atzontzompantla

[Jerry Offner]

It is always worthwhile consulting the pictorial sources.  They are closer in time to the establishment of many place names.  They provide a much fuller context for the language. They open numerous pathways into Nahua intution into their own language, some of which agree with, and others of which are at variance with, current formal linguistic understanding.

The most efficient means to do this is the group of programs available at:

http://www.sup-infor.com/navigation.htm especially the pictographic dictionaries, prepared by Marc Thouvenot and many collaborators, including members of this list.  They cannot be consulted on-line but must be downloaded along with the appropriate programs on the site.  This is not a difficult process these days although I have encountered grown-up PhDs who claim to be unable to accomplish this--hopefully their kids or the neighbors can do it for them in a few minutes.    

Using this resource, you can find in the Matriculas de Huexotzinco from the reasonably nearby Huexotzinco area, three entries for the glyph reading Atzompan (387_637r_02; 387_720v_01; 387_755v_23), and three with the reading atzon (387_550r_20, 387_544v_17, 387_665v_21).  The program allows for the easy simultaneous display of all six glyphs.  In each case, there is a human head surmounted by hair drawn in the typical Nahua depiction of water, including whorls and shells of one or two types.  Not surprisingly, the first two come from a place/administrative division named Atzompan (they don't appear to be glossed, but I have not scoured every page of this section).  

The gloss on the fourth example appears to be "tacon" (c is c cedilla).  The fifth is pedro "tatzon quili" (caution--I have not studied the paleography of this document but others on the list have).  The sixth is "juan atzon" (both n's indicated by the characterisitc curving line later used up side down on nike shoes).  

It is important to keep in mind that the glyphic elements do not always match up with the actual, "on the ground" meanings, as the Nahua enjoyed playing with their own languagwe while writing glyphs,  but, overall, these look more obvious and promising than many. 

I'll let others puzzle out all this from here.  

With regard to classes of Nahua toponyms, there are a number (e.g. RG of Xonotla y Tetela) where the meaning is explained in contemporaneous Spanish as more or less "place where there are a lot of this or that kind of [named] plant"). 

Here is an excerpt:

Al capitulo diez y seis dizen, y es asi, que este pueblo de Tetela esta poblado entre grandes sierras y rrodeado dellas, y no ay cosa descubierta en el, sino es hazia la parte del norte; y las sierras que le tienen rrodeado, la vna que tiene por la parte del norte se llama Tzotolo en su lengua, por hauer muchos arboles en ella que se llaman asi, que en la lengua española son vnos arboles a manera de «palma», saluo que tenian diferente la oja de la palma; y la otra sierra que le çerca por la parte del sur la llaman Nexmotoyo por que ay muchas yerbas deste nonbre en la sierra que se parecen a la yerba de la «sabila» que se cria en España, y la otra sierra que le çerca por la parte de poniente la laman Tzimayo por que ay en el muchas «rraizes» deste nonbre que ellos comian en aquel tienpo, que son a manera de canaorias de España. 
Tzotolo is an important peak/landmark in the region.  I don't know if we'll ever know if some or all of the plants are sacred or just characteristic of the places named.  The informants on the  spot may have been in fear of the then typically violent religious persecution by the Spaniards --about 1580-1582, so they may be presenting an explanation that would not frighten the Spaniards.    Or perhaps sometimes a camohtli is just a camohtli.  
 We do find a number of mysterious glyphs from the pictorial documents to the east of the Valley of Mexico composed of a tepetl and some indeterminate, but distinctive plant.  

Which brings up a final question:  do we tend to over-etymologize this language?  With so much of the cultural conext lost, is accurate understanding or genuine insight always the result or are a web of false landscapes sometimes created, which are then further elaborated?  (This is an intense concern for pictorial sources which are often "over-iconographized").   Yes, we are further from nature by far than the Nahua, but I don't think of a field of springs when I see the word Springfield, nor a big  rock for Boulder, Colorado or a bridge at a port with Bridgeport, CT.  Nor did the Nahua think of just reed place when they read Tollan as a glyph.  There are other examples like "Woman Hollering Creek" in Texas.  There are several such places, each with a set of variant legends about the impending assault upon a woman of one or another ethnic group by members of another (always different) ethnic group.  In Mesoamerica there is the singing mountain glyph that occurs in a number !
 of different languages.  

