Maya script
Maya script | ||
---|---|---|
Logosyllabic
| ||
Time period | 3rd century BCE to 16th century CE | |
Direction | Mixed | |
Languages | Unicode range | None (tentative range U+15500–U+159FF) |
This article is part of a series on the |
Maya civilization |
---|
History |
Spanish conquest of the Maya |
|
Maya script, also known as Maya glyphs, is historically the native
Maya writing used
Languages
Evidence suggests that codices and other classic texts were written by scribes—usually members of the Maya priesthood—in Classic Maya, a literary form of the extinct Chʼoltiʼ language.[4][5] It is possible that the Maya elite spoke this language as a lingua franca over the entire Maya-speaking area, but texts were also written in other Mayan languages of the Petén and Yucatán, especially Yucatec. There is also some evidence that the script may have been occasionally used to write Mayan languages of the Guatemalan Highlands.[5] However, if other languages were written, they may have been written by Chʼoltiʼ scribes, and therefore have Chʼoltiʼ elements.
Structure
Mayan writing consisted of a relatively elaborate and complex set of glyphs, which were laboriously painted on ceramics, walls and bark-paper codices, carved in wood or stone, and molded in stucco. Carved and molded glyphs were painted, but the paint has rarely survived. As of 2008[update], the sound of about 80% of Maya writing could be read and the meaning of about 60% could be understood with varying degrees of certainty, enough to give a comprehensive idea of its structure.[6]
Maya texts were usually written in blocks arranged in columns two blocks wide, with each block corresponding to a noun or verb
The Maya script was a logosyllabic system with some syllabogrammatic elements. Individual glyphs or symbols could represent either a morpheme or a syllable, and the same glyph could often be used for both. Because of these dual readings, it is customary to write logographic readings in all caps and phonetic readings in italics or bold. For example, a calendaric glyph can be read as the morpheme manikʼ or as the syllable chi.
Glyphs used as syllabograms were originally logograms for single-syllable words, usually those that ended in a vowel or in a weak consonant such as y, w, h, or glottal stop. For example, the logogram for 'fish fin'—found in two forms, as a fish fin and as a fish with prominent fins—was read as [kah] and came to represent the syllable ka. These syllabic glyphs performed two primary functions: as phonetic complements to disambiguate logograms which had more than one reading (similar to ancient Egyptian and modern Japanese furigana); and to write grammatical elements such as verbal inflections which did not have dedicated logograms (similar to Japanese okurigana). For example, bʼalam 'jaguar' could be written as a single logogram, bʼalam; a logogram with syllable additions, as ba-bʼalam, or bʼalam-ma, or bʼa-bʼalam-ma; or written completely phonetically with syllabograms as bʼa-la-ma.
In addition, some syllable glyphs were
Harmonic and disharmonic echo vowels
Phonetic glyphs stood for simple consonant-vowel (CV) or vowel-only (V) syllables. However, Mayan phonotactics is slightly more complicated than this. Most Mayan words end with consonants, and there may be sequences of two consonants within a word as well, as in xolteʼ ([ʃolteʔ] 'scepter') which is CVCCVC. When these final consonants were sonorants (l, m, n) or gutturals (j, h, ʼ) they were sometimes ignored ("underspelled"). More often, final consonants were written, which meant that an extra vowel was written as well. This was typically an "echo" vowel that repeated the vowel of the previous syllable. For example, the word [kah] 'fish fin' would be underspelled ka or written in full as ka-ha. However, there are many cases where some other vowel was used, and the orthographic rules for this are only partially understood; this is largely due to the difficulty in ascertaining whether this vowel may be due to an underspelled suffix.
Lacadena & Wichmann (2004) proposed the following conventions:
- A CVC syllable was written CV-CV, where the two vowels (V) were the same: yo-po [yop] 'leaf'
- A syllable with a long vowel (CVVC) was written CV-Ci, unless the long vowel was [i], in which case it was written CiCa: ba-ki [baak] 'captive', yi-tzi-na [yihtziin] 'younger brother'
- A syllable with a glottalized vowel (CVʼC or CVʼVC) was written with a final a if the vowel was [e, o, u], or with a final u if the vowel was [a] or [i]: hu-na [huʼn] 'paper', ba-tzʼu [baʼtsʼ] 'howler monkey'.
- Preconsonantal [h] is not indicated.
