 |
FAMSI © 2008: Laura Rodríguez Cano |
|
Toponymic Analysis of Three Lienzos from the Mixtec Lowlands, Oaxaca The Toponymic Analysis This section presents four aspects that I consider to be important to the toponymic analysis which was conducted on the three lienzos from the Mixtec Lowlands which include defining the implications that the toponym carries, the suppositions upon which the analysis is carried out, the procedures utilized in the study, and finally, a summary of the results and contributions achieved by the investigation. "Toponomy", in a broad sense, is the study of the origin and meaning of place names, by which "toponym" refers to a locality. The term toponym as used in this report applies to the meaning of the place names represented in the Colonial records which involves the analysis of their components, their identification and their location in a specific area (in this case, the Mixtec Lowlands). The toponym is made up of composite of signs (glyphs or glosses) which, according to certain rules, represent a denomination that exists in a physical reference that occupies a particular geographical space within the study region, and whose analysis provides historical information. The toponym tends to have a descriptive character regarding the space that it names. It’s origin can be related to the environment and the geography, which can include orographic elements (hills, gorges, knolls, canyons, etc.), hydrological elements (rivers, lagoons, springs), zoological elements (birds, insects and mammals), botanical elements (trees, bushes, plants and herbs) or those things which reflect an association to the cosmovision of the group that establishes them. Among these last mentioned we can consider religious aspects, deities or mythological events, festivals, rituals, foundations, conquests, wars, historic personages, constructions, etc. (Guzmán 1987.). In other cases, names of places already existent in other regions are also used. As previously mentioned, this analytic study of the toponym considered, on the one hand, that the glyphic records of the place names take into consideration the geographic and political areas of the Mixtec Lowlands, which due to their importance were represented by the inhabitants during the Colonial Period. On the other hand, the toponyms represented in the lienzos follow patterns and structures which reflect the manner in which the place names are constructed, in which can be detected that they are constituted by phonetic elements (logographic or logosyllabic) of the language which their writers spoke (Mixtec and/or Nahuatl). This suggests that the glosses associated with them in said languages are directly related. Under these parameters the gloss aids in the identification of the toponym. At the same time, the glyphic image giudes us as to the meaning which should be found for the place name registered by the gloss. The analysis of the three lienzos had two principal processes: to obtain graphic registers on a 1:1 scale and photographs of the lienzos that will allow a clear and detailed documentation of materials (see the heliographics of the lienzos in the appendix); so that, we could proceed with the systematic analysis of the toponymic glyphs and of their Mixtec and Náhuatl glosses. This consisted in the paleography of the glosses and a proposal of meaning supported by the identification of the composite glyphs which make up the graphic toponyms. As part of the work of identification of the toponyms represented in the lienzos, the use of dictionaries and Colonial vocabularies in the Mixtec (Reyes 1593; Alvarado, 1962) and Náhuatl (Molina, 1992) languages was indispensable, as was consulting studies about the Mixtec (Caso, 1962; Jiménez, 1962; Arana and Swadesh, 1965; Josserand, 1978 and 1984; Terraciano, 1994; among others). This owing to the fact that it was necessary to understand the grammatical structure of these languages in order to know how they constituted the locatives and to propose a morphological analysis of the Mixtec and Náhuatl glosses from the Colonial documents. Other activities carried out in this analysis, during the end of the first and second semesters of the year 2001, focused on complementing the identification of the toponymic registers of these lienzos and consisted of:
