Chiconautla Mexico A Crossroads of Aztec PDF

LAQ20(3) Nichols:Layout 1 7/6/09 3:42 PM Page 1
CHICONAUTLA, MEXICO:
A CROSSROADS OF AZTEC TRADE AND POLITICS
Deborah L. Nichols, Christina Elson, Leslie G. Cecil, Nina Neivens de Estrada,

Michael D. Glascock, and Paula Mikkelsen
Chiconautla, situated on the northeastern shore of Lake Texcoco and the southern edge of the Teotihuacan Valley, lay at an
important juncture for east-west exchange in the Basin of Mexico with connections to as far away as the Gulf Coast. Recently,
we completed an INAA study on ceramics from Chiconautla to examine marketing and exchange patterns from A.D. 950 to
1521. We present these data and contextualize them in light of contexts excavated at the site by George C. Vaillant, in par-
ticular materials from an Aztec noble residence he called “Casa Reales.” We also examine historical information regard-
ing Chiconautla’s role in Aztec society as it existed at the eve of Spanish conquest. We evaluate the site’s particular position
at the crossroads of important trade routes in light of recent models of Aztec markets and exchange and what these patterns
say about shifting political affiliations in this critical region.
Chiconautla, ubicado en el margen noreste del Lago de Texcoco y en el límite sur del Valle de Teotihuacan, se sitúa en un lugar
estratégico para facilitar el intercambio este-oeste en la Cuenca de México con conexiones tan lejanas como la Costa del
Golfo. Recientemente completamos un estudio de INAA en muestras cerámicas de Chiconautla para examinar los sistemas de
mercado y patrones de intercambio entre 950 y 1521 d.C. Presentamos aquí estos datos, organizados de acuerdo a los con-
textos excavados por George C. Vaillant en el sitio de Chiconautla, en particular los materiales que provienen de una resi-
dencia noble Azteca de las que él llamó “Casas Reales.” También examinamos información histórica acerca del papel que
jugó Chiconautla en la sociedad Azteca en la víspera de la conquista española. Evaluamos la posición particular del sitio en
la confluencia de importantes rutas de comercio tomando como referencia los modelos recientes propuestos para entender los
mercados e intercambios Aztecas, y lo que dicen estos patrones acerca de los cambios de afiliaciones políticas en esta crucial
región.
C
hiconautla, the capital of a small Chiconautla may have been the Basin’s most
Postclassic-period city-state or altepetl sit- important break-of-bulk center—a town where
uated on the northeastern shore of Lake goods were transferred between land and water-
Texcoco and the southern edge of the Teotihuacan borne transport (Blanton 1996:75) (Figure 1).
Valley, lay at an important juncture for exchange Although archaeologists agree that commerce
between the Basin of Mexico and the Gulf Coast grew significantly in Postclassic Mesoamerica,
(Blanton and Hodge 1996; Elson 1999:153, Gib- they assign different weights to economic and polit-
son 1964:361; Hassig 1985:219; Sanders ical factors used to model market development.
1965:81–82; Sanders and Evans 2001:948–949). Blanton et al. (1993: 210–214) and Smith (2004:93)
Deborah L. Nichols ! 6047 Silsby Hall, Department of Anthropology, Dartmouth College Hanover NH 03755
deborah.nichols@dartmouth.edu
Christina Elson ! Anthropology Division, American Museum of Natural History, 79th St at Central Park West, New York
City, NY 10024 celson@amnh.org
Leslie G. Cecil ! Stephen F. Austin State University, Box 13047-SFA Station, Nacogdoches, TX 75962 cecillg@sfasu.edu
Nina Neivens de Estrada ! Tulane University, Dept. of Anthropology, 1326 Audubon Ave., New Orleans, LA 70118
ninaneivens@yahoo.com
Michael D. Glascock ! University of Missouri, 2032 Research Reactor Center, 1513 Research Park Drive, Columbia, MO
65211 glascockm@missouri.edu
Paula Mikkelsen ! Division of Invertebrate Zoology, American Museum of Natural History, 79th St at Central Park West,
New York, NY 10024 (Present address: Paleontological Research Institution, 1259 Trumansburg Road, Ithaca, NY 14850,
pmm37@cornell.edu)
Latin American Antiquity 20(3), 2009, pp. XX-XX

Copyright ©2009 by the Society for American Archaeology
1
2 LATIN AMERICAN ANTIQUITY [Vol. 20, No. 3, 2009
Figure 1. Map of Basin of Mexico showing the location of placed mentioned in the text.
