K&L.p21.#3 TOK.p18.r5.c2 BMM9.p13.r2.c1 25EMC.pdfp29.#8.1
AN (a’n) AAN AN AN
25EMC.pdfp29.#8.2&3&4&5 = K&L.p21.#3.6&1&2&3
MHD (Houston/Montgomery)
BPK Mural E’1
*u.<BAAH+AAN>:hi{l}
Tokovinine Tokovinine
NAR Stela 46 E2 NAR Stela 46 E6
u.<<BAAH[AN]>:li> u.<<*BAAH[*AN]>:*li>
Coll-1 Coll-1
YAX Lintel 14 A1 YAX Lintel 14 G1
u.<BAAH[AAN]:hi:li> u.<BAAH[AAN]:li>
Graham Coll-1 Graham
YAX Lintel 23 K2 YAX Lintel 25 G1 YAX Stela 18
<a:AN>.<IX:*k’a[ba]:la> <u:BAAH[AN]:li>.<IX:{y}OHL:la> u.<<BAAH{il}[AN]>:nu>
· No glyphs given in K&H.
· Not in EB, but K&H, K&L, BMM9 (the “descendent” dictionaries of EB) all give “unripened maize” – used as part of impersonation expressions as a verb a’n “to be, exist”.
· Often reduced to just a few bars and dots infixed within BAAH, when writing ubaahila’n.
· YAX Lintel 23 K2 seems to be one of the few instances of A’N not in connection with ubaahila’n. It’s unclear what it means in this context. MHD appears not to know either, as the blengl is given just as “??”.
· Even in the very well-known context of ubaahila’n, the true meaning isn’t that clear to me. Traditionally it was translated as “(in) impersonation of”, “(in) impersonating”. Some epigraphers prefer “personification of”. I suppose, literally, ubaahil = “the image of” + “existing” somehow results in the meaning of “personification of” (/ “impersonation of”).
Graham
NAR Stela 24 (right side) D4
a.nu
· The disharmonic spelling, with second syllabogram nu, is perhaps one of the reasons for the reading with a glottalized vowel.
· Note that EB reads this as anul (giving NAR Stela 24 E3-D4 as a reference) – EB.p25.pdfp30.#2: anul n. “incarnate, embodied” » ’u-[BAH]hi-li ’a-nu > ubahil anu[l] [Sim: 1) In EB, square brackets indicate underspelling, which means that EB reads anul instead of the more modern reading a’n.]