Cacao and Chocolate

Abstract

The origin of the words $lsquo;cacao$rsquo; and $lsquo;chocolate$rsquo; and their use in the reconstruction of the early history of Mesoamerica, remain very controversial issues. Cambell and Kaufman (1976, American Antiquity 41:80–89), for example, proposed that the word $lsquo;cacao$rsquo; originated from Mixe–Zoque languages, thus possibly representing Olmec traditions. According to this argument, other Mesoamerican languages, including Nahuatl, borrowed the word as a symbol of prestige and Olmec influence. Other researchers claim the word $lsquo;chocolate$rsquo; represents a more recent neologism, a possible Maya–Nahuatl hybrid, due to the late appearance of the word in central Mexico's Colonial sources. We refute the putative Mixe–Zoque origin of $lsquo;cacao$rsquo; and provide linguistic evidence to propose that $lsquo;cacao,$rsquo; like $lsquo;chocolate,$rsquo; is a Uto-Aztecan term. Analysis of these words highlights general and particular evolutionary trends that originate from the Uto-Aztecan language family. In addition, we show that these two words were initially used as descriptive terms to refer to the shape of the plant's bean and the techniques of drink preparation. Etymological evidence verifies the use of a Mayan term for cacao as early as the Classic period (fourth century a.d.). This early appearance of the term in Mayan and the later diffusion of the Nahua word throughout all of Mesoamerica correlate with additional data to support the conclusion that Teotihuacanos spoke Nahuatl.

Teotihuacan

“…Hill (2001Hill ( , 2010Hill ( , 2011a, a linguist influenced by Bellwood (2001), proposes that the spread of proto-Uto Azteca speakers took place early as part of a northward expansion of farming groups from central Mexico. She cites Dakin and Wichmann's (2000) interpretation of the word for cacao (chocolate) used in Classic Maya inscriptions as borrowed, likely from Teotihuacan. Kaufman and Justeson (2007), however, dispute their interpretation and instead argue that Teotihuacan elites spoke a language from the Mixe-Zoquean family.…”

Mesoamerican mantic names as an etymological source of Mixtec vocabulary

“…However, this may have been drawn from Elio Antonio de Nebrija's Spanish-Latin vocabulary, a source for the Mixtec one, which includes similar entries (v. Swanton 2021:54-55). 34 This is not to say that no such studies exist; for example, there exists a robust and ongoing debate involving the etymologies of the words "cacao" and "chocolate" (Dakin and Wichmann 2000;Hernández Triviño 2013;Kaufman and Justeson 2007).…”

A recent northern origin for the Uto-Aztecan family

“…The Nahuan languages are widely thought to have originated in northern Mexico before migrating southwards into central Mexico (Suárez 1983, Kaufman 2001. These languages all share cognate terms for traditionally Mesoamerican cultural traits, but there is ongoing debate regarding the timing of their entry into the Valley of Mexico relative to the fall of Teotihuacan ~500 CE (Suárez 1983, Kaufman 2001, Dakin & Wichmann 2000, Macri & Looper 2004. Kaufmann (2001) suggests that the origins of this group could date back to about 400 BCE (~2,400 BP) to explain the large quantity of loanwords and contact-induced change between Nahuan and Mixe-Zoquean languages, as well as influences from Huastecan and Totonacan.…”