of the Maya Tzolk'in calendar;
designates the Sun God. <> (John Montgomery) Represents a face within a cartouche. <> (Jacques
Coulardeau) This is a lot more complex. First, note the cartouche and the two sign peripheries, hence
three such peripheries, cartouche included, are the reference to blood sacrifice. The twentieth day
of the Tzolk’in calendar is in the calendar the day that calls for going back to the first day, hence
exiting this month that has been fulfilled to get to the first day of the next cycle, into the next month.
It is the very same value as the number 20 in the vigesimal numbering system of the Mayas.
K'AL (k'al) (T683a) > noun "twenty;" cardinal number; the "moon" sign. <> (Jacques
Coulardeau) Note the metaphorical reference to the moon and the clear reference to the new
moon, the passing from one cycle to the next, which is the very nature of the moon or at least
what we see of it, just the same as 20, and the passage from one vigesimal series to the next.
K'AL (k'al) (T713a) 1> transitive verb "to bind, tie, wrap" 2> transitive verb "to close"
3> transitive verb "to set" 4> noun "completion" <> (John Montgomery) Represents the back of
an extended human hand. <> (Jacques Coulardeau) With the common symbol for “cut off” on
the hand: two concentric circles. Twenty units are brought and bound together, detached from
this initial level, promoted as one in the next higher level, and the initial level is declared empty.
Twenty is the number that triggers the turning of this series of twenty items to be upgraded to one in
the immediately higher level, hence at the lower level, starting a new vigesimal series that is at first
empty till one entity is added to it. That’s exactly the value of zero in modern numeration, decimal,
vigesimal, or any other. In the decimal system when we reach 10, the first series is full and the 0
added to 1 closes this first decimal series and triggers the starting of a new series of ten with 11 up
to 20 with a 0 that closes the second series of ten and opens the third with 21. This brings the concept
that, at this moment, waiting for the next element and the next series, the initial one is empty, and
the Mayas used a special glyph to express this emptiness, not zero per se but “empty.”
mi/MI (mi) (T173) 1> phonetic sign 2> noun "nothing, zero"; negative marker. <> (Jacques
Coulardeau) Note the structure of the glyph cut up into three sections by two bars. Note the two
outside peripheries with a third one inside. A perfect balance that will only last an instant, till one unit
is added.
mi/MI (mi) (T217v) 1> phonetic sign 2> noun "nothing, zero"; negative marker. <>
(Jacques Coulardeau) Note the two glyphs have a very similar structure, a hand telling you to stop
with two beads inside a third bubble, hence a ternary item with a binary structure inside, the same
as in the previous glyph. Slightly more complex than the simple double concentric circles for “cut-
off.” Cut off for sure, but with a ternary reference of the self-sacrifice that will enable the show to go
on, because the numeration has to go on.
mi/MI (mi) (T no number) > noun "nothing, zero"; negative marker <> (John Montgomery)
Represents a human head with a right hand over the lower jaw. <> (Jacques Coulardeau) This leads
to nothing, emptiness, and death. It refers to one ritualistic torture before human sacrifice, the ripping
off of the lower jaw of the sacrificee-to-be before other possible tortures or final death by decapitation,
heart excision, or strangling.

mi/MI (mi) (T no number) <> (Jacques Coulardeau) This glyph is not given by John
Montgomery but is provided by Michael D. Coe and others. It is very common in Long Count to date
past historical events. Long Count is a long series of numbers due to their vigesimal system and this
glyph is commonly used when one level in the dating series is empty. Empty is equivalent to zero if
we do not consider zero as a number, but zero is a number in any decimal counting system to mark
the last element of a group of ten like 10, 20, 30, etc., though in Maya it is the reaching of the number
twenty – “k’al” – that triggers the emptying of the first group of twenty upgraded as one entity added
in the just higher level of counting, hence leaving the lower level empty – “mi.” Hence, twenty can be
expressed in two ways: “k’al winik” or “twenty men”. Note here this glyph “winik”
has the same T-number, T521, as the glyph for “winal,” a month of twenty days (see below) but
“winik” is in a “triple” cartouche, two peripheries for the “winal” glyph , essentially
containing three double elements (two beads at the top, and on each side a double-lined curl, along
with at the bottom a three-bumped emerging unidentified item), inside a third cartouche for “winik.”
This fact implies a lot on derivation of words from a root. In this case, we could consider both “winik”
and “winal” come from a root “win-“ with two derivation suffixes “-al” or “-ik.” We could also consider
that the root is “wi-“ and the derivation suffixes are “-nal” or “-nik.” The question is open since we
would wonder what the relation between a “twenty-day month” and a ”man,” “a person,” or “a being”
is that justifies the two derivations. But clearly, we could not be in a first- or second-articulation
language. It seems to show this Maya is a third-articulation language. But the research remains to
be done.
To go back to Long Count, twenty would be , one winal + empty hence zero k’in.
JUN (jun) (T329) > noun "one"; cardinal number <> (John Montgomery) Represents a
human forefinger. <> (Jacques Coulardeau) The dot and bar system might be more common.
, “k’al winik mi.” Note the final “mi“ is not needed since the four bars imply the
number is twenty and if we had the final “mi” it would transform the four bars into twenty times twenty,
the normal order then should be , and the four bars would be upgraded
as “one” in the third level and replaced by “mi” in this second level, hence
. In our example of twenty men, The four bars would be replaced by , meaning
one of the second-rank counting system, and “mi” would be necessary as said before,
. It is actually difficult to know because the long count is used for dates or distances. The
original unit is “k’in” (a day, T544), then a month of twenty days, “winal” T521,
and then we run into a discrepancy for plain counting since in calendrical Long Count the next stage
is 18 winals for a year, one TUN (tun) (T1034) > noun "year"; year of 360 days used in the

