Archaeological Views of Aztec Culture: Mary G. Hodge

Journal of Archaeological Research, Vol. 6, No.
3, 1998
Archaeological Views of Aztec Culture

Mary G. Hodge
To understand Aztec society most scholars have relied heavily on the rich and abundant documents written during the 16th and 17th centuries. But new archaeological fieldwork is yielding data that supplement the documents; it offers new insights into Aztec society that contribute to comparative studies of complex societies. Publications from 1989 to 1997 emphasize (1) chronologies based on archaeological evidence rather than texts; (2) the origins of the Aztecs and the nature of the preimperial period; (3) developmental sequences and internal organization of individual sites and polities; (4) the economies of households, communities, and regions; and (5) the impact of the Aztec empire on subject regions.
KEY WORDS: Aztecs; archaeology; Mexico; Postclassic.
INTRODUCTION Aztec culture's central role in Postclassic Mesoamerica is documented by painted codices, Nahuatl chronicles, and Spanish eyewitness accounts, but this body of texts is biased toward politically dominant cities and elite activities. Texts, moreover, lack the time depth required for clarifying the origins and early development of Aztec culture Dissatisfaction with the limitations of the documentary record and the desire to include the Aztec in archaeologically based comparative studies of complex societies have stimulated new archaeological work on the Aztec. This review examines directions taken by Aztec archaeology during the 1990s. Recent research has emphasized individual households, communities, and polities, complemented by investigations of the economic, social, and political systems that integrated communities regionally. Although the compelling documentary record of Aztec society draws archaeologists somewhat inevitably toward clarifying cultural history, current archaeologi197
1059-0161/98/0300-0197$15.00/0 1998 Plenum Publishing Corporation
198
Hodge
cal projects emphasize comparative studies of prehistoric urban systems, empire formation, political economies, and other aspects of complex societies. This review summarizes trends in archaeological studies1 of Aztec culture published between 1989 and 1997, organized according to concerns shared by much of the current research on Aztec culture: (1) definition of cultural chronologies based on archaeological evidence rather than texts; (2) the origins of the Aztecs and the nature of the preimperial period; (3) community studies designed to clarify developmental sequences and the internal organization of individual sites, as well as to place individual communities in the context of regional systems; (4) the economy, emphasizing archaeologically recoverable evidence of subsistence, production, and exchange systems at household, community, and regional scales; and (5) the effects of the Aztec empire on the Basin of Mexico and regions outside it. In view of our past reliance on the documentary record, I note ways in which recent archaeology expands, contradicts, or corroborates the views of Aztec culture presented by texts. Where possible, I offer impressions about the directions that future research may take.
DEFINING AZTEC In this review, following current practice, the term 'Aztec" is used to refer to the Nahuatl-speaking peoples of central Mexico who were part of the dominant polity, the Aztec (or Triple Alliance) empire at the time of European invasion in A.D. 1519. It also refers to the empire as a political and geographic entity, to imperial policies, and to imperial artistic and architectural styles. For subimperial units I employ the more specific polity, region, or culture names used in Nahuatl texts (e.g., Culhua, Mexica, Acolhua, Tepaneca, Chalca, Xochimilca). The term "Aztec" also designates two segments of the Postclassic period: the Early Aztec period (traditionally A.D. 1150-1350) and the Late Aztec period (A.D. 1350-1521) during which the Aztec empire emerged (founded A.D. 1428-1430). Signaling the beginning of the Early Aztec period is a ceramic complex consisting of Orange ware, Red ware, and Polychrome serving dishes. Within those same wares, new types developed during the Late Aztec period; distinctive types that appear in the Late Aztec period are Aztec III ("Tenochtitlan phase") Black-on-Orange serving
'Limitations on space requires this review to emphasize archaeological field studies and analyses published between 1989 and 1997.
Archaeology of Aztec Culture
199
dishes, Redware ("Guinda") bowls, Texcoco Fabric-Marked salt containers, Xochimilco Polychrome vessels, and Texcoco Molded and Filleted censers. Recent refinements in chronology have sought to distinguish preimperial from imperial Aztec material culture. Identifying artifacts other than ceramics is necessary for greater precision in the study of the empire, because the beginning of the Late Aztec ceramic phase (A.D. 1350) does not coincide with the empire's formation, which occurred in A.D. 1428-1430 according to texts. One clear characteristic of the Aztec imperial period is a distinctive monumental art style. Imperial period art includes sculptures in the round that depict serpents and standard-bearers, relief carvings of mythical and political themes, and commemorative boulder sculpture. Architectural complexes featuring twin temples, often assumed to be products of imperial or Late Aztec presence, are now known to predate the empire's emergence. The standardized rectangular Aztec palace structure likewise predates the imperial period; its distribution appears to be a manifestation of regional preimperial elite networks rather than imperial presence (Smith, 1990; Smith and Berdan, 1992; Umberger and Klein, 1993). A definitive list of Aztec material culture attributes is still needed, though imperial period material culture remains more clearly defined than preimperial, perhaps due to the greater cultural diversity that characterized the Early Aztec period (Hodge, 1984, 1994).
CURRENT VIEWS OF THE AZTEC EMPIRE The word "Aztec" makes us think of the vast tribute empire (A.D. 1430-1521) described in pictorial codices, Nahuatl prose histories, and Spanish chronicles.3 In the A.D. 1500s, this empire exacted tribute from 38 provinces covering much of Mesoamerica. Tenochtitlan, the empire's capital, housed ca. 200,000 inhabitants (Smith, 1994, p. 26), and in the imperial center were seen "...oratories like towers and fortresses and all gleaming white, and it was a wonderful thing to behold..." (Diaz del Castillo, 1956, p. 218). Tenochtitlan and the imperial core (Fig. 1) were densely populated zones, but outside the Basin of Mexico the Aztec empire has been described
2
New translations, reprintings, and critical studies of many fundamental Aztec texts have appeared recently, providing tools for all areas of Aztec studies [e.g., Alva Ixtlilxochitl (1975-1977), Alvarado Tezozomoc (1975), Anales de Cuauhtitlan (1992), Chimalpahin Cuauhtlehuanitzin (1965,1991), Codex Mendoza (see Berdan and Anawalt, 1992,1997); Codex Telleriano-Remensis (1995), Duran (1994), Sahagun (1993)]. 3 See Cortes (1986), Diaz del Castillo (1956), Duran (1994), and Sahagun (1950-1982).
200
Hodge
as nearly "invisible" because it did not invest in roads, administrative buildings, or walls as did other historically known empires (Smith and Berdan, 1992). The empire's low visibility in material culture can be viewed as a by-product of (1) its strategy of controlling specific locations rather than a contiguous region and (2) its bureaucratic emphasis on directing the flow of tribute goods to the capital. As a result, large-scale material manifestations of the empire are rare. Significant exceptions are garrisons located at Oztuma on the Tarascan border in Guerrero and Quauhtochco in Veracruz. Aztec ceramics were recovered at both in great quantities and, at Quauhtochco, Basin of Mexico-style monumental architecture is found despite this site's 250-km distance from Tenochtitlan (Umberger and Klein, 1993). Perhaps more typical of the Aztec empire are the borders in the Atlixco Valley of Puebla, which were not fortified but were marked by uninhabited buffer zones, monumental sculpture, and different ceramic assemblages on either side of the boundary (Plunket, 1990; Plunket and Urunuela, 1994). A revised map of imperial provinces and a new interpretation of imperial organization show that the Aztec empire was composed of a core zone whose periphery was controlled by a variety of strategies (Berdan et al., 1996). In the core zone (the Basin of Mexico and adjacent areas), economic and political systems were integrated closely with those of the imperial capital (Blanton, 1996; Hodge, 1996). Outside the core zone were tributary and strategic provinces. The 38 tributary provinces in the Codex Mendoza (Berdan and Anawalt, 1992) were located in the empire's interior and paid specified goods to Tenochtitlan. In contrast, strategic provinces were located on trade routes, militarily important points, and at trade entrepdts. As part of a frontier strategy, the strategic provinces' relationships with the Mexica were "client-like." Rather than regularly scheduled tribute they rendered "gifts" to the Mexica that were sometimes reciprocal (Berdan, 1996; Smith, 1996; Smith and Berdan, 1992, pp. 355-356). This model of Aztec imperial strategies should stimulate future research on clarifying the empire's effects on tribute-paying areas. In accord with the current emphasis of Aztec archaeology, this review concentrates on the empire's core zone (Fig. 1) and its relationships with regions outside the Basin of Mexico (Fig. 2).
ORIGINS OF THE AZTECS AND IDENTIFICATION OF LOCAL CULTURAL SEQUENCES Many Nahuatl texts have a historical focus, marking the passage of time according to Aztec year counts, 52-year centuries, events in human lifetimes such as rulers' accession to office, and/or astronomical events such as comets or eclipses. Since archaeological sequences reflect changes in
201
Fig. 1. Map of the Basin of Mexico.
202
Hodge
Fig. 2. Locations of sites and regions in greater central Mexico mentioned in this article.
material culture, lack of fit is to be expected between time measured by archaeological data and by texts. Traditionally, however, the documentary record has prompted attempts to correlate events in chronicles with archaeological evidence (Davies, 1980; Smith, 1984, 1987; Vaillant, 1938). As a result, past chronologies for Aztec culture have been strongly influenced by texts (e.g., Vaillant, 1938). The number of different chronologies published for the Aztec periods attest to scholars' lack of agreement about this region's Postclassic cultural sequence, and attest to the lack of fit between textual chronologies and archaeological sequences, though recent excavations have furnished some answers (Fig. 3). Archaeologists in the 1990s have questioned the regional archaeological sequence as well as chronologies based on texts. Excavations of deep, stratified sites, domestic contexts, and well-defined single-component sites
203
Fig. 3. Comparison of cultural sequences in and near the Basin of Mexico.
have offered opportunities for controlled collection of carbon samples and artifacts with clear contexts appropriate for refining chronology. Newly acquired radiocarbon dates point to the necessity of developing local chronologies within regional phases.
204
Hodge
One approach shortens the 200-year phases of the "traditional" regional chronology employed through much of central Mexico (Smith and Doershuk, 1991). Seriation of imported and locally produced ceramics recovered from the rural sites of Cuexcomate and Capilco in Morelos, supported by radiocarbon dates, permitted Michael Smith and John Doershuk to define four shorter Postclassic phases for western Morelos (Fig. 3) and for Yautepec, Morelos (Hare and Smith, 1996). These sequences offer more precise chronological control and greater accuracy in correlating local changes in production, exchange, social organization, population growth, and interactions with other sites and regions. In the Basin of Mexico, phases based on a relatively well-defined regional ceramic sequence have been employed for some years, though they lacked independent verification from absolute dates (Parsons, 1966; Sanders et al, 1979; Whalen and Parsons, 1982). Recent excavations at Xaltocan, Otumba, Chalco, Xico, Azcapotzalco, and site Ch-Az-195 in Lake Chalco have yielded radiocarbon dates that deviate markedly from the established regional chronology, offering the potential for a more precise regional chronology and identification of subregional sequences (Brumfiel, 1992, 1997; Charlton and Nichols, 1990, 1991; Garcia Chavez, 1990; Hodge, 1993a; Nichols, 1995; Parsons et al, 1983a, 1996). The most striking new radiocarbon dates concern the initial appearance of Aztec material culture. Aztec I Black-on-Orange, the earliest style of Aztec decorated pottery, is associated with nine calibrated dates from wood carbon representing pure Aztec I strata (see Parsons et al, 1996). The radiocarbon dates from Xaltocan and Ch-Az-195 clearly precede A.D. 1150, the date that the Early Aztec period begins in the traditional chronology. Radiocarbon dates for Aztec I and associated material culture contrast not only with the regional archaeological chronology, but also with textual accounts of the Aztec migrations into the Basin of Mexico (Chimalpahin Cuauhtlehuanitzin, 1991; Davies, 1980; Duran, 1994; Smith, 1984, pp. 167175). Xaltocan exemplifies a lack of correspondence between textual reports of community origins and archaeological evidence. Texts report that Xaltocan was settled after the collapse of Tula (ca. A.D. 1150), but radiocarbon dates recovered in Elizabeth Brumfiel's excavations put Aztec I at Xaltocan as much as 400 years early, overlapping with the Late Toltec period, whose early portion has been radiocarbon dated to A.D. 900-1000 at Tula (Healan, 1989, p. 44). Other archaeological data at Xaltocan attest to continuous occupation from the Middle Formative onward (Brumfiel, 1991c, p. 179). In contrast to Xaltocan, Chalco provides an example of closer correspondence between archaeological and textual information. Chalco's Colonial-period Nahua chronicler states that Chalco was founded
205
in A.D. 1150 (Chimalpahin Cuauhtlehuanitzin, 1965; Schroeder, 1991). Excavations at Chalco revealed intensive post-lbltec construction at a residential mound, accompanied by Aztec I Black-on-Orange vessels. Radiocarbon dates for the earliest Aztec occupation fall around A.D. 1100. Thus, at Mound 65 in urban Chalco, the radiocarbon dates for the initial Aztec occupation are close to A.D. 1150, the traditional start of the Early Aztec period (Hodge, 1993a; Parsons et al., 1996). These examples suggest that documentary chronologies and archaeological data will show closer correspondence in later periods, while dates for earlier events in texts may be less reliable or fabricated later when referring to mythological events. Recent stylistic and compositional studies help explain the variable timing of the appearance of Aztec I ceramics at different sites. These studies demonstrate that both local production and trade account for the presence of Aztec I. In the Basin of Mexico, Aztec I ceramics were produced in or near Culhuacan and Chalco, with small amounts possibly produced near Tenochtitlan (Hodge and Neff, 1997; Mine et al., 1994). At sites located near clay sources, locally made Aztec I sherds comprise the assemblages, but at sites where Aztec I pottery was imported, a variety of sources may be represented. For example, neutron activation revealed that Aztec I sherds recovered at Xaltocan are products of Culhuacan, Chalco, and the Tenochtitlan area (Hodge and Neff, 1997). The vessels from some production regions can be distinguished visually as well as compositionally, but all correspond to an Aztec I style (Mine et al., 1994). Finally, evidence is emerging of an Aztec I horizon that extended beyond the Basin of Mexico: ceramics in the Aztec I style presumed to be locally produced are reported in early contexts in Morelos and Puebla (McCafferty, 1994, pp. 69-74; Noguera, 1954, pp. 99-106; Norr, 1987; Plunket, 1990, pp. 6-8; Smith, 1983). Newly acquired radiocarbon dates also are clarifying the nature of interactions between regions of the Basin of Mexico after the initial emergence of Aztec culture. Radiocarbon dates now place the appearance of Aztec II in the 1200s at Chalco, Xaltocan, Otumba, and Tenayuca (Brumfiel, 1992; Hodge, 1993a; Nichols, 1995; Parsons et al., 1996). Though the traditional regional chronology accurately places Aztec II within the Early Aztec period, A.D. 1150-1350, Aztec II can no longer be regarded as temporally equivalent to Aztec I. Aztec II ceramics co-occur with Aztec I at Chalco and Xaltocan but in later strata above pure Aztec I (Brumfiel, 1992; Hodge, 1993a). Aztec II only partly overlaps in time with Aztec I. Identification of ceramic sources offers insight into the relations between communities that used these ceramics. Both Aztec I and Aztec II are present at Chalco, but neutron activation analysis of 30 sherds revealed all the Aztec II specimens to be imports, whereas all the Aztec I sherds were made