argue that commerce intensified during the era of They point to how Aztec city-state rulers (includ-
political decentralization that followed the collapse ing Chiconautla) taxed sales on vendors and how
of Classic period regional state systems (such as it was in their interest to foster local-level com-
Teotihuacan) as specialists and entrepreneurs relied mercial production and exchange. Rulers of city-
on markets to trade across political boundaries. states competed, fought, and allied with each other
Trigger (2003:403) also links the development of prompting the creation of an interconnected elite
markets with city-state organization. Even under class in the Basin of Mexico that crosscut political
the political consolidation of the Triple Alliance, boundaries. Conspicuous consumption of prestige
Trigger argues that the integration of Aztec city- goods and ritual paraphernalia, along with a dra-
states was as much, if not more, economic, than matic rise in regional population, helped fuel trade.
political. Aztec imperial rulers promoted trade and Garraty (2006) sees a close connection between the
fostered markets while separating them from the development and structure of Aztec market net-
control of rival local elites. For Berdan and Smith works and elite interests.
(1996:210), the “complex interlocking market sys- Our goal was to examine Chiconautla’s growth
tem” that developed in the Aztec heartland in the as a trading hub and its relationships with the Triple
Late Postclassic exemplifies a larger goal of all Alliance capitals of Tenochtitlan and Texcoco and
empires: to encourage economic growth while con- with Otumba, the largest city-state in the Teoti-
trolling resources. huacan Valley and an important regional craft pro-
Several scholars including Blanton (1996), duction center (e.g., Charlton et al. 2000; Nichols
Brumfiel and Earle (1987), and Hodge and Minc 1996; Otis Charlton et al. 1993). Our recent source
(1990; Hodge et al. 1992, 1993, Minc 1994, 2006) study using instrumental neutron activation analy-
emphasize politics in the development of markets sis (INAA) of ceramics from the site, many drawn
as a means of financing emerging state economies. from an Aztec noble residence or palace (locally
Nichols et al.] CROSSROADS OF AZTEC TRADE AND POLITICS 3
named “Casas Reales”) excavated in the 1930s (see 2004: 353; Nichols et al. 2008; Parsons and Goren-
Vaillant 1962; Elson 1999; Sanders and Evans flo 2009).
2001:983–988; Smith 2008:45), allows us to eval-
uate how ceramic exchange changed over time and Middle Postclassic
what this says about shifting economic relations and Settlement pattern and documentary data led
political affiliations in this critical region. researchers to propose that Aztec city-state of the
To begin, we present an overview of current Middle Postclassic (A.D. 1150–1350) were asso-
Basin-wide political models derived from studies ciated with highly localized solar market systems—
of the Postclassic period economy. We use these a system lacking a central place hierarchy where
data to hypothesize what patterns we might expect political control limits consumer choice (Charlton
to see at Chiconautla during the Postclassic period. and Nichols 1997:199–202; Hassig 1985:73; Hicks
In the second part of the article, we examine archi- 1978:93; Smith 1979). Recent composition and
tecture and artifacts from Chiconautla’s palace stylistic studies, however, indicate that Early Aztec
including the results of INAA on serving and rit- (Aztec II) decorated wares (Red wares and Orange
ual ceramics. In the final section we discuss our wares) were exchanged more commonly than
results in light of regional economic models. expected from the solar market model.
In addition to expanded exchange between
Ceramic Studies and Models of the adjoining market zones, exports of ceramics from
Postclassic Political Economy production zones that included politically power-
ful city-states (e.g., Texcoco in eastern Basin, and
Recent stylistic and compositional studies of Tenochtitlan and Azcapotzalco in the southwest-
ceramics designed to examine systems of market ern Basin) increased (García 2004; Garraty 2006;
exchange emerging after the decline of the Classic Minc 1994, 2006; Minc et al. 1994; Nichols et al.
