K&L.p14.#4 TOK.p31.r1.c4 BMM9.p17.r5.c1 Bíró-ONtM.p4.fig3 (Mathews)
BPK Stela 2 H1-H2
CHIT pe/T’UL/CHIIT CHIT IX.<YAX:CHIT> <1:WITZ’>.<NAH:KAN>
YAX Lintel 15 B2 F1
YAX:CHIT NAAH:KAN
TOK.p15.r1.c1 = BMM9.p11.r5.c2 JM.p63.#1 JM.p163.#1
lo / CHIIT CHIT CHIT:ti CHIT?
Graham Helmke&Kupprat-WSA.p40.fig1.d Coll-1 Coll-1
NAR Stela 24 C16 PMT Panel 1 YAX Lintel 14 G2a YAX HS2 Step 7 Q3-R4
<CHIT:ti>.K’UH? <YAX:CHIT>.<1:WITZ’> NAH.<ka:KAN> YAX:CHIT u.<BAAH:li{aan}> YAX:<CHIT:ta> 1.WITZ’ NAH.<KAN:na>
· No glyphs given in K&H.
· BMM9, K&H, K&L all give: ““father, patron”? cognate of kit” in contrast to EB which describes it as “unknown meaning” (but includes it under “kinship terms”).
· TOK doesn’t distinguish CHIIT from pe and T’UL, and BMM9 and K&L implicitly suggest that CHIT is a bearded rabbit (from the drawing, not stated in words).
· Many more examples shown under chit ch’ab.
· The end phonetic complement of CHIT in YAX HS2 Step 7 Q3-R4 is ta, which is possibly why some sources give CHIIT instead of CHIT. Perhaps many more of them read CHIIT, but due to their philosophical principles, don’t write long vowels.
· Variants (3):
o A. Representational: rabbit head with beard:
§ This glyph can also be read as pe (is there a tendency for pe not to have a beard and for CHIT to have a beard?).
§ This glyph can also be read as T’UL.
o B. Representational: deity / human-like head.
o C. Abstract:
§ This can also be read as lo.
§ Easily confused with IHK’ – the difference is that IHK’ often has some cross-hatching above the inner (lower) semicircle, specifically, in the “protector” part (if present) around the two small touching dots.
· Occurs in the names of gods / titles of rulers, or in the meaning “father/patron”. See also Yax Chit Juun Witz’ Naah Kan.
· JM.p163.#2 lo-k’u-ta èlok’ta = “came out from”, “emerged from”.
o Dorota Bojkowska: this is a misreading on the part of JM. This does not write lok’ or any of its related forms. It is the same glyph-block as CRN Panel 3 D2. It is CHIT:K’UH:ta. Dorota: not on CRN Panel 1.
o The fact that this is from CPN Stela P is established in Kupprat-LMylO.p47.pdfp8.fig2.l; unfortunately, it is unclear from the paper how Kupprat intends for this to be transliterated/read.
o MHD provides the solution: K’EK’EN?.ne.<CHIT:K’UH:ta>
§ The ne is presumably just the end phonetic complement for K’EK’EN.
§ CHIT K”UH is the phrase of interest.
§ The ta is glossed as the proposition “in”/“at”, with the location given in the next glyph-block (B12) – unfortunately an undeciphered glyph, assigned the 3-letter code MHD.AB7:
· A glyph with two identical animal/monster heads, symmetrically facing outwards (the left head facing left and the right head facing right).
· Only two hits in MHD – this one (CPN Stela P) and CPN Stela 7.