206
Hodge
locally (Neff and Hodge, 1998). Where Aztec I is scarce or nonexistent, as at Tenayuca, Aztec II is the initial Black-on-Orange ceramic. The location of production sources for Aztec II in the north-to-southwest sectors of the basin and Aztec I in the southeast explains the regional surveys' findings that Aztec I and II have different, though overlapping, spatial concentrations, with Aztec I concentrated in the south and Aztec II in the northcentral basin [though at the production site of Culhuacan both Aztec I and Aztec II were made (Mine et al, 1994; Parsons et al., 1982, pp. 342-351)]. Aztec III vessels, known as "Tenochtitlan phase" Black-On-Orange, are associated traditionally with the expansion of the Aztec empire, but the mechanisms that distributed Aztec III ceramics need clarification if the dynamics of the Aztec empire's emergence are to be understood. Recent excavations have offered some evidence. In Morelos, radiocarbon dates show that Aztec III appeared close to A.D. 1350, prior to the empire's emergence (A.D. 1430), just as predicted by the traditional regional chronology in which the Late Aztec period begins at A.D. 1350 (Fig. 3). Aztec III, therefore, can be regarded in Morelos as evidence of contact with politically dominant preimperial Basin of Mexico cities such as Azcapotzalco (Smith and Doershuk, 1991). At Otumba, radiocarbon dates associated with Aztec III ceramics predate A.D. 1400 (Nichols, 1995). At Chalco, Aztec III ceramics postdate A.D. 1400, but nonetheless they appear prior to the Tenochca conquest of Chalco (assuming that texts accurately place this event around A.D. 1456). Thus, at Chalco and Otumba in the Basin of Mexico and at Cuexcomate and Capilco in Morelos, Aztec III ceramics were present prior to incorporation into the empire. In these admittedly few cases where radiocarbon dates have been obtained for Aztec HI ceramics, their initial presence suggests that they were the result of exchange or diplomacy, rather than conquest. Since excavations and associated radiocarbon dates with clear contexts remain few in number, data from additional sites are needed for a more comprehensive understanding of the acquisition of Aztec III ceramics and the ceramic record's implications for relationships among sites and regions inside and outside the Basin of Mexico. Ceramics and other artifacts transitional between prehispanic and Colonial times (notably Aztec IV Black-On-Orange vessels) remain virtually undated [though one recent radiocarbon date places Aztec IV at Xaltocan ca. A.D. 1440; however, it was mixed with Aztec III (Brumfiel, 1992, p. 3)]. Excavations at sites occupied at the end of the prehispanic era and beginning of the Colonial period could contribute greatly to knowledge of this period. Radiocarbon dating is contributing much to Aztec chronology, but complementing those dating methods is obsidian hydration dating (Elam et al., 1998; Evans and Freter, 1989; Smith and Doershuk, 1991, pp. 306-
207
307; Stevenson and Jackson, 1997). In general, obsidian hydration sequences parallel radiocarbon dates and associated cultural sequences, but a number of problems have been noted (Braswell, 1992; Cowgill, 1996; cf. Webster et al, 1993). In Morelos, Smith and Doershuk (1991) found significant differences in dates for equivalent cultural assemblages at two neighboring sites, and they attribute these to compositional differences in obsidian flows and to different soil conditions at the two sites. Most significantly, the three-century range of variation typical of most of the obsidian dates was deemed too long for use in defining phases shorter than two centuries. Similarly, at Chalco the obsidian hydration dates parallel the radiocarbon sequence, but very wide ranges of dates within single well-defined strata suggest reuse and redeposition of obsidian throughout site occupation; where tight control over chronology is required, sampling strategies must emphasize primary deposits from singlecomponent households or excellent stratigraphy. In contrast, at Xaltocan, obsidian dates show a closer fit with radiocarbon dates (Stevenson and Jackson, 1997). As an increasing number of absolute dates with stratigraphic contexts are obtained, refinement of chronologies in the Basin of Mexico can continue. The improved chronological control over local sequences is already allowing archaeologists to trace influences of particular sites on others and the movement of artifacts from centers to peripheries. Sharpening the chronology is essential to the accurate tracing of interactions among Aztec communities and the effects of the Aztec empire on subject regions. Evidence that the Early Aztec period lasted much longer than previously thought challenges archaeologists to develop new models for the study of this era.
AZTEC COMMUNITIES Urban Center, Village, and Polity Organization The Aztec state is one of the ancient world's principal examples of a highly urban society. Since Tenochtitlan and, to a lesser extent, Texcoco are the focus of the documentary accounts, archaeology is needed to provide information about other cities. In the 1990s, excavations and surveys of urban centers and rural communities in and near the Basin of Mexico are clarifying the nature of urban/rural relations. These new excavations will help us expand upon the Basin of Mexico survey results (Sanders et al., 1979).
208
Hodge
Archaeological and documentary data indicate that Late Aztec-period urban centers in the Basin of Mexico ranged in population from 1000 to 25,000 (Hodge, 1994). Urban centers outside the Basin of Mexico averaged 3000 inhabitants, compared to 9000 inside (Smith, 1994, p. 26). Urban surveys at Huexotla, Yautepec, Otumba, and Xaltocan show that in these midsize urban centers, neighborhoods were distributed around a civic-ceremonial center and that topography conditioned urban form outside the ceremonial-civic center. The grid pattern characteristic of Tenochtitlan was clearly not a planning principle for other Aztec cities (Brumfiel, 1976, 1981, 1992; Charlton et al, 1991; Charlton and Nichols, 1990; Nichols, 1994; Smith et al, 1994). One of the more striking urban planning feats disclosed by recent excavations is that the "island" community of Xaltocan actually rests on a man-made 5-6-m high tell constructed in Lake Xaltocan starting ca. A.D. 800 (Nichols and Frederick, 1993). New insights into Aztec settlement have been achieved by combining ethnohistoric and archaeological evidence (Harvey, 1991; Williams, 1994). Barbara Williams used data from Colonial-period field censuses from Tepetlaoztoc to investigate why some Aztec villages mapped by the Basin of Mexico survey displayed a nucleated settlement pattern, while others were dispersed. Previous suggestions to account for these differences have included social organization, ethnicity, or duration of occupation, but in Tfepetlaoztoc land quality and land use emerged as key factors influencing rural settlement patterns. Dispersed settlement characterized villages where households had gardens near their houses, a land-use pattern made possible where there is fertile soil. In contrast, nucleated settlements characterized poorer land, where outlying fields were cultivated (Williams, 1994). Documentary and archaeological data also have been combined to compare Aztec political units. The regional surveys classified sites by location, size, population, and ecological zone, but comparing settlements according to indigenous categories provides insight into the structure of the Aztec regional political system (Hodge, 1994). For example, archaeological sites can be analyzed according to a culturally defined unit, the altepetl [Nahuatl, altepetl, town or king; altepenayoti, a major city and its territory containing dependent communities and people, i.e., a city-state (Karttunen, 1983; Molina, 1970, p. 4)]. Since documents describe polity boundaries and/or list urban centers' dependent rural communities, archaeological sites within such boundaries can be assumed to have constituted the prehispanic polity. From these culturally defined groups of archaeological sites, the size, population, and internal settlement hierarchies of city-states can be estimated and compared (Hodge, 1994). In analyzing the survey data from the Tbxcoco, Ixtapalapa, and ChalcoXochimilco regions (Parsons et al, 1983b), sites can be assigned to 15 city-
209
states, showing that during Late Aztec times a continuum of population sizes characterized city-states. As might be expected, the most populous city-states were at the top of the political hierarchy. Urban center populations correlated with a city-state's position in the political hierarchy as well. Territory size, however, did not correlate with the population size of urban centers as one might have expected for agrarian states. The rural territories of some city-states were too small to support the urban population. The observed imbalance between urban center population and rural territory size is explained by documents that indicate elites in politically dominant Aztec cities were supported by tribute from dependent communities outside their own city-states (Hodge, 1994). The analysis of settlements composing city-states also revealed that despite a regional hierarchy of site classes based on size, estimated population, and civic-ceremonial architecture (Sanders et al., 1979), site-class hierarchies were suppressed within city-states. Individual city-states contained a single large settlement and many small ones (small villages and hamlets) but generally lacked intermediate settlement categories. Identification of the size of city-state territories accounts for this pattern: most rural communities were located within a day's walk to and from the citystate center where the rural population went for market exchange, ritual, and tribute payment in goods and labor. Intrapolity settlement hierarchies probably were absent, because centralization at city-state urban centers of political, economic, and ritual activities (reported in texts) made intermediate-level administrative centers unnecessary (Hodge, 1994). Socioeconomic Change in Aztec Communities A prevailing interest guiding Aztec archaeological projects in the 1990s is the social organization of communities and the empire's socioeconomic impact on conquered regions. Since chronological control at many sites remains problematic, only the Early Aztec and Late Aztec periods can be compared to shed light on pre- and postimperial societies and economies; where chronology has been further refined, such comparisons can be more precise. Studies investigating the social composition of Aztec sites have revealed that in contrast to the well-defined Aztec socioeconomic strata described in documents, household remains represent a continuum of statuses. Comparison of house sizes, construction, and goods found in houses revealed a continuum in wealth and status in the rural Morelos villages excavated by Michael Smith (1992, 1994; Smith et al., 1994). Remains of large and relatively elaborate houses are interpreted as residences
210
Hodge
of elites (Fig. 4) (Evans, 1991; Smith, 1992). Excavations by Susan Evans at Cihuatecpan in the Teotihuacan Valley revealed that one such high-status residence was built of cut stone, contained more rooms, and was larger (ca. 15 x 15 m) than average houses (Evans, 1988). This structure resembles the tecpan (Nahuatl, "lord's place") described in Nahuatl documents (Evans, 1991, p. 65). Excavation of households at two rural sites in Morelos (Capilco and Cuexcomate) provided data for comparing preimperial conditions to those under the empire (the Early and Late Cuauhnahuac phases). These excavations, directed by Michael Smith, revealed that after this region's incorporation into the Aztec empire, the overall standard of living decreased. Additionally, elite and commoner household assemblages became more homogeneous, suggesting depression of elite income. Agricultural terracing increased, perhaps an attempt to expand agricultural production to support an expanding Late Postclassic population and/or to satisfy tribute demands. These excavations suggest a general decrease in the standard of living after
Fig. 4. Comparison of Aztec palace plans, c, courtyard areas; p, open platforms. (A) Texcoco (from Mapa Quinatzin, no scale given); (B) Cuexcomate (Smith, 1992); (C) Cihuatecpan (Evans, 1991); (D) Site Tr-65 in the Tehuacan Valley (Sisson, 1973, pp. 34-35); (E) Chiconauhtla [from a map by George Vaillant (1966), no scale given; see also Evans (1991)]. Drawing after Smith and Berdan (1992, Fig. 1).
211
conquest by the Aztec empire, seemingly due to taxation by provincial and imperial powers (Price and Smith, 1992; Smith, 1992, 1994; Smith and Heath-Smith, 1994; Smith and Price, 1994). In Chalco, restriction of exchange opportunities and reorganization of labor for domestic and craft production is evident in contexts postdating A.D. 1400, after which documents say that the northern basin polities began their efforts to control Chalco (conquering it ca. A.D. 1456). Quantities of obsidian and imported decorated ceramics decreased, and export of locally made Chalco Polychrome ceramics ceased. Imperial taxation is suggested by an increase in cotton fiber production. Some aspects of Chalca livelihood appear unaffected, however. Diet, as inferred from faunal remains, continued as it had before the Tenochca conquest, though there was a minor trend for domestic animals (turkey, dog, rabbit) to constitute a greater percentage of the bone assemblage in household refuse. (Botanical remains were not preserved.) Chalco Polychrome serving dishes continued to be made and used locally, though less elaborate (less labor-intensive) decorative variants characterize imperial-period contexts (Brewington, 1998; Elam, 1998; Hodge, 1998; Polaco and Guzman, 1998). At Xaltocan, evidence of social and economic domination by Tenochtitlan was suggested in excavations by Elizabeth Brumfiel. The frequency of lip plugs, emblematic of Otomi identity, decreased in Late Aztec contexts (Brumfiel et al, 1994). A possible local decorated ceramic production industry vanished (Hodge and Neff, 1997). Overall quantities of obsidian decreased after conquest by the northwestern valley polities (first Azcapotzalco and Cuauhtitlan, ca. 1395, and then Tenochtitlan, ca. A.D. 1430). Imported Black-on-Orange serving dishes, previously from several cities, were now restricted to Tenochtitlan and Cuauhtitlan (Hodge and Neff, 1997). Apparently the northwestern cities, and particularly Tenochtitlan, whose elites became the imperial-period governors of Xaltocan, exerted much influence on the exchange practices of Xaltocan's people in Late Aztec times (Brumfiel, 1997; Brumfiel and Hodge, 1996). In sum, surveys and excavations at cities and villages in and near the Basin of Mexico are documenting the trends in conquered areas during the imperial period. Additionally, research concerning the capital's hinterland and imperial provinces provides evidence that allows comparison with the imperial capital. Investigations of the Imperial Capital Excavation at the Great Temple of Tenochtitlan, which began in the late 1970s, continues to furnish insights into ritual and political life in the
212
Hodge
imperial center and to augment chroniclers' descriptions of the Great Temple, said to be
