<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=windows-1252">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.2963" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV>
<DIV>Dear colleagues,</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I am doing some work on homosexuality and 'unconventional' sexuality and
gender identity in Aztec culture and wondered if anyone had any opinions on
Geoffrey Kimball's retranslations of the <EM>Florentine Codex</EM> passages on
homosexuality. The article reference is: Geoffrey
Kimball, 'Aztec Homosexuality: the Textual Evidence', <EM>Journal of
Homosexuality</EM>, 26.1 (1993), pp.7-24. Whilst his suspicion of the Dibble and
Anderson translation seems reasonable at times, however, his own interpretations
often seem a little loaded with modern references, so I would be very interested
to hear any thoughts on his retranslations. In particular, he takes issue with
the use of the term 'patlache' to mean 'hermaphrodite', contending that it
should instead be translated as 'homosexual woman' and that the 'correct' term
for hermaphrodite is 'cihuaoquichtli'. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>This material is intended to form a small section of a larger book on life
and gender in Tenochtitlan, but is proving rather tricky to pin down! (I am
sure it will provide the basis for some later more specialised work as
well now.) I would be very grateful for any thoughts and opinions (on- or
off-list) on Kimball's work, and also any additional references or pointers
which people might care to offer on homosexuality, hermaphroditism, and
transvestism in Tenochtitlan. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Best wishes and thanks,</DIV>
<DIV>Caroline Dodds</DIV></DIV>
<DIV>------<BR>Dr. Caroline Dodds<BR>Junior Research Fellow<BR>Sidney Sussex
College<BR>Cambridge<BR>CB2 3HU</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Tel: 01223 (3)30867<BR>Mob: 07740675610<BR>Email: <A
href="mailto:ced44@cam.ac.uk">ced44@cam.ac.uk</A></DIV></BODY></HTML>