·    Variants (5):

o A. Axe – long, rectangular outline – features:

§ Washer.

§ Axe-blade with internal reinforcement on the long and outside edges, with 2 touching dots.

o B. Boulder – features:

§ Asymmetric cave with reinforced ceiling.

§ Curved vertical band (sometimes just line).

§ 2 touching dots at half-height, on one side (the side which curves out).

o C. Axe + Boulder: Axe variant on top of Boulder variant.

o D. CH’ICH’-like / “JELLYFISH”-like (though probably related to neither of them):

§ (Optionally), top – a hand-like element, vaguely resembling the reduced variant of NAL = “maize”, “place”:

·      Left: An (optionally bold) left feeler with protector (BMM9 has a washer).

·      Right: A horizontally rectangular element with a series of slightly wavy horizontal ticks on the right wall (vaguely resembling a hand with fingers on the right.

§ Bottom

·      A boulder outline with trilobate base (CH’ICH’-like) – each lobe (optionally) having a series of slightly curved ticks (creating the impression of a “jellyfish”).

·      An (optionally bold) inverted lipped-U in the top part.

·      (Optionally) two struts or a ladder between the inverted lipped-U and the ceiling.

·      The “wood property marker” below the lipped-U:

o   A slightly curved vertical band (sometimes just line) from the inverted lipped-U to the floor.

o   2 touching dots at half-height, on one side of the slightly curved vertical line (on the side which curves out).

§ Note that only the older sources (JM and Thompson) list this glyph without the NAL-like top element (and even JM has one form with the NAL-like element – JM.p230.31) – all modern sources have the NAL-like top element as an integral part of the glyph. Interesting too that Bonn doesn’t recognize TE’ as the reading (2025-05-05), despite its widespread acceptance in the other pedagogical sources. Equally interesting, BMM9.p21.r6.c1 lists it as a separate logogram, pronounced YET (with no question mark).

§ Do not confuse this variant of TE’ with “JELLYFISH”/ta:

·      In “JELLYFISH” there are only two lobes on the bottom (with a long “bay” between the two lobes, stretching in from the outside to about halfway inside the “JELLYFISH”) whereas in this variant of TE’ there are three lobes on the bottom, with no “bay” (the place of the “bay” is taken by the middle lobe).

·      There is never a “wood property marker” in “JELLYFISH”, whereas (unsurprisingly) it is always present in this variant of TE’.

§ Do not confuse this variant of TE’ with “MIJIIN”. They don’t really resemble one another that much:

·      This variant of TE’ has two indentations about 1/3 and 2/3 of the way along the bottom (“CH’ICH’-like” / blood-cartouche), which “MIJIIN” never has.

·      “MIJIIN” has an AJAW-face in the centre, which this one never has (instead it has the “wood” element).

·      The only aspect they have in common is a sort of inverted lipped-U in the top.

o E. Head – also referred to as the Pax God, Paax God, Pax Deity:

§ Eye: a large squarish eye, with eyeball in the top left corner:

·      Note that 25EMC.pdfp46.#8.3 is not TE’ but “UHMAN”:

o   The eye is not square and it has a scroll inside (and no eyeball in the top left corner).

o   The mouth region has two large and distinct scrolls , one going left and one going right.

Both these characteristics are typical for “UHMAN”.

§ A “cruller” to the left, right and under the eye (as with all crullers, when present).

§ Mouth: a CH’AB-like element.

CPN Stela D A5 is the head variant interacting with a full-figure variant of the number “8” (IXIIM = “maize”, with corn husk and kernels in the head), forming the Haab date of a CR: 8-TE’-IHK’-SIHOOM = “8-Ch’en”.

§ Nuckols-SGaFF.p19.pdfp12.para1: Another key decision was made in block A5 [of CPN Stela D], where the first head variants occur.in this inscription [of otherwise full-figure glyphs]. (Figure 4b) Here the maize god Ixiim sits as a full-figure glyph for the number 8, holding the head variant for the logograph TE’. These two signs together spell waxakte’, meaning “eighth” and referencing the 8th day of the month Ch’en. Visually, these two signs reference growth, fertility, and trees: the maize god represents the life cycle of the maize plant itself and the associated abundance and life that corn brings, while the head variant for TE’ represents the “Pax” tree god—a personified tree embodied by a face that sits at the base of mythical trees with roots growing from the jawless bottom half of its mouth. Although the maize god was the scribe’s only choice for personifying the number 8, the decision to include the TE’ head variant seems intentional—the inclusion of the suffix -te’ after waxak (“eight”) appears to have been optional to scribes. Furthermore, in other full-figure texts that include TE’, the scribe frequently conflates the TE’ sign’s flowing roots with the face of the associated number, creating a leafy beard. The choice to isolate this sign as a head variant draws the reader’s eye and visually reinforces the theme of trees and leafy growth associated with forests and trees—an aspect also associated with stela[e?], as will be discussed below. In addition, the theme of severed heads growing from trees finds parallels in the Maya myth in which the Maize God is decapitated in the Underworld, and his head is hung from a calabash tree.

·    ZenderEtAl-TSSw.p43.pdfp9.c1.l-11: itz’in te’ [itz’in] taaj […] “junior trees and junior obsidians.” […] This is almost certainly a reference to members of a ranked ritual order of priest-scribes.