period state of Teotihuacan have greatly advanced 2002; Ma 2003; Nichols et al. 2008). For example,
our understanding of the Aztec economy in the during this time period Black-on-Orange Aztec II
Basin of Mexico. ceramics from the Texcoco region appear at Cerro
Portezuelo and Black-on-Orange Aztec II ceram-
Early Postclassic ics produced in the Tenochtitlan region were
During the Early Postclassic (A.D. 950–1150) exported to Chalco and Xaltocan. In both cases,
ceramic exchange networks, particularly the ceramic data echo historical data suggesting Tex-
exchange of decorated vessels with prestige value, coco and Tenochtitlan and Azcapotzalco (both fall
expanded between urban centers (Nichols et al. in the Tenochtitlan production zone) were expand-
2002). Rural villagers in the Teotihuacan Valley ing their spheres of political influence. From her
mostly consumed locally made pottery (Crider et data on Aztec Red wares, Minc (2006) posits a
al., 2007). The influence that Tula (north of the model of noncentralized overlapping market net-
Basin) and Cholula (south of the Basin) had in the works. In contrast Blanton (1996), Garraty (2006),
Basin is unclear. and Nichols et al. (2002) see indications of Aztec
Internal political boundaries did impose some market hierarchies beginning in the Middle Post-
limitations on exchange as ceramics fall into two classic.
major production and stylistic zones: (1) Maza-
pan/Tollan found in the eastern and northern Basin; Late Postclassic
and (2) Black-on-Orange Aztec I present in the In the Late Postclassic (A.D. 1350–1521),
southern Chalco-Xochimilco area, at Xaltocan in exchange through both market and tribute systems
the north-central Basin, and farther east at Cholula intensified and the organization of market networks
and southwestern Puebla. Except at some sites in became more centralized in the core of the Basin
the southern Basin, these complexes generally have of Mexico. The Texcoco and Tenochtitlan compo-
non-overlapping spatial distributions, suggesting sition zones exported increasing amounts of Black-
the distributions can be tied to ethnic/political divi- on-Orange Aztec III pottery (now the most common
sions among Early Postclassic city-state confeder- type of decorated service ware), and these imper-
ations (Brumfiel 2005; Crider 2008; García Chavez ial capitals also became the largest markets and
craft production centers in the Basin. Exports from period indicates that ceramic production was mul-
the Chalco composition group to other regions of ticentric throughout and suggests a shift from (1)
the Basin decreased sharply, possibly with the onset a highly localized, solar marketing model to (2)
of nearly a century of hostility between Chalco and increased movement of decorated vessels though
Tenochtitlan that culminated in Tenochtitlan’s con- a network of overlapping markets, perhaps also
quest of Chalco in 1465 (Hodge et al. 1992, 1993; influenced by kinship, marriage, and political
Nichols et al. 2002:69–70). alliances, to (3) a hierarchical market system
While exports of Aztec III Black-on-orange pot- increasingly influenced by the Triple Alliance cap-
tery from the southwestern Basin expanded to the itals of Texcoco and especially Tenochtitlan (Brum-
eastern Basin and beyond, ceramics made in the fiel 1987; Charlton et al. 2000; Nichols et al. 2002;
eastern Basin mostly circulated within the Texcoco- Smith 1979, 1980, 2003a, 2003b, 2003c). Points
headed Acolhua domain (Garraty 2006; Hodge and of debate concern how much political control rulers
Neff 2005; Minc 2006; Nichols and Charlton 2001; exerted over the economy and the degree to which
Nichols et al. 2002; Skoglund et al. 2006). The such control reduced or inhibited horizontal or lat-
northeastern Basin in particular, although politi- eral integration between subregional market zones
cally incorporated into the Acolhua confederation, (Garraty 2007; Minc 2006).
may not have been as fully integrated into the How do data describing Chiconautla’s political
regional system of interlocking markets (Blanton history fit with this emerging pattern of market
1996; Charlton 1994; Charlton et al. 2000). In short, exchange? Sanders (1986:525) proposes that in the
by the Late Postclassic, although the Tenochtitlan Early Postclassic the entire Teotihuacan Valley,
and Texcoco regions produced substantial amounts including Chiconautla, formed a small state cen-
of Black-on-Orange Aztec III ceramics, those from tered at Teotihuacan that was incorporated into the
the Tenochtitlan composition group appear across Toltec Tula sphere. In the Middle Postclassic (ca.
the Basin at a scale suggesting to some scholars that A.D. 1150–1350/1400), Chiconautla grew into a
Tenochtitlan intervened to promote the growth of large town with its own ruling family, although it
its own production system at the expense of others is not clear if it was politically independent or was
(Blanton 1996). dominated by Xaltocan, one of eight large regional
The production and distribution of Aztec Red centers in the Basin (Sanders et al. 1979:137–149).