Maya Long Count calendar and Distance Numbers <> (John Montgomery) Represents the head of
a bird. <> (Jacques Coulardeau) It is clear here that the wayeb month of five days is not taken into
account in these two numbering instances. When dates are given in our standard calendar or dating
system, has the correction been made? The difference between this 360-day year and our standard
year is a little bit more than 5¼ days every year, therefore 525 days every century, hence 1.44 years
every 100 Haab years (360 days). The dates are given, we guess, in our standard calendar, but no
specification nor explanation is provided.
TUN (tun) (T528) 1> noun "stone" 2> noun "year"; primarily used with this
meaning in Period Ending glyphs <> (John Montgomery) May represent rainclouds (the so-called
bunched grapes) and the rainbow. <> (John Montgomery) Represents a zoomorphic head with
possible infixed rainclouds (the so-called bunched grapes) and the rainbow. See KAWAK and ku.
<> (Jacques Coulardeau) In the first glyph, there is only the rainbow. In the second glyph, there are
both the bunched grapes and the rainbow.
KAWAK (Kawak) (T528) > noun day sign; nineteenth day of the Maya Tzolk'in calendar
<> (John Montgomery) May represent rainclouds (the so-called bunched grapes) and the
rainbow within a cartouche. <> (Jacques Coulardeau) Note the three peripheries when the
cartouche is included, and the six grapes bunched at the top with the equilibrium 2 x 3.
ku. ku (ku) (T528) > phonetic sign <> (John Montgomery) May represent rainclouds
(the so-called bunched grapes) and the rainbow (the arch in the lower right corner). <> (Jacques
Coulardeau) The pattern 2 + 1 lines surrounding the main content of the glyph is still present,
though it is more complex than before, and the formula 2 x 3 grapes or clouds is still present.
HAAB’/JA'AB' (ja'ab') (T548) > noun "year"; the year of 365 days as used in
the 52-Year Cycle or Calendar Round <> (John Montgomery) Represents the cross-section of a
cylindrical wooden drum or tunkul See also AB' and TUN. <> (Peter Mathews) HAAB' (haab')
(T548) > noun "year"; the year of 365 days as used in the 52-Year Cycle or Calendar Round <>
Represents the cross-section of a cylindrical wooden drum, or tunkul See also HAB' and TUN. TUN
(tun) (T548) > noun "year"; year of 360 days used in the Maya Long Count calendar and Distance
Numbers <> (John Montgomery) Thought to represent a cylindrical wooden drum, or tunkul, in cross-
section. <> (Jacques Coulardeau) Note the fact that the same reference (Foundation for the
Advancement of Mesoamerican Studies Inc.) gives the same glyph two values: 360-day or 365-day
year. It does not explain which was the Maya count and if the Mayas had two different counts. That
is at least one question to be solved – if possible – for such an exhibition and a catalog.
AB'-[b'i] (ab') (T548[585]) > noun "year"; the TUN sign in Initial Series and Distance Number
notations + infixed b'i. <> (John Montgomery) The Upper half represents the cross-section of a
wooden drum, or tunkul See AB'. <> (Peter Mathews) HAB'-[b'i] (hab') (T548[585]) > noun "year";
the TUN sign in Initial Series and Distance Number notations + infixed b'i <> Upper half represents
the cross-section of a wooden drum or tunkul. See HAB'.
AB'( ab') (T548) 1> noun "year"; the year of 360 days; the TUN sign in Initial Series
and Distance Number notations 2> noun part of the name of the ruler of Seibal, Aj B'olon Ab'taj
(cf. Seibal Stelae 7, 9, 10, and 11) <> (John Montgomery) Represents the cross-section of a
wooden drum or tunkul. See also JA'AB' and TUN. <> (Peter Mathews) HAB' (hab') (T548) 1>

noun "year"; the year of 360 days; the TUN sign in Initial Series and Distance Number notations
2> noun part of the name of the ruler of Seibal, AJ B'olon HAB'taj (cf. Seibal Stelae 7, 9, 10, and
11) <> Represents the cross-section of a wooden drum or tunkul. See also HAAB' and TUN. <>
(Jacques Coulardeau) Note the unexplained discrepancy between the 360-day and 365-day
years is not solved and is rather reasserted.
AB'-[b'i] (ab') (T548[585]) > noun "year"; the TUN sign in Initial Series and Distance Number
notations + infixed b'i <> (John Montgomery) The upper half represents the cross-section of a
wooden drum or tunkul. See AB'. <> (Peter Mathews) HAB'-[b'i] (hab') (T548[585]) > noun "year";
the TUN sign in Initial Series and Distance Number notations + infixed b'i <> The upper half
represents the cross-section of a wooden drum or tunkul. See HAB'.
b'i/B'I (b'i) (T585) 1> phonetic sign 2> noun "road" <> (John Montgomery) The "quincunx"
glyph. <> (Peter Mathews) b'i/B'IH (b'i/b'ih). <> (Christophe Helmke) 1> b'i (b'i) b'i ~ syllabogram
2> b'i (b'i[h]) b'ih ~ noun "road", "path". <> Represents a human footprint on the surface of the road,
a Mesoamerican convention for denoting roads. The footprint is symbolic because of the five toes,
four small and one big, yet not realistic like in b'e/B'E (b'e) (T301v) 1> phonetic
sign 2> noun "road" <> (John Montgomery) Represents a human footprint. <> (Peter Mathews)
b'i/B'IH (b'i/b'ih) <> (Christophe Helmke) 1> b'I (b'i) b'i ~ syllabogram 2> b'I (b'i[h]) b'ih ~ noun
"road", "path". <> Represents a human footprint on the surface of the road, a Mesoamerican
convention for denoting roads. <> (Jacques Coulardeau) This connection of the year, the calendar,
and the measuring of time and distance (Note it should be distance and time because time is using
spatial words to express itself) is symbolic of the walking the Mayas had to do to go somewhere
since they had no draft animals to carry baggage or people or draw some vehicles on wheels, and
for them, life was a long walk from birth to death and then even after death, they had to go/walk to
Xibalba, go/walk through many tests and finally come/walk out of it in the North ready to climb the
ceiba tree to the heavenly sky.
You can see how much we miss with this catalog, and many problems having to do with time,
space, people, beliefs, rites, practices, and rituals that are not approached properly since the authors
are only using – very few – Maya phrases in the Latin alphabet, hence transliterated INTO the Latin
alphabet, hence transliterated OUT OF the rich glyphic writing system. Just try to understand why
the year, hence time, is represented in this writing system as a cross-section of a “tunkul,” a wooden
drum. You can also wonder why the wooden drum known as a tunkul is built by derivation from “tun”
which means “year” and “stone,” “stone” for a wooden drum.
Note on all these glyphs the various purely visual elements that are not explained for their
meaning or value. To compare them to grapes or clouds is a purely Westernized vision. It might
perhaps be true for the visual identification, but it does not explain the value of these graphic
elements, and they disappear with the transliteration into the Latin alphabet and they have to be
memorized – if they ever are – as paradigmatic elements, and yet we do not know what these
paradigmatic elements are, what value they have, and overall if everyone who uses the language
has all these paradigmatic elements recorded in their memory.
One “tun” and these 18 winals are only 360 days, hence the “tun” is 5¼ days short on the solar
year, and these 5¼ days, reduced to 5 days, are considered to be a nineteenth month, the wayeb’
that brings the Ha’ab’/Ja’ab’ year to 365 days.
WAYEB' (Wayeb') (T157:548) > noun month sign; last "month" of the Maya Ja'ab,’' or
“Ha’ab’” calendar; the final five-day unlucky period. <> (Peter Mathews) WAYEB' (Wayeb')
(T157:548) > noun month sign; the final five-day unlucky period of the Maya Ha’ab' calendar. <>

