·     PDIG = “Palenque Deity Introductory Glyph”.

·     Most often found in the expression uhx luut k’uh.

·     From Erika Raven’s summary on PDIG (personal communication 2021-08-17) – this glyph has had many proposed readings:

o cha: Yuri Knorozov

o HAL: Michel Davoust

o K’AHTIB: Alexander Voss

o LOT: Linda Schele

o lu: Martha Macri

o LUT: Peter Mathews

o LUUT: Baron

o p'u-lu-ti: Martha Cuevas García & Guillermo Bernal

·     Baron-PhD.p190-198 is devoted to the decipherment of this glyph:

o Baron discusses some of the alternative proposals.

o Baron-PhD.p193.fig4.4b is an idealized distillation of the many occurrences of the PDIG in the PAL TI tablets.

o Many other examples were found via this dissertation.

o I have included Baron’s drawings as well as other drawings of the same glyph-blocks.

o I have adopted Baron’s proposed reading of luut as well as a slightly modified meaning she proposed for ux luut k’uh = “gods from a set” (Baron proposed “gods from a large set”, but I think it already works quite well without the “large”.

·     Baron-PGaPL.fig3.4 has some discussion on this also.

·     Baron-PGaPL.p62.pdfp62.l-1: The PDIG consists of three parts: the number three (hux), an undeciphered middle element, and the glyph for k'uh (Figure 3.4a). The reading of the PDIG hinges on the glyph's undeciphered middle portion, consisting of a sign that resembles the lu syllable with an infixed crossed-band element and the phonetic ti sign. […] // A far more convincing reading of the PDIG is hux luut k'uh. The two ceramic examples and Postclassic codex example of the phrase all spell the middle portion phonetically as lu-ti (Figure 3.4b). The term luut probably referred to twins, friends, or sets (Table 3.1). […] // To read the PDIG as hux luut k'uh, one must argue that the crossed-band element inside the lu sign either functions as a variant of the more typical lu sign or, alternatively, that it is a logogram reading LUUT somehow fused with the lu sign. The latter is probably the better explanation, given that in one example, the -ti suffix is totally absent, suggesting that it was not entirely necessary in order to read the middle part of the glyph as luut (Figure 3.4c). // The reading of the PDIG as hux luut k'uh was first proposed by Schele (1992:127-28). Those who accept this reading of the glyph typically interpret the hux ("three") part of the phrase as referring to three gods (Prager 2013:584). Because the PDIG was used frequently to introduce Palenque's patron gods and because Palenque's most important patrons were three in number, it is logical to assume that the hux in the glyph corresponded to the three gods listed after. This assumption has also led to the wider inference that patron deities primarily occurred as sets of three. As it turns out, both of these conclusions are incorrect. While many inscriptions did list patron gods as sets of three, they were often inconsistent. Take the patron gods of Calakmul, for example. Stela 58 named three gods, while Stela 54 named five. Cancuen Panel 1 named three Calakmul patron gods, but only two were the same as those listed on Stela 58. Other inscriptions mentioned only one Calakmul patron deity. At first glance, god lists appear to have been more formulaic at Palenque, since the typical triad of GI, GII, and GIII can be found eight times in its inscriptions. Twice, however, an additional three gods were added to the list. Once GII was paired with a different god, and on another occasion, GI was listed with four other deities. The PDIG introduced deity lists at Palenque consisting of one, two, three, or six gods. And at Caracol the glyph introduced lists of three, four, and six gods. On the Vases of the Seven and Eleven Gods it appears to have referred to just one god in a list of many. Thus, not only did Maya texts regularly list patron deities in groups other than triads but the "three" in the PDIG does not seem to have referred the actual number of gods that it introduced. In some hieroglyphic contexts hux had the extended meaning of "many" (Grube 1997:88). Given the lack of consistency in how many gods followed the PDIG, it may be best translated something like "the many-together god(s)" or "god(s) from a large set." Thus, the phrase is a quite literal description of patron deities, who were venerated in ever-accumulating pantheons.

 

·     The two vases are among the few examples of a pure syllabogram spelling – photos from mayavase.com (Kerr) and drawing by Baron – which help to support the reading luut.

·     There are quotes around the glyph-block references as they are “unofficial”, assigned by me for convenience.

·     The Vase of the Seven Gods is also referred to for this pure syllabogram spelling in Baron-PGaPL.fig3.4b.

·     A search in MHD with “bllogosyll contains 3” and “bllogosyll contains lut” yields 19 examples (uhx luut k’uh), many of them very clear.