1537 6 Calli
1538 7 Tōchtli
Nicān moquetz in cuauhteōcalli
ìcuāc motlātìquê in ācalco tenōch-
1539 8 ācatl
Nicān ompēuhquê in yan-
cuīc tlālpan yàquê tenōchcâ
tlacōxiuhtica in momiquilî
don Diego Panitzin.
1540 9 Tecpatl
Ic XIII in tlàtohuāni. Nicān motlà-
tòcātlalî in don Diego Tehuetzqui-
Notes and Questions
Please sign in to write a note for this page
Should we translate "tlatoani" as king? I think "ruler" might be better. Also CT has question about Acalco--"in boats" or a place name. To resolve.
1538. Gordon: Since placenames are in reality postpositional phrases, they can be translated in many cases in reference to nouns just as much as to places. Thus the sequence "ynacalco" can be read in any one of three ways.
1) in Acalco (in Acalco)
2) in boats (in acalco)
3) in their boats (inacalco)
Which one is right is a matter of context, not grammar.
1539. Cristobal’s version: At this time the people of Tenochtitlan, gone to a new land (with tlacoxihuitl), departed. [within half a year] don Diego Panitzin died. Gordon’s offered here for the following reasons.
Gordon: CT translation doesn't deal adequately with ompeuhque AND yaque. An alternative possibility is to take yaque as a noun in apposition with tenochca, meaning "traveler" and the like. But I don't think that's necessary.
I also translate momiq'li as "passed away", taking the reverential form into account. We can't always differentiate in English elegantly between reverential and neutral usage, but where we can, we should in my opinion.