(Jacques Coulardeau) It is never very clear if, in Long Count or Distance Numbers, this discrepancy
is corrected either partially for Long Count (adding the wayeb’ to the 18 winals to build a Long Count
365-day “tun” though it should be 365¼ day long) or not at all. For other numeration or quantification
is the tun replaced by a multiple of 20 as it should be? I have so far not found an answer to this
question. It would be useful to know for distance quantification because the 18 winals to build one
tun is no longer justified by the solar cycle in this case. If we try to recompose this glyph, we run into
a trap. If we decompose it as way-eb’, we get something that does not fit with John Montgomery’s
dictionary. To fit we have to decompose it as way-ab’
WAY (way) (T769a) 1 > noun "hole" 2> noun "entrance, portal" 3> noun "water" 4>
noun "spirit, co-essence, nawal" 5> noun "room, quarter" 6> intransitive verb "to sleep" <> (John
Montgomery) Represents a "hole" or supernatural portal and the jaws of the "Snaggle Tooth
Dragon." <> (Jacques Coulardeau) This glyph corresponds to the top prefix of the glyph under
scrutiny, but the meaning is that this « wayeb ‘ month is an entrance, a portal, an opening, and
not an end. We are back to the element that triggers shifting from a finishing series to the next
starting series. And the series is a “ha’ab’, a 360/365-day year.
AB' (ab') (T548) 1> noun "year"; the year of 360 days; the TUN sign in Initial Series
and Distance Number notations 2> noun part of the name of the ruler of Seibal, Aj B'olon Ab'taj
(cf. Seibal Stelae 7, 9, 10, and 11) <> (John Montgomery) Represents the cross-section of a
wooden drum or tunkul. See also JA'AB' and TUN. <> (Peter Mathews) HAB' (hab') (T548) 1>
noun "year"; the year of 360 days; the TUN sign in Initial Series and Distance Number notations
2> noun part of the name of the ruler of Seibal, AJ B'olon HAB'taj (cf. Seibal Stelae 7, 9, 10, and
11) <> Represents the cross-section of a wooden drum or tunkul. See also HAAB' and TUN.
The other solution does not correspond to the glyph under scrutiny here, though the “skull”
meaning would make sense by insisting on the death, hence the end, of a “ha’ab’.” Yet I think
the idea of a portal opening the way to the next “ha’ab’” is more interesting. In fact, the two
values would fit properly with the idea of the end that triggers the next “ha’ab’.”
EB' (Eb') (Tno number) > noun day sign; twelfth day of the Maya Tzolk'in calendar. <>
(John Montgomery) Represents a skull with a T528 KAWAK infix, within a cartouche.
Note I generally just set the glyphs one after the other. In fact, glyphic writing does not just
concatenate but integrates the various glyphs into composite glyphs and along this line, the scribes
or artists had some freedom to compose these composite glyphs the way they wanted within rather
flexible rules. I do not know how to do it, and I must say I am not a glyphic artist.
Then back to the first two twins. Their names mean ONE FIRST-LORD and SEVEN FIRST-
LORD. “One” is of course superior to “seven” because it implies FIRST. Note it is the first of these
two twins who will become the Maize God. But first, these two are challenged to a ball game by the
Death Lords of Xibalba. They lose, so they die. Jun Hunahpu is beheaded, and his head is set up in
a tree. The daughter of one death lord visits the head in the tree, and this head, hence Jun Hunahpu,
spits to her (but not at her) and she captures the spit in her hand and gets pregnant with two twins,
those who are going to be the Hero Twins. The first one is Hunahpu, but not Jun Hunahpu since he
comes second after his father who was first. So, plain Hunahpu, FIRST LORD. The second twin is
Xbalanque, variously translated as JAGUAR SUN (x-B’alam-que), HIDDEN SUN (x-B’ahl-am-que),
and JAGUAR DEER (x-B’alam-Quieh). The variety of such translations is not important. What is
important is that he is a direct representative of the jaguar, the sacred feline of the Mayas. Note the
glyphs.

or IX (Ix/ix) (T524) 1> noun day sign; fourteenth day of the Maya Tzolk'in calendar
2> noun "jaguar" <> (John Montgomery) Depicts three glints within an eye (below the eyelid), with
the glints possibly doubling as jaguar spots, within a cartouche. <> (Jacques Coulardeau) Those
three flints and the three circumferences in the first glyph refer to the divine nature of this jaguar and
the blood we owe to this divine “jaguar.” But look at the eyelashes. In the first glyph, five eyelashes,
maybe all double-lined or the first one single-lined and the other double-lined. This is a direct allusion
to the Quincunx, the five basic cardinal points but also the fifth point, the center, is seen as an
opening to the underground and heavenly levels. In the second glyph five eyelashes, the first one
standing alone by itself and the four others standing two by two. The same allusion to the same
quincunx.
B'ALAM (b'alam) (T751) > noun "jaguar" <> (John Montgomery) Represents the head of
a jaguar.
(Christophe Helmke) > B'ALAM (b'a[h]lam) b'ahlam ~ noun "jaguar" or b'ahl-am transitive verb-
agentive literally "hider" as a perfect referent to these elusive creatures. (cf. research by Marc Zender,
https://liberalarts.tulane.edu/anthropology/people/faculty-staff/marc-zender).
K'IN (k'in) (T544) 1> noun "day" 2> noun "sun" 3> noun period of one day, used in the
Maya Long Count calendar and Distance Numbers <> (John Montgomery) Represents a four-
petaled flower, possibly a plumeria flower, which symbolizes the sun and thus the "day." <> (Jacques
Coulardeau) Note the three circumferences.
K'IN (k'in) (T544hv) 1> noun "day" 2> noun "sun" 3> noun period of one day, used in the
Maya Long Count calendar <> (John Montgomery) Represents the humanized head of an animal.
<> (Jacques Coulardeau) Every detail should be considered. The headdress is built with two
elements that are visually double on the back (double lines, like the ear too) but the front of it is more
complex: a lower double line with some grey filling between them, then a double line continuing those
of the back oblong shape and on those two lines five decoration with five points on each of the two
lines. And we should of course mention the earring that carries two black spots with a round
attachment to the ear itself. Two tongue-like or flowing fluids are coming out of the mouth. All those
double elements and the allusion to the quincunx are the assertions that this “k’in” is the basis of
everyday life, day and night, solar rhythm.
K'IN-ni (k'in) (T1010:116) or K’IN-ni (k’in) (T544:116) 1> noun "day" 2> noun
"sun" 3> noun period of one day; used in the Maya Long Count calendar. <> (Jacques Coulardeau)
The first glyph is composed of three glyphs and not two, and the second glyph is composed of two
glyphs but the top glyph of this second glyph is slightly modified. In the first glyph, behind the head,
there is a K’IN glyph that is part of a triple vertical glyph, the T544 day/sun glyph being bigger than
the top and bottom bubbles, each with a bead inside. This is the structure of Jun/Hun, hence ONE
or FIRST and a solar connection. Note we should also consider the infix on the forehead of the glyph
and the similar extension of this infix behind the cranium. The third or second lower glyphic element,
T116, is the way this writing system reinforces the final consonant of a CVC syllable. But it represents
some fluid that flows like any liquid, and in the context of the sacred Tzolk’in calendar, we have to
think of blood. The Head glyph is more interesting because the head is the opening and main graphic
element of the glyph, identified as “k’in” by the glyphic element attached to the back of the head on
the right side of the glyph (ternary element with the “k’in” glyph in the central bubble of a group of
three, hence a reference to the self-sacrifice we all and daily owe the gods, and as I said before this
is the first duty of any man. Note in the first glyph this flowing fluid under the head is similar to the

