·     Hamann-PiCM.p6.para1: As with other relationship terms, this is practically never found without the possessive prefix.

·     The “AJAW”-face inside the “MIJIIN” itself causes it to have been given the nickname “capped AJAW”.

·     The reading “MIJIIN” has been rejected by a number of epigraphers. However, supporting evidence for this reading might be:

o At AT-YT2021-lecture13.t0:03:36 Tokovinine renders this glyph as K’AHK’ MIHIIN.

o At AT-YT2021-lecture24.t0:17:07 Tokovinine explains that at the time of the Spanish conquest, the Yucatec words for “son of mother” and “son of father” were yal and mehen(?).

o MartinEtAl-LE46dN.pdfp8 & MartinEtAl-LE46dN.pdfp9 give mijiin in the transliteration of NAR Stela 46 C1 and pI4 (admittedly, Tokovinine is one of the co-authors).

o Searching in MHD on “blcodes contains ZA3” gives 189 hits, all glossed as mijin.

·     Some epigraphers consider the K’AHK’ element to be an integral part of the “MIJIIN” glyph – not read separately, others that it is in fact read separately.

o Most of the standard references (K&L, TOK, BMM9, 25EMC) treat the K’AHK’/“flames” as an integral part of MIJIIN.

o MHD treats the K’AHK’ as a separate element, as the image of ZA3 does not have the “flames” above it.

§ A search on “blcodes contains ZA3” gives 192 hits, but a search on “blcodes contains ZA3” and “blcodes does not contain ZBB (=the “flames” of K’AHK’) gives more than 60 hits.

§ This significantly large number show that MHD views the K’AHK’ as a separate glyph.

§ Interestingly, a very large proportion of the MIJIINs without K’AHK’s are preceded by a colour term: IHK’, SAK, YAX, etc.

§ So MHD reads the “capped AJAW” without the “flames” as ZA3/MIJIIN, and reads the “capped AJAW” with the “flames” as ZBB and ZA3 occurring together, i.e. as K’AHK’ MIJIIN.

·     Erika Raven: Milan in EMC 2021 said that it’s a squash seed that’s sprouting, so the “flames” are actually leaves.

·     Erika Raven (personal communication 2022-01-05): (paraphrased from Dutch): the “flames” are not flames, but leaves, sprouting from the XAAK/SAAK-seed. That’s the reason that this is used as a relationship term. [Sim: Indeed, “leaves” makes much more sense in this context.]

·     The whole phrase is a parentage statement (with or without xaakil/saakil) and means “child of father” (the sprout or pumpkin seed of the right-side-up “AJAW”-face is somehow related to the father-child relationship), see also TIK Stela 31.

·     Do not confuse this with the visually similar Tzolk’in day-name AJAW. It’s only AJAW when it’s in the “blood-cartouche”, in the context of a Tzolk’in date. Furthermore, the Tzolk’in day-name AJAW never has a “cap” nor “flames”.

·     Do not confuse this with the visually similar XAAK/SAAK. XAAK/SAAK is very “plain” – just the “AJAW-face”, nothing more. MIJIIN always has a “cap”, although whether or not the “flames” on the top are to be included is an open question.