·    Reading/pronunciation – some epigraphers transcribe xukup or xukuup, others do not transcribe anything at all (probably because of uncertainty between reading xu or tz’i for the bat-head):

o Looper-LW.p135.pdfp148.c1.para2.l-4 (2003): The name of Copan may have been Xukpi or Xukup, after the motmot, a type of flycatcher (Momotus momota). Additional toponyms at Copan derive from the names of birds, such as Mo’ Witz (“Macaw Mountain”).

o GutiérrezGonzález-PhD.p147.pdfp160.fn60 (in connection with QRG Stela E) (2012): About the doubtful xukpi’ reading for Copán, see note 30. [Sim: English from Spanish via GT]

o GutiérrezGonzález-PhD.p96.pdfp109.fn30 (2012): [English from Spanish via GT] The emblem glyph of Copán consists of three glyphic elements: T756.T528.T177. There have been some proposals for its translation from a transliteration xu-ku-PIH/xu-ku-pi that would be transcribed xukpi' or Xukpi (see Schele, Grube, and Fahsen 1994; see Montgomery 2002). Looper (2003:135) points out that it could be read not only as xukpi but also xukup by a direct derivation from the word motmot (Momotus momota), which is not a bat but a flycatcher bird. This work [Sim: meaning the PhD thesis itself] does not follow these proposals, so the glyph of the bat (T756) that is observed in the main sign of the emblem glyph of Copán is not transliterated or transcribed or translated, but is handled as COPÁN (without translation and in capital letters). Whenever there is a reference to this bat glyph preceded by the logogram IK' in the first part (or transliteration), the traditional name of Copán will be used under the “black COPAN” formula.

o Martin-AMP (2020) doesn’t assign a reading.

o The reading xukuup is from Dorota Bojkowska’s notes from the Stuart lecture on the CPN HS (Penn Pre-Columbian Society, 2022), where Stuart had Xuk(uup?) on his slide. The long-u is probably because of the disharmonic spelling, with Cu+Ci.

o It’s unclear to me what the connection is (if any) between the ritual object used in some dances in YAX and the EG of CPN and the toponym of QRG.

·    The glyphs for writing the word for a ritual object (featured on two YAX lintels) and those for writing the EG of CPN are very similar: both are <bathead-glyph>-ku-pi. In all probability, they are the same word, whatever the correct reading might be. It’s largely as a matter of convenience that I transcribe xukpi for the former and xukuup for the latter, partly just to differentiate the two meanings.

·    The main toponym for the QRG site is Ihk’ Xukuup, where the second word is (for all intents and purposes) identical to the CPN toponym.

·    Both Xukuup and Ihk’ Xukuup are used in very similar ways, for CPN and QRG respectively. One difference is that Xukuup for CPN appears as K’uhul Xukuup Ajaw (=“The Holy Lord of CPN”, i.e. is an EG) while Ihk’ Xukuup for QRG appears only as Ihk’ Xukuup Ajaw (“The Lord of QRG”). This is even after the QRG successfully threw off the overlordship of CPN, becoming for all intents and purposes, an “independent” polity, charting its own way by subduing neighbouring cities, and with its own extensive and intensive building program. “TOL”, the other title for rulers of QRG does appear with K’uhul, i.e. K’uhul “TOL” Ajaw is an/the EG for QRG.