Talk:Tláloc

Untitled
Also, the screen name of a liberal posting on political forums.

Matlolcueitl

 * The reference to Matlolcueitl was removed because 1) "She of the Jade Skirt" is the Chalchiuhtlicue and 2) I could find no reference to Matlolcueitl which wasn't itself a reference to this page. Corrections welcome. -- Dystopos 19:03, 28 November 2004 (UTC)
 * her name is Matlalcueitl with an a instead of the o.·Maunus· tlahtōlli  19:33, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

The picture

 * The picture is REALLY FREAKY!
 * I think the original artwork depiction of Tlaloc is rather good, but that a PD Pre-Columbian depiction would be more appropriate. Other thoughts? -- Infrogmation 21:11, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I agree that a Pre-Columbian depiction would be more appropriate. I looked myself -- not extensively but I looked -- when this drawing was posted.  I couldn't find anything that was not copyrighted (understandably) and I couldn't even pull up a good "fair use" image.  Also, note that a JPG was pulled earlier this year for copyright problem.  Someone did add a link at the bottom, which helps somewhat.  In the end, my thoughts were that this drawing was better than no drawing.  -- Madman 00:40, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Teotihuacan

 * How can you possibly know if sacrifices were done to the rain god by the Teotihuacanos? Wasn't Teotihuacan occupied during classic period? -- Tlalocatecútli 14:41, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
 * You are right, we know nothing of the content of teotihuacano ritual practice - it is also incorrect to say that depictions of tlaloc are found in teotihuacan since that implies that thy spoke nahuatl something that is not at all certain. They may have had a completely different name for their raingod.·Maunus· tlahtōlli  19:32, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Derivation

 * I have read that Tláloc is short for Tlalocatecútli - agglutination in Náhuatl of the stem words tlál(li) - earth, ócan - paradise and tecútli - lord. This literally means that Tláloc is the lord of Tlalócan, the wattery paradise beneath the earth. Is this correct? -- Tlalocatecútli 14:20, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Where did you read this? The derivation seems quite likely, though the assumption that its literal meaning is also a religious meaning is suspect. If you can provide a citation, we can add the etymology and its reference to the article. --Dystopos 22:38, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
 * it is the reverse: Tlalocatectli is a longer version of tlalolc. Tlalocatecutli means "lord of tlalocan" - tlalocan means "place of tlaloc" - the meaning of the word tlaloc is not well understood but is often interpreted as "that which lies on the ground" ie. rain.·Maunus· tlahtōlli  19:30, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

"also known as Nuhualpilli"

 * According to who? I can't find this in any of my many books about the Mexicans. -- Tlalocatecútli 17:33, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
 * The name Nuhualpilli is used in reference to Tlaloc in the Song of Tlaloc from the Florentine Codex. Although referenced as the name of the god of stone workers, it is, indeed, on of Tlaloc's names. 02:18, -- 71.56.236.98 30 November 2006 (UTC)
 * if so it is a typo: nahuatl has no u vowel. Indeed a google search for "nuhualpilli" returns only hits on wikipedia and mirrors. I remain unconvinced of tlaloc having such an epithet.·Maunus· tlahtōlli  19:27, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
 * If Náhuatl has no u vowel then what's the u doing in the word Náhuatl? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 216.67.161.139 (talk) 03:25, 23 January 2007 (UTC).
 * It is representing the consonant sound of a w. It is pronounced NA-watl not na-HOO-atl·Maunus· tlahtōlli  07:59, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
 * please cease inserting the supposed epithet nuhualpilli: classical nahuatl can simply not form such a word. The sourcing presented is from a non specialist website that includes unsourced statements it cannot functio as a reliable source. Unless new documentation is provided I will keep reverting the insertion of "nuhualpilli" it is simply an unsourced statement.·Maunus· ·ƛ· 11:54, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Isn't the Florentine Codex a primary source? If we citited that wouldn't it make it "correct".

Xuchilbara 15:22, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
 * If you quoted the Florentine Codex that would make it a case of false quotation. According to the Florentine Codex his epithet was Nahualpilli with an a as the second letter.·Maunus· · ƛ · 17:03, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Ah then must be a typo or mispelling. Xuchilbara 21:39, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Lets see here...