ware, primarily used as serving ware, may not mir- By ca. 1430–1434 Chiconautla had a tlatoani
ror that of Black- on- Orange ware. Brumfiel (ruler) appointed during the reorganization of the
(2004:251) suggests Red ware “bowls” were drink- Acolhua state under Nezahualcoyotl. As part of its
ing containers and notes some of the painted tribute, Chiconautla provided labor and services to
designs on Red wares evoke Omacatl, the Aztec the palace at Texcoco (Alva Ixtlilxóchitl 1975–77.
god of hospitality. In both the Middle and Late 2: 89–90; Hodge and Blanton 1966: 230). While
Postclassic, the production of low-fired Red ware Chiconautla’s rulers intermarried with Texcoco’s
appears more localized than Black-on-Orange royal family, in the Late Postclassic they also may
wares (Charlton et al. 2008; Neff et al. 2000; have had kinship ties to Tenochtitlan (Berdan and
Nichols et al. 2002). Minc’s (2006:108) recent Anawalt 1992:2:222; Evans 2001; Gibson 1964:
analysis of Aztec Red ware from the eastern and 43; Hodge 1991:134–135; Sanders and Evans
southeastern Basin argues for a dual market sys- 2001:948–949). Elson (1999:153) notes that the
tem in the Late Postclassic Basin that was spatially gloss on the depiction of Motecuhzoma’s palace in
congruent with the two major confederations of the Codex Mendoza lists Chiconautla as one of
the empire, Tenochtitlan and Texcoco, as antici- three polities called “friends of Motecuhzoma”
pated by Hassig (1985). (Berdan and Anawalt 1992:3:f69r).
Following Sanders, for the Early Postclassic we
Chiconautla and Models of the expect that Chiconautla primarily consumed
Postclassic Political Economy ceramics produced in the Teotihuacan region. At
the same time, trace element analysis may tell us
The current understanding of marketing and something about how Chiconautla’s economic rela-
exchange patterns for the A.D. 650–1521 time tions expanded beyond the Teotihuacan Valley. For
the Middle and Late Postclassic, if economic data Table 1. Ceramic Types and Forms Recovered from a
mirror historical evidence, then we would expect Trench Cutting into a Midden That Dates to the Epiclassic
and Early Postclassic.
that developing kinship, marriage, and political
alliances with the Triple Alliance capitals of Tex- Type/Form Number Percentage
coco and Tenochtitlan increased the city-state’s par- Cream slip white 244 1.66
ticipation with these production zones. We also Censer 265 1.81
anticipate seeing patterns in the forms and types of Comal 779 5.32
ceramics from the palace that suggest shared ritual Plain Bowl 833 5.68
behavior (Berdan and Smith 1996:214–215) and Coyoltlatelco 966 6.59
Other 1471 10.04
regional or intra-elite competitive displays and con- Basin 1795 12.25
sumption to mark status among elites (Brumfiel Jar 3837 26.18
1987, 2004). At the same time, increasing com- Mazapan (Red-on-Buff) 4466 30.47
merce and Chiconautla’s growth as a trade center TOTAL 14656 100.00
should have expanded the local availability of
goods (Blanton 1996).
In the following sections we present an overview analyzed by Vaillant in the field and was inconsis-
of the archaeology of Chiconautla. We examine tently collected so we cannot present those data.
data on architecture and on local and imported non- The context contained five complete human skele-
ceramic materials recovered during excavations. tons, but the date of the interments is not clear
We describe the results of INAA on 200 ceramic (Table 2). One individual was placed with a
materials, including decorated pottery (bowls and Graphite Black-on-Red bowl; the others were
tripod bowls); fancy serving vessels (copas, pulque interred without offerings.