fluid coming out of the left corner of the mouth with the tongue sticking out in the front. The second
glyph is built with the standard k’in glyph, T544, but with an added bead in the center transforming
this day/sun glyph into a direct representation of the quincunx and the ritualistic meaning it conveys.
Back to the two Hero Twins Taised by their grandmother. At her place they encounter a third
pair, the real sons of their own father born before the fatal challenge to their father and uncle from
the Death Lords, but these two older twins are jealous of their younger twin step-brothers and the
Hero Twins punish them by tricking them into being transformed into monkeys. They are known as
Hun/Jun Batz ONE/FIRST HOWLER MONKEY and Hun/Jun Chuwen ONE/FIRST ARTIST.
b'a-tz'u (b'atz') (T501.203v) > noun "monkey"; "howler monkey"; saraguate. <>
(Christophe Helmke) > b'a-tz'u (b'a'tz') b'a'tz' ~ noun "howler monkey".
tz'I (tz'i) (Tno-number) > phonetic sign <> (John Montgomery) Represents a hand
grasping a writing instrument.
tz'i-b'a (tz'ib') (T243:501) 1> noun "writing" 2> noun "painting."
tz'i-b'a (tz'ib') (T243.501hv:314) 1> noun "writing" 2> noun "painting."
CHUWEN (Chuwen) (T520) > noun day sign, within a cartouche; eleventh day of the Maya
Tzolk'in calendar. <> (Jacques Coulardeau) The numerical pattern is two: 2 circumferences, 2
squarish bubbles at the bottom, each of these squarish bubbles with a double vertical side. Stability,
and in this case the scribe and the artist are those who control and represent the culture, religion,
and myths of the Mayas in frescoes and codices, plus plates, mugs, and bowls.
CHUWEN (chuwen) (Tno-number:520) > noun "artist"; artist's title. <> (Jacques Coulardeau)
It is a sketchy version of the previous glyph with some sort of headdress or hat. This headdress or
hat is composed of two elements: the lower one has a double lower edge, and the top one carries
two vertical bars. So, It is clearly attached to the number 2, another instance of the stability number
that, in this case, doubles up the same stability number of the previous glyph used as the lower part
of the composite glyph that is not analyzed or decomposed by John Montgomery. And this still
undone analysis is fully lost when transliterated. But this binary reference in the context of the twins,
the three pairs of twins we are considering, is the assertion that if we fight, if we work hard against
all sorts of difficulties, we can win, vanquish death, or at least reach some positive solution to these
problems; This binary theme is optimistic and it counter-balances the very alienating perspective of
regular if not constant blood sacrifice. This practice receives some positive dimension from this
binary architecture of our solar daily life.
These two monkeys will become the patrons or maybe even the Gods, at least the divine patrons,
of respectively scribes and artists. Note the two “professions” can be seen as similar or connected
since writing is as much artistic as the art part of the various codices, plates, or frescoes. The two
are always associating, in one way or another, artistic representations and glyphic inscriptions, on
the same artistic items.
Back to the two Hero Twins and their mission. These two Hero Twins are challenged again by
the Death Lords for the same reason as their father and uncle: they play ball all the time, and that
disturbs the Death Lords in Xibalba, just under the surface of the earth. The Twins accept the
challenge from a pair of Death Lords, Hun/Jun-Came “One-Death” and Vucub/Wuk-Came “Seven-

Death,” and go through all the tests proposed by the Death Lords. There are several of these Death
Lords, and the number is not that clear, probably at least nine. Two of them are dominant, number
seven first and number one only second. They are known as Came, Cizin, Kisin, Cimil, and many
other names. John Montgomery provides two glyphs for the word he identifies as meaning “death,”
both glyphs identified as T736v.
CHAM (cham) (T736v) > intransitive verb "to die"; generally, "death" <> (John
Montgomery) Depicts a human skull. <> (Jacques Coulardeau) Note, on the first glyph, the three
lashes on the eye socket which looks like a closed eyelid. On the second glyph representing the left
profile view of a skull, we have two groups of three beads, one in front of the eye and the other in
place of the ear. Note the series of five beads between the upper jaw and the lower jaw. It could be
an allusion to being sacrificed by first ripping the lower jaw off. The Death Lords are, in fact, a number
+ “death” like in
, for One Death or Jun Cham, and or for Seven
Death or Wuk Cham. The numbers would normally be integrated into a composite glyph with the
glyph for Death.
CHAM-li (chamil) (T736v:24) > intransitive verb "to die"; generally, "death." <> (Christophe
Helmke) MUK-li (mu[h]k[I]l) muhk-il ~ noun-location literary "bury-place," or "burial," "grave," and
"sepulcher." <> (Jacques Coulardeau) Note how close “chamil” is to the one suggested before as
“Cimil.” The lower element T24 has, in the dictionary, when given separately, only three lines in what
is a big oblong bubble inside a semi-cartouche, hence a self-sacrifice connection. li
(li) (T24) > phonetic sign <> (John Montgomery) Represents a mirror. See also -il. -il
(-il) (T24) > particle suffix indicating possession <> (John Montgomery) Represents a mirror. See
also li. <> (Jacques Coulardeau) We can notice the circularity of the two definitions, “li” sending to “-
il” sending back to “li.” In our case, we have the particle suffix and thus we can assume it implies
the possession by death, that it is death’s territory. In the case of CHAM-li, the bubble is reduced to
a top curved line and there are four lines in it. It should be checked. It might be a discrepancy, or it
may be signifying, a shift from blood to equilibrium.
CHAM-mi (cham) (T736v:173) > intransitive verb "to die"; generally, "death." <> (Christophe
Helmke) CHAM-mi (chami) cham-i ~ root intransitive verb "to die." <> (Jacques Coulardeau) The
lower glyphic element, T173, has already been encountered as mi/MI(mi) (T173) > phonetic sign 2>
noun "nothing, zero,” negative marker. <> (Jacques Coulardeau) Note the structure of the glyph cut
up into three sections by two bars. Note the two outside peripheries, in the case of the separate “mi”
with a third one inside. There is only one outside periphery in this case, but the reference to
three and two is clear. Note the lower jaw seems to have a thumb on it, and we encounter here again
the pre-sacrifice torture of ripping the lower jaw off of the sacrificee-to-be or the simple idea that
death is when you lose your lower jaw. Yet death is nothing, is emptiness, is “mi.”