From _A Scattering of Jades_, which is a collection of works translated by Thelma Sullivan, stanza 3 of the Song of Tlaloc on page 170 says, "Ahuiya! My master, Nahualpilli, the Sorcerer Prince truly you have brought forth your own sustenance".

As for the Florentine, the same can be found in Book 2, part III p.224 of the 1981 J. O. Anderson limited edition published by the School of American Research and the University of Utah. Except there it's spelled "Naualpilli".

I posted this correction months ago on this discussion list, but I don't know what happened to it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.56.236.98 (talk) 02:36, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

"Tlaloc in El Savador?"
Since he was the MEXICAN rain god how could he have been worshiped in El Salvador? Do they speak Náhuatl down there? I don't think so but maybe some similar Uto-Aztecan language like Náhuat. All Meso-American cultures have a similar rain god like like Cocijo (Miztec), Tajin (Totonac) or Chac (Mayan). Is this really correct? -- Tlalocatecútli 21:56, 4 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Yes, Nahuatl-related languages were (and are still) spoken in areas of mid-Central America, and a number of peoples with cultures and traditions closely linked to those common to the central mexican plateaux were living in the Salvadoran region by at least Postclassic times; see for eg Pipil, whose language Nawat is indeed Uto-Aztecan. Classical Nahuatl was also quite a lingua franca of the region and traders, and considerable traffic and migration along the Pacific Guatemalan coast into the Salvadoran region from the Mexican uplands ensured a dynamic cultural exchange between these two separated areas.--cjllw | TALK  00:13, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

God of Lightning?
According to The Aztecs - People of the Sun by Alphonso Caso, Tlaloc is also the god of lightning so the text that said so should have remained.216.67.161.230 16:08, 5 December 2006 (UTC)Tlalocatecútli


 * Yes indeed, Tlaloc also had association with lightning and thunder, and quite a few other phenomena associated with water- storms, flood, etc. Can easily be readded (was it removed?)


 * Article also needs some rework to emphasise Tlaloc's significance to central mexican precolumbian cultures generally, and not just the Aztec/Mexica who were only relatively recent newcomers on the scene.--cjllw | TALK  23:04, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

About the name Nahualpilli...
For those of you who can't seem to find the reference to "Nahualpilli" being one of Tlaloc's names, please see Book II "The Ceremonies" of Sahagun's Florentine Codex, specifically "Tlalloc. icujc" (The Song of Tlaloc). Also, see Sullivan's _Scattering of Jades_. Likewise, Oliver's _Mockeries and Metamorphoses_, while primarly about Tezcatlipoca, also discusses this name in relation to Tlaloc. In fact, I've yet to see a Mesoamerican scholar discount Nahualpilli as one of Tlaloc's titles. Honestly, this is very basic scholarship, and this issue should've been resolved a long time ago. If such a word can never exist in classic Nahuatl, then why did Thelma Sullivan ever bother? She was only one of the greatest Nahuatl linguists that ever lived. If the Florentine is suddenly considered "specialized" sourcing, then I'm afraid that most of the Mesoamerican articles on Wikipedia need to be highly edited. I'd also like to know why a primary source can't be referenced in the article, since Taube's book, full of all the mistakes that it is (and it is, indeed, full of mistakes and pet theories on his part), is freely used as a source.

I'd furthermore like to ask why this article mentions nothing in depth of Tlaloc's cave/mountain associations, lightning associations, appearances in mythology (with citation), astronomical associations (as per the Borgia, etc), his pre-Aztec history or his ties with warfare. And how about a real iconography discussion? Really, this article is of exceptionally low quality at the moment, and requires much improvement. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.237.103.215 (talk) 01:07, 2 April 2007 (UTC).
 * I am discounting the name nuhualpill hat someone keeps reinserting, with a reference to an obscure website. Nahualpilli is a different story and if you quote a page number of the florentine codex that will do fine as a reference, Thelma Sullivan will do even better - but no one has presented such sources up untill now. And yes the article is of low quality - please go ahead and do something about it.·Maunus· · ƛ · 07:21, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