vessels); common decorated serving vessels The midden produced seven sherd disks, six
(dishes, bowls, and molcajetes); ritual objects (fig- Teotihuacan/Early Classic figurines, 97 Mazapan-
urines, temple models, incense burners, flutes, and Tollan figurines, and 14,696 sherds. A small por-
pipes); and artifacts used in production (spindle tion of the sample (6.59 percent) consists of
whorls for weaving both cotton and maguey cloth). Coyotlatelco ceramics (dated to A.D. 650–850),
Our goal is to determine the origin of a wide array indicating some settlement in this area during the
of goods and then examine how these goods might Epiclassic. The most abundant pottery types are
have flowed through trade networks. domestic utilitarian vessels, lending support to the
suggestion that the feature is a midden. Although
Chiconautla as a Postclassic Center jar body sherds were not uniformly counted in these
proveniences, over 26 percent of the total number
Ethnohistoric and previous INAA data suggest of ceramics in the trench is undecorated sherds
Chiconautla’s primary economic ties would have from jars (necks, rims, and bodies). Other utilitar-
been with pottery-producing places on the eastern ian ceramics recorded in the trench are comals (5.32
side of the Basin. Yet, the town’s location allowed percent), undecorated bowls (5.68 percent), and
it access to the Basin’s most important transporta- undecorated basins (12.25 percent). Decorated
tion artery: Lake Texcoco. This is the primary rea- Early Postclassic Mazapan/Tollan pottery, primar-
son that George Vaillant chose to excavate the site ily Red-on-Buff wares in the form of tripod ves-
in 1935, and while he did not publish a detailed sels, jars, and bowls, account for just over 30
analysis of the work, he employed careful field percent of all ceramics.
methods and his data are useful today.
Middle and Late Postclassic
Early Postclassic
Elsewhere Elson has argued that the structure dug
Data on Chiconautla’s Early Postclassic occupation by Vaillant at Chiconautla is best interpreted as a
were recovered during the excavation of a midden. palace occupied in the Middle and Late Postclas-
Vaillant’s field notes document an absence of archi- sic (Elson 1999; Elson and Smith 2001; see also
tecture but an abundance of sherds, animal bones, Smith 1992; Smith 2008:chapters 2, 4; Sanders and
and broken tools (Table 1). Animal bone was not Evans 2001:983–988; Vaillant and Sanders 2000).
Table 2. General Data Recorded on Burials Recovered in the Early Postclassic Period Midden.
Field No. Condition Sex/ Position Offering

201 fair young adult male/ flexed on left side with graphite black on polished
head south/ no information red bowl at feet
202 disturbed adult male/ no information none
203 good adolescent/ semi-seated head SE and face NW none
204 disturbed Baby/ no information none
205 fair baby (about one year)/ buried in olla none
Evans (1988, 1991, 2004:32–33) suggested that by Vaillant lay below a poorly preserved building
the structure warranted further discussion, and one that might have been occupied into the Colonial era.
goal of this paper is to comprehensively describe These floors were dug away and a building dating
the structure, present a plan drawn directly from to the Late Postclassic period emerged. Construc-
Vaillant’s field drawings, and determine if the mate- tion materials are one line of evidence attesting to
rial culture found in the building supports the asser- the building’s function as a palace. Platforms sup-
tion that it is indeed an example of palatial porting structures were made of tepetate (local
architecture occupied by local nobility (Figure 2). bedrock made of compacted volcanic ash) with
The Late Postclassic building detected found corners of dressed stone slabs. Exterior platform
Figure 2. The Aztec period palace at Chiconautla. In this plan, block lines show well-defined walls of rooms, dotted lines
show proposed walls based on architectural remains, and solid lines show platform edges. The regions shaded in light
gray illustrate the approximate location of proveniences described in the text. The sunken patio is shaded in dark gray.
walls and platform surfaces were plastered. Struc- Evans (2004:33) (and recently Smith [2008:45])
ture walls had stone foundations finished with have suggested that the building was a noble resi-
adobe bricks and then plastered both inside and out. dence but perhaps not a tecpan—a building that
Many rooms contained internal pillars made of functioned as an administrative palace and the
solid stone cobbles or stone rings (into which home of a hereditary lord—because it had “small”
wooden beams could have been inserted). rooms and lacks a dais or reception room (Evans
During the Late Postclassic the palace was mod- 2004:8–9). Our interpretation of the Chiconautla
ified as rooms and room blocks were leveled and residence is that it has a sunken patio surrounded
rebuilt. At times (such as in the zone north of the on at least three sides by elevated blocks of rooms.
East Platform rooms and in the zone between the Any of these rooms could have served as a “recep-
Central Traverse rooms and South Platform rooms) tion” room while other rooms could have served as
clear plans could not be drawn out. The recon- residential quarters providing semiprivate living
struction of the Central Traverse rooms is based on spaces for extended families (see also Smith 2008:
Vaillant’s interpretation of fragmentary architecture Chapters 2, 4).
atop the platform. The South Platform rooms were The palace contained several key residential fea-
demolished, filled in with trash including ceram- tures. The North Platform rooms housed a shallow
ics and ash, and covered with a platform. Else- circular construction of plastered cobbles, proba-
where, the archaeological deposit recovered from bly a sweatbath or temazcalli, and a beehive-shaped
this provenience has been evaluated as a ritual dump structure constructed of rings of straw liberally
made during the celebration of an event taking coated with mud, probably a storage structure or
place every 52 years called the New Fire Ceremony cuexcomatl. Many rooms contained square-shaped
(Elson and Smith 2001). It is unclear if rooms or hearths or tlacuilli (made of stone slabs projecting
an open platform surface were built here when the into the plaster floor), and at least one was filled
rooms were demolished. with fine white ash.