In short, if the vowels are the same (harmonic), a simple vowel is intended. If the vowels are not the same (disharmonic), either two syllables are intended (likely underspelled), or else a single syllable with a long vowel (if V1 = [a e? o u] and V2 = [i], or else if V1 = [i] and V2 = [a]) or with a glottalized vowel (if V1 = [e? o u] and V2 = [a], or else if V1 = [a i] and V2 = [u]). The long-vowel reading of [Ce-Ci] is still uncertain, and there is a possibility that [Ce-Cu] represents a glottalized vowel (if it is not simply an underspelling for [CeCuC]), so it may be that the disharmonies form natural classes: [i] for long non-front vowels, otherwise [a] to keep it disharmonic; [u] for glottalized non-back vowels, otherwise [a].
A more complex spelling is ha-o-bo ko-ko-no-ma for [haʼoʼb kohknoʼm] 'they are the guardians'.[a] A minimal set is,
- ba-ka [bak]
- ba-ki [baak]
- ba-ku [baʼk] = [baʼak]
- ba-ke [baakel] (underspelled)
- ba-ke-le [baakel]
Verbal inflections
Despite depending on consonants which were frequently not written, the Mayan
Voice | Transliteration | Transcription | Gloss |
---|---|---|---|
Active | u-TZUTZ-wa | utzutzuw | "(s)he finished it" |
Passive | TZUTZ-tza-ja | tzu[h]tzaj | "it was finished" |
Mediopassive
|
TZUTZ-yi | tzutzuy | "it got finished" |
Antipassive
|
TZUTZ-wi | tzutzuw | "(s)he finished" |
Participial
|
TZUTZ-li | tzutzul | "finished" |
The active suffix did not participate in the harmonic/disharmonic system seen in roots, but rather was always -wa.
However, the language changed over 1500 years, and there were dialectal differences as well, which are reflected in the script, as seen next for the verb "(s)he sat" (⟨h⟩ is an infix in the root chum for the passive voice):[8]
Period | Transliteration | Transcription |
---|---|---|
Late Preclassic | CHUM? | chu[h]m? |
Early Classic | CHUM-ja | chu[h]m-aj |
Classic (Eastern Chʼolan) | CHUM[mu]la-ja | chum-l-aj |
Late Classic (Western Chʼolan) | CHUM[mu]wa-ni | chum-waan |
Emblem glyphs
An "emblem glyph" is a kind of royal title. It consists of a place name followed by the word ajaw, a Classic Maya term for "lord" with an unclear but well-attested etymology.[9] Sometimes the title is introduced by an adjective kʼuhul ("holy, divine" or "sacred"), resulting in the construction "holy [placename] lord". However, an "emblem glyph" is not a "glyph" at all: it can be spelled with any number of syllabic or logographic signs and several alternative spellings are attested for the words kʼuhul and ajaw, which form the stable core of the title. "Emblem glyph" simply reflects the time when Mayanists could not read Classic Maya inscriptions and used a term to isolate specific recurring structural components of the written narratives, and other remaining examples of Maya orthography.
This title was identified in 1958 by Heinrich Berlin, who coined the term "emblem glyph".[10] Berlin noticed that the "emblem glyphs" consisted of a larger "main sign" and two smaller signs now read as kʼuhul ajaw. Berlin also noticed that while the smaller elements remained relatively constant, the main sign changed from site to site. Berlin proposed that the main signs identified individual cities, their ruling dynasties, or the territories they controlled. Subsequently, Marcus (1976) argued that the "emblem glyphs" referred to archaeological sites, or more so the prominence and standing of the site, broken down in a 5-tiered hierarchy of asymmetrical distribution. Marcus' research assumed that the emblem glyphs were distributed in a pattern of relative site importance depending on broadness of distribution, roughly broken down as follows: Primary regional centers (capitals) (Tikal, Calakmul, and other "superpowers") were generally first in the region to acquire a unique emblem glyph(s). Texts referring to other primary regional centers occur in the texts of these "capitals", and dependencies exist which use the primary center's glyph. Secondary centers (Altun Ha, Lubaantun, Xunantunich, and other mid-sized cities) had their own glyphs but are only rarely mentioned in texts found in the primary regional center, while repeatedly mentioning the regional center in their own texts. Tertiary centers (towns) had no glyphs of their own, but have texts mentioning the primary regional centers and perhaps secondary regional centers on occasion. These were followed by the villages with no emblem glyphs and no texts mentioning the larger centers, and hamlets with little evidence of texts at all.[11] This model was largely unchallenged for over a decade until Mathews and Justeson,[12] as well as Houston,[13] argued once again that the "emblem glyphs" were the titles of Maya rulers with some geographical association.
