Translation of Tzompantli (an old question?)

[sfargo@earthlink.net]

Original Message:
-----------------
From: Frances Karttunen karttu at NANTUCKET.NET
Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2005 11:25:50 -0500
To: NAHUAT-L at LISTS.UMN.EDU
Subject: Re: Translation of Tzompantli


On Jan 5, 2005, at 10:47 AM, Archaeology Institute wrote:

>  During the course of my research I found diverse translations and
> interpretations of the term "tzompantli."  For one, the term tends to
> be
> interpreted as "skull rack" in the most generic sense, whereas those
> who have had occasion to translate the term more literally identify
> its meaning with the translation of "skull banner" -- which appears to
> constitute a gloss of tzontecomatl (skull
> or gourd?) and pantli (banner).


'Banner' is pamitl.  It is one of those nouns which drops its stem i
when the absolutive suffix -tl is absent, and when m comes into final
position, it delabializes to -n.  This is why in possessed forms and
some compounds, one finds the form pan.  There has been some
back-formation from this pan stem, so you might find pantli meaning
'banner.'

However, the second element in tzompantli is a different word, namely
pantli, which means 'row' or 'wall.'

The tzom- is the stem form of tzontli 'head of hair. In this case, the
final n of the stem assimilates in labialization to the following p of
pantli.

There are plenty of representations of the tzompantli, so we know it
was a rack of skulls, not scalps.  It appears that the tzom- in this
case stands for the compound tzontecomatl literally 'scalp pot,' which
is the Nahuatl word for skull.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Just a note to say I think there’s evidence that the question has 
been asked before.

It looks to me as though this discussion is illustrated in the 
triptych of The Garden of Earthly Delights/El Jardín de las 
Delicias (which I would prefer to call La Bariedad del Mundo), 
in the Tree-man in the right panel. 

1) Somebody, I think Keith Moxey, has identified the Tree-man 
as part of a human skull. I haven't contributed any such creative
 interpretations, but 
2) I do think the big horse’s or bovine skull next to it has to do 
with a skull rack since I’m reading the Tree-man as a 
representation of the year 3-House/casa/calli.
3) There’s a pantli/banner on top of the Tree-man. I thought it had 
to do with representing the Pater Noster in Latin in rebus form as 
pantli-something.
4) There’s a big chunk of hair at the right of the human face that 
makes the Tree-man look like a man and not just a tree. I thought 
it was to combine images of the bright star Capella with the 
Capella Sistina/Sistine Chapel, as part of the very complicated 
European iconography.

In other words there are logical reasons for a skull (human or 
horse) to be there, a pantli, and some hair, but I thought they were 
parts of four different systems of iconography that are all combined 
in this very messy picture, a Nahuatl chronology, Nahuatl words 
that can be mnemonics for Latin, a reference to Rome (a chapel), 
and a star name. 

It’s even kind of interesting that there’s no gourd, because “gourd” 
is one of the possible translations of a hapax in the book of Jonah 
(illustrated in Durer’s engraving of St. Jerome) and the artist might 
have deliberately omitted it from the right panel and put gourds in 
the center panel instead.

But it looks as though the combination of images could have to do 
with a discussion where somebody explained that the word 
tzompantli had to do with hair and what it had to do with the word 
pantli. So before 1528 which is the apparent date of the triptych
 somebody was asking what a tzompantli was and it looks as 
though they got a similar explanation of the compound word. It’s 
interesting to think about trying to figure out what kinds of 
explanations the Europeans were getting, whether they would 
ask “what is that?” or “what does that name mean?” and get an 
etymology for an answer. (It might not be exactly an explanation 
if the questions stop with translations like “Sitting Bull.”)

I keep using the term European because it’s hard to tell whether 
the discussion was in Spanish or Italian, and maybe the most 
likely explanation is that it was both, that Peter Martyr wasn't the 
only one who spoke Spanish but was more comfortable with Italian. 

There is a good photo at www.wga.hu/index.html, listed under 
Hieronymus Bosch (I say incorrectly). There are also a drawing 
and engraving of just the Tree-man, which I think are much later 
and reflect no knowledge of Nahuatl at all. I’m working on an 
article trying to show that they’re late copies on other grounds 
since the people who think they’re important aren't into Nahuatl 
etymology but can relate to the question of whether a Bruegel 
signature is real or fake. But I think it’s an illustration of Nahuatl 
briefly being an area of inquiry for “humanists” in the sixteenth 
century. The problem with the triptych as evidence is that it’s
 full of pictures that only look like riddles with answers once you 
see one of the answers. This is something I don't think I would 
ever have noticed if the question and answer hadn't arrived 
as an e-mail, so thank you to Archaeology Institute (I don’t have 
the e-mail with your name on it) and Frances Karttunen.

Susan Gilchrist


--------------------------------------------------------------------
mail2web - Check your email from the web at
http://mail2web.com/ .