CHAM-mi-ya (chamiy) (T736v:126.173) > incompletive intransitive verb "dies"; generally,
"death." <> (Christophe Helmke) CHAM-mi-ya (chamiiy) cham-iiy ~ intransitive verb-deictic, "died
(ago)", "died (hence)." <> (Jacques Coulardeau) We have three beads in place of the ear. The
strange look of the lower jaw with the strange composition of the T-number formula. It should be
T736v.173:126. The formula given by the dictionary would produce the word CHAM-ya-mi, and
anyway, T126 is under the pair T736v.126. The ternary structure of both T173 and T126 is quite
visible. Each of the three petals of T173 contains only one inner line, which makes two with the
outside periphery, hence three times two. On the other hand, T126 has only two big bubbles or petals
containing two lines each, hence having three lines with the outside periphery, and there are two
beads in the third central element between the two petals. The same balance of two and three. But
we can only see that if we consider the glyphs, not their transliteration, and then it is not a comment
coming from nowhere. It is an observation coming from the glyphs themselves.
XIBALBA
Xibalba was rife with tests, trials, and traps for anyone. The roads to Xibalba, “Xibalba Be,”
crossed, first a river filled with scorpions, then a river filled with blood, and finally a river filled with
pus. Note the number three again, which makes this place connected to some sacrifice, some
bloodletting, some death. Probably not ancient but modern syllabic writing with ancient glyphs.
Xi- T736v xi (xi) (T736v) > phonetic sign <> (John
Montgomery) Represents a human skull. <> (Jacques Coulardeau) Note the three teeth on three
glyphs (except the third glyph with only two teeth), the eye surrounded with respectively six, six, four,

and five dots on the model of the heart or core of the water lily of the next glyph, the three dots on
the ear of the first glyph. Three, multiples of three, two, multiples of two, and five that is three plus
two (and five is the quincunx). There is like an equilibrium between life and death, life in death, the
living dead nature of the dead in Xibalba, who can be alive when they arrive, like our twins, but
promised to death anyway.
b’a T501 b'a/B'A (b'a) (T501) 1> phonetic sign 2> noun "head" 3> adjective "first" 4> reflexive
suffix "self," "thing" 5> noun "image," "being," "self" <> (John Montgomery) Represents a water lily.
<> (Peter Mathews) b'a/B'AH (b'a/b'ah) <> (Christophe Helmke) 1> b'a (b'a) b'a ~ syllabogram 2>
b'a (b'a[ah]/b'a[h]) b'ah ~ noun "gopher", "head", "self". <> (Jacques Coulardeau) Note the core or
eye of the water lily bloom that has three bands inside, empty first, with two dots second, and empty
third. Note the three double lines at the bottom of the bloom. Same remark as before.
la T178 and 7534 la (la) (T178 or T534) > phonetic sign. la (la) (T178) > phonetic
sign. <> (Jacques Coulardeau). The first glyph has three dots on its face if it is a face. The second
glyph is composed of three elements, first, the previous glyph, second, three dots, third, the first
glyph again. This time three is dominant, but in the first glyph, the curved bubble around the top dot
and the triangular “nose,” if it is a nose, probably the feminine pistil, or maybe one masculine stamen,
differentiate them into one + two, and in the second glyph, you have the same pattern with the two
blooms, first and last, and one group of three dots in the middle, though they are in an inverted order
as compared to the three dots of the other glyph or of the two side glyphic elements: two beads on
top, and one under.
b‘a T501 b'a/B'A (b'a) (T501) 1> phonetic sign 2> noun "head" 3> adjective "first" 4> reflexive
suffix "self," "thing" 5> noun "image," "being," "self" <> (John Montgomery) Represents a water lily.
<> (Peter Mathews) b'a/B'AH (b'a/b'ah) <> (Christophe Helmke) 1> b'a (b'a) b'a ~ syllabogram 2>
b'a (b'a[ah]/b'a[h]) b'ah ~ noun "gopher", "head", "self." <> (Jacques Coulardeau) The question that
has to be asked here is about the phylogeny of these glyphs. This balance of two and three can
express the “living-dead” nature of the visitors of Xibalba: the newcomers may be dead for the
surface world, but they are not yet dead in Xibalba. They are living dead till they fail in their tests and
really die. Were the glyphs devised to express this vision (and I insist on vision because it has to be
mentally visualized before being turned into a glyph), or did the glyph come ready-made from who
knows where and were associated with the ideas to which they seemed to fit? Asking the question
is answering it. Glyphs could not be haphazard accidents or plastic works of imagination. The glyphs
had to be devised to express what the oral discourse contained, and the paradigmatic content was
visually or symbolically integrated into the glyphs.
Xibalba often comes associated with “b’e” like in “Xibalba b’e,” meaning the way to, the route to,
the path to Xibalba.
b’e T301v or b'e/B'E (b'e) (T301v) 1> phonetic sign 2> noun "road" <> (John
Montgomery) Represents a human footprint inside or not a cartouche. <> (Peter Mathews) b'i/B'IH
(b'i/b'ih) <> (Christophe Helmke) 1> b'I (b'i) b'i ~ syllabogram 2> b'I (b'i[h]) b'ih ~ noun "road", "path".
<> Represents a human footprint on the surface of the road, a Mesoamerican convention for
denoting roads, or the activity of walking.
Down in Xibalba, beyond the three rivers, the visitors come to a crossroads and have to choose
one of four roads with which the Death Lords of Xibalba are trying to confuse and beguile the visitors.
Then these visitors come upon the Xibalba council place and are expected to greet the seated Lords
with mannequins sitting next to them to confuse and humiliate visitors, and the confused visitors are
then invited to sit upon a bench, which is actually a hot cooking surface. The city counts at least six