surrounded by a great wall, built in the large carved stones in the manner of serpents joined to one another. . . . Above the chambers or shrines [of the temple] was a beautiful battlement of small black stones like jet [obsidian] ... the entire form [was] stuccoed in white with red paint, shining splendidly. . . . The balustrades alongside the stairway ended at the top with two seated stone men holding standards in their hands.. . . The courtyard contained many rooms and apartments belonging to the [priests and priestesses], aside from other [chambers] on the top for priests and ministers.,.. The courtyard was so large that during a feast it held eight to ten thousand. . . . (Duran, 1994, p. 76)
Recent publications on the offerings excavated in the Great Temple provide fascinating data (Gonzalez and Olmedo Vera, 1990; Lopez Lujan, 1993, 1994; Polaco, 1991). Information on the monumental architecture, sculpture, and caches found in the area of the Templo Mayor, the Colonial Cathedral, and adjacent streets are being compiled by the Programa de Arqueologia Urbana (PAU) in order to reconstruct the entirety of Tenochtitlan's ceremonial center (Matos Moctezuma, 1992, 1993), Publications issued early in the Templo Mayor investigation, prior studies now republished, and major exhibit catalogs constitute a growing body of literature on the Great Temple complex (Boone, 1987; Broda et al, 1987; Matos Moctezuma, 1988, 1990). Excavations outside the Great Temple complex offer even more evidence about the Aztec capital and its environs. At Tlatelolco, excavations during 1987-1989 revealed human interments, presumably offerings, under the front of the main temple platform, rather than as caches, as in the Great Temple (Roman Berrelleza, 1991). Polychrome murals unearthed at Tlatelolco attest to the sophistication of Tenochtitlan's "sister city." Ongoing study by the Escuela Nacional de Antropologia is revealing Tlatelolco's prehispanic origins and transition into a Colonial city (Carballal et al, 1993; Charlton and Fournier, 1994), supplementing other studies of Tlatelolco (Angulo V, 1991; Barlow, 1989). New finds include examples of architectural works (e.g., recent reports of a ballcourt and causeways) and arts of ancient Tenochtitlan (e.g., Carballal Staedtler and Hernandez, 1989; Martos Lopez and Pulido Mendez, 1989). Another aspect of Tenochca culture receiving attention is the orientation and placement of public buildings in ritual space. Archaeoastronomical studies show the Templo Mayor to be aligned so that celestial events could be correlated with reference points on the horizons seen from the Templo Mayor or from other shrines (Aveni et al, 1988). Investigation on mountaintops surrounding Mexico City disclosed remains of ceremonial structures, corroborating documents' reports that certain peaks seen from the Templo Mayor served as pilgrimage sites (Aveni, 1991, p. 71). On Mount Tlaloc, there is an enclosure dating to Late Postclassic times that substantiates documents'
213
claims that imperial rulers made pilgrimages to Mt. Tlaloc and other shrines around the Basin of Mexico. Fieldwork suggests that springs on Mt. Tlaloc served as a shrine, for at these springs a cavity resembling an offering bowl was carved into rock (Iwaniszewski, 1994; Townsend, 1991,1992). These studies of Tenochca ritual space and of the interconnections among communities, shrines, and topographic features are part of ongoing efforts to understand how the landscape was incorporated into imperial cosmology (or "cosmovision" (Broda, 1991; Broda et ai, 1987; Carrasco, 1991)]. Studies of political monuments are suggesting yet another method of incorporating the landscape into imperial ideology (Lopez Lujan and Garcia, 1990).
AZTEC ECONOMIES: LAND USE, CRAFT PRODUCTION, AND EXCHANGE Aztec Subsistence and Resource Use Economic use of the landscape is a traditional focus of Basin of Mexico studies, and archaeology aptly expands the limited data in documents on prehispanic land use. Agricultural production has been the focus of archaeological studies in the last 5 years, and future publications are anticipated from current field projects. Chinampa agriculture, traditionally associated (in documentary accounts and regional survey) with intensified production in the southern basin during the imperial period, has received attention from many (Avila, 1991; Nichols and Frederick, 1993; Popper, 1995; Rojas Rabiela, 1993, 1995). At the island city of Xaltocan, in the northern basin, chinampas were constructed and used in Early Aztec times, showing that chinampa agriculture was practiced in both the northern and southern Basin of Mexico lakes (Brumfiel, 1997; Nichols and Frederick, 1993; Parsons et al, 1982). Agricultural systems that included terracing and canals have been documented in Otumba and Morelos (Charlton, 1990; Smith and Price, 1994). In other parts of the Basin of Mexico maguey cultivation was a central activity in the rural economy (Evans, 1990). In the 1990s ethnoarchaeological studies provided insights into prehispanic resource use. Major contributions include studies of traditional practices for maguey processing, salt making, and insect collection (Parsons, 1989a, 1994, 1996; Parsons and Parsons, 1990). Essential for interpretation of archaeological remains of households are studies of the construction, layout, and use of modern rural houses in central Mexico (Barba and Ortiz, 1992; Smith, 1992). The processing of maguey, cotton, and other materials for fiber used in weaving has drawn much attention recently since evidence of cloth pro-
214
Hodge
duction and changes in fiber and cloth production are important for interpreting Aztec domestic production as well as the political and market economies (Anawalt, 1990, 1993; Brewington, 1998; Brumfiel, 1997; Hicks, 1994). Data from recent excavations show that fiber production in subject communities increased during Late Aztec times (Brewington, 1998; Brumfiel, 1991b). Moreover, cloth production has been suggested as a reason for increased salt production in the Basin of Mexico during the Late Aztec period, since salt was used as a mordant in dyeing fiber or cloth as well as produced for export in Fabric-Marked pottery containers and for local consumption. It has been suggested that wood cutting may have increased in Late Aztec times, serving as fuel for fires used in salt extraction [since the Aztecs lacked the vast supplies of discarded automobile tires used by contemporary salt makers (Parsons, 1994)]. This topic leads to yet anotherwhether Late Aztec practices and resource exploitation caused erosion and landscape degradation. Whether or not Aztec society degraded its environment has been investigated through combined geomorphological and archaeological study in the southeastern section of the Basin of Mexico. In contrast to findings elsewhere in Mesoamerica (Manzanilla, 1993; Metcalfe et al., 1989, 1990; O'Hara et al., 1993), in the Rio Amecameca valley no evidence was found of prehispanic soil degradation and erosion. Major erosion episodes occurred, but only after the beginning of the Colonial period. In one location, 2.5 m of sediment radiocarbon dated to A.D. 1650-1950 covered a chinampa from which Aztec pottery was recovered in association with a radiocarbon range of A.D. 1180-1250 [770 50 B.R; (Hodge et al, 1996)]. Results indicate that prehispanic peoples' demands on the environment of the Rio Amecameca valley did not degrade the soil, nor did they result in erosion and flooding as did Colonial practices. Of course, data must be obtained from other areas of the basin and outside it before final conclusions about the entire basin are reached. Study of landscape history has provided insight into the patterning of Aztec settlements mapped by regional surveys. Geomorphological study suggests that in the southeastern Basin of Mexico changes in settlement location from Toltec to Aztec times may be a response, in part, to changes in lake levels. Although the Late Toltec period witnessed a high lake level, it fell during the Early and Late Aztec periods. Regional settlement maps (Parsons et al, 1982, 1983b) show that Late Toltec settlements favored high ground, and Early and Late Aztec communities advanced onto the lakeshore and onto islands in the lake exposed by falling lake levels (Hodge et al, 1996), Thus landscape history offers insights into the influences of environmental change on prehistoric settlement locations. The combination of archaeological and geological evidence has potential for interpreting
215
Postclassic settlement choices, and such studies can be extended to other parts of the Basin of Mexico. Aztec Craft Production Documents referring to prehispanic times report the presence of craft specialists in major Aztec urban centers such as Tenochtitlan-Tlatelolco and Texcoco. It seems unlikely, however, that craft production would have occurred only in the largest cities, since Colonial documents report specialists in other centers. In Xochimilco artisans and specialists such as feather workers, fishermen, canoe makers, and masons paid taxes in labor and products to the local tlatoani (Hodge, 1984, pp. 88-89). Pottery, wood products, and woven goods that could have been made locally were available at Coyoacan's municipal market (Carrasco and Monjaras-Ruiz, 1978). The Relaciones geogrdficas of the Colonial period list each region's specializations in utilitarian and craft goods; furthermore, the array of goods in the Codex Mendoza and other tribute lists implies regional specialties (Acuna, 1984-1987; Berdan and Anawalt, 1992; Blanton, 1996). If the documentary record concerning prehispanic craft production practices is to be expanded and quantified, archaeological data are required. Studies of Craft Production in Aztec Communities Investigations into craft production in the Basin of Mexico are well represented in recent research. Of particular interest has been the study of changes in craft production in the contexts of political centralization, urbanism, and social stratification (Earle and Brumfiel, 1987). It is assumed that production took place near particular resources (Sanders and Santley, 1983), but it has been proposed as well that, as part of the process of urbanism and political centralization, particular centers attracted craft specialists while rural populations became agricultural specialists (Brumfiel, 1976, 1981, 1991a). Moreover, in some areas both craft and agricultural production may have increased during imperial times to satisfy tribute requirements. At Huexotla, just 3-4 km south of Texcoco, survey data indicate that craft production diminished in rural contexts from Early Aztec to Late Aztec times, with agriculture predominating (Brumfiel, 1976, 1981). Survey data have been interpreted as evidence that areas near the capitals became food producers for urban populations. Imperial taxation is suggested as another cause of change in production. At Huexotla, Xaltocan, and Xico, and apparently throughout the Basin of Mexico, evidence from spindle whorls indicates that cotton fiber
216
Hodge
production increased from Early to Late Aztec times, presumably for use in weaving manias, a tribute item (Brumfiel, 1976, 1981, 1991b). Cotton fiber production also increased outside the basin in the cotton-growing region of Morelos during the Late Cuauhnahuac phase (Smith, 1992; Smith and Hirth, 1988). At Chalco, as elsewhere, cotton-spinning whorls became more plentiful in imperial times, while at the same time becoming stylistically less elaborate, perhaps an accommodation to increased demands on labor during the time when Chalco was subjected to heavy tribute burdens by Tenochtitlan, Texcoco, and other northern cities (Brewington, 1998). Other explantions could be put forth for the increase in cotton spinning and cloth production. Contrasting data come from Otumba, a city-state center 55 km northeast of Tenochtitlan and 40 km northeast of Texcoco, where survey and excavation reveal strong evidence of several craft specializations. Concentrated areas of manufacturing debris were identified as workshops for clay mold-made figurines, ceramic censers, obsidian earspools, obsidian blades, and other lapidary items. Goods produced throughout the site (presumably at the household level) included basalt metates and cloth (Charlton and Nichols, 1990, 1991; Charlton et al, 1991; Nichols, 1994; Otis Charlton, 1993, 1994; Otis Charlton et al., 1993). It is becoming apparent that several factors affected craft production in city-state centers during Aztec times. Distance from major urban centers and agricultural potential may be important (Brumfiel, 1981, 1991a,c). Location near limited, valued resources such as obsidian, and near trade routes, was important; so was distance from the imperial centers (Charlton, 1994; Charlton et al, 1991; Nichols, 1994). After imperial centers administered the rights to hold markets, local rulers' relationships to politically dominant cities also may have affected the presence or absence of craft specialists and the markets through which they distributed their goods (Brumfiel and Hodge, 1996). Finally, since politically dependent populations could be subject to local, provincial, and imperial taxation, the number of levels of taxation to which a given community was subject may have influenced its occupants' overall economic well-being (Hodge, 1996; Smith and Heath-Smith, 1994). Regional Studies of Aztec Craft Production Studies of Aztec regional craft production are complementing site-specific investigations. Using data gathered by regional surveys (Blanton, 1972; Parsons, 1971; Parsons et al, 1982), which furnished a regional perspective, one category, ceramic serving dishes, was studied in detail (Hodge and
217
Mine, 1990; Hodge et al., 1992, 1993; Mine, 1994; Mine et al, 1994). Such vessels' standardized forms and decorations indicate that they were made in specialized workshops, and compositional and stylistic analyses have identified the sources of these widely traded vessels. Criteria for identifying production zones are (1) a distinctive compositional profile; (2) a distinctive appearance, including region-specific design motifs; and (3) correlation between raw clay samples and ceramics. To date, only production regions, not individual workshops, have been identified. Neutron activation analysis (NAA) of Black-on-Orange ceramics, the most widely recognized Aztec ceramic type, revealed that these vessels were produced in several regions of the Basin of Mexico. Aztec I ("Culhuacan phase") ceramics were produced predominantly in the south-central portion of the basin, at Culhuacan, where they were first found in abundance, also at Chalco, and, to a lesser degree, near Tenochtitlan (Hodge and Neff, 1997; Mine et al, 1994). Aztec II ("Tenayuca phase") vessels were produced in the northern and central parts of the basinin the Texcoco, TenochtitlanTenayuca, Cuauhtitlan, and Ixtapalapa regions (H. Neff, personal communication, 1995; Mine et al., 1994). Aztec III ("Tenochtitlan phase") production zones encompass the entire basin and extend beyond it. Within the basin, production took place near Tenochtitlan, Ixtapalapa, Texcoco, Chalco, and Cuauhtitlan (Hodge et al, 1992, 1993). Outside the basin, Aztec III ceramics were made at Tlacotepec, believed to be an imperial outpost (Neff et al, 1991). Aztec III-IV (transitional style) and Aztec IV ("Tlatelolco phase") vessels are linked compositionally to the IxtapalapaTenochtitlan and Texcoco regions; additional analyses of collections from Tlatelolco are in progress (Charlton and Fournier, 1994; Neff, 1995). There is continuity from Early to Late Aztec times in the Basin of Mexico's Black-On-Orange production zones identified as of 1995the Texcoco, Chalco, Ixtapalapa, Tenochtitlan, and Cuauhtitlan regions. Neutron activation analysis has verified that formal and stylistic variations provide visual keys to the products of each region (Hodge, 1992, 1993b; Hodge et al, 1993). In Aztec III (Late Aztec) vessels, paste profiles of the Tenochtitlan and Ixtapalapa regions overlap, however, suggesting that an increased number of workshops produced Aztec III ceramics, using different mixtures of clays from shared sources. It is almost certain that more Blackon-Orange sources will be discovered, since the paste profiles of some sherds cannot be assigned to known production zones and paste composition groups (Hodge et al, 1992, 1993; Neff, 1995). Aztec systems for ceramic production are as complex as the society they represent: compositional studies show that production patterns for other decorated ceramics differ from those of Orange ware. Red ware bowls were produced in six Early Aztec zones, but by Late Aztec times in only three,
218
Hodge
perhaps evidence of greater control of production by Tenochtitlan and Texcoco (Mine, 1994). Chalco-Cholula Polychrome dishes were produced at Chalco in Early and Late Aztec times. Sources of Late Aztec polychrome bowls (sometimes called "Redware Polychrome") and other Late Aztec polychromes recovered in the Basin of Mexico remain unidentified, though compositional studies confirm that they are not imports from the well-known Late Postclassic polychrome-producing centers in Puebla-Tlaxcala, Cholula, Huexotzinco, or Ocotelulco-Tizatlan (Neff and Hodge, 1998; Neff et al, 1994). Regional patterns of ceramic production changed during Aztec times, according to recent studies. The Early Aztec production system is consistent with this period's noncentralized political organization; several independent centers produced visually and compositionally distinct styles within the Red ware, Orange ware, and Polychrome traditions. During Late Aztec times, the nearly universal geographical distribution of Aztec HI Black-on-Orange parallels political unification of the region (Hodge and Mine, 1990). Compositional studies also show Aztec III Black-On-Orange to be a standardized style adopted by existing workshops, not simply an export associated with the expansion of northern Basin of Mexico polities into adjacent regions (Hodge et al, 1992, 1993). In summary, evidence exists for the restructuring of production practices in communities near Tenochtitlan and Texcoco, as a result of which agriculture and cloth production were emphasized in Late Aztec times. Both the imperial capital and certain city-state centers in the basin supported craft specialists, but outside the Basin of Mexico metropolitan zone, studies at Otumba suggest that city-state centers may have supported more diversified craft production. Data from more sites and regions will ultimately establish how various factorssuch as location near relatively rare sources, distance from imperial centers, political relationship to imperial centers, rule by local or imperial officials, or degree of exchange with major urban centersinfluenced local production in the Late Aztec period. Pottery provides a strong regional body of evidence concerning craft production in the Basin of Mexico, but data on other crafts, such as figurines (Otis Charlton, 1994), will expand our knowledge. In addition, diachronic studies are required to determine how production specialties developed in specific communities throughout the Postclassic period. Such data are anticipated from ongoing field work and analyses. Aztec Exchange Exchange in the Basin of Mexico. Marketplace exchange is clearly documented in the imperial period. Exchange in the Basin of Mexico took place
219
through a hierarchy of periodic markets centered at Tenochtitlan-Tlatelolco. Tenochtitlan and Texcoco held daily markets; others occurred at intervals of 5, 9, 13, or 20 days (Blanton, 1996). Large markets met more often and had a greater selection of goods than small markets. Marketplace exchanges of goods in kind or for exchange media such as cloth were overseen by state officials. Rulers of city-states received income from fees paid by vendors at markets, and rights to hold markets were reportedly reassigned as a means of political reward and punishment. Specialized markets instituted in a number of towns in the Late Postclassic period altered an existing pattern of market cells within a central place network, perhaps giving the state greater control over the regional market system (Berdan, 1989; Blanton, 1996; Hodge, 1984). Based on documents, Early Aztec exchange regions have been presumed to be congruent with city-state territories, and the Late Aztec economy has been presumed to be as centralized as documents report the political system to have been. Archaeological studies of the 1990s have been testing this document-based framework for exchange institutions via study of traded materials recovered by survey and excavation. Based on ceramic collections gathered by regional surveys of the Texcoco, Ixtapalapa, and Chalco-Xochimilco regions, stylistic and compositional analyses of decorated serving dishes have been employed to learn about Aztec-period exchange systems (Hodge, 1992; Hodge and Mine, 1990; Hodge et al., 1992, 1993; Mine, 1994). Most Early Aztec exchange of these ceramics took place within political confederations. Boundaries between confederations, often reported at war, were less permeable. Early Aztec exchange systems in the Basin of Mexico thus corresponded to the boundaries of geographically distinct, independent political confederations (Hodge and Mine, 1990; Mine et ai, 1994). During Late Aztec times, market-zone boundaries remained congruent with political boundaries, but two large market systems dominated the basin, and their boundaries corresponded to the political domains of Tenochtitlan and Texcoco (Mine, 1994). Political affiliation conditioned Late Aztec exchange, rather than distance and travel time, as a pure central-place model would predict (Hodge, 1992). Goods from single sources may well have followed distribution systems different from goods, such as ceramics, that were produced in several locations, but much remains to be learned about the exchange of limitedsource materials, such as obsidian. Comparing obsidian at Xaltocan, Huexotla, and Xico, Brumfiel found that obsidian decreased markedly at Xaltocan in the Late Aztec period, while at Huexotla the quantity remained roughly the same and at Xico there was a slight increase (Brumfiel, 1991a,c; Brumfiel and Hodge, 1996). In Chalco, there is more variety of obsidian sources during the politically decentralized Early Toltec period than in Az-
220
Hodge
tec times. An overall decrease in the quantity of obsidian in Late Aztec contexts also indicates fewer exchange opportunities for the Chalca (Elam et al, 1996). Quantified data from more sites and a larger range of artifact classes are still required for more precise definition of the factors that affected exchange systems throughout the greater Aztec domain. Exchange Outside the Basin of Mexico. Texts report that the imperial capital supported a guild of pochteca, long-distance traders who took manufactured goods such as cotton mantas to places inside and outside the empire and returned with exotic materials. Pochteca trade was closely linked to imperial interests, since the pochteca carried goods for the hueytlatoani of Tenochtitlan and collected information about foreign territories for him. War settlement could require the imposition of markets in conquered provinces to ensure the pochteca an official exchange location and hence access to goods (Berdan, 1994). Since most sumptuary goods sought by Aztec long-distance traders were relatively perishable (feathers, animal skins) or rare (green stones, gold dust), they are seldom recovered by archaeologists, and since marketplaces also leave few traces, evidence for archaeological study of long-distance trade has been limited to a few products. One approach to measuring long-distance trade has been the study of exports from the imperial center. Michael Smith analyzed the distribution of Late Aztec ceramics including Black-on-Orange, Red ware (Guinda) bowls, Texcoco Fabric-Marked salt containers, and Texcoco Filleted and Molded censers at sites outside the Basin of Mexico. Smith found that 83% of Basin of Mexico ceramics recovered outside the basin were recovered at sites within the imperial provinces (Fig. 5). These ceramics represent very small quantities, ranging from 0.1 to 4.7% of decorated vessels [the exception is the apparent imperial outpost of Quauhtochco, where 20% of decorated sherds are reported to be Basin of Mexico imports based on visual identification (Smith, 1990, p. 156)]. Since many of the decorated vessels are containers, they may have held something when exported. Other ceramics seem to have been transported long distances, despite great fragility, because of their ritual value. For example, Texcoco-style censers are found as far afield as Veracruz (Curet et al, 1994). Recovery of Basin of Mexico ceramics in enemy territories, such as Tlaxcala and the Tkrascan state, suggests that trade was not altogether politically controlled (Smith, 1990). Exported obsidian revealed little restriction by imperial borders. Obsidian from Pachuca, associated with the imperial period because it predominates at Late Aztec sites in the Basin of Mexico, has been recovered throughout Mesoamerica in Postclassic contexts. In the southeastern lowlands it appears in ceremonial contexts (apparently valued for its green color); in northern Mesoamerica it was favored for utilitarian use (it ap-
221
Fig. 5. Map of the Aztec empire showing sites from which Aztec ceramics have been recovered [base map from Aztec Imperial Strategies (Berdan et al., 1996); ceramic map after Smith (1990, Fig. 5)].
pears primarily in the form of blades). Obsidian trade thus seems to have been stimulated by both practical and ideological factors (Smith, 1990, pp. 156-162). Imports into the Basin of Mexico. Imports also provide evidence of exchange practices within the empire. Some items are thought to have come into Tenochtitlan via trade, since they do not appear in tribute lists. Unknown quantities may have entered Tenochtitlan as unscheduled tribute and as gifts from provincial leaders and/or foreign rulers (Berdan, 1992). Complete ceramic vessels found in ceremonial caches such as the Volador offering or at monuments like the Templo Mayor include imports from Cholula, Oaxaca, and the Huasteca (Matos Moctezuma, 1988, 1990; Soli's
222
Hodge
Olguin and Morales, 1991). Tenochca caches also include Mixtec sculptures; ancient Mezcala-style green stone sculptures; precious stone and metals such as jadeite, copper, and gold; and marine fauna including shell (Lopez Lujan, 1993, 1994; Polaco, 1991). Neutron activation analyses reveal that turquoise was imported into Postclassic central Mexico from western Mexico and from the U.S. Southwest (Harbottle and Weigand, 1992). At sites in the Basin of Mexico other than Tenochtitlan, the most common imports are sherds from decorated ceramic serving dishes. Traces of Huastec ceramics have been recovered in Otumba, the Teotihuacan Valley, Huexotla, and Xaltocan; traces of Tlahuica and Cholula polychromes have been reported at Chalco (Smith, 1990). At present, so few sites in the Basin of Mexico have been systematically sampled that quantified, regional evidence regarding import patterns is not available. The data on imported and exported goods suggest that independent merchants and market systems moved ceramics, obsidian, and other utilitarian goods (Smith, 1990, p. 165). The presence of Basin of Mexico products in enemy areas suggests that some exchange systems and merchants operated outside state control. Recovery of Basin of Mexico ceramics in sites of all sizes and in both elite and commoner households further suggests that trade and acquisition of such items was not politically controlled, and the falloff in quantities of Basin of Mexico goods with distance also argues for nonstate controlled exchange. Current data thus "suggest the importance of exchange mechanisms independent of the control of the Triple Alliance states" (Smith, 1990, p. 164). Archaeological study best provides evidence of non-pochteca exchange, since such traders are mentioned only by documents and less is said about their exchange networks.
CONCLUSIONS Current investigations emphasize archaeological models and archaeologically measurable aspects of Aztec culture. Efforts are underway to establish chronologies and cultural processes based on material culture, as independent lines of evidence from ethnohistory. As noted by Smith (1990, p. 165), "Rather than using the ethnohistoric record to explain the archaeological record (or vice versa), we need to use both sets of data to document and explain the socioeconomic processes that shaped the Mesoamerican past." Recent investigations of Early Aztec culture have revealed a much earlier beginning date than previously thought, requiring a rethinking of the regional Postclassic chronology. The limited evidence that Early Aztec
223
times began earlier and lasted longer than the traditional chronology assumed is tantalizing, but more evidence is required to convince all. In the 1990s, archaeological fieldwork is producing revised models of empire formation and its impact on other regions. Refined chronologies are showing that some attributes believed to characterize the Late Aztec empire predate its emergence and are manifestations of elite networks that developed prior to the empire. Trade with communities near the basin seems to precede imperial control, based on the presence of Aztec III Black-on-Orange ceramics. Garrisons constitute rare large-scale manifestations of imperial presence; more typical effects of imperial presence are restriction of trade opportunities and evidence of increased taxation. Learning about Aztec city-state polities and communities beyond the documentary record is a goal of the archaeological projects of the 1990s. Such studies are being conducted at the household, community, and regional levels. Household excavations are increasing, but more are needed from a larger selection of sites for adequate comparisons of household activities, subsistence practices, and diet. The study of craft production in the Basin of Mexico and nearby suggests that patterns varied in imperial times with distance from major cities, political relations, and location near special resources. Regional studies remain essential for integrating data from specific sites with survey data. One approach to understanding the settlement patterns surveys of the Basin of Mexico utilizes Aztec cultural categories; therefore, the "city-state" has become a basic unit of analysis (Charlton and Nichols, 1997; Hodge, 1984, 1994; Nichols and Charlton, 1997). The regional patterning of exchange has been clarified through stylistic and compositional analyses of decorated ceramic serving dishes. These analyses demonstrate that Early and Late Aztec exchange systems corresponded to political boundaries, and they indicate that political factors shaped this regionally integrated market system. During Late Aztec times, market-zone boundaries remained congruent with political boundaries, but major exchange zones corresponded to the domains of politically dominant cities. The studies reviewed here demonstrate that, even in the core zone of the Aztec empire, communities and regions were affected by the empire in varied ways. New archaeological data concerning the effects of the Aztec empire on its core and the empire's relations with areas outside it will contribute to comparative studies of empires. In this review I have attempted to summarize ways in which archaeology is "gaining a foothold in the analysis of conquest-period societies" in Mesoamerica (Smith, 1990, p. 164). I have suggested how archaeological data on the Aztec can contribute to comparative studies of urbanization, empire formation, and economic organization of complex societies. Future research must concentrate on field-
224
Hodge
work designed to obtain a wider range of data from a greater number of sites (Parsons, 1989b). Studies must be conducted soon, since so many sites are threatened by the expansion of the fastest growing urban zone in Mesoamerica.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I wish to thank colleagues who offered information on their ongoing projects during my collection of data for this review: Robbie Brewington, Elizabeth Brumfiel, Michael Elam, Patricia Fournier, Hector Neff, Deborah Nichols, Jeffrey Parsons, and Michael Smith. I would like to extend thanks to the editors of JAR for their patience during the extended bibliographic search and writing of this paper. My sincere apologies go to any scholar whose work may have been omitted from this review. Any omissions are inadvertent and unintended; an effort was made to refer to all recent publications, but the impressive volume of recently published works precludes full and complete coverage. (Following Mary Hodge's death, we created two new bibliographies to make the article more useful and up-to-date. We added the items from 1995 to 1997, and combined them with many Mary had cited for the years 1989-1995.)
REFERENCES CITED
Acuna, R. (ed.) (1984-1987). Relaciones geogrdflcas del siglo XVI: Mexico, 9 vols., Universidad Nacional Autonoma de M6xico, Mexico City. Alva Ixtlilxochitl, F. de (1975-1977). Obras histdricas, 2 vols., Universidad Nacional Aut6noma de Mexico, Mexico City. Alvarado Tezozomoc, F. (1975). Crdnica mexicana, Editorial Porrua, S.A., Mexico. Anales de Cuauhtitlan (1992). Codex Chimalpopoca: The Text in Nahuatl with a Glossary and Grammatical Notes, 2 vols., Bierhorst, J. (trans, and ed.), University of Arizona Press, Tucson. Anawalt, P. R. (1990). The emperor's cloak: Aztec pomp, Toltec circumstances. American Antiquity 55: 291-307. Anawalt, P. R. (1993). Riddle of the emperor's cloak. Archaeology 46: 30-36. Angulo V., J. (1991). Trabajos de exploraci6n y conservaci6n en Tlatelolco. Arqueologia 6: 101-116. Aveni, A. F. (1991). Mapping the ritual landscape: Debt payment to Tlaloc during the month of Atlcahualo. In Carrasco, D. (ed.), To Change Place: Aztec Ceremonial Landscapes, University Press of Colorado, Niwot, pp. 58-73. Aveni, A. F., Calnek, E. E., and Hartung, H. (1988). Myth, environment, and the orientation of the Templo Mayor of Tenochtitlan. American Antiquity 53: 287-309. Avila, R. (1991). Las chinampas de Ixtapalapa, D.F., Institute Nacional de Antropologia e Historia, Mexico City. Barba, L., and Ortiz, A. (1992). Andlisis qufmico de pisos de ocupacion: un caso etnogr&fico en Tlaxcala, Mexico. Latin American Antiquity 3: 63-82.
225
Barlow, R. (1989). In Monjaras-Ruiz, J., Lim6n, E., and Failles H., M. (eds.), Tlatelolco: fuentes e historia, Obras de Robert H. Barlow, Vol. 2, Institute Nacional de Antropologia e Historia and Universidad de las Ame'ricas, Mexico and Puebla. Berdan, F. F. (1989). Trade and markets in precapitalist states. In Planner, S. (ed.), Economic Anthropology, Stanford University Press, Stanford, CA, pp. 78-107. Berdan, F. F. (1992). Economic dimensions of precious metals, stones, and feathers: The Aztec state. Estudios de Cultura Nahuatl 22: 291-323. Berdan, F. F. (1994). Economic alternatives under imperial rule: The eastern Aztec empire. In Hodge, M. G., and Smith, M. E. (eds.), Economies and Polities in the Aztec Realm, Studies on Culture and Society, Vol. 6, Institute of Mesoamerican Studies, State University of New York, Albany, pp. 291-312. Berdan, F. F. (1996). The tributary provinces. In Berdan, F. F., Blanton, R. E., Boone, E. H., Hodge, M. G., Smith, M. E., and Umberger, E., Aztec Imperial Strategies, Dumbarton Oaks, Washington, DC, pp. 115-135. Berdan, F. F., and Anawalt, P. R. (eds.) (1992). The Codex Mendoza,, 4 Vols., University of California Press, Berkeley. Berdan, F. F., and Anawalt, P. R. (eds.) (1997). The Essential Codex Mendoza, University of California Press, Berkeley. Berdan, F. F., Blanton, R. E., Boone, E. H., Hodge, M. G., Smith, M. E., and Umberger, E. (1996). Aztec Imperial Strategies, Dumbarton Oaks, Washington, DC. Blanton, R. E. (1972). Prehispanic Settlement Patterns of the Ixtapatapa Region, Mexico, Occasional Papers, No. 5, Department of Anthropology, Pennsylvania State University, University Park. Blanton, R. E. (1996). The Basin of Mexico market system and the growth of empire. In Berdan, F. F., Blanton, R. E., Boone, E. H., Hodge, M. G., Smith, M. E., and Umberger, E., (eds.), Aztec Imperial Strategies, Dumbarton Oaks, Washington, DC, pp. 47-84. Boone, E. H. (ed.) (1987). The Aztec Templo Mayor, Dumbarton Oaks, Washington, DC. Braswell, G. A. (1992). Obsidian-hydration dating, the Coner phase, and revisionist chronology at Copan, Honduras. Latin American Antiquity 3: 130-147. Brewington, R. (1998). Weaving and fiber production: Pre-imperial and imperial periods. In Hodge, M. G. (ed.), Place of Jade: Society and Economy in Ancient Chalco, Memoirs in Latin American Archaeology, Department of Anthropology, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh (in press). Broda, J. (1991). The sacred landscape of Aztec calendar festivals: Myth, nature, and society. In Carrasco, D. (ed.), To Change Place: Aztec Ceremonial Landscapes, University Press of Colorado, Niwot, pp. 74-120. Broda, J., Carrasco, D., and Mates Moctezuma, E. (1987). The Great Temple of Tenochtitlan: Center and Periphery in the Aztec World, University of California Press, Berkeley. Brumfiel, E. M. (1976). Specialization and Exchange at the Late Postclassic (Aztec) Community of Huexotla, Mexico, Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Brumfiel, E. M. (1981). Specialization, market exchange, and the Aztec state: A view from Huexotla. Current Anthropology 21: 259-278. Brumfiel, E. M. (1991a). Agricultural development and class stratification in the southern Valley of Mexico. In Harvey, H. R. (ed.), Land and Politics in the Valley of Mexico: A Two Thousand Year Perspective, University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque, pp. 43-62. Brumfiel, E. M. (1991b). Weaving and cooking: Women's production in Aztec Mexico. In Gero, J., and Conkey, M. W. (eds.), Engendering Archaeology: Women and Prehistory, Basil Blackwell, Oxford, pp. 224-251. Brumfiel, E. M. (1991c). Tribute and commerce in imperial cities: The case of Xaltocan, Mexico. In Claessen, H. J. M., and van de Velde, P. (eds.), Early State Economics, Transaction, New Brunswick, pp. 177-198. Brumfiel, E. M. (ed.) (1992). Postclassic Xaltocan: Archaeological Research in the Northern Valley of Mexico, 1990 Annual Report, Unpublished report, on file at Albion College, Albion, MI.
226
Hodge
Brumfiel, E. M. (ed.) (1997). Postclassic Xaltocan: Ecological and Social Determinants of Production in the Northern Basin of Mexico, Unpublished manuscript, on file at Albion College, Albion, MI. Brumfiel, E. M., and Hodge, M. G. (1996). Interaction in the basin of Mexico: The case of Postclassic Xaltocan. In Mastache, A. G., Parsons, J. R., Santley, R. S., and Serra Puche, M. C. (eds.), Arqueologla mesoamericana: homenaje a William T. Sanders, Instituto Nacional de Antropologia e Historia, Mexico, pp. 417-438. Brumfiel, E. M., Salcedo, T., and Schafer, D. K. (1994). The lip plugs of Xaltocan: Function and meaning in Aztec archaeology. In Hodge, M. G., and Smith, M. E. (eds.), Economies and Polities in the Aztec Realm, Studies on Culture and Society, Vol. 6, Institute of Mesoamerican Studies, State University of New York, Albany, pp. 113-131. Carballal, M., Flores, M., and Lechuga, M. del C. (1993). Dinteles en Tlatelolco. Arqueologia Mexicana 1(1): 75-76. Carballal Staedtler, M., and Hernandez, M. F. (1989). Las calzadas prehispSnicas de la Isla de Mexico: algunas consideraciones acerca de sus funciones. Arqueologia: Revista de la Direccidn de Arqueologia del Instituto Nacional de Antropologia e Historia, Segunda Epoca, 1: 71-80. Carrasco, D. (ed.) (1991). To Change Place: Aztec Ceremonial Landscapes, University Press of Colorado, Niwot. Carrasco, P., and MonjaraVRuiz, J. (eds.) (1978). Coleccidn de documentos sobre Coyoacdn, Vol. 2 (Autos referentes al cacicazgo de Coyoacdn que proceden del AGN), Coleccion Cientifica 65, Instituto Nacional de Antropologia e Historia, Mexico. Charlton, T. H. (1990). Operation 12, Field 20, Irrigation system excavations. In Charlton, T. H., and Nichols, D. L. (eds.), Early State Formation Processes: The Aztec City-State of Otumba, Mexico, Part I, Preliminary Report on Recent Research in the Otumba City-State, Report No. 3, Mesoamerican Research Colloquium, Department of Anthropology, University of Iowa, Iowa City, pp. 201-209. Charlton, T, H. (1994). Economic heterogeneity and state expansion: The northeastern Basin of Mexico during the Late Postclassic period. In Hodge, M. G., and Smith, M. E. (eds.), Economies and Polities in the Aztec Realm, Studies on Culture and Society, Vol. 6, Institute of Mesoamerican Studies, State University of New York, Albany, pp. 221-256. Charlton, T. H., and Fournier G., P. (1994). Tlatelolco and la traza: Divergent routes after the conquest. Paper presented at the 1994 Conference on Historical and Underwater Archaeology, Vancouver, BC. Charlton, T. H., and Nichols, D. L. (eds.) (1990). Early State Formation Processes: The Aztec City-State of Otumba, Mexico, Part I, Preliminary Report on Recent Research in the Otumba City-State, Report No. 3, Mesoamerican Research Colloquium, Department of Anthropology, University of Iowa, Iowa City. Charlton, T. H., and Nichols, D. L. (eds.) (1991). Los procesos de desarrollo de los estados tempranos: el caso del estado azteca de Otumba, 4 vols., Report submitted to the Instituto Nacional de Antropologia e Historia, Mexico, Publications in Anthropology, No. 4, University of Iowa, Iowa City. Charlton, T. H., and Nichols, D. L. (1997). Diachronic studies of city-states: Permutations on a themecentral Mexico from 1700 B.C. to A.D. 1600. In Nichols, D. L., and Charlton, T. H. (eds.), The Archaeology of City-States: Cross-Cultural Approaches, Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, DC, pp. 169-207. Charlton, T. H., Nichols, D. L., and^Otis Charlton, C. (1991). Aztec craft production and specialization: Archaeological evidence from the city-state of Otumba, Mexico. World Archaeology 23: 98-114. Chimalpahin Cuauhtlehuanitzin, D. F. de S. A. M. (1965). Relaciones originates de Chalco Amequemecan escritas por Don Francisco de San Anton Mundn Chimalpahin Cuauhtlehuanitzin, Sylvia Rend6n (trans.), Fondo de Cultura Economica, Mexico City. Chimalpahin Cuauhtlehuanitzin, D. F, de S. A. M. (1991). Memorial breve acerca de la fundacion de la Ciudad de Culhuacan, Castillo F. V. M. (ed.), Instituto de Investigaciones Historicas, Serie de Cultura Nahuatl, Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico, Mexico.
227
Codex Telleriano-Remensis (1995). Codex Telleriano-Remensis: Ritual, Divination, and History in a Pictorial Aztec Manuscript, Quinones Keber, E. (ed), University of Texas Press, Austin. Cort6s, H. (1986). Letters from Mexico, In Padgen, A. (trans, and ed.), Yale University Press, New Haven, CT. Cowgill, G. L. (1996). Discussion. Ancient Mesoamerica 7: 325-331. Curet, L. A., Stark, B. A., and VSsquez Z., S. (1994). Postclassic changes in Veracruz, Mexico. Ancient Mesoamerica 5: 13-32. Davies, N. (1980). The Toltec Heritage: From the Fall of Tula to the Rise of Tenochtitlan, University of Oklahoma Press, Norman. Diaz del Castillo, B. (1956). The Discovery and Conquest of New Spain, 1517-1521, Garcia, G. (ed.), Maudslay, A. P. (trans.), Farrar, Straus, and Giroux, New York. Duran, D. (1994). The History of the Indies of New Spain, Heyden, D. (ed. and trans.), University of Oklahoma Press, Norman. Earle, T. K., and Brumfiel, E. (eds.) (1987). Specialization, Exchange, and Complex Societies, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Elam, J. M. (1998). Style and use of obsidian tools and other lithic artifacts. In Hodge, M. G. (ed.), Place of Jade: Society and Economy in Ancient Chalco, Memoirs in Latin American Archaeology, Department of Anthropology, Universty of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh (in press). Elam, J. M., Neff, H., Glascock, M., and Stevenson, C. M. (1998). An obsidian hydration sequence from Mound 65 at Chalco. In Hodge, M. G. (ed.), Place of Jade: Society and Economy in Ancient Chalco, Memoirs in Latin American Archaeology, Department of Anthropology, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh (in press). Evans, S. T. (ed.) (1988). Excavations at Cihuatecpan: An Aztec Village in the Teotihuacan Valley, Vanderbilt University Publications in Anthropology, No. 36, Vanderbilt University, Nashville. Evans, S. T. (1990). The productivity of maguey terrace agriculture in central Mexico during the Aztec period. Latin American Antiquity 1: 117-132. Evans, S. T. (1991). Architecture and authority in an Aztec village: Form and function of the tecpan. In Harvey, H. R. (ed.), Land and Politics in the Valley of Mexico: A Two Thousand Year Perspective, University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque, pp. 63-92. Evans, S. T., and Freter, A. (1989). Hydration analysis of obsidian from Cihuatecpan, an Aztec period village in Mexico. Paper presented at the 54th Annual Meeting of the Society for American Archaeology, Atlanta. Garcia Chivez, R. (1990). Reporte de excavacidn y andlisis preliminar del material arqueoldgico de los sondeos efectuados en el sitio Xico, Municipio de Chalco, Estado de Mexico, con motivo de la introducci6n de tubena alto calibre para dotar de agua a la poblacion del Valle de Chalco, Report on file, Centro Regional del Estado de Mexico del Institute Nacional de Antropologia e Historia, Toluca, Mexico. Gonzalez, C. J., and Olmedo Vera, B. (1990). Esculturas mezcala en el Templo Mayor, Instituto Nacional de Antropologia e Historia and G. V. Editores, Mexico. Harbottle, G., and Weigand, P. C. (1992). Turquoise in Pre-Columbian America. Scientific American (February): 78-85. Hare, T., and Smith, M. (1996). A new Postclassic chronology for Yautepec, Morelos. Ancient Mesoamerica 7: 281-297. Harvey, H. R. (1991). The Oztoticpac land maps: A reexamination. In Harvey, H. R. (ed.), Land and Politics in the Valley of Mexico: A Two Thousand Year Perspective, University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque, pp. 163-185. Healan, D. (ed.) (1989). Tula of the Toltecs: Excavations and Survey, University of Iowa Press, Iowa City. Hicks, F. (1994). Cloth in the political economy of the Aztec state. In Hodge, M. G., and Smith, M. E. (eds.), Economies and Polities in the Aztec Realm, Studies on Culture and Society, Vol. 6, Institute of Mesoamerican Studies, State University of New York, Albany, pp. 89-111.
228
Hodge
Hodge, M. G. (1984). Aztec City-States. Studies in Latin American Archaeology and Ethnohistory, No. 3, Memoirs of the Museum of Anthropology, No. 18, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Hodge, M. O. (1992). The geographical structure of Aztec imperial-period market systems. National Geographic Research and Exploration 8: 428-445. Hodge, M. G. (1993a). Estudio arqueologico del Chalco prehispdnico, informe preliminar al Consejo de Arqueologla, Institute Nacional de Antropologia e Historia, submitted 15 May. Hodge, M. G. (1993b). Los motivos decorativos de la ceramica y los sistemas regionales de intercambio en la sociedad azteca. In Tortolero Villasenor, A. (ed.), Entre logos y volumes: Chalco-Amecameca, pasado y presente, El Colegio Mexiquense, Zinacatepec, Mexico, pp. 73-102. Hodge, M. G. (1994). Polities composing the Aztec empire's core. In Hodge, M. G., and Smith, M. E. (eds.), Economies and Polities in the Aztec Realm, Studies on Culture and Society, Vol. 6, Institute of Mesoamerican Studies, State University of New York, Albany, pp. 43-71. Hodge, M. G. (1996). Political organization of the central provinces. In Berdan, F. F., Blanton, R. E., Boone, E. H., Hodge, M. G., Smith, M. E., and Umberger, E. (eds.), Aztec Imperial Strategies, Dumbarton Oaks, Washington, DC, pp. 17-45. Hodge, M. G. (ed.) (1998). Place of Jade: Society and Economy in Ancient Chalco, Mexico, Memoirs in Latin American Archaeology, Department of Anthropology, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh (in press). Hodge, M. G., and Mine, L. D. (1990). The spatial patterning of Aztec ceramics: Implications for prehispanic exchange systems in the Valley of Mexico. Journal of Field Archaeology 17: 415-437. Hodge, M. G., and Neff, H. (1997). Xaltocan in the economy of the Basin of Mexico: A view from ceramic tradewares. In Brumfiel, E. (ed.), Postclassic Xaltocan: Ecological and Social Determinants of Production in the Northern Basin of Mexico, Unpublished manuscript, on file at Albion College, Albion, MI. Hodge, M. G., Neff, H., Blackman, M. J., and Mine, L. D. (1992). A compositional perspective on ceramic production in the Aztec empire. In Neff, H. (ed.), Chemical Characterization of Ceramic Pastes in Archaeology, Prehistory Press, Madison, pp. 203-220. Hodge, M. G., Neff, H., Blackman, M. J., and Mine, L. D. (1993). Black-on-Orange ceramic production in the Aztec empire's heartland. Latin American Antiquity 4: 130-157. Hodge, M. G., C6rdova F. de A , C. E., and Frederick, C. D. (1996). Los asentamientos prehispanicos y el medio ambiente del sureste de la Cuenca de Mexico. In Tortolero Villasenor, A. (ed.), Medio ambiente agricultura e industria en la Cuenca de Mexico: varios siglos de transformaciones, Editores Siglo Veintiuno, Mexico. Iwaniszewski, S. (1994). Archaeology and archaeoastronomy of Mount Tlaloc, Mexico: A reconsideration. Latin American Antiquity 5: 158-176. Karttunen, F. (1983). An Analytical Dictionary of Nahuatl, University of Texas Press, Austin. Lopez Lujan, L. (1993). Las ofrendas del Templo Mayor de Tenochtitlan, Instituto Nacional de Antropologfa e Historia, Mexico. L6pez Lujan, L. (1994). The Offerings of the Templo Mayor of Tenochtitlan, Ortiz de Montellano, B. R., and Ortiz de Montellano, T. (trans.), University Press of Colorado, Niwot. Lopez Lujan, L., and Garcfa, N. M. (1990). Los petroglifos de Amecameca: un monumento dedicado a la elecci6n de Motecuhzoma Xocoyotzin. Anales de Antropologia 27: 127-156. Manzanilla, L. (1993). Cambios climaticos globales del pasado. Antropologicas: Revista de Difusidn del Instituto de Investigaciones Antropoldgicas, UNAM (Nueva Epoca) 7: 83-88. Martos Lopez, L. A., and Pulido M6ndez, S. (1989). Un juego de pelota en la ciudad de M6xico. Arqueologla: Revista de la Direccidn de Arqueologla del Instituto Nacional de Antropologia e Historia, Segunda Epoca, 1: 81-88. Matos Moctezuma, E. (1988). The Great Temple of the Aztecs: Treasures of Tenochtitlan, Thames and Hudson, New York. Matos Moctezuma, E. (1990). Treasures of the Great Temple, Alii, La Jolla, CA.
229
Matos Moctezuma, E. (1992). Arqueologfa urbana en el centra de la ciudad de Mexico. Estudios de Outturn Ndhuatl 22: 133-142. Matos Moctezuma, E. (1993). Programa de arqueologia urbana. Antropolojgicas, Revista de Difusi6n del Institute de Investigaciones Antropoldgicas, UNAM (Nueva Epoca) 8: 34-40. McCafferty, G. G. (1994). The Mixteca-Puebla stylistic tradition at Early Postclassic Cholula. In Nicholson, H. B., and Quinones Keber, E. (eds.), Mixteca-Puebla: Discoveries and Research in Mesoamerican Art and Archaeology, Labyrinthos, Culver City, CA, pp. 53-77. Metcalfe, S. E., Street-Perrott, F. A., Brown, R. B., Hales, P. E., Perrott, R. A., and Steininger, F. M. (1989). Late Holocene human impact on lake basins in central Mexico. Geoarchaeology 4: 119-141. Metcalfe, S. E., Brown, R. B., Hales, P. E., Perrott, R. A., Steininger, F. M., and Street-Perrott, F. A. (1990). Arqueologia de cuencas lacustres. El impacto humano en Guanajuato y Michoacan. Arqueologia 4: 3-14. Mine, L. D. (1994). Political Economy and Market Economy under Aztec Rule: A Regional Perspective Based on Decorated Ceramic Production and Distribution Systems in the Valley of Mexico, Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Mine, L. D., Hodge, M. G., and Blackman, M. J. (1994). Stylistic and spatial variability in Early Aztec ceramics: Insights into pre-imperial exchange systems. In Hodge, M. G., and Smith, M. E. (eds.), Economies and Polities in the Aztec Realm, Studies on Culture and Society, Vol. 6, Institute of Mesoamerican Studies, State University of New York, Albany, pp. 134-173. Molina, A. de (1970). Vocabulario en lengua castellana y mexicana y mexicana y castellana [1571], Editorial Porrua S.A., Mexico. Neff, H. (1995). Preliminary Report on Compositional Analysis of Black-on-Orange Ceramic Paste Specimens from Tlatelolco Mexico, Manuscript on file at University of Missouri Research Reactor, Columbia. Neff, H., and Hodge, M. G. (1998). Serving vessel production at Chalco: Evidence from neutron activation. In Hodge, M. G. (ed.), Place of Jade: Society and Economy in Ancient Chalco, Memoirs in Latin American Archaeology, Department of Anthropology, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh (in press). Neff, H., Glascock, M., McVicker, D. E., and Lambertino-Urquizo, L. (1991). Aztec Colonial Presence at Tlacotepec in the Valley of Toluca, Mexico, Unpublished final report on neutron activation analysis, Missouri University Research Reactor, University of Missouri, Columbia, Feb. 26. Neff, H., Bishop, R. L., Sisson, E. B., Glascock, M. D., and Sisson, P. R. (1994). Neutron activation analysis of Late Postclassic Polychrome pottery from central Mexico. In Nicholson, H. B., and Quinones Keber, E. (eds.), Mixteca-Puebla: Discoveries and Research in Mesoamerican Art and Archaeology, Labyrinthos, Culver City, CA, pp. 117-141. Nichols, D. L. (1994). The organization of provincial craft production and the Aztec city-state of Otumba. In Hodge, M. G., and Smith, M. E. (eds.), Economies and Polities in the Aztec Realm, Studies on Culture and Society, Vol. 6, Institute of Mesoamerican Studies, State University of New York at Albany, pp. 175-193. Nichols, D. L. (1995). The Post-Classic occupation at Otumba: A chronological assessment. Paper presented at the 1995 Annual Meeting of the Society for American Archaeology, Minneapolis. Nichols, D. L., and Charlton, T. H. (eds.) (1997). The Archaeology of City-States: Cross-Cultural Approaches, Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, DC. Nichols, D. L., and Frederick, C. D. (1993). Irrigation canals and chinampas: Recent research in the northern Basin of Mexico. Research in Economic Anthropology 7: 123-150. Noguera, E. (1954). La ceramica arqueoldgica de Cholula, Editorial Guarania, Mexico. Norr, L. (1987). Appendix I: Postclassic artifacts from Tetla. In Grove, D. (ed.), Ancient Chalcatzingo, University of Texas Press, Austin, pp. 525-546. O'Hara, S. L., Street-Perrott, F. A., and Burt, T. P. (1993). Accelerated soil erosion around a Mexican highland lake caused by prehispanic agriculture. Nature 362: 48-51.
230
Hodge
Otis Charlton, C. (1993). Obsidian as jewelry: Lapidary production in Aztec Otumba, Mexico. Ancient Mesoamerica 4: 231-243. Otis Charlton, C. (1994). Plebeians and patricians: Contrasting patterns of production and distribution in the Aztec figurine and lapidary industries. In Hodge, M. G., and Smith, M. E. (eds.), Economies and Polities in the Aztec Realm, Studies on Culture and Society, Vol. 6, Institute of Mesoamerican Studies, State University of New York, Albany, pp. 196-219. Otis Charlton, C., Charlton, T. H., and Nichols, D. L. (1993). Aztec household-based craft production: Archaeological evidence from the city-state of Otumba, Mexico. In Santley, R. S., and Hirth, K. G. (eds.), Prehispanic Domestic Units in Western Mesoamerica: Studies of the Household, Compound, and Residence, CRC Press, Boca Raton, pp. 147-171. Parsons, J. R. (1966). The Ceramic Sequence in the Teotihuacan Valley, Mexico, Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Parsons, J. R. (1971). Prehispanic Settlement Patterns of the Texcoco Region, Mexico, Memoirs of the Museum of Anthropology, No. 3, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Parsons, J. R. (1989a). Una etnografia arqueo!6gica de la production tradicional de sal en Nexquipayac, Estado de M6xico. Arqueologia: Revista de la Direction de Arqueologia del Institute National de Antropologia e Historia, Segunda Epoca 2: 69-80. Parsons, J. R. (1989b). Arqueologfa regional en la Cuenca de M6xico: una estrategia para la investigation futura. Anales de Antropologia 27: 159-257. Parsons, J. R. (1994). Late Postclassic salt production and consumption in the Basin of Mexico: Some insights from Nexquipayac. In Hodge, M. G., and Smith, M. E. (eds.), Economies and Polities in the Aztec Realm, Studies on Culture and Society, Vol. 6, Institute of Mesoamerican Studies, State University of New York, Albany, pp. 257-290. Parsons, J. R. (1996). Tequisquite and Ahuauhtle: Rethinking the prehispanic productivity of Lake Texcoco-Xaltocan-Zumpango. In Mastache, A. G., Parsons, J. R., Santley, R. S., and Serra Puche, M. C. (eds.), Arqueologia Mesoamericana: homenaje a William T. Sanders, Institute Nacional de Antropologia e Historia, Mexico, pp. 439-460. Parsons, J. R., and Parsons, M. H. (1990). Maguey Utilization in Highland Central Mexico: An Archaeological Ethnography, Anthropological Papers, No. 82, Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Parsons, J. R., Brumfiel, E. M., Parsons, M. H., and Wilson, D. J. (1982). Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in the Southern Valley of Mexico: The Chalco-Xochimilco Region, Memoirs of the Museum of Anthropology, No. 14, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Parsons, J. R., Brumfiel, E. M., Parsons, M. H., Popper, V., and Taft, M. (1983a). La agricultura chinampera del periodo prehispdnico tardio en el lago Chalco-Xochimilco, Mexico, Informe preliminar al Institute Nacional de Antropologia e Historia, Mexico, Dec. 1982. Parsons, J. R., Kintigh, K. W., and Gregg, S. A. (1983b). Archaeological Settlement Pattern Data from the Chalco, Xochimiko, Ixtapalapa, Texcoco, and Zumpango Regions, Mexico, Technical Reports No. 14, Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Parsons, J. R., Brumfiel, E., and Hodge, M. (1996). Developmental implications of earlier dates for early Aztec in the basin of Mexico. Ancient Mesoamerica 7: 217-230. Plunket, P. (1990). Arqueologia y etnohistoria en el Valle de Atlixco. Notas Mesoamericanas 12: 3-18. Plunket, P., and Urufiuela, G. (1994). The impact of the xochiyaoyotl in southwestern Puebla. In Hodge, M. G., and Smith, M. E. (eds.), Economies and Polities in the Aztec Realm, Studies on Culture and Society, Vol. 6, Institute of Mesoamerican Studies, State University of New York, Albany, pp. 433-446. Polaco, O. J. (1991). La fauna en el Templo Mayor, Proyecto Templo Mayor. Institute Nacional de Antropologia e Historia, Colecci6n Divulgation, GV Editores y Asociaci6n de Amigos del Templo Mayor, Mexico. Polaco, O. J., and Guzman, A. F. (1998). Faunal resources at Chalco: Coyotlatelco through Aztec periods. In Hodge, M. G. (ed.), Place of Jade: Society and Economy in Ancient Chalco, Memoirs in Latin American Archaeology, Department of Anthropology, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh (in press).
231
Popper, V. S. (1995). Nahua Plant Knowledge and Chinampa Farming in the Basin of Mexico: A Middle Postclassic Case Study, Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Price, T. J., and Smith, M. E. (1992). Agricultural terraces. In Smith, M. E. (ed.), Archaeological Research at Aztec-Period Rural Sites in Morelos, Mexico, Vol. I. Excavations and Architecture, Monographs in Latin American Archaeology, No. 4, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, pp. 267-292. Rojas Rabiela, T. (ed.) (1993). La agricultura chinampera: compilation historica, Universidad Autdnoma de Chapingo, Mexico. Rojas Rabiela, T. (1995). Las chinampas del Valle de Mexico. In Rojas Rabiela, T. (ed.), Presente, pasado, y futuro de las chinampas, Centro de Investigaciones y Estudios Superiores en Antropologia Social y Patronato del Parque Ecol6gico de Xochimilco, Mexico, pp. 53-75. RomSn Berrelleza, J. A. (1991). A study of skeletal materials from Tlatelolco. In Carrasco, D. (ed.), To Change Place: Aztec Ceremonial Landscapes, University Press of Colorado, Niwot, pp. 9-19. Sahagun, B. de (1950-1982). Florentine Codex, General History of the Things of New Spain, 12 books, Anderson, A. J. O., and Dibble, C. E. (eds. and trans.), School of American Research and the University of Utah Press, Santa Fe, Salt Lake City. Sahagun, B. de (1993). Primeros memoriales, facsimile edition, Anders, F. (photog.), University of Oklahoma Press, Norman. Sanders, W. T., and Santley, R. S. (1983). A tale of three cities: Energetics and urbanization in pre-hispanic central Mexico. In Vogt, E. Z., and Leventhal, R. M. (eds.), Prehistoric Settlement Patterns: Essays in Honor of Gordon R. Willey, University of New Mexico Press and Peabody Museum for Archaeology and Ethnology, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, pp. 243-291. Sanders, W. T., Parsons, J. R., and Santley, R. S. (1979). The Basin of Mexico: Cultural Evolution of a Civilization, Academic Press, New York. Schroeder, S. (1991). Chimalpahin and the Kingdoms of Chalco, University of Arizona Press, Tucson. Sisson, E. B. (1973). First Annual Report of the Coxcatlan Project, Robert S. Peabody Foundation for Archaeology, Andover, MA. Smith, M. E. (1983). Postclassic Culture Change in Western Morelos, Mexico: The Development of Archaeological and Ethnohistorical Chronologies, Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of Illinois, Champaign-Urbana. Smith, M. E. (1984). The Aztlan migrations of the Nahuatl chronicles: Myth or history? Ethnohistory 31: 153-186. Smith, M. E. (1987). The expansion of the Aztec Empire: A case study in the correlation of diachronic archaeological and ethnohistorical data. American Antiquity 52: 37-54. Smith, M. E. (1990). Long-distance trade under the Aztec empire: The archaeological evidence. Ancient Mesoamerica 1: 153-169. Smith, M. E. (ed.) (1992). Archaeological Research at Postclassic Period Sites in Morelos, Mexico, Volume I: Excavations and Architecture, Monographs in Latin American Archaeology, No. 4, Department of Anthropology, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh. Smith, M. E. (1994). Hernan Cortes on the size of Aztec cities: Comment on Dobyns. Latin American Population History Bulletin 25: 25-27. Smith, M. E. (1996). The strategic provinces. In Berdan, F. F., Blanton, R. E., Boone, E. H., Hodge, M. G., Smith, M. E., and Umberger, E. (eds.), Aztec Imperial Strategies, Dumbarton Oaks, Washington, DC, pp. 137-150. Smith, M. E., and Berdan, F. F. (1992). Archaeology and the Aztec empire. World Archaeology 23: 353-367. Smith, M. E., and Doershuk, J. F. (1991). Late Postclassic chronology in western Morelos, Mexico. Latin American Antiquity 2: 291-310. Smith, M. E., and Heath-Smith, C. (1994). Rural economy in Late Postclassic Morelos: An archaeological study. In Hodge, M. G., and Smith, M. E. (eds.), Economies and Polities
232
Hodge
in the Aztec Realm, Studies on Culture and Society, Vol. 6, Institute of Mesoamerican Studies, State University of New York, Albany, pp. 349-376. Smith, M. E., and Hirth, K. G. (1988). The development of prehispanic cotton-spinning technology in western Morelos, Mexico. Journal of Field Archaeology 15: 349-358. Smith, M. E., and Price, T. J. (1994). Aztec-period agricultural terraces in Morelos, Mexico: Evidence for household-level agricultural intensification. Journal of Field Archaeology 15: 349-358. Smith, M. E., Heath-Smith C., Kohler, R,, Odess, J., Spanogle, S., and Sullivan, T. (1994). The size of the Aztec city of Yautepec: Urban survey in central Mexico. Ancient Mesoamerica 5: 1-11. Solis Olguin, F. R., and Morales, D. (1991). Rescate de un rescate, coleccidn de objetos arqueoldgicos de El Volador, Ciudad de Mexico, Catalogo de las colecciones arqueoldgicas del Museo Nacional de Antropologia, Museo Nacional de Antropologfa (Mexico), Institute Nacional de Antropologia e Historia, Consejo Nacional para la Cultura y las Artes, Mexico. Stevenson, C. M., and Jackson, T, L. (1997). Estimation of hydration rates from chemical composition: A case example from Xaltocan. In Brumfiel, E. M. (ed.), Postclassic Xaltocan: Ecological and Social Determinants of Production in the Northern Basin of Mexico, Unpublished manuscript, on file at Albion College, Albion, MI. Townsend, R. F. (1991). The Mt. Tlaloc project. In Carrasco, D. (ed.), To Change Place: Aztec Ceremonial Landscapes, University Press of Colorado, Niwot, pp. 26-30. Townsend, R. F. (1992). The renewal of nature at the Temple of Tlaloc. In Townsend, R. (ed.), The Ancient Americas: Art from Sacred Landscapes, Art Institute of Chicago, pp. 171-185. Umberger, E., and Klein, C. F. (1993). Aztec art and imperial expansion. In Rice, D. S. (ed.), Latin American Horizons, Dumbarton Oaks, Washington, DC, pp. 295-336. Vaillant, G. C. (1938). A correlation of archaeological and historical sequences in the Valley of Mexico. American Anthropologist 40: 535-573. Vaillant, G. C. (1962). The Aztecs of Mexico: Origin, Rise, and Fall of the Aztec Nation, Vaillant, S. B. (ed.), Doubleday, Garden City, NY. Webster, D., Freter, A., and Rue, D. (1993). The obsidian hydration project at Copan: A regional approach and why it works. Latin American Antiquity 4: 303-324. Whalen, M. E., and Parsons, J. R. (1982). Ceramic markers used for period designations. Appendix 1, in Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in the Southern Valley of Mexico: The Chalco-Xochimilco Region, Memoirs of the Museum of Anthropology, No. 14, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, pp. 385-459. Williams, B. J. (1994). The archaeological signature of local level polities in Tepetlaoztoc. In Hodge, M. G., and Smith, M. E. (eds.), Economies and Polities in the Aztec Realm, Studies on Culture and Society, Vol. 6, Institute of Mesoamerican Studies, State University of New York, Albany, pp. 73-87.
BIBLIOGRAPHY OF RECENT LITERATURE

Altman, I. (1991). Spanish society in Mexico City after the conquest. Hispanic American Historical Review 71: 413-445. Anawalt, P. R. (1992). A comparative analysis of the costumes and accoutrements of the Codex Mendoza. In Berdan, F. F., and Anawalt, P. R. (eds.), The Codex Mendoza, University of California Press, Berkeley, pp. 103-150. Anawalt, P. R. (1993). Rabbits, pulque, and drunkenness: A study of ambivalence in Aztec society. In Cordy-Collins, A., and Sharon, D. (eds.), Current Topics in Aztec Studies: Essays in Honor of Dr. H. B. Nicholson, San Diego Museum Papers 30, San Diego, pp. 17-38. Anawalt, P. R. (1996). Aztec knotted and netted capes: Colonial interpretations vs. indigenous primary data. Ancient Mesoamerica 7: 187-206.
233
Barbosa-Cano, M. (1994). Huaxyacac: Aztec military base on the imperial frontier. In Hodge, M. G., and Smith, M. E. (eds.), Economies and Polities in the Aztec Realm, Studies on Culture and Society, Vol. 6, Institute of Mesoamerican Studies, State University of New York, Albany, pp. 377-404. Bell, T. L., Church, R. L., and Gorenflo, L. (1988). Late Horizon regional efficiency in the northwestern Basin of Mexico: A location-allocation perspective. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 7: 163-202. Berdan, F. F. (1992). The imperial tribute roll of the Codex Mendoza. In Berdan, F. F., and Anawalt, P. R. (eds.), The Codex Mendoza, University of California Press, Berkeley, pp. 55-79. Berdan, F. F. (1992). Economic dimensions of precious metals, stones, and feathers: The Aztec state society. Estudios de Cultura Ndhuatl 22: 291-323. Berdan, F. F., and Smith, M. E. (1996). Imperial strategies and core-periphery relations. In Berdan, F. F., Blanton, R. E., Boone, E. H., Hodge, M. G., Smith, M. E., and Umberger, E. (eds.), Aztec Imperial Strategies, Dumbarton Oaks, Washington, DC, pp. 209-217. Blanton, R. E. (1996). A consideration of causality in the growth of empire: A comparative perspective. In Berdan, F. F., Blanton, R. E., Boone, E. H., Hodge, M. G., Smith, M. E., and Umberger, E. (eds.), Aztec Imperial Strategies, Dumbarton Oaks, Washington, DC, pp. 219-225. Boone, E. H. (1989). Incarnations of the Aztec Supernatural: The Image of Huitzilopochtli in Mexico and Europe, Transactions of the American Philosophical Society 79(2), Philadelphia. Boone, E. H. (1991). Migration histories as ritual performance. In Carrasco, D. (ed.), To Change Place: Aztec Ceremonial Landscapes, University of Colorado, Niwot, pp. 121-151. Boone, E. H. (1992). The Aztec pictorial history of the Codex Mendoza. In Berdan, F. F., and Anawalt, P. R. (eds.), The Codex Mendoza, University of California Press, Berkeley, pp. 35-54. Boone, E. H. (1994). The Aztec World, Smithsonian Books, Washington, DC. Boone, E. H. (1994). Aztec pictorial histories: Records without words. In Boone, E. H., and Mignolo, W. D. (eds.), Writing Without Words: Alternative Literacies in Mesoamerica and the Andes, Duke University Press, Durham, NC, pp. 50-76. Boone, E. H. (1996). Manuscript painting in service of imperial ideology. In Berdan, F. F., Blanton, R. E., Boone, E. H., Hodge, M. G., Smith, M. E., and Umberger, E. (eds.), Aztec Imperial Strategies, Dumbarton Oaks, Washington, DC, pp. 181-206. Boone, E. H., and Mignolo, W. D. (eds.) (1994). Writing Without Words: Alternative Literacies in Mesoamerica and the Andes, Duke University Press, Durham, NC. Bray, W. (1968). Everyday Life of the Aztecs, Dorset Press, New York. Brumfiel, E. M. (1996). Figurines and the Aztec state: Testing the effectiveness of ideological domination. In Wright, R. P. (ed.), Gender and Archaeology, University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia, pp. 143-166. B u r k h a r t , L. M. (1989). The Slippery Earth: Nahua-Christian Moral Dialogue in Sixteenth-Century Mexico, University of Arizona Press, Tucson. Burkhart, L. M. (1992). Mujeres mexica en "el frente" del hogar: trabajo dom6stico y religi6n en el Mexico azteca. Mesoamerica 23: 23-54. Cabrera Vargas, M. del R. (1992). El estado mexica en el siglo XVI: la burocracia estatal. Boletm de Antropologia Americana 25: 25-51. Carrasco, D. (ed.) (1989). The Imagination of Matter: Religion and Ecology in Mesoamerican Traditions, BAR International Series, No. 515, Oxford. Carrasco, D., and Matos Moctezuma, E. (1992). Moctezuma's Mexico: Visions of the Aztec World, University Press of Colorado, Niwot. Carrasco, P. (1991). Territorial structure of the Aztec empire. In Harvey, H. R. (ed.), Land and Polities in the Valley of Mexico: A Two Thousand Year Perspective, University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque, pp. 93-112. Chance, J. K. (1994). Indian elites in late Colonial Mesoamerica. In Marcus, J., and Zeitlin, J. F. (eds.), Caciques and Their People: A Volume in Honor of Ronald Spores,
234
Hodge
Anthropological Papers, No. 89, Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, pp. 45-65. Charlton, T. H. (1996). Early Colonial period ceramics: Decorated Red ware and Orange ware types of the rural Otumba Aztec ceramic complex. In Mastache, A. G., Parsons, J. R., Santley, R. S., and Serra Puche, M. C. (eds.), Arqueologia Mesoamericana: Homenaje a William T. Sanders, Institute Nacional de Antropologia e Historia, Mexico, pp. 461-479. Clendinnen, I. (1991). The Aztecs: An Interpretation, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Cline, S. L. (ed.) (1993). The Book of Tributes: Early Sixteenth-Century Nahuatl Censuses from Morelos, Nahuatl Studies, Series No. 4, UCLA Latin American Center, Los Angeles. Colston, S. A. (1993). People, places, and pictures: Name signs from a corpus of early Colonial Acolhua cadastral manuscripts. In Cordy-Collins, A., and Sharon, D. (eds.), Current Topics in Aztec Studies: Essays in Honor of Dr. H. B. Nicholson, San Diego Museum Papers 30, San Diego, pp. 93-109. Cordy-Collins, A., and Sharon, D. (eds.) (1993). Current Topics in Aztec Studies: Essays in Honor of Dr. H. B. Nicholson, San Diego Museum Papers 30, San Diego. Davies, N. (1993). The Aztecs as empire builders. In Cordy-Collins, A., and Sharon, D. (eds.), Current Topics in Aztec Studies: Essays in Honor of Dr. H. B. Nicholson, San Diego Museum Papers 30, San Diego, pp. 65-69. Denevan, W. M. (1992). The pristine myth: The landscape of the Americas in 1492. Annals of the Association of American Geographers 82: 369-385. de Vega Nova, H., and Mayer Guala, P. (1991). Proyecto Yautepec. Bolettn del Consejo de Arqueologia 1991: 79-84. Diaz Oyarzabal, C. L. (1991). Materiales arqueoldgicos de la Plaza Bancomer Coyoacdn, Catalogo de las Colecciones Arqueol6gicos del Museo Nacional de Antropologia, INAH, Mexico. Doolittle, W. E. (1990). Canal Irrigation in Prehistoric Mexico: The Sequence of Technological Change, University of Texas Press, Austin. Doyle, M. W. (1986). Empires, Cornell University Press, Ithaca. Dubernard Chauveau, J. (1991). Codices de Cuernavaca y unos titulos de sus pueblos, Miguel Angel Porrua Grupo Editorial, Mexico. Evans, S. T. (1989). House and household in the Aztec world: The village of Cihuatecpan. In MacEachern, S., Archer, D. J. W., and Garvin, R. D. (eds.), Households and Communities, The Archaeological Association of the University of Calgary, Calgary, pp. 430-440. Evans, S. T. (1993). Aztec household organization. In Santley, R. S., and Hirth, K. G. (eds.), Prehispanic Domestic Units in Western Mesoamerica: Studies of the Household, Compound, and Residence, CRC Press, Boca Raton, pp. 173-189. Evans, S. T. (1996). Cihuatecpan: An Aztec period village in the Teotihuacan Valley. In Mastache, A. G., Parsons, J. R., Santley, R. S., and Serra Puche, M. C. (eds.), Arqueologia Mesoamericana: homenaje a William T. Sanders, Institute Nacional de Antropologia e Historia, Mexico, pp. 399-416. Evans, S. T., and Freter, A. (1996). Teotihuacan Valley, Mexico, Postclassic chronology: Hydration analysis of obsidian from Cihuatecpan, an Aztec-period village. Ancient Mesoamerica 7: 267-280. Freter, A. (1993). Obsidian-hydration dating: Its past, present, and future application in Mesoamerica. Ancient Mesoamerica 4: 285-303. Furst, J. L. M. (1995). The Natural History of the Soul in Ancient Mexico, Yale University Press, New Haven, CT. Gasco, J., and Voorhies, B. (1989). The ultimate tribute: The role of the Soconusco as an Aztec tributary. In Voorhies, B. (ed.), Ancient Trade and Tribute: Economies of the Soconusco Region of Mesoamerica, University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City, pp. 48-94. Gerhard, P. (1993). A Guide to the Historical Geography of New Spain, University of Oklahoma Press, Norman. Gillespie, S. D. (1989). The Aztec Kings: The Construction of Rulership in Mexico History, University of Arizona Press, Tucson.
235
Gonzalez Rodrigo, J. (1992). Manejo de recursos naturales renovables en una comunidad indigena nShuatl. Estudios de Cultura Nahuatl 22: 445-459. Gonzalez Rul, F. (1988). La cerdmica en Tlatelolco, Institute Nacional de Antropologia e Historia, Mexico City. Graulich, M. (1991). L'inauguration du temple principal de Mexico en 1487. Revista Espanola de Antropologia Americana 21: 121-143. Graulich, M. (1992). Mexico City's "Templo Mayor" revisited. In Saunders, N. J (ed.), Ancient
America: Contributions to New World Archaeology, Oxbow Monograph 24, Oxbow Books,
Oxford, pp. 19-32. Gruzinski, S. (1993). The Conquest of Mexico, Polity Press, Cambridge. Guil'liem Arroyo, S. (1991). Discovery of a painted mural at Tlatelolco. In Carrasco, D. (ed.),
To Change Place: Aztec Ceremonial Landscapes, University Press of Colorado, Niwot, pp.
20-30. Guzmdn Peredo, M. (1991). Underwater Archeology in Mexico, Ediciones Euroamericanas, Mexico. Hare, T. S. (1994). Lapidary Craft Specialization at Otumba (TA 80): A Case Study in the Organization of Craft Production in Late Aztec Mexico, M.A. thesis, Department of Anthropology, University of Iowa, Iowa City. Hare, T. S., and Smith, M. E. (1996). A new Postclassic chronology for Yautepec, Morelos. Ancient Mesoamerica 7: 281-297. Haskett, R. (1991). Indigenous Rulers: An Ethnohistory of Town Government in Colonial Cuemavaca, University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque. Heyden, D. (1989). The Eagle, the Cactus, the Rock: The Roots of Mexico-Tenochtitlan's Foundation Myth and Symbol, BAR International Series, No. 484, Oxford. Heyden, D. (1991). Dryness before the rains: Toxcatl and Tezcatlipoca. In Carrasco, D. (ed.), To Change Place: Aztec Ceremonial Landscapes, University of Colorado Press, Niwot, pp. 188-202. Hicks, F. (1992). Subject states and tributary provinces: The Aztec empire in the northern Valley of Mexico. Ancient Mesoamerica 3: 1-10. Hicks, F. (1994). Xaltocan under Mexica domination, 1435-1520. In Marcus, J., and Zeitlin, J. F. (eds.), Caciques and Their People: A Volume in Honor of Ronald Spores, Anthropological Papers, No. 89, Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, pp. 67-85. Hicks, F. (1994). Alliance and intervention in Aztec imperial expansion. In Brumfiel, E., and
Fox., J. (eds.), Factional Competition and Political Development in the New World,
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 111-116. Hoekstra, R. (1990). A different way of thinking: Contrasting Spanish and Indian social and economic views in central Mexico (1550-1600). In Ouweneel, A., and Miller, S. (eds.), The Indian Community of Colonial Mexico, CEDLA 58, Amsterdam, pp. 60-86. Hosier, D. (1994). The Sounds and Colors of Power: The Sacred Metallurgical Technology of Ancient West Mexico, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA. Hosier, D., and Macfarlane, A. (1996). Copper sources, metal production, and metals trade in late Postclassic Mesoamerica. Science 273: 1819-1824. Iguaz, D. (1993). Mortuary practices among the Aztec in the light of ethnohistorical and archaeological sources. Papers from the Institute of Archaeology, University College, London 4: 63-76. Kellogg, S. (1993). The social organization of households among the Tenochca Mexica before and after the conquest. In Santley, R. S., and Hirth, K. G. (eds.), Prehispanic Domestic
Units in Western Mesoamerica: Studies of the Household, Compound, and Residence, CRC
Press, Boca Raton, FL, pp. 207-224. Kellogg, S. (1995). Law and the Transformation of Aztec Culture, 1500-1700, University of Oklahoma Press, Norman. Klein, C. F. (1988). Rethinking Cihuacoatl: Aztec political imagery of the conquered woman. In Josserand, J. K., and Dakin, K. (eds.), Smoke and Mist: Mesoamerican Studies in Memory of Thelma D. Sullivan, Part I, BAR International Series, No. 402, Oxford, pp. 237-277.
236
Hodge
Klein, C. F. (1993). The Shield Women: Resolution of an Aztec gender paradox. In
Cordy-Collins, A., and Sharon, D. (eds.), Current Topics in Aztec Studies: Essays in Honor
of Dr. H. B. Nicholson, San Diego Museum Papers 30, San Diego, pp. 39-64. Klein, C. F. (1994). Fighting with femininity: Gender and war in Aztec Mexico. Estudios de Cultura Ndhuatl 24: 219-253. Leibsohn, D. (1994). Primers for memory: Cartographic histories and Nahua identity. In Boone, E. H., and Mignolo, W. D. (eds.), Writing Without Words: Alternative Literacies in Mesoamerica and the Andes, Duke University Press, Durham, NC, pp. 161-187. Le6n-Portilla, M. (1992). The Aztec Image of Self and Society: An Introduction to Nahua Culture, Klor de Alva, J. (ed.), University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City. Le6n-Portilla, M. (ed.). (1992). The Broken Spears: The Aztec Account of the Conquest of Mexico, Foreword by Klor de Alva, J., Beacon Press, Boston. Le6n-Portilla, M. (1993). Those made worthy by divine sacrifice: The faith of ancient Mexico. In Gossen, G. H. (ed.), South and Mesoamerican Native Spirituality, Crossroad, New York, pp. 41-64. Lockhart, J. (1992). The Nahuas after the Conquest: A Social and Cultural History of the Indians of Central Mexico, Sixteenth through Eighteenth Centuries, Stanford University Press, Stanford. Lockhart, J. (1993). We People Here: Nahuatl Accounts of the Conquest of Mexico, University of California, Berkeley. L6pez Austin, A. (1988). The Human Body and Ideology: Concepts of the Ancient Nahuas. (Ortiz de Montellano, T., and Ortiz de Montellano, B, trans.), 2 vols., University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City. Lopez Lujan, L. (1995). Guerra y muerte en Tenochtitlan. Descubrimientos en el Recinto de
las Aguilas. Arqueologia mexicana III (12): 75-77. Marcus, J. (1992). Mesoamerican Writing Systems: Propaganda, Myth, and History in Four
Ancient Civilizations, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ. Martinez de la Macorra, C. (1993). Elementos urbanos en Mexico Tenochtitlan. Cuadernos de Arquitectura Mesoamerica 23: 29-36. Matos Moctezuma, E. (1992). Arqueologia urbana en el centre de la ciudad de Mexico. Estudios de Cultura Ndhuatl 22: 133-142. McCaa, R. (1994). Child marriage and complex families among the Nahuas of ancient Mexico. Latin American Population History Bulletin 26: 2-11. McCaa, R. (1995). Spanish and Nahuatl views on smallpox and demographic catastrophe in
Mexico. Journal of Interdisciplinary History 25: 397-431. Mundy, B. E. (1996). The Mapping of New Spain: Indigenous Cartography and the Maps of the
Relaciones Geogrdftcas, University of Chicago Press, Chicago. Nichols, D. L. (1996). An overview of regional settlement pattern survey in Mesoamerica: 1960-1995. In Mastache, A. G., Parsons, J. R., Santley, R. S., and Serra Puche, M. C. (eds.), Arqueologia Mesoamericana: homenaje a William T. Sanders, Instituto Nacional de Antropologfa e Historia, Mexico, pp. 59-96. Nichols, D. L., and Charlton, T. H. (1996). The Postclassic occupation at Otumba: A chronological assessment. Ancient Mesoamerica 7: 231-244. Nicholson, H. B., and Quinones Keber, E. (eds.) (1994). Mixteca-Puebla: Discoveries and Research in Mesoamerican Art and Archaeology, Labyrinthos, Culver City, CA. Nielsen, H. (1996). The 2:2:1 Tribute distribution in the Triple Alliance: Analyzing the Tetzcocan manuscripts. Ancient Mesoamerica 7: 207-214. Ortiz de Montellano, B. (1990). Aztec Medicine, Health, and Nutrition, Rutgers University Press, New Brunswick, NJ. Pastrana, A. (1994). La estrategia militar de la Triple Alianza y el control de la obsidiana: el caso de Itzeyocan, Veracruz. Trace 25: 74-82. Pollard, H. P. (1993). Tariacuri's Legacy: The Prehispanic Tarascan State, University of
Oklahoma Press, Norman. Robertson, D. (1994). Mexican Manuscript Painting of the Early Colonial Period: The
Metropolitan Schools, Boone, E. (foreword), University of Oklahoma Press, Norman.
237
Rodrfquez Shadow, M. (1990). El Estado Azteca, Universidad Aut6noma del Estado de Mexico, Toluca. Rogers, J. D., and Wilson, S. M. (eds.) (1993). Ethnohistory and Archaeology: Approaches to Postcontact Change in the Americas, Plenum, New York. Rojas, J. L, de (1991). La organizaci6n del imperio mexica. Revista Espanola de Antropologla Americana 21: 145-169. Rojas, J. L. de (1993). La sociedad indigena novohispana en el siglo XVI a travel del tribute. Revista Espanola de Antropologla Americana 23: 153-164. Sandstrom, A. (1991). Corn is our Blood: Culture and Ethnic Identity in a Contemporary Aztec Village, University of Oklahoma Press, Norman. Saunders, N. J. (1994). At the mouth of the obsidian cave: Deity and place in Aztec religion. In Carmichael, D. L., Hubert, J., Reeves, B., and Schanche, A. (eds.), Sacred Sites, Sacred Places, Routledge, London, pp. 172-183. Schroeder, S. (1991). Indigenous sociopolitical organization in Chimalpahin. In Harvey, H. R. (ed.), Land and Politics in the Valley of Mexico: A Two Thousand Year Perspective, University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque, pp. 141-162. Schroeder, S. (1992). The noblewomen of Chalco. Estudios de Cultura Ndhuatl 22: 45-86. Scott, S. (1993). Teotihuacan Mazapan Figurines and the Xipe Totec Statue: A Link Between the Basin of Mexico and the Valley of Oaxaca, Vanderbilt University Publications in Anthropology, No. 44, Nashville. Smith, M. E. (1989). Cities, towns, and urbanism: Comments on Sanders and Webster. American Anthropologist 91: 454-461. Smith, M. E. (1994). Economies and polities in Aztec period Morelos: Ethnohistoric overview. In Hodge, M. G., and Smith, M. E. (eds.), Economies and Polities in the Aztec Realm, Studies on Culture and Society, Vol. 6, Institute of Mesoamerican Studies, State University of New York, Albany, pp. 313-348. Smith, M. E. (1996). The Aztecs, Blackwell, Oxford, England. Smith, M. E. (1996). The Aztec silent majority: William T. Sanders and the study of the Aztec peasantry. In Mastache, A. G., Parsons, J. R., Santley, R. S., and Serra Puche, M. C. (eds.), Arqueologia Mesoamericana: homenaje a William T. Sanders, Institute Nacional de Antropologla e Historia, Mexico, pp. 375-386. Smith, M. E. (1997). Aztec city planning. In Selin, H. (ed.), Encyclopedia of the History of Non-Western Science, Technology, and Medicine, Kluwer, Dordrechts, The Netherlands (in press). Smith, M. E. (1998). TIahuica Ceramics: The Aztec-Period Ceramics of Morelos, Mexico, Monograph on file, Department of Anthropology, State University of New York, Albany. Smith, M. E., and Berdan, F. F. (1996). Province descriptions (Appendix 4). In Berdan, F. F., Blanton, R. E., Boone, E. H., Hodge, M. G., Smith, M. E., and Umberger, E. (eds.), Aztec Imperial Strategies, Dumbarton Oaks, Washington, DC, pp. 265-323. Townsend, R. (1992). The Aztecs, Thames and Hudson, New York. Umberger, E. (1996). Art and imperial strategy in Tenochtitlan. In Berdan, F. F., Blanton, R. E., Boone, E. H., Hodge, M. G., Smith, M. E., and Umberger, E. (eds.),v4ztec Imperial Strategies, Dumbarton Oaks, Washington, DC, pp. 85-106. Umberger, E. (1996). Aztec presence and material remains in the outer provinces. In Berdan, F. F., Blanton, R. E., Boone, E. H., Hodge, M. G., Smith, M. E., and Umberger, E. (eds.), Aztec Imperial Strategies, Dumbarton Oaks, Washington, DC, pp. 151-179. Umberger, E. (1996). Material remains in the central provinces (Appendix 3). In Berdan, F. F., Blanton, R. E., Boone, E. H,, Hodge, M. G., Smith, M. E., and Umberger, E. (eds.), Aztec Imperial Strategies, Dumbarton Oaks, Washington, DC, pp. 247-264. van Zantwijk, R. (1985). The Aztec Arrangement: The Social History of Pre-Spanish Mexico, University of Oklahoma Press, Norman, van Zantwijk, R. (1994). Factional divisions within the Aztec (Colhua) royal family. In Brumfiel, E. M., and Fox, J. (eds.), Factional Competition and Political Development in the New World, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 103-110. Weaver, M. P. (1993). The Aztecs, Mayas, and Their Predecessors: Archaeology of Mesoamerica, 3rd ed., Academic Press, New York.
238
Hodge
Williams, B. J. (1991). The lands and political organization of a rural Tlaxilacalli in Tepetlaoztoc, c AD 1540. In Harvey, H. R. (ed.), Land and Politics in the Valley of Mexico: A Two Thousand Year Perspective, University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque, pp. 187-208.

