INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF MAYA HIEROGLYPHS 



25 



are puzzling enough when the essential characteristics and meaning 

 of a glyph have been determuied, but when both are unknown the 

 problem is indeed knotty. For example, it would seem as a logical 

 deduction from the foregomg examples, that I of figure 11 is a "head" 

 variant of Tc; and similarly n might be a "head" variant of m, but 

 here we are treading on uncertain ground, as the meanings of these 

 forms are unknown. 



Nor is this feature of Maya writing (i. e., the presence of "head 

 variants") the only pitfall which awaits the beginner who attempts 

 to classify the glyphs according to their appearance. In some cases 

 two entirely dissimilar forms express exactly the same idea. For 

 example, no two glyphs could differ more in appearance than a and 6, 

 figure 12, yet both of these forms have the same meaning. This 

 is true also of the two glyphs c and d, and e and/. The occurrence of 

 forms so absolutely unhke in appearance, yet identical iii meaning, 

 greatly complicates the problem of glyph identification. Indeed, 

 identity, in both meaning and use must be clearly established before 

 we can recognize as variants of the same glyph, forms so dissimilar 

 as the examples above given. Hence, because their meanings are 

 unknown we are unable to identify g and h, figure 12, as synonyms, 



h c d e f g 



Fig. 12. Normal-form and head-variant glyphs, showing absence of common essential element. 



notwithstanding the fact that their use seems to be identical, h 

 occurring in two or three texts under exactly the same conditions 

 as does g in all the others. 



A further source of error in glyph identification is the failure to 

 recognize variations due merely to individual pecidiarities of style, 

 which are consequently unessential. Just as handwriting differs 

 in each individual, so the delineation of glyphs differed among the 

 ancient Maya, though doubtless to a lesser extent. In extreme 

 cases, however, the differences are so great that identification of 

 variants as forms of one and the same glyph is difficult if indeed not 

 impossible. Here also are to be included variations due to differences 

 in the materials upon which the glyphs are delineated, as well as those 

 arising from careless drawing and actual mistakes. 



The foregoing difficulties, as well as others which await the student 

 who would classify the Maya glyphs according to form and appear- 

 ance, have led the author to discard this method of classification as 

 unsuited to the purposes of an elementary work. Though a problem 

 of first importance, the analysis of the simple elements is far too 

 complex for presentation to the beginner, particularly since the 