deadly houses. Here is the order in Dennis Tedlock’s translation of the Popol Vuh. The first is the
Dark House. The second is the Razor House. The third is the Rattling House or Cold House. The
fourth is the Jaguar House. The Fifth is the Midst of the Fire, a House of Fire. And the sixth is the
Bat House. Here are the glyphs in a different order given by
http://www.inriodulce.com/links/thenineGods.html.
na/NA/NAJ (na/naj) (T4) 1> phonetic sign 2> noun "house" 3> adjective
"first"; ordinal number. <> (Peter Mathews) na/NA/NAH (na/nah) <> (Jacques Coulardeau) In five
cases, it has to be rotated to the right to be attached to the right side of the main glyph, and in the
fifth case it has to be rotated some more to the right to be positioned under the main glyph. The main
glyph is a component that could be seen as classifying, though in the context, it is more identifying,
and yet it has to be a classifying glyph, but each word identifies a class of houses that only has one
member, hence a singleton.
The word “na” is, in fact, a nominal suffix attached to the right of five glyphs and under one.
These various glyphs it is attached to designate the particular purpose of each house.
SOTZ’ (T756), bat.
is in fact rotated from CH'AM (ch'am) (T533:670, inverted into 670:533) with the
integration of the core of b’a (T501),” head,” “self,” on the back of the upside-down fist.
AK'AB' (ak'ab') ak'-ab' (T504) […] <> (Christophe Helmke) noun "night" <> Represents a
side view of a serpent's body, showing the ventral scales at the bottom and the dorsal markings at
the top. <> (Jacques Coulardeau) Note the three dots on the three lower bumps, or ventral scales,
and within the upper half circle of the top half of the glyph the two triple bubbles, meaning two bubbles
with three concentric lines, including the outside line. Thus, we have four ternary elements: three
beads, three bumps, and two triple bubbles within a very clear binary pattern: the lower and the
upper halves, the two concentric half circles of the upper half, the two bubbles within the inner half
circle of the upper half of the glyph, and the two concentric lines defining the upper half of the glyph
and the content of it.

B'ALAM (b'alam) (T751) > noun "jaguar," a sacred animal for the Mayas but known to be
aggressive, and dangerous.
K'AK' (k'ak') (T122) > noun "fire." Fire is the ultimate punishment, but also the ultimate
magic.
This is the specular image on the right of the original glyph on the left. si (si) (T57) >
phonetic sign. <> (Jacques Coulardeau) We can note the three beads or drops of blood in each half
of the double glyph, hence six drops, like the six houses and the six nights spent in the six houses.
The glyph carries a hat composed of two bubbles or petals initially and four at the end, after the use
of specular symmetry. This glyph is then T57.57, though with specular symmetry. The above image
of the six Xibalba houses gives the name of the last one as “sis na.” This implies that the “sis” glyph
is obtained by doubling the initial “si” glyph by mirror symmetry, hence producing “sisi,” and then
shortening it to “sis.” (Or “siis” likewise shortened to “sis.”) The second half of the “sisi” word is only
the way to add an “s” to the first half if we satisfy ourselves with a superficial and un-semantic
approach of the glyphs. It is slightly more complicated especially because we do not know how these
stories were told or “read” by the priests, or by ritualistic readers or performers who might have been
the scribes or artists themselves.
Kimi, Death Lord
The names in Maya and the glyphs are correct though two are mysterious: “ch’am or ch’ayim
na” (meaning of ch’am or ch’ayim is “to receive” or “to harvest”), and “Sis na,” at least with the means
provided by FAMSI (Foundation for the Advancement of Mesoamerican Studies Inc.), seems to imply
the visitor who is spending the night in this house is there to receive, hence to submit and be passive
while suffering this extreme cold.

And then, the seventh trial for the visitors who are still alive, if they were not dead before coming
to Xibalba to compete for a chance to be saved and be able to climb into the sky, into heaven, end
up having to compete in a tricked pre-arranged ball game.
Of course, the Death Lords cheat, and the Hero Twins do too. So, the Twins are finally
condemned to be incinerated, but they volunteer and jump into the furnace because they cheated
before with a most important sorcerer consulted by the Death Lords. He suggests the ashes are
thrown into the river, as secretly agreed with the Hero Twins. As soon as their ashes touch the water,
they are reincarnated into two young men pretending to be magicians who are going to go to Xibalba
under a disguise to trick the Death Lords, and tricked they are, the Death Lords. The Death Lords
end up dead, killed by the Hero Twins, and the two main Death Lords Wuk Came and Jun Came will
be revived, resuscitated only when they tell the twins where the body of their father is, and they
resuscitate him under the identity of the Maize God, Jun Nal Ye. It is not explained that simply in this
book but it shows that TWO is the symbol of normal life, of plain life, of some type of living equilibrium,
whereas three is the self-sacrificed blood all humans have to shed on paper they then burn to the
Gods who created man, humanity from corn flour and divine blood from the Gods themselves, the
very blood all humans have to provide the Gods with, like a mortgage payment they have to pay
back as a reimbursement of this debt in blood, for the Gods to go on living, and for humanity to go
on existing. Such practices are existential, and such beliefs are cathartic: they alleviate the fear all
humans experience in front of the stake of death when life expectancy is only around 30 years, and
even when it is more.
When we know the Maya main Gods, not the local ones, are three, we understand the force of
this offering of human blood. The main trilogy is Chaak, the Rain God, K’awiil, the Lightning God,
and Ik’ K’u, the Wind God. Yet, Chaak must have felt some remorse to have a trinity of Gods
managing the weather, and so, he is going along with a body double of some sort, Yopaat, the name
of a deity often used as an elite title. And yet could we or even can we go without the second trinity
of Gods and this time a trinity of life with Itzamnaaj, the supreme creator God, K’inich Ajaw, the Sun
God, and Jun Nal Ye, the Maize God, the one who provided the corn meal necessary to create man,
the one that dies every autumn and is reborn every spring. There is no life if the world has not been
created by Itzamnaaj. There is no life if there is no sun dictating the rhythm of life and providing the
energy needed for plants, and first of all, Maize, to grow. And finally, there is no life if the Maize God
does not imprint his life and death rhythm or cycle, and thus provides basic and divine food to the
human species. The first trinity is fateful, the fate of the weather. The second trinity is existential, the
existence and survival of life under the heavy dictatorship of the weather that requires so many blood
sacrifices to be granted by humanity to enable Gods to go on living and with them, humanity. And
the same as three generations of twins dictate the survival of humanity against death by offering Jun
Nal Ye to humanity, the God of the second solar cycle with first the cycle of day and night, the regular
sun and the slightly off-tune moon on one hand, and then the second cycle of the seasons that
dictate the growth of what humanity needs to survive, provided the first trinity of Gods do not prevent
it by imposing a deadly weather every so many or few years.
On the female side of the divine cosmos, two Goddesses look after humanity to guarantee their
staying alive. First Chak Chel, or Ix Chel (lady rainbow) announces the end of the storm and the
return of the sunshine and normal living conditions, hence the end of the capricious phases dictated
by the first trinity. She is the one who protects humanity by supporting the second trinity. The second
Goddess is the Moon, though Michael D. Coe does not go that far. He called her Goddess ONE
whose name is not clear. We only have a -ki suffix suggesting a name ending with the letter /k/. She
can easily be recognized when the rabbit, which is her close associate, is with her. The rabbit is
normally Tul or Tz’o (T758v in both cases). It does not go with the -ki suffix. The word for
“star” would be Ek’ or (T510 or 510af, respectively), but most of the time it

