We have now completed the pages from the hyperlink 'revise the model' (of the calendar in K). The idea is to gradually make each of the calendars more definite, by way of integrating new facts as mirrored from the trail of glyph types and their possible meanings (as governed by my order in the glyph dictionary).

Also in the next page at pure in the glyph dictionary I have links leading to the K calendar:

 

The feathers of Tangaroa fell down and became trees. The pure glyph type may depict two seasons like the shells of a bivalve (without its soft living interior). Long ago I came to see the henua glyph as a tree, a wooden pole, a staff, a gnomon etc, and to believe the meaning to be 'path of the sun' or similar, i.e. a kind of measure of time. In most trees 'fire is living', the wood can be used in a fire. Feathers - fire - wood - tree - staff - gnomon - path of a celestial body - seen because it is shining - i.e. a kind of fire.

How can my idea about pure glyphs showing two bent henua be motivated? Once, long ago, I had decided that the pure glyph type could not be regarded as composed of two bent henua. The reason was that I had not, at that time, found any glyph with a single bent henua (of the sort Ka2-7 exemplifies). My conclusion was that pure glyphs did not depict two bent henua.

Now that I recognize the existence of single bent henua glyphs, another situation rules. Yet, are not the supposed henua in pure glyphs more bent than whatever single bent henua I may find?

There are very many henua glyphs in my glyph catalogue, and therefore it is rational to instead first investigate how the pure glyphs look. At the present moment I have not yet began to fill the glyph catalogue with those in the Santiago Staff and I am less than halfway through H, P and Q. All glyphs from the other texts are though documented. So far I have assembled these pure glyphs:

 

Now we can compare these 30 examples of pure glyphs with the henua glyphs which for my eye appear to be most bent. To make the comparison more easy I only list glyphs which belong to A, B, D, E, K, N, S or Y. With the exeptions of I (Santiago Staff) and H, P, Q no other texts have pure glyphs.

In Tahua the many pure glyphs and other circumstances may make a more thorough listing useful:

 

Instead of comparing pure glyphs in Tahua with bent henua in Tahua, we continue with listing also all bent henua in the other relevant texts:

 

The general impression is that the two members of the pair of 'henua' in a pure glyph not are the same as a single bent henua. There probably is a difference in meaning between the 'shell halves' in a pure glyph and a single bent henua.

Empty sea shells should be listened too, not looked at. Fire does not thrive in water, nor in sea-shells.

Eyes are for looking in the light on real objects, ears are for listening in the dark to what the spirits have to say.

Yet, bent henua probably carry a different meaning than straight ones. We can compare Ka1-7 and Ka1-9 with the parallel glyhphs in G and B, none of the six glyphs are straight: