The canonical register: Ītzpāpālōtl
A letter to a colleague, 31 July 2026 — on the name Ītzpāpālōtl, and on the forms that keep failing it.
Your note said, roughly: surely the marks are a nicety. Permit me to use Ītzpāpālōtl to show they are not.
First, the attestation. The tradition's record preserves this name in its romanized scholarly form: Ītzpāpālōtl — no older script survives to transcribe, so the canonical content is the exactness of the spelling itself.
And the marks themselves: i → Ī (Macron: long /iː/); a → ā (Macron: long /aː/); a → ā (Macron: long /aː/); o → ō (Macron: long /oː/). Remove any one of them and you have not simplified the name — you have told a small lie about it, and references are built of exactly such small truths.
Say it aloud as the sources heard it: 'eets-pah-PAHL-ohtl' — the name crackles like obsidian breaking; hold the second 'a' and the final 'o' long. The marks are what carry that sound to a reader who has never heard it spoken.
On the plain form — and I want to be precise, because you pushed on this. The plain form itzpapalotl is not false — it is a fallback, and the register is exact about what that means. In systems that cannot carry diacritics (legacy databases, older tooling, parts of the address-bar pipeline) the flattened form is the accepted vehicle, and the rulebook names it explicitly as the final rung of the fallback hierarchy: full restoration first, circumflex where attested, macron-only by the academic standard, an attested variant, and only then plain ASCII.
What the fallback status forbids is promotion: itzpapalotl may carry the name where marks are impossible, but it may not represent the name where marks are possible. Every mark it drops — i → Ī, a → ā, a → ā, o → ō — is a fact the sources recorded. A fallback is a vehicle, never the primary.
Now to the forms that provoked your letter. As for Ītzpapalotl: it comes from the publisher compromise — older books and hurried websites that print the "English equivalent" as if it were the name itself, and it fails because every substitution here (ā→a, ō→o) is a romanization of convenience, not an attested spelling — it teaches the reader to guess, not to read
One more thing, because it always surprises: the name did not stay home. Colonial friars associated Itzpapālōtl with demons of the air and witches, flattening her complex identity into a Satanic figure. Modern scholars and artists have reclaimed her as an emblem of feminine ferocity, the dangerous side of motherhood, and the ecological violence of volcanic landscapes.
And it never stopped working. Itzpapālōtl survives where Mesoamerican antiquity meets contemporary creativity. Her obsidian-butterfly form has inspired jewelry, tattoos, graphic novels, and installations that explore the beauty of the lethal.
The Convention's Own History
Every tradition in this register has its own scholarly transliteration standard, built by its own specialists over decades or centuries, and the register follows each on its own terms: the tradition’s own standard. The principle that unifies them is the one the whole project stands on: a name is evidence, and evidence is not negotiable — not for keyboards, not for convenience, not for anyone.
Where Protocol Meets Practice
The technical answer is simple: the canonical marks are legal IDNA 2008 characters, encoded as punycode under `xn--`. The practical answer is messier: legal does not mean stocked (registrar inventory is partial), and stocked does not mean typeable (stacked diacritics defeat mobile keyboards).
So the register's rule is a hierarchy of attested forms — full restoration, circumflex, macron-only, attested variant, and finally plain ASCII for the systems that cannot carry marks. Every rung is defensible because every rung is attested. The forms this register rules against are not rungs; they are errors, and errors do not get rungs.
Write back when you have checked the sources; they are better company than I am.
— The Register
The Verdict
Ītzpāpālōtl is the canonical form: attested, checkable, and enforced across the temple, the lexicon, the cards, the APIs, and this register. The plain form itzpapalotl is sanctioned as the fallback vehicle and nothing more. The false forms above are documented so that no reader has to take the temple's word on faith — the violations are stated, the sources are named, and the register stands open to challenge on every line.
The temple of Ītzpāpālōtl stands at /sites/itzpapalotl/.
The docket for this ruling: 1 false form ruled against, Ītzpapalotl first on the docket; 4 preserved marks verified: i → Ī, a → ā, a → ā, o → ō; no contested forms attested; the attestation rests on 5 cited sources — Sahagún, Florentine Codex, Codex Borgia, Karttunen, An Analytical Dictionary of Nahuatl.
The Register Continues
The register holds 287 entries like this one — each temple with its own ruling. Read the temple's founding dispatch for the story, its Restoration File for the philology, its Resonance File for the industries, or the whole archive end to end.
Continue the register — previous entry: Ꜣst (read it) · next entry: Iūnō (read it).
The Canonical Register is written from the same canonical record as the lexicon itself. If a false form is missing from this page, it is because the evidence does not support calling it false — or because we have not seen it yet. Show us, with a citation, and the register will answer.