All the development of the aforementioned work has as its initial results: The compilation of a toponymic corpus of the Mixtec Lowlands, which covers 350 place names (Spanish, Mixtec and Náhuatl) among present day populations and localities, which also include boundaries and places that are referred to in the Colonial documentation for the XVI, XVII and XVIII centuries -- information that forms the central body of my Doctoral dissertation investigation. In addition, they are toponyms which are being integrated into a database concerning the place names of the Mixtec Lowlands, as part of my investigation project in the ENAH. This substantial corpus of place names of the region under study helped to identify and to propose a preliminary area of geographical and political space of the seigniories represented in the lienzos. Another of the achievements of this study included obtaining excellent records on a 1:1 scale, as well as drawings and photographs (these are not so good due to the lighting conditions of the archival repositories in which lienzos CMP36 and L57 are found). The details of the glyphs and glosses of the three lienzos allowed clear observation of the composite glyphs which made up the toponyms represented as well as allowing the paleographic transcriptions of the glosses in the indigenous languages associated with them (Mixtec and Náhuatl). This register was important seeing as up until this study there were no known good published reproductions of these documents which still preserve the traditional indigenous writing system (Plate 1, Plate 2, and Plate 3). This approach enabled the preparation of index cards and tables which synthesized the systematic analysis of the toponymic glyphs and of their glosses in Mixtec and Náhuatl (Plates 13-22; Plate 26, Plate 27, Plate 28), and also present a comparative review of those earlier proposals made for the case of the Postcortesan Mixtec Codex No. 36 and the Xochitepec Map (Plate 9, Plate 10, Plate 11, Plate 12; and Plate 23, Plate 24, Plate 25). The tables appended to this report are a summary of the epigraphic analysis of the glyphic components of the 109 toponyms analyzed in the three lienzos. They determine which icons meet with a locative function and which ones meet with a nomative function of the locality. Also included in these are the classification assigned to the toponymic registers of each lienzo,17 its graphic image, the paleographic proposal for the gloss, the iconographic and epigraphic identifications and, lastly (in the case of 73 place names represented in the lienzos), we consider their associated glosses, where we analyze and identify which are locative roots and which are substantive, adjective and verbal roots which form the components that give the place its name. (Plates 9-28). The analysis of the 73 toponyms that the glyphic register and its gloss have, prior to the tables which summarize the proposed identification of the place names in these documents, consisted in the development of their 73 index cards in which the following points were considered: Paleographic reading, morphological analysis of the name, and search for the meaning of each component identified (which was established according to the semantic fields of the words and by the glyphic image associated with them). Here I present some examples from each lienzo, choosing those which are relatively clear in order to demonstrate how each analysis was carried out: Lienzo: CMP36 Toponymic Key: 4L (4 Left) Paleographic Reading: Yucucama Language: Mixtec Morphological Analysis: Yucu-cama Meaning of the components: Yucu: Hill, mountain, wild grasses, bush (Arana and Swadesh, 1965:136-137). Cama: Light, swift, young, content, soft (Arana and Swadesh, 1965:60). Cana: Ugly, atrocious, deformed, dangerous, mischievous, restless, emerge from inside, come up, appear (Arana and Swadesh, 1965:60). In present-day dictionaries of the Mixtec from the Coast, for example, Cahma means "noisy" and Caña means "mischeivious". (Stark et al., 1986:5-6). Choosing of meanings: For the first word yucu would be hill, as shown by the glyph. For the second, cama, the meanings that most closely relate to the glyphic representations are those for cana, in the adjective sense as well as in the verb sense, since the figure of an animal comes out of or emerges from the hill and has a ferocious aspect. Although the gloss says cama, the orthography of the XVI century could put an m in place of an n and viceversa. Proposal for literal meaning: Hill-ugly/atrocious Proposal for translation: Ugly Hill
Lienzo: L57 Key for the toponyms: 9L (9 Left) Paleographic Reading: Nduhuayahui Language: Mixtec Morphological Analysis: Nduhua-yahui Meaning of the components: Nduhua/Nduvua: upside down, on the back, upward (Arana and Sawdesh, 1965:108). Yahui: Price, market. Yavui: maguey (century plant), dark, hole (Arana and Swadesh, 1965:132-133). Choice of Meanings: The gloss registers yahui,. Nonetheless, the associated image has no relation with any of the possible meanings for yahui. We know that the orthography of the XVI century was variable and that the scribes could write hu or vu for the same sound. So it is that we choose the meaning "maguey", since the glyph has phytomorphic elements similar to this plant. This change also recurs in the first word that makes up the gloss nduhua for nduvua. Proposal for the literal meaning: Upside-down century plant Proposal for translation: Place of the upside-down century plant
