·     Slightly different formulations:

o Baron-PGaPL (page reference unknown, from GoogleBooks): The "Square Nosed Beastie" (SNB) (see Martin 1996) has sometimes been called a patron deity of Naranjo (e.g., Martin and Grube 2008; Schele 1986; Tokovinine and Fialko 2007). However, this character is more accurately described as an ancestor, probably the founding ancestor of the Naranjo dynasty. The SNB was depicted on Stela 45 as a floating disembodied head gazing down from above. His attributes were fused with those of later known ancestors (Tokovinine and Fialko 2007). Patron deities were never depicted in this manner. Moreover, the SNB originated a dynastic count. In other words, later kings counted their reign numbers from his, much as President Obama is counted as forty-fourth in the line from George Washington. (The Jaguar God of the Underworld, in contrast, was not given a number in this dynastic count.)

o Tokovinine-PfaP.p98.c1.para2: Ik’-[T1021], also known as a “Square-Nosed Beastie,” is a divine founder of the Naranjo royal line (Martin and Grube 2000a: 70; Grube and Martin 2004: 4; Tokovinine and Fialko 2007: 10, Figure 14). According to Naranjo inscriptions, he acceded to kingship either 22000 or 896000 years ago. Naranjo rulers claimed the title of uyajawte’ k’uh, “those of the lineage of the god” (NAR Alt 1: H3–I3). Deceased Sa’aal lords could be even represented as avatars of the divine founder (Tokovinine and Fialko 2007: 10). In other words, being a “Sa’aal lord” was as much about governing Naranjo as being a descendant of Ik’-[T1021].

o Tokovinine-TPoP.p150.para2: The final common expression of war and conquest is a verb spelled with the undeciphered “star-over-earth” or “star war” logogram (see [Chinchilla Mazariegos 2006] for the latest interpretation of the glyph) followed by the name of the defeated person, the place name or ch'e'n. We know from the contexts of the word that it is an intransitive verb used to describe the downfall of people and places. […] The much later Tikal victory against Naranjo is described on Tikal Temple 4 Lintel 2 as the ‘downfall’ of the “Wak kab nal [person]” (a title of Naranjo rulers) “in the ch'e'n” of the Naranjo patron deity, the “Black Square-Nosed Beastie”.

o Tokovinine-TPoP.p180.para3: Another important example is the representation of a captured Naranjo palanquin on Lintel 2 from Temple 4 at Tikal (Figure 6.4). The text and image on the lintel previously analyzed by Martin (1996) describe the circumstances and the aftermath of the victorious war that the Tikal ruler Yik'in Chan K'awiil waged against Naranjo. The main inscription (Jones, et al. 1982:Fig.73) informs of the “defeat of Wak kab nal in the ch'e'n of” a Square-Nosed Beastie – a deity otherwise known as the divine founder of the Sa'aal dynasty (see below) – and the capture of the royal palanquin. I suggest a slightly different reading of the passage. Instead of treating Wak kab nal as a place name, I assume that it is an abbreviated (yax) Wak kab nal winik, the title of Naranjo rulers. Therefore the passage 181 reports the defeat of the Naranjo king in an unspecified ch'e'n belonging to the Naranjo patron deity where the palanquin was presumably captured. In light of my reading of the inscription, the fact that the base of the palanquin is emblazoned with SA' signs likely standing for the spelling of Sa'aal (Figure 6.4) suggests that the ch'e'n mentioned as the place of the battle and the original location of the palanquin is Sa'aal, just like Sa'aal as a ch'e'n mentioned at Caracol.

o Tokovinine-TPoP.p182.pdfp193.para1: In the inscriptions carved on their own monuments, Naranjo lords preferred to call themselves k'uhul sa'aal ajaw “holy (divine) Sa'aal lord(s)” (Table 6.6). Their claims to holiness were likely linked to the divine origins of the dynasty (Martin and Grube 2000:70; Wanyerka, et al. 2004:6-7; Tokovinine and Fialko 2007:10). The founder of the dynasty, whose name (IK'-mi-[T1021]-AJAW) remains partially undeciphered (I am using a common nickname – “Square-Nosed Beasty” or SNB), is a deity mentioned at other Classic Maya sites including Palenque and Copan. According to Naranjo inscriptions, he acceded to kingship either 22000 years (Middle Classic NAR Alt 1:A2-A9) or 896000 years ago (Late Classic NAR St 1:F7-E14). It seems that the tendency was to move his reign ever further back in time. All Sa'aal rulers counted their accessions since the accession of the SNB. For instance, late Classic king K'ahk' Tiliw Chan Chaak was the 38th Sa'aal ruler to accede to kingship since the SNB (NAR St 24:B13-C17). Naranjo rulers were keen to emphasize the divine origins of the dynasty and sometimes claimed the title of uyajawte' k'uh, “the warlord of the god” (NAR Alt 1:H3).

o AT-E1168-lecture23.t0:45:11-45:51: And then some places were described as literal possessions. So different kingdoms were seen as the property of gods, but sometimes the property of deified ancestors. So Ihk’ Miin, the founder of Naranjo, owned Naranjo. Sak Hix Muut owned Tikal. The founder of the dynasty at Palenque – Akan Nal Muwaan Mat Ixiim – was the owner of Palenque. So these spirits of ancestors were tangible kings – the tangible physical rulers[?] – perhaps as real images as possessors of the land. And of course Copan was literally owned by Yax K’uk’ Mo’. So his court was what held the place together, in a way.

·     Sim’s summary of the different formulations – there are two subtle issues here:

o There’s one issue of the SNB/Miin being the “general deity” and Ihk’ Miin being a “specific instantiation” (or aspect) of the SNB.

o There’s the other issue of the difference between a figure being between a patron deity and being an ancestral figure.

So, it’s incorrect to say that Ihk’ Miin was the patron deity of NAR – he was the ancestral figure of the NAR dynasty. And when using this “correct” term of ancestral figure, it’s incorrect to say that the SNB was the ancestral figure of the NAR dynasty, one needs to say that Ihk’ Miin was.

·     Mitchell-VCoP is an MA thesis with 15 references to the SNB, all in relation to (being?) the founder of the NAR dynasty.

·     Interesting aspects of some of the examples above:

o QRG Zoomorph P: the text appears to be written from right to left, rather than the conventional left to right order:

§ The SNB faces right rather than left.

§ The IHK’ is to the right of the SNB rather than to the left.

Furthermore, the K’AL often seen inside the lower loop of the “S” is separate from the SNB and is below the IHK’ – an interesting aspect independent of the text being written from right to left.

o TIK Temple 4 Lintel 2

§ The IHK’ is not written as a glyph (not even conflated with MIIN) but instead manifests as a cross-hatched internal area within the body of the “S”. This is known also for YIHK’IN, where the IHK’ may also (sometimes) manifest as cross-hatched sub-areas of K’IN rather than any distinctive elements of the IHK’ logogram being present in the K’IN.