The usual form of the Mexican symbol for this day is shown in plate LXV, 32. It is also a naked skull.
Like Dr Seler, I am compelled to admit that I can give no satisfactory suggestion as to the origin of the form shown in plate LXV, 27. According to Colonel Mallery,[232-1] one sign among the Indians for knife is to "cut past the mouth with the raised right hand," which, if figured, would probably bear some resemblance to the marks on this symbol.[232-2]
Maya, _manik_; Tzental, _moxic_; Quiche-Cakchiquel, _queh_; Zapotec, _china_; Nahuatl, _mazatl_.
The symbol for this day, shown in plate LXVIII, 31, is without any change worthy of notice, the only difference observable being a greater or less degree of perfection with which it has been drawn by the aboriginal artist. It is found, however, in various combinations where it is subject to variation in form, if these in truth be intended for this symbol. As Brasseur de Bourbourg has suggested, this appears to have been taken from the partially closed hand, where the points of the fingers are brought round close to the tip of the thumb. Whether intended to show the palm or back outward is uncertain, though apparently the latter. The nearest approach I find among the Indian signs figured by Colonel Mallery is that denoting "little, diminutive, small." But the position of the hand in the symbol appears to indicate the act of grasping; either signification gives _ch_ as the chief phonetic element of the Maya word _chan_ and _chichan_, signifying "little," and _chuc_, _chucah_, "to grasp, to seize" ("alcanzar, asir, prender," Perez); or _chuuc_, "to take, grasp, catch, seize," Henderson.[232-3] It would seem from this that if the symbol is phonetic in any sense, the chief element of the word indicated is _ch_. The supposition by Drs Schellhas and Seler that this symbol sometimes contains the elements of the sign of the four winds or wind cross, appears to be without any real foundation. The partial cross-shape figure in it is merely the conventional method of drawing the opening between the fingers, and would be just as correctly given as an oval as an inverted _tau_.
As this interpretation of the symbol is quite different from that given by other writers, some evidence to justify it is presented here.