The debate on the nature of "emblem glyphs" received a new spin in Stuart & Houston (1994). The authors demonstrated that there were many place-names-proper, some real, some mythological, mentioned in the hieroglyphic inscriptions. Some of these place names also appeared in the "emblem glyphs", some were attested in the "titles of origin" (expressions like "a person from Lubaantun"), but some were not incorporated in personal titles at all. Moreover, the authors also highlighted the cases when the "titles of origin" and the "emblem glyphs" did not overlap, building upon Houston's earlier research.[14] Houston noticed that the establishment and spread of the Tikal-originated dynasty in the Petexbatun region was accompanied by the proliferation of rulers using the Tikal "emblem glyph" placing political and dynastic ascendancy above the current seats of rulership.[15] Recent investigations also emphasize the use of emblem glyphs as an emic identifier to shape socio-political self-identity.[16]
Numerical system
The Mayas used a positional base-twenty (vigesimal) numerical system which only included whole numbers. For simple counting operations, a bar and dot notation was used. The dot represents 1 and the bar represents 5. A shell was used to represent zero. Numbers from 6 to 19 are formed combining bars and dots, and can be written horizontally or vertically.
Numbers over 19 are written vertically and read from the bottom to the top as powers of 20. The bottom number represents numbers from 0 to 20, so the symbol shown does not need to be multiplied. The second line from the bottom represents the amount of 20s there are, so that number is multiplied by 20. The third line from the bottom represents the amount of 400s, so it is multiplied by 400; the fourth by 8000; the fifth by 160,000, etc. Each successive line is an additional power of twenty (similar to how in Arabic numerals, additional powers of 10 are added to the left of the first digit). This positional system allows the calculation of large figures, necessary for chronology and astronomy.[17]
History
It was until recently thought that the Maya may have adopted writing from the Olmec or Epi-Olmec culture, who used the Isthmian script. However, murals excavated in 2005 have pushed back the origin of Maya writing by several centuries, and it now seems possible that the Maya were the ones who invented writing in Mesoamerica.[18] Scholarly consensus is that the Maya developed the only complete writing system in Mesoamerica.[19]
Before the arrival of Spanish conquistadors, the Aztecs destroyed many Mayan works and sought to depict themselves as the true rulers through a fake history and newly written texts.
For many years, only three
Knowledge of the writing system was lost, probably by the end of the 16th century. Renewed interest in it was sparked by published accounts of ruined Maya sites in the 19th century.[22]
Decipherment
Deciphering Maya writing has proven a long and laborious process. 19th-century and early 20th-century investigators managed to decode the
Including "Examples of Phonetic Construction in Maya Hieroglyphs", in 1946.
As
In 1959, examining what she called "a peculiar pattern of dates" on stone monument inscriptions at the Classic Maya site of
Although it was then clear what was on many Maya inscriptions, they still could not literally be read. However, further progress was made during the 1960s and 1970s, using a multitude of approaches including
A new wave of breakthroughs occurred in the early 1970s, in particular at the first
From that point, progress proceeded rapidly. Scholars such as J. Kathryn Josserand, Nick Hopkins and others published findings that helped to construct a Mayan vocabulary.[34] The "old school" continued to resist the results of the new scholarship for some time. A decisive event which helped to turn the tide in favor of the new approach occurred in 1986, at an exhibition entitled "The Blood of Kings: A New Interpretation of Maya Art", organized by InterCultura and the Kimbell Art Museum and curated by Schele and by Yale art historian Mary Miller. This exhibition and its attendant catalogue—and international publicity—revealed to a wide audience the new world which had latterly been opened up by progress in decipherment of Maya hieroglyphics. Not only could a real history of ancient America now be read and understood, but the light it shed on the material remains of the Maya showed them to be real, recognisable individuals. They stood revealed as a people with a history like that of all other human societies: full of wars, dynastic struggles, shifting political alliances, complex religious and artistic systems, expressions of personal property and ownership and the like. Moreover, the new interpretation, as the exhibition demonstrated, made sense out of many works of art whose meaning had been unclear and showed how the material culture of the Maya represented a fully integrated cultural system and world-view. Gone was the old Thompson view of the Maya as peaceable astronomers without conflict or other attributes characteristic of most human societies.
