Talk:Huey tlatoani

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mesoamerica, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.MesoamericaWikipedia:WikiProject MesoamericaTemplate:WikiProject MesoamericaMesoamerica articles

Mexico

This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Mexico, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Mexico on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MexicoWikipedia:WikiProject MexicoTemplate:WikiProject MexicoMexico articles

I've changed this pages name from tlatoani. The word tlatoani was used to refer to any member of the Aztec nobility, the emperors were called Hueyi Tlatoani.

Now, is there anyone who wants to change all links from Tlatoani to Hueyi Tlatoani? :P --Mixcoatl 02:53, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)

"Puppet" rulers?[edit]

Is the epithet "puppet" entirely NPOV, perhaps some more neutral description would be better. Thoughts?--cjllw | TALK 02:50, 12 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I see your point, although I think "puppet" describes them perfectly. Any thoughts on NPOV descriptions? "Spanish-appointed"? Madman 03:55, 12 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Spanish-appointed" or similar could work. Perhaps if some source explicitly calls them "puppets", that could be mentioned or expanded upon.--cjllw | TALK 05:26, 12 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not all those rulers were puppets. While apointed by the spanish, only the first three could be considered puppets. The other, while taking orders form the spanish, had some liberty, and even fought along the spanish. After the last one Luis de Santa María Na[na]cacipactzin, Tenochtitlan (Mexico city) was under the direction of judges, who were not originary from Tenochtitlan, so aztec cronicles, like "Relacion anonima de Tlatelolco" does not considered them as Tlatoques or "rulers". In this acount Nacacipatzin is counted as the 27th (and last) aztec ruler. Nanahuatzin 09:08, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Spelling of Singular v Plural[edit]

In my understanding of (Huasteca) Nahuatl, -ani is the plural suffix and -que(tl) is the singular suffix meaning "doer of something". But the article currently says tlatoque is plural... Can someone who knows Classical Nahuatl help verify this? --Krubo 01:36, 5 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The article is correct. -ni is an agentive (often called habitual) suffix deriving from a verb X a noun with the meaning "someone who X'es" or "someone who can X". Nouns derived with this suffix have several different plural patterns: sometimes they pluralize just with a -h (a saltillo), sometimes with a -meh, and sometimes with a -queh. tlahtōani always pluralize with -queh thus tlahtōqueh was the correct plural in classical náhuatl. The suffix Queh or quetl also has other functions beside it does form the agentive in some modern dialecs (I gather you are familiar with Xilitla Nahuatl where it may have this function). In classical nahuatl this suffix had the form -qui not -quetl as I think it dos in xilitla. Maunus 08:13, 5 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Then the singular and plural agentive/habitual -(a)ni and -que(tl) are swapped in Classical and Huasteca Nahuatl. Perhaps the qui/quetl forms make sense because only -quetl (Huasteca singular agentive) can have a -tl singular noun ending, perhaps. I am now avidly reading your Nahuatl dialects page. PS: I have been flummoxed by the "saltillo" you mention (eg, is it [h] or [ʔ], etc.) and would appreciate any links to info on it. --Krubo 04:02, 6 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The saltillo is [ʔ].Maunus 08:40, 6 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Split[edit]

The concept of huey tlatoani needs to be distinguished from Tlatoani of Tenochtitlan. The early rulers were not considered emperors: according to Chimalpahin, "ytzcohuatzin fue vltimo Rey de los que Gouernaron de Mexico Tenuchtitlan, y El Primer Emperador de ella" (Itzcoatl was the last king who governed Mexico Tenochtitlan, and its first emperor.) Neither, I expect, were the later ("puppet") rulers considered emperors. Furthermore, it's possible that other rulers such as Tezozomoc was called huey tlatoani in their time.

This article should be about the term huey tlatoani itself and how it was used, with the Aztec rulers at Tlatoani of Tenochtitlan. --Ptcamn 02:24, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I was right — Atonaltzin, a Mixtec ruler, was referred to as huey tlatoani in Nahuatl. --Ptcamn 02:45, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On second thought, we could merge huey tlatoani into tlatoani, making it into a single article explaining both tlatoani and related terms like huey tlatoani, cihuatlatoani, teuctlatoani. --Ptcamn 03:30, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think it should be merged togueter. Tlatoani means speaker, and Huey tlatoani, means Great speaker. it is part of the same concept. I think it was never equivalent to emperor. Emperor was an european concept, that implies

an inheritable title. While rulers could be related, it was more like an aristocracy, where the ruler was elected between them. Nanahuatzin 22:28, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]