is attached to Venus, CHAK EK' (chak ek') (T109:510v) > adjective + noun "great star"; the
proper name of the planet Venus, an extremely harsh Goddess known as the Morning or Evening
Star. CHAK (chak) (T109) 1> adjective "red" 2 > adjective "great." <> (Jacques
Coulardeau) Note the plastic creativity in the glyph for “Chak Ek’”: the T109 glyph that comes first
on top of the second glyph, has been curved up to stand like a crown on the second glyph. We have
already seen the second glyph. Ek’ (T510v) <> (Jacques Coulardeau) The glyph has
been rotated “upside down,” as compared to its normal orientation, and slightly modified in width and
height. This is again the free plastic creativity of the scribe or artist. This word Chak Ek’ would easily
go with the suffix -ki, but the Moon and Venus are not at all comparable. Michael D. Coe’s suggestion
that the name of the moon could be “Ixik,” meaning woman, is probably too generic. But it is a
possibility. The Dresden Codex is very rich on Venus, and she is different from the Moon. The
example given by this book, on page 79, of a “cylinder vessel with the Moon Goddess and her rabbit
sitting on a throne and receiving other celestial beings, The Maize God, The Water-lily Serpent, a
black-eyed Jaguar God, and a skeletal Death God” is rather convincing she is a Goddess of her own.
But four divine beings coming, you say? Wrong. Only three. The second walking behind the Maize
God who normally, when depicted as a lunar God, wears a Water-lily Serpent as a headdress, is this
headdress. Note that these three characters or gods represent the three phases of life. First, birth
with the Maize God and his Water-Lily Serpent, born and reborn every year in the water he emerges
from. Then, the Jaguar God represents life or living in a harsh world requiring blood and self-sacrifice.
And finally, a skeletal Death Lord represents death and the descent into Xibalba.
Three, here, becomes a direct symbol of the blood self-sacrifice needed for Gods to survive and
humanity to live on. But it is also the revelation of the triple nature of the Moon Goddess who thus
becomes a wider concept in the history of humanity, what is called “triple goddess” that some, in the
Eurasian context, consider a characteristic of all pagan religions. Pagan is a Christian-centered
concept inherited from Judaism which was the first Abrahamic religion to reject this “pagan” ternary
characteristic. Note I do not use the word “trinity” because the Christian religion has made it Christian,
hence no longer “pagan” because this trinity is, in fact, one, God himself seen as the Father, the Son,
and the Holy Spirit (note the masculine nature of the concept in continuation with the Jewish God
who is binary, “God and His Spirit,” Bible, Genesis, 1:2). This ternary nature of the Moon is seen as
a goddess, hence a feminine concept, despite the three or four characters following her who are all
males. With this lunar ternariness, we are back to the first triad in which Chaak had a body double
accompanying him, but this initial triad is masculine by essence. But both Chaak and Jun Nal Ye
have body doubles making them double, and the whole set quaternary. Note the moon herself has
a body double in the rabbit, making her double. But if you take all the characters in this presentation,
you have four in front of the Moon goddess and her Rabbit, and that makes six, hence twice three.
And this numerical pattern is very common in the glyphic writing of the Mayas. Note it has a
completely different meaning from the number six in the Old Testament seen as a six-branch star or
two triangular cups, one pouring God’s wisdom into the other cup that is man’s cup receiving God’s
wisdom. But Christianity brought 666 as the number of the beast in the Apocalypse of the Book of
Revelation, and the blood of Jesus will have to be drawn and poured for humanity to finally maybe
perhaps receive God’s wisdom. Really? Check Ukraine and Palestine, for two examples of God’s
wisdom.
What is attractive in this quaternary element for the Mayas in those two humanoid characters,
Itamnaaj and Jun Nal Ye, and do not forget the third case with the Moon and her rabbit? Avoiding
the ternary pattern that requires blood self-sacrifice, and yet three pairs containing body doubles?
That reminds us of the prefix in K’u (T1016) or K’u (T41, in fact, a composite glyph,
T41.1016) k'u/K'U (k'u) (T1016) 1> phonetic sign 2> noun "god, divinity" 3> adjective. "divine, sacred"
<> (John Montgomery) May represent a monkey's face. <> (Jacques Coulardeau) The prefix has a

