ved to modern times. We see them in the figures
given by Charnay, Stevens, and other explorers; and what is worthy of
special notice in this connection is, that they sometimes consist of
openwork or trellis-like figures. Therefore, if we connect the upper
part of the house symbols with the _ben_ glyph, it is still by no means
certain that it is derived from, or bears any relation to, the mat
character. We notice further that in the figures of houses this supposed
mat figure is not used to indicate the thatching, but is clearly
distinguished from it. Again, if the upper characters of LXVI, 25, 26,
are intended to signify the thatching, roof matting, or roof, and are
simple ideograms drawn from the thing represented, then the lower
characters in these symbols might well be supposed to represent the wall
or framework of the house. But the widely different relations in which
we find this lower character forbid this conclusion. That the wall may
be indicated is true, but if so it must be ikonomatically or by the
phonetic value of the symbol. I have therefore found it very difficult
to reach any entirely satisfactory conclusion in regard to these house
symbols. That the lower character is phonetic in the true or rebus sense
can, I think, be shown, but, notwithstanding the objections I have
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 ov