Lienzo: MX Toponymic key: 1UH (1 Upper-Historic) Paleographic Reading: Ytnona[m]a Language: Mixtec Morphological Analysis: Ytno-nama Meaning of the components: Ytno/itnu: abrupt slope (Arana and Swadesh, 1965:92). Nama: A type of plant that produces soap (Arana y Swadesh, 1965:94). Choice of Meanings: In the somewhat deteriorated drawing there is a phytomorphic element which supports the identification of the word Nama. Proposal for the literal meaning: Slope-soap plant Proposal for translation: Slope of the soap plant
Lienzo: MX Toponymic key: 5UG (5 Upper Geographic) Paleographic Reading: Tlematepetl Language: Náhuatl Morphological Analysis: Tlema-tepetl Meaning of the components: Tlema(itl): item for carrying fire (censer) which comes from Tle(tl) fire and ma(itl) hand. Tepetl: Hill (Molina, 1992). Choice of Meanings: The found ones Proposal for the literal meaning: Censer-Hill Proposal for translation: Hill of the Censer
These index cards that imply the glyph-gloss relationship show that in general the form of composing place names in Mixtec consists in the first word of the name, or the first glyph from the bottom to the top having a locative function, which identifies geographic places such as: Hills, piles of something, slopes, cornfields, flat, grassy areas, land, town, rocks, boulders, gaps between mountains, plazas, lakes, springs, temples, etc. These locatives on occasion reflect the geography and the landscape of the region. In other cases, especially in the glyphs, they pick one to indicate said locative function, the hill being the most frequent. The second part of the gloss or the rest of the glyphs that make up the toponym refer principally to the noun-things (substantive) (animals, plants, personages, cultural objects) or qualities-adjectives (colors or states of things) that complete the place name. In very rare cases, some actions-verbs are represented. In the case of the glyphs-glosses relationships, which makes up the names in the Náhuatl language, the situation changes in the construction of the name of the place of the gloss. Apparently the glyphs have the same structure, where the lower part presents the glyph with a locative function that can be the image of mountain, teeth, bodies of water or representations of flat surfaces or flat grassy areas, and over them there appear other glyphs that qualify the locatives. In exchange, in the toponymic glosses in Náhuatl the structure is first the nouns, verbs and adjectives that serve to characterize the type of place, and afterward the locative bases are added: tepetl (hill), co (place), titlan (abundant), pan (in, on top of), oztoc (cave), tlan(tli) (teeth), among others.
Lastly, this analysis identifies that at least in two of the three lienzos, various toponymic glyphs are shared (Plate 29, Plate 30, and Plate 31) which also appear in other codices from the Mixtec Lowlands, such as the Sánchez Solís or the Egerton. This raises the possibility that the political geography of two of the seigniories registered in lienzos CMP36 and L57 is shared due to the fact that the territorial borders are similar, in what would possibly correspond to the Southwest of Huajuapan and the Northeast of San Vicente el Palmar.
One of the problems that the recognized glyphic semblance presents is that the associated glosses are not the same on both lienzos. Nonetheless, during the analysis we were able to recognize that the lienzo 57 glosses present, on two occasions, a repetition of the same gloss in two different glyphic registers, suggesting that the registered glosses in this lienzo are not contemporary to the elaboration of the glyphs. A proposition that we are unable to provide contrast for, since we only know of one copy of this lienzo (Plate 29). It is clear that the results obtained in this investigation reinforces the proposal that the lienzos come from the Mixtec Lowlands, that they register three important seigniories in Huajuapan, Suchitepec and San Vicente el Palmar during the Early Colonial Period, and, that at least two of them have common boundaries. On the other hand, it shows the form in which the toponyms were constructed on a glyphic level and determines which forms are most common for naming places. There is no doubt that these advances in the study of the toponymy of the Colonial documentation that still preserves the system of traditional indigenous writing raise new hypotheses for the continued work toward understanding these registers, and in the reflection that they have regarding Colonial political spaces in the Mixtec Lowlands.
|
||
|
Text links to all pages at this site are available at the FAMSI INDEX |
||