Toponyms probably stand up to this test better than most words, but how about words like "dresser" "eraser" "photograph" or "cracker", or more interestingly "deerstalker" (the hat) or pamphlet (not a small pamph), etc. where we are saved from error only because of our extensive and detailed knowledge of English and its relationship to other langages and cultures and their relationship to still other languages and cultures? (e.g. pamph, again).  There are doubtless better examples to show how etymologies can follow false paths, particularly with so much information lost.  

Working with gylphs, it often strikes me that they contain far more meaning than how we translate them or can translate them.  Example again: Tollan.  Another are the glyphs for Texcoco which are various and appear to refer to an original non-Nahua toponym, as has been discussed at length on this list a long time ago. Certainly John Sullivan's post on place names is informative in this context.  

 

Jerry Offner 








----- Original Message ----- 
From: John Sullivan 
To: nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
Sent: 8/28/2010 08:54:08 AM 
Subject: [Nahuat-l] atzontzompantla


Tom, 
You're right. This is a hard "altepenym", but let's go through and look at a few things we DO know.
1. The vast majority of altepenyms are composed of a noun stuck onto a locative root. Here there are two possibilities for the locative root. It is either a). -tlan, "town of the...." or b) -tlah, "town of abundant...." Since word final "n"s in multisyllable words are devoiced in Nahuatl, the "n" in -tlan is offen not included in spelling. And we know that "h", especially in the word final position is practically never written. So we really have no way of telling which of the endings is used for Atzontzompantla. But we know it's one of the two.
2. In the vast majority of cases, the embedded noun refers to some geophysical aspect of sacred landscape. In less cases it refers to a plant or an animal that plays a role in nahuatl spirituality. In even less cases it is a verb expressing an action related to a ceremony or myth/legend (which in turn is related to sprituality and sacred landscape). At times it can refer to a sacred instrument (used in a ceremony). And in a very small set of cases, the embedded noun is the name of a deity. So.... when in doubt, assume that your altepenym composed of a noun referring to sacred landscape or a sacred plant or animal, plus the locative root. In other words, if a town is named Tocatlan, from "tocatl", "spider" and -tlan, it doesn't mean that there are a lot of spiders in the area. Rather, it refers to the spider as an animal that plays a role in Mesoamerican spirituality. There has been some debate on nahuat-l about this, and many people don't agree with me, so take that into acc!
 ount.
Michael has suggested that we are dealing with tzompamitl, "coral tree" or tzompantli, "scull-rack". Both of these are in line with what I say above.
 3. A big problem that I referred to before is the presence of the "n" on the first "tzon" if this is indeed is a reduplication of the second "tzon/tzom". Actually I have seen some attestations of reduplications that include a final consonant on a funny little database called "Alpha", but I don't think this kind of reduplication is explained in any of the classical grammars. I would prefer to think that the "atzon-" and "tzompantli/tzompamitl" are separate elements. So the question is, What is the "atzon-". The first thing we think of is that the "a-" corresponds to "water" and this is a good guess because water appears in a large number of altepenyms, and because of the explanation given by the townspeople. But there is another possibility: ahtzon- might mean "topless" ("ah-", "negative" plus "tzontli", "hair, and by extension, the head, top, end or culmination of something"). This would work morphologically, because when you prefix "ahtzon (the "h" disappears in everyday s!
 pelling)" to "tzompamitl/tzompantli" the final "n" wouldn't drop off. So the question is, Is there anything in Mesoamerican stories referring to a coral tree or a skull rack whose top has been cut off or removed?
John


John Sullivan, Ph.D.
Professor of Nahua language and culture
Universidad Autónoma de Zacatecas
Zacatecas Institute of Teaching and Research in Ethnology
Tacuba 152, int. 43
Centro Histórico
Zacatecas, Zac. 98000
Mexico
Work: +52 (492) 925-3415
Fax: +1 (858) 724-3030 (U.S.A.)
Home: +52 (492) 768-6048
Mobile: +52 1 (492) 103-0195
idiez at me.com
www.macehualli.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/nahuat-l/attachments/20100828/cbc5c8f9/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl