presented, the most satisfactory interpretation of the upper part is that it represents the roof, as we see in the upper figure of LXVI, 25, the crosshatching and the double _ben_ lines. Hence it would seem satisfactory to consider it merely an ideogram or picture but for the prefix, which can not be readily accounted for on the idea of a pictorial representation. As we have found that the lower character of plate LXVI, 26, has the phonetic value of _ch_ usually combined with _o_ or _u_ (see remarks above on LXV, 44), we may find in this glyph _otoch_, "house," though the full signification of the entire compound symbol appears to embrace more than this. Possibly the upper part is a determinative. The lower part, however, of LXVI, 25 and 27, is found, as before remarked, where it can have no reference to a building. As it has the two heavy lines indicative of the _p_ sound (see explanation of LXIV, 11), and also of the guttural, it is probable that the signification, where a structure is referred to, is _pak_ (_pakal_), "a building, wall, fortification." But when it is found in an entirely different relation, as in Tro. 17b, where it is over an individual tying a deer, it must have an entirely different signification. It is possible that it may be consistently rendered by _pacoc_ (_paccah_), "to cord, fasten, bind" (Henderson), or some derivative thereof. We find it again on Tro. 19*d and 20*d, and Dres. 18c, 19c, and 20c, where females are represented as bearing burdens on their backs. Now, _cuch_ signifies "to bear, to carry," and also "a load, a burden," and _cuch-pach_, "a carrier, a porter" (literally "to carry on the back," _pach_ denoting "back"). In this instance also the phonetic value assigned it holds good. On Tro. 17b the same glyph stands above an individual who is in the act of striking a snake which is biting his foot. In this case it has a suffix like that to LXVI, 3, which, as we have stated, probably represents the sound _ah_, _ha_, or _hal_, and indicates that the word is a verb. There are several words containing the phonetic value assigned the character, which are applicable, as _pokchetah_, which Perez interprets "pisar, poner el pie sobre algo;" _puchah_, "despachurran, machucar;" _pachah_, "to scatter, break" (H.); _pech_, "to crush" (H.); _pacez_ (_paczah_), "to squeeze, press, crush" (H.). It seems, therefore, quite probable that the lower part of these compound symbols is phonetic. If Dr Seler is correct in his supposition that the symbol is derived from the plaited mat, then it is most likely simply ideographic or a mere conventional pictograph. Possibly this is the correct conclusion, as I can find no evidence tending to show that it is phonetic. If we could suppose the form was intended to represent a "road" or "pathway"--_be_, _beil_, and _bel_ in Maya, and _beel_ in Zotzil--we might assume it to be phonetic.