However, three years later, in 1989, supporters who continued to resist the modern decipherment interpretation made their last argument against it. This occurred at a conference at Dumbarton Oaks. It did not directly attack the methodology or results of decipherment, but instead contended that the ancient Maya texts had indeed been read but were "epiphenomenal". This argument was extended from a populist perspective to say that the deciphered texts tell only about the concerns and beliefs of the society's elite, and not about the ordinary Maya. In opposition to this idea, Michael Coe described "epiphenomenal" as "a ten penny word meaning that Maya writing is only of marginal application since it is secondary to those more primary institutions—economics and society—so well studied by the dirt archaeologists."[35]
Linda Schele noted following the conference that this is like saying that the inscriptions of ancient Egypt—or the writings of Greek philosophers or historians—do not reveal anything important about their cultures. Most written documents in most cultures tell us about the elite, because in most cultures in the past, they were the ones who could write (or could have things written down by scribes or inscribed on monuments).[citation needed]
Over 90 percent of the Maya texts can now be read with reasonable accuracy.[3] As of 2020[update], at least one phonetic glyph was known for each of the syllables marked green in this chart. /tʼ/ is rare. /pʼ/ is not found, and is thought to have been a later innovation in the Ch'olan and Yucatecan languages.
(ʼ) | b | ch | chʼ | h | j | k | kʼ | l | m | n | p | s | t | tʼ | tz | tzʼ | w | x | y | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
a | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | |
e | Yes | Yes | Yes | ? | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | ? | Yes | ? | Yes | |
i | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | ||
o | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | ? | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | |
u | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | ? | Yes | Yes |
Syllables
Syllables are in the form of consonant + vowel. The top line contains individual vowels. In the left column are the consonants with their pronunciation instructions. The apostrophe ' represents the glottal stop. There are different variations of the same character in the table cell. Blank cells are bytes whose characters are not yet known.[38]
a | e | i | o | u | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
b | |||||
ch /tš/ |
|||||
ch’ | |||||
h /h/ |
|||||
j /x/ |
|||||
k | |||||
k’ | |||||
l | |||||
m | |||||
n | |||||
p | |||||
s | |||||
t | |||||
t’ | |||||
tz /ts/ |
|||||
tz’ | |||||
w | |||||
x /š/ |
|||||
y /j/ |
|||||
a | e | i | o | u |
Example
Tomb of Kʼinich Janaabʼ Pakal:
Row | Glyphs | Reading | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
I | J | I | J | |
4 | ya k’a wa | ʔu(?) K’UH hu lu | yak’aw | ʔuk’uhul |
5 | PIK | 1-WINAAK-ki | pik | juʔn winaak |
6 | pi xo ma | ʔu SAK hu na la | pixoʔm | ʔusak hunal |
7 | ʔu-ha | YAX K’AHK’ K’UH? | ʔuʔh | Yax K’ahk’ K’uh? |
8 | ʔu tu pa | K’UH? ? | ʔutuʔp | k’uh(ul)? ...l |
9 | ʔu KOʔHAW wa | ?[CHAAK] ...m | ʔukoʔhaw | Chaahk (‘GI’) |
10 | SAK BALUʔN | – | Sak Baluʔn | – |
Text: Yak’aw ʔuk’uhul pik juʔn winaak pixoʔm ʔusak hunal ʔuʔh Yax K’ahk’ K’uh(?) ʔutuʔp k’uh(ul)? ...l ʔukoʔhaw Chaahk (‘GI’) Sak Baluʔn.
Translation: «He gave the god clothing, [consisted of] twenty nine headgears, white ribbon, necklace, First Fire God’s earrings and God’s quadrilateral badge helmet, to Chaahk Sak-Balun».
Revival
In recent times, there has been an increased interest in reviving usage of the script. Various works have recently been both transliterated and created into the script, notably the transcription of the
Computer encoding
As of 2023, the Maya script cannot be represented in any standard computer character encoding. With the renewed usage of Maya writing, digital encoding of the script has been of recent interest.[41] A range of code points (U+15500–U+159FF) has been tentatively allocated for Unicode, but no detailed encoding proposal has been submitted yet.[42] The Script Encoding Initiative project of the University of California, Berkeley, was awarded a grant in June 2016 to create a proposal to the Unicode Consortium for layout and presentation mechanisms in Unicode text. It was expected to be completed in 2017,[43] but as of 2023[update], they have not completed this project.[44]
The goal of encoding Maya hieroglyphs in Unicode is to facilitate the modern use of the script. For representing the degree of flexibility and variation of classical Maya, the expressiveness of Unicode is insufficient (e.g., with regard to the representation of infixes, i.e., signs inserted into other signs), so, for philological applications, different technologies are required.[45]
The
Notes
- ^ Vowel length and glottalization are not always indicated in common words like 'they are'.