Archaeological Views of Aztec Culture: Mary G. Hodge

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Archaeological Views of Aztec Culture: Mary G. Hodge

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Archaeological Views of Aztec Culture: Mary G. Hodge

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Journal of Archaeological Research, Vol. 6, No.

Archaeological Views of Aztec Culture

Archaeology of Aztec Culture

Archaeology of Aztec Culture

Fig. 1. Map of the Basin of Mexico.

Archaeology of Aztec Culture

Fig. 3. Comparison of cultural sequences in and near the Basin of Mexico.

Archaeology of Aztec Culture

Archaeology of Aztec Culture

Archaeology of Aztec Culture

Archaeology of Aztec Culture

Archaeology of Aztec Culture

Archaeology of Aztec Culture

Archaeology of Aztec Culture

Archaeology of Aztec Culture

Archaeology of Aztec Culture

Archaeology of Aztec Culture

Archaeology of Aztec Culture

Archaeology of Aztec Culture

Archaeology of Aztec Culture

Archaeology of Aztec Culture

BIBLIOGRAPHY OF RECENT LITERATURE

Archaeology of Aztec Culture

Archaeology of Aztec Culture

Klein, C. F. (1993). The Shield Women: Resolution of an Aztec gender paradox. In

Archaeology of Aztec Culture

You might also like