The jehlaj k'ojob expression is the most widely quoted of all era day events in Maya inscriptions and it refers to the changing of a pedestal or altar at the start of the current era on 13.0.0.0.0 4 Ajaw 8 Kumk'u or August 11/13 3114 BC, the "zero" date of the Maya Long Count calendar. Here is an example from from Stela C, East side (block B6) of Quirigua, Guatemala:
JEL-[la]ja k’o-ba collocation from Quirigua Stela C
(Drawing by Annie Hunter)
The item that is being changed is the k'ojob. The term is not well understood since it occurs very rarely in the inscriptions. I thought a further inquiry into this enigmatic term might shed some light on the subject since so much of how we interpret this climatic era day event depends on knowing the type of the object that is being changed. The term k’ojob is found on the following era day monuments:
Coba Stela 1, back (N18)
Chichen Itza, The Caracol
(Structure 3C15), Panel 1, Right Lateral Face (R9)
Copan Stela 23, sides “A” (D7-D9)
and “C” (F1)
La Corona Altar 4 (A’1)
Palenque, Temple of the Cross, Main
Panel (D6)
Palenque, Temple of the Sun, Main
Panel (E1)
Piedras Negras, Altar 1, Fragment B (L2)
Quirigua Stela C, East side (B6)
In all these cases, the word is
spelled using two syllabic signs /k’o-/
and /-b’a/, with the intial /k’o-/ syllable spelled using the T220
sign that is a depiction of a clinched, downward pointing fist (Thompson
1962:449; Boot 2008:9). The /k’o/
syllable was first deciphered by Linda Schele based on a k’o-jo or
k’oj for
“mask” spelling on a Site R, Lintel 2 text associated with a figure
wearing a mask (Schele 1991:108). Early in the decipherment of era day texts, it was
proposed that the term k’ob might
read yeb for “his stair” (Macleod
1991) with the T220 holding a syllabic value of /ye-/ (the T220 sign is very similar to the T710 /ye-/ sign representing the profile of a
partially open right hand). As the meaning syllabic signs progressed, it became
clear that T220 and T710 held distinct values of /k’o/ and /ye/
respectively. Schele used the /k’o/
value for T220 to derive k’oh, the
word for “image/mask” on the Palenque Cross Tablet (D6) (while discounting the very
prominent /–b’a/ syllable sitting
directly under the /k’o-/ ) as well
as on the K6593 Panel (block A4) (Schele 1992:122-123 and 127; Freidel et al.
1993:65-67 and page 70-71). Schele also applied the /k’o-/ value to a translation in the Quirigua Stela C era day text
(B6) and arrived at a slightly different spelling than that on the Palenque
Temple of the Cross example (this time incorporating the /-b’a/ syllable into the word) with a reading of k’ohba for “image or statue” (Schele
1992:123; Freidel et al. 1993:67). More recently, Freidel and MacLeod (2000)
proposed a new reading for the subject of the era day expression at Palenque
and Quirigua:
First of all, reevaluation of the Creation
text at Quirigua C shows that the k’ohba “images(s)” reading was probably not
correct. The subject of the “crossed planks” verb in Kan-Balam’s Palenque
Creation texts, and in others, must be k’oob “hearth”, “trivit”, found in
Yucatec k’ooben “hearth, hearthstones, kitchen with cognates in Kekchi “k’ub”;
Chorti and Cholti “chub”- probably glottalized: ch’ub
The term was now thought to represent “hearthstone” and it
relates to the colonial Yucatec Maya word for
k’ob’en “kitchen, hearth” that is composed of three stones on
which a cooking griddle sits (cf. Barrera Vásquez 1980:406, after Boot
2009:9). This new reading has had favor among leading epigraphers in the field
yet, others employ a more generalized term of “tripod” rather than hearthstone
(Looper 2003:226).
The term k’ob
is used in the inscriptions outside the context of era day expressions and
these additional uses offer evidence toward its spelling and insights into its
meaning (p.c. Péter Bíró 2008). Additional spellings of the word occur on Copan
Structure 30, Altar 19469 (A1) (Schele 1990; Andrews 2005 et al. 2005:285-287)
and Yaxchilan Hieroglyphic Stairway 5, Step 16 (block 81) (Boot 2009:111).