References
- S2CID 46351994.)
{{cite journal}}
: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link - ^ "Symbols on the Wall Push Maya Writing Back by Years". The New York Times. 2006-01-10. Retrieved 2010-05-12.
- ^ a b c d Breaking the Maya Code 2008.
- S2CID 741601.
- ^ a b Kettunen & Helmke 2020, p. 13.
- ^ Kettunen & Helmke 2020, p. 22.
- ^ Kettunen & Helmke 2020, p. 66.
- ^ Kettunen & Helmke 2020, p. 72.
- ^ Lacadena García-Gallo & Ciudad Ruiz 1998, pp. 31–64.
- ^ Berlin, H. (1958). "El Glifo Emblema en las inscripciones Maya". Journal de la Société des Américanistes de Paris (in Spanish). 47: 111–119.
- S2CID 37509459.
- ^ Mathews 1991.
- ^ Houston 1986.
- ^ Houston 1993, pp. 97–101.
- ^ Tokovinine, A. (December 2006). People from a place: re-interpreting Classic Maya "Emblem Glyphs". 11th European Maya Conference "Ecology, Power, and Religion in Maya Landscapes". Malmö University, Sweden.
- ^ Gronemeyer, S. (2009). "Maya Political Relations and Strategies". In Źrałka, Jarosław; Koszkul, Wiesław; Golińska, Beata (eds.). Contributions in New World Archaeology. The 14th European Maya Conference. Vol. 4. Cracow: Polska Akademia Umiejętności and Uniwersytet Jagielloński (published 2012). pp. 13–40.
- ^ Information panel in the Museo Regional de Antropología in Mérida (state of Yucatán), visited on 2010-08-04
- ^ Saturno, Stuart & Beltrán 2006, pp. 1281–1283.
- ^ Coe 1992, preface.
- ISBN 9781628733228.
- ^ Robinson, Andrew (2002). Lost Languages: The Enigma of the World's Undeciphered- Scripts. New York City: Nevraumont Publishing Company. p. 122.
- ^ a b McKillop 2004, p. 294.
- ^ Constantine Rafinesque (1832) "Philology. Second letter to Mr. Champollion on the graphic systems of America, and the glyphs of Otolum or Palenque, in Central America – Elements of the glyphs," Atlantic Journal and Friend of Knowledge, 1 (2) : 40–44. From p. 42: "This page of Demotic has letters and numbers, these represented by strokes meaning 5 and dots meaning unities as the dots never exceed 4."
- ^ "Yury Valentinovich Knorozov | Russian linguist". Britannica. 2004. Retrieved 2023-02-12.
- ^ American Antiquity, Vol. 12, No. 2. 12 (2): 108–117. 1946
- ^ (in Russian) Yuri Knorozov
- ^ Coe 1992, p. 151.
- ^ a b Coe 1992, p. 147.
- ^ Coe 1992, p. 125–144.
- ^ "Ершова Г. Г. Юрий Валентинович Кнорозов // Портреты историков. Время и судьбы. М., Наука, 2004. С. 474–491". h.120-bal.ru. Retrieved 2023-02-12.
- ^ Coe 1992, pp. 167–184.
- ^ Coe 1992, pp. 204–205.
- ^ Coe 1992, p. 205.
- ^ "Josserand, Hopkins interview transcript" (PDF). Nightfirefilms.org. Retrieved 5 June 2015 – via Google Docs.
- ^ Coe 1992, p. 268.
- ^ Kettunen & Helmke 2020.
- ^ "Updated List of Characters for Mayan Codices" (PDF). Unicode.org. Retrieved 24 April 2021.
- ^ Pitts, Mark (2008). "Writing in Maya Glyphs: Names, Places, & Simple Sentences : A Non-Technical Introduction to Maya Glyphs" (PDF). FAMSI. pp. s. 16–22.
- .
- ^ "Ojarasca-Xikitin/Cigarra Un poema tseltal en glifos mayas".
- ^ Joseph DeChicchis (2012), Current Trends in Mayan Literacy, In: John C. Maher, Jelisava Dobovsek-Sethna, and Cary Duval (eds.), Literacy for Dialogue in Multilingual Societies. Proceedings of Linguapax Asia Symposium 2011, Tokyo 2012, p. 71-82
- ^ "Roadmap to the SMP". unicode.org. Retrieved 2023-02-12.