line of drops or beads meaning the self-sacrifice required by all Gods. But in this case, there are four
beads and not three or a multiple of three. In this highly symbolic art, the play on two, three, four,
and six has to be significant and signifying. Note these four beads correspond to the four lines on
the top of the glyph, four lines with three equal and empty spaces between them. This type of
symbolism and questioning is not typical of the Mayas. It is highly present in medieval Romanesque
and Gothic architecture in Europe playing on 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9 in the number of arches and
columns supporting the arches in the choir or the nave of such churches. Five is negative and yet it
is saved since the five arches will need six columns, and six is highly positive as the wisdom of
Solomon. Eight arches are the symbol of resurrection and the Second Coming of Jesus Christ, and
yet it needs nine columns, and nine is the apocalypse and Doomsday. The Mayas and I guess many
other cultures in the world have come across such symbolic values and dealt with them and their
contradictions in their own contexts.
What I am trying to show is quite clear. The semantic or semiotic value of the concepts we are
coming across in Maya either can be some plain commentary or description of the Gods, or whatever
is described, or we can look for the elements in the glyphs of the old writing system that support the
commentary we are giving. In fact, in a phylogenetic approach, we should consider the elements in
the old glyphic writing system that the scribes or artists projected into the glyphs as details of these
glyphs, details whose meaning is lost when the glyphs are transliterated. It is not enough to mention
these details in a commentary if it is not shown, identified, or pointed out in and from the glyphs
themselves because then these details reveal the intentional consciousness of these scribes and
artists. I will give an example from the book itself when Caitlin C. Earley presents the Palenque Triad.
“According to inscriptions from the seventh and eighth centuries, the three patron gods of
Palenque were born at a place called Matwiil in 2360 B.C. Known as the Palenque Triad, they
are called GI (abbreviation for God I), GII (abbreviation for God II), and GIII (abbreviation for
God III) (fig. 143, see below). Each has distinct associations. GI is an aquatic solar deity,
perhaps associated with the rising of the sun from the eastern ocean in the morning. GII also
known as Unen K’awiil (Baby Kawiil), is the deity connected with lightning, ancestry, and
agricultural fertility. GIII is an aspect of K’inich Ajaw, the sun god, and is associated at the site
with warfare and the underworld. [Note 56: David Stuart, Sourcebook for the 30th
Maya Meetings,
March 14-19, 2006] 2006, p. 88.] Although these gods are worshipped elsewhere individually,
only at Palenque do all three appear consistently together.” (page 179)
The first remark is going to question the identity of GI which is not given by name in the quotation
above, but defined as “an aquatic solar deity, perhaps associated with the rising of the sun from the
eastern ocean in the morning.” We just saw Michael D. Coe considered GI was the Moon, which
would bring a feminine goddess in this triad of male gods. The second remark is the fact the triad is

based on aquatic birth (rising sun), life (lightning, ancestry, and agriculture), and death (war and the
underworld). This triad then has the same triadic value as the triple goddess we just saw or the
simple cardinal cycle of the sun: It rises in the East, crosses the sky in the daytime, and finally dies
in the west for the night. This solar daily triad is probably the foundation of the number three seen
as a cycle of life that has to be sustained with self-sacrifice. This ternary element seems to be carried
by the first element of the first glyph below, the three vertical beads that mean the number “three.”
This first glyph could be an introductory glyph announcing the next three glyphs. But that brings up
the next remark. These four glyphs are a triad, the Palenque Triad, and yet there are four glyphs. It
deserves an explanation of such an association of three and four. This first glyph is a composite
glyph, like the next three glyphs, and it could be useful to get the “formula” describing the architecture,
the morphology, or the syntax of these glyphs in Tnumbers. And who are the three gods?
However, the image given by the book is deficient because it does not provide a clear “redrawing”
and it does not analyze any element. It provides a picture of four composite glyphs for three gods
and no specification.
To see better what it is about we have to look for a clear redrawing of the glyphs.

The next stage in this work should be to identify all the elements in these composite glyphs, their
architecture, and the meaning of all the meaningful elements. Regrettably, we are not provided with
this approach in this book. In other words, such a non-glyphic approach is just finishing up the
culturicide of the colonial invaders. They burned the books, and the MET erases the glyphic language
that becomes nothing but some set of images and illustrations. The main difficulty is to connect the
various elements composing a glyph, and on one hand, the meaning of these elements, the
composite glyph being a composite meaning of all elements brought together, but on the other hand,
we have to determine which elements are the syllabic elements used to write the word concerned,
in this case the names of the three gods. And we can note at once the scribes and artists have some
freedom. If we take the example of the Palenque Triad as shown by Heinrich Berlin in his paper “The
Palenque Triad” (Berlin Heinrich. The Palenque Triad. In: Journal de la Société des Américanistes.
Tome 52, 1963. pp. 91-99, doi: https://doi.org/10.3406/jsa.1963.1994, available at
https://www.persee.fr/doc/jsa_0037-9174_1963_num_52_1_1994) we get the following glyphs for
the three gods. In 1963, Eric Thompson was highly dominant, and the glyphs were not considered
as a writing system but only as artistic direct reference to some item, here the three Gods of the triad.

Each glyph, even the most pictorial can be identified in pairs, because they have some distinctive
signs that are the semiological or semantic elements that refer to this or that god and the same
elements appear in each pair but with some freedom on the artistic side of the glyphs. But the
challenge is to identify the elements that will be read after having been written. Note on the two G I
glyphs, how the ears have first three dots and second six dots, but the dots over the ears are six first
and then three. Such regularity, even in inverted vertical order, indicate we are dealing with the same
god, but note how the earring is a double circle inside another third circle in the first glyph, and it is
easy to identify the earring in the second glyph as being la T178 and 7534 .and here we enter
the glyphs as the writing system. The architecture is also clear and the same in both glyphs. In the
two glyphs the last element is the earring, and since we just identified it as being “la,” the name of
this God either has a last syllable “la” or this last glyphic element is a reinforcement of the final
consonant “l” of the name of this God. And we can add paragdigmatic connections to this glyphic
element, to this “la” that we find in the verb “la-ja” -la-ja (-laj/laj) (T534.181)
1> positional completive verbal suffix pattern 2> transitive verb "to end" 3> transitive verb "to finish."
<> (Peter Mathews) la-ja (laj) (T534.181) > transitive verb "to end, finish." <> (Jacques Coulardeau)
Note this is a closing suffix for a glyph and at the same time it adds the idea of “coming to an end.”
That’s how we can progress in Maya language and Maya culture, and this book by the MET(ropolitan
Museum) of New York does not provide such tools and analyses.
To conclude, I will quote in this book, the final study by Iyaxel Cojtí Ren.
“Both the k’ab’awil and the alaxik may have belonged originally to families and lineages,
but some of them went on to have a role at the community level. Currently, k’ab’awil is
understood as a philosophical term referring to the ability to see beyond the material or physical
things around us: to see with the eyes of the heart. The combination of these abilities, to see
both the tangible and the intangible, is the experience of k’ab’awil [as differentiated from alaxik].
“ (page 206)
That’s when we regret the absence of the glyphic words because they provide the eyes of the
body and alaxik with the intangible that only the eyes of the heart, hence k’ab’awil, can grasp and
that is reduced to only some abstract knowledge, or maybe the survival of old habits and abilities.

Let the Mayas Speak In their old Glyphs

Let the Mayas Speak In their old Glyphs

Recomendados

Recomendados

Mais conteúdo relacionado

Semelhante a Let the Mayas Speak In their old Glyphs

Semelhante a Let the Mayas Speak In their old Glyphs (20)

Mais de Editions La Dondaine

Mais de Editions La Dondaine (20)

Último

Último (20)

Let the Mayas Speak In their old Glyphs