While some details of the palace’s ongoing In the central sunken patio Vaillant uncovered
remodeling and renovations are fuzzy, it is clear that a small stone construction that he interpreted to be
by the Late Postclassic it encompassed both ritual an altar, and it may be that private rites were con-
and residential areas. The western end of thecom- ducted here while more public events incorporat-
plex was a platform accessed via a wide stairway. ing larger groups of people were carried out on the
This platform was expanded sometime in the Late nearby platform.
Postclassic, at which point several room blocks (the Vaillant did uncover some architecture that
West Platform rooms) were knocked down and might date to the Middle Postclassic such as the
buried under its surface. A trench excavated off the West Traverse rooms, later buried under the plat-
northwest corner of the platform discovered char- form. In addition, pits placed into the floors of the
coal, obsidian blades, incense burners, and frag- North Platform rooms show that this area had at
ments of large baked ceramic tiles that may be a least five levels of plaster floors. We do not know
kind of crenellation adorning the roof. Three elon- the plan of the Middle Postclassic building, but one
gated cones of stone and baked clay—objects called hypothesis is that it was a smaller structure cen-
tenones or clavos—were embedded in one of the tering on the North Platform rooms.
platform’s stone-faced walls. In codices like
Sahagún (1950–82 Bk 11:271, figs. 889, 890) Ceramic Selection and INAA Procedures
houses described as elite residences (tlatocacalli
and tecpilcalli) have stone facing, can have circu- While in Mexico, Vaillant carefully analyzed all the
lar elements embedded in rows above the door ceramics from excavation (over 100,000 sherds)
frame, and can have a mosaic pattern of circular and tabulated the number of each ceramic type for
elements in panels above and on both sides of the each provenience unit. He brought a large sample
door. The presence of decorative crenellations and collection (several thousand) of these sherds to
clavos in this zone suggests to us that the North Plat- New York. Because he coded and described a num-
form was part of the palace and probably a center ber of previously unknown or poorly defined
of ritual activity. ceramic types now recognized as having particu-
lar temporal or cultural significance, Chiconautla’s based on previously assigned compositional groups
ceramics are a valuable data set that can be applied (Davis 1986). For the Chiconautla project, we are
to current research questions. using previously defined compositional groups
Some ceramic vessels brought to New York as established by Neff using CDA.
part of the site’s type collection were marked with Canonical discriminant analysis is the best
specific provenience information but we cannot method by which to illustrate the compositional dif-
exactly correlate all ceramics we sampled for INAA ferences between Basin of Mexico groups (Neff
with particular excavation units. Elson and Nichols and Glascock 2000). In order to firmly establish
selected a sample of 200 ceramics from Vaillant’s the veracity of the compositional groups detected
original types and correlated these with types and in the Chiconautla sample, each group was statis-
variants in the current ceramic typology for the tically verified by calculating Mahalanobis dis-
Teotihuacan Valley and eastern Basin of Mexico tances. Additional explanations of the interpretation
(Charlton 1968; Cyphers 2000; García Chávez of compositional data obtained from the analysis
2004; Hodge and Minc 1991; Lopez 2003; Nicolás of archaeological materials are discussed in detail
2003; Nichols and McCullough 1986; Parsons elsewhere (e.g., Baxter 1992, 1994a, 1994b, 2000;
1966, 1971; M. Parsons 1972a, 1972b, 1975; Rat- Baxter and Buck 2000; Bieber et al. 1975; Bishop
tray 1966, 1996; Sanders 1986, 1994–96; Sanders and Neff 1989; Bishop et al. 1982; Glascock 1992;
and Evans 2001; Whalen and Parsons 1982). We Harbottle 1976; Neff 2000).
decided to examine excavated data from the palace The Tenochtitlan and Cuauhtitlan reference
to look for general patterns of ceramic consump- groups include archaeological