- ^ "Encoding the Mayan Script: your Adopt-a-Character sponsorships at work". unicode.org. Retrieved 2023-02-12.
- ^ Script Encoding Initiative (2022). "Progress Overview". University of California Berkeley Department of Linguistics. Retrieved 2022-04-13.
- S2CID 67865187. Archived from the original(PDF) on 2020-02-08.
Bibliography
- ISBN 978-0-500-28553-4.
- ISBN 0-500-05061-9.
- Gronemeyer, Sven (2012). "Statements of Identity: Emblem Glyphs in the Nexus of Political Relations". In Jarosław Źrałka; Wiesław Koszkul; Beata Golińska (eds.). Maya Political Relations and Strategies. Proceedings of the 14th European Maya Conference, Cracow, 2009. Contributions in New World Archaeology. Vol. 4. Cracow: Polska Akademia Umiejętności and Uniwersytet Jagielloński. pp. 13–40.
- Guéguen-Leclair, Guy (2012). Écriture maya. L'Alphabet consonantique dans les anciens textes mayas (Research papers).
- ISBN 0-292-73855-2.
- ) on 2021-02-24. Retrieved 2007-07-06.
- Kettunen, Harri; Helmke, Christophe (2020). Introduction to Maya Hieroglyphs (PDF) (in English, Spanish, French, Polish, Danish, Slovak, and Italian). Wayeb. Retrieved 2021-11-11.
- Lacadena, Alfonso; Wichmann, Søren (2004). "On the Representation of the Glottal Stop in Maya Writing". The Linguistics of Maya Writing. Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press. pp. 103–162.
- Lacadena García-Gallo, Alfonso; Ciudad Ruiz, Andrés (1998). "Reflexiones sobre la estructura política maya clásica". In Andrés Ciudad Ruiz; Yolanda Fernández Marquínez; José Miguel García Campillo; Maria Josefa Iglesias Ponce de León; Alfonso Lacadena García-Gallo; Luis T. Sanz Castro (eds.). Anatomía de una Civilización: Aproximaciones Interdisciplinarias a la Cultura Maya (in Spanish). Madrid: Sociedad Española de Estudios Mayas. ISBN 84-923545-0-X.
- de Landa, Diego (1566) [From 1958 Porrua edition, with page numbers in parentheses]. Prager, Christian (ed.). "Relacion de las Cosas de Yucatán" (PDF) (published 2002) – via Wayeb.org.
- Lebrun, David (Director) Guthrie, Rosey (producer) (2008). Breaking the Maya Code (Documentary). Night Fire Films. ASIN B001B2U1BE.
- ISBN 0-521-39210-1.
- ISBN 0-88402-066-5.
- McKillop, Heather (2004). The ancient Maya : new perspectives. New York, N.Y.: W. W. Norton & Company, Inc. ISBN 978-0-393-32890-5.
- ISBN 978-0-7818-1020-3.
- ISBN 978-0-7818-0862-0.
- Saturno, William A.; S2CID 46351994. Retrieved 2007-06-15.
- ISBN 0-8076-1278-2.
- ISBN 0-688-07456-1.
- ISBN 0-385-17249-4.
- ISBN 0-88402-209-9.
- ISBN 978-0-520-23221-1.
- ISBN 978-0-8061095-8-9.
- ISBN 978-0-9826826-0-9.
External links
- The European Association of Mayanists (Wayeb) has resources, including full books, on their Electronic Resources page
- A partial transcription, transliteration, and translation of the Temple of Inscriptions text by Michael D. Carrasco Archived 2006-09-01 at the Wayback Machine
- A Preliminary Classic Maya-English/English-Classic Maya Vocabulary of Hieroglyphic Readings by Erik Boot
- FAMSI resources on Maya Hieroglyphic writing
- Maya Writing in: Guatemala, Cradle of the Maya Civilization
- Wolfgang Gockel's morphemic interpretation of the glyphs
- Corpus of Maya Hieroglyphic Inscriptions Program at the Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology, Harvard University Archived 2011-09-27 at the Wayback Machine
- Corpus of Maya Hieroglyphic Inscriptions, Volumes 1–9. Published by the Peabody Museum Press and distributed by Harvard University Press
- Talakh Viktor (2011-03-19). "Introduction to hieroglyphic script of the Maya. Manual" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 2012-08-29. (in Ukrainian)
- Time Line of Decipherment