The Copan altar is circular in shape and flat-topped; it
is 30 cm in diameter and 8 cm thick and has wheel-like shape. A glyphic text is
carved on its perimeter edge; the text “states that u yak’ chaak was brought out or manifested at the celebration of Yax Pasaj’s first k’atun of rule, and the ceramic effigy referred to is the yitah yahawil “the companion of the lord or his office”
(Andrews et al. 2005:287). This small circular altar makes an ideal platform on
which the effigy indicated most probably sat. Notice how scribes spell the k’ob term on this Copan altar and on the
Yaxchilan steps by adding the interior syllable /-jo-/ :
Copan Str.30 Altar 19469 (A1-A6):u-JEL k’o-jo-ba u ya-k’u
CHAAK-ki . . .
Yaxchilan Stairway 5 Step 16
(block 81): . . . k’o-jo-ba-li ye-TE’-je
u-chan ta-ja-mo’-o? aj-15-ba-ki
k’uhul-“YAX EG?”-[AJAW] KALOM-TE’
These two cases spell the term with the interior /-jo-/ syllable indicating that the word
may be under-spelled in other cases when written as k’o-ba. The Copan example is especially telling since it occurs in
phrase that uses the same verb jel collocation
as in the era day expression by recording “the
next k’ojob (of) uyak’u chaak” The item possessed by uyak’u chaak is the k’ojob
or the round flat-topped altar itself on which the inscription is written. Here is a photo of a cast of the Copan altar:
Copan Structure 30, Altar 19469
(Photo by Carl Callaway)
Here is close up of the main event. Note the addition of the /-jo/ syllable above the /-ba/ sign:
u-JEL k’o-jo-ba collocation on Copan Structure 30, Altar 19469
(photo by Carl Callaway)
In
the Yaxchilan example, k’o-jo-ba-li ye-TE’-je u-chan ta-ja-mo’-o? aj-15-ba-ki k’uhul-“YAX EG?”-[AJAW] KALOM-TE’ the possessor of the k’ojobil is the king Itzamnaj Balam III the “guardian” and captor of
Torch Macaw. So, the question arises:
What is the meaning of k’ojob?
Does the term name a particular flat-topped stone or a hearth stone? The full
spelling of the term as k’o-jo-ba
argues against the previous derivation as k’o-ba
and a classification as a hearthstone.
One more example of the
term k’ob comes from the site of
Joyanca where it is part of a
standard dedicatory phrase for another small circular altar (very similar in
shape and size to the previous Copan altar) from Structure 6E-12 thought to be
used as an incensario stand (Formé
2006:06). David Stuart transcribed the glyph blocks A2-C1 as: T’AB'AY u-k’o-b’a TUN-ni-li? (Formé
2006:06) Like on the Copan altar, the item indicated by the k’o-ba spelling is the circular altar
that is being dedicated. The Joyanca stone, with its flat top is ideal for an
effigy stand. It is difficult to ascertain given the present evidence,
if the k’ojob refers to the altar/pedestal
stone itself, or to the effigy/god it supports, or the altar/pedestal stone and
the effigy/god together (p.c. Barbara
Macleod 2011). Based on the current evidence
stated, the proper spelling of the term is k’o-jo-ba
for k’ojob and may translate as a flat-topped,
circular stone altar.
In a counter opinion David Stuart (2011a:216-219)
interprets the term under consideration as not k’ojob but k’oj meaning
“image,” “mask” or “face” with the /–ba/ suffix attached at the end of k’oj root serving apparently
as an instrumental suffix.
The new glyphic phrase reads something like jelaj
k’oj baah for “the face-image changed” (Stuart 2011a:219)
with k’oj being in this case “image.”
Stuart offers the following explination:
Perhaps the word k’oj refers to masks, images, or
faces that should be equated in some manner with the three sacred stones
dedicated on that day by the gods. I suggest this as a possibility because
we’ve long known that the three stone heads or masks along a celestial band
comprise an important cosmological symbol for the Classic Maya, most often
manifested as small portrait heads attached to “sky belts” worn by Maya kings
as part of the ceremonial costume for period-ending rituals. The “change of
masks” might then, refer to the idea of the cosmos getting a new identity of
some type― a makeover of sorts―which in turn became symbolically reflected in
the ritual dress of Maya Kings, and especially in their cosmic belts (Stuart 2011a:12).
The new Stuart hypothesis is difficult to adopt in the
face of such a strong correspondence between the object named in the dedicatory
passage on the altars/pedestal stones from Joyanca and Copan.
Hopefully in the future, additional texts using the k’ojob term will come to light and help
clarify its essential meaning and semantic domain.