"Disputed Spanish" accents
In Náhuatl accute accents are used to show which syllable is emphasized. For this reason the "disputed Spanish" accents you removed from Tláloc were legitimate and even desirable. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.193.87.154 (talk • contribs)
 * I made the edits with reference to this conversation. If you have references that would help settle the dispute, they would be welcomed. --Dystopos 15:15, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
 * In Nahuatl stress is always predictable on the penultimate syllable and so there is no need to show stress in the orthogrsaphy. For nahuatl words that has entered into spanish the accent is often included if the penultimate stress doesn't conform to the normal stress patterns of spanish. in short: tláloc is a spanish spelling tlaloc is the english spelling and is the actual phonetic rendering of the nahuatl word which is best written tlāloc or tlaloc in nahuatl.

Not all readers know this or that the emphasis is on the last syllabe in Mayan languages. Not all of us can read the phonetic rendering or know where to look it up so in my view the diacritical marks are useful.


 * No but english which is the language of this wikipedia does not use accents on letters to denote stress. This means that the accents are only useful for people who speak spanish and expect spanish orthography to be employed. I don't think many people visit the english wikipedia expecting spanish orthography of languages other than spanish. English works on aztec mythoilogy do not normalloy use the spanish accented spellings and foe example looking for tláloc with an accent in in Taube and Millers The Gods and Symbols of Ancient Mexico and the Maya or World Mythology by Duncan Baird Publishers would leave you dissapointed - the word is spelled with no accent in English. ·Maunus· · ƛ · 18:18, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Don't know if there's any good place for this tidbit
Found this fascinating item while doing research on Cantinflas in a periodicals database: Tlaloc received one write-in vote in the Mexican presidential election of July 5, 1964, coming in behind Cantinflas, who received two.(Associated Press. "Write-In votes" (news brief), The Dallas Morning News, July 24, 1964, section 1, page 5. Wording is mine.)

Incidentally, the AP news brief cited refers to him as "Tlaloc, the centuries-old Aztec stone god recently moved to Mexico City ... ." I mention that because that suggests there might be relevant articles in newspaper databases AND because the moving of the statue suggests one reason why he'd have been sufficiently at the forefront of voters' minds to get any votes at all. Lawikitejana 06:25, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

dubious horror story
This tearing off of the fingernails of children so as to make them cry - what is the source? I suggest this horror story be removed if no source is brought forward.77.162.130.139 (talk) 21:15, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
 * This aspect of aztec ritual is mentioned in "Conquest..." by Hugh Thomas, and he refers to the Florentine Codex. A reliable source. But probably an unimportant detail. Karstein (talk) 22:46, 14 December 2015 (UTC)


 * The source of this "horror story" is the very same linked source that the entire section is copy pasted from: https://www.mexicolore.co.uk/acrobats/319_1.pdf
 * The child torture was the whole point of the sacrificial ritual, it's not an unimportant detail. 47.234.225.14 (talk) 21:48, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Tlaloc. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.conaculta.gob.mx/saladeprensa/2002/25mar/centro.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 09:12, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

The Illuminatus Trilogy
There are at least 10 mentions of Tlaloc in The Illuminatus Trilogy. This notation was apparently undone by user:Doug Weller as "unsourced" and "not significant". Leaving aside its significance for the moment, what would constituted proper sourcing for this type of notation? I have a PDF of the book and a search for the word generates 10 hits (I could quote one or more passages and refer to page numbers in a printed edition). Would that be sufficient sourcing? Hazratio (talk) 19:10, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
 * that's explicitly forbidden, see WP:NOR. Also see "In popular culture" content. Doug Weller  talk 19:52, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Simply because something is mentioned in a book or franchise does not necessarily demonstrate its significance in popular culture, especially when you don't explain how the subject's importance to the book/franchise is, especially if it's not regarded as being relevant enough to mention in depth at the parent page, or how the subject's role in the book/franchise affects popular culture's view of the subject.--Mr Fink (talk) 20:05, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Or, shorter: "If the topic isn't mentioned or discussed in the parent page, it's not notable to be mentioned in its own page."--Mr Fink (talk) 20:59, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

language
I think this article needs an overview of proper objective voice and sources 67.0.210.224 (talk) 08:39, 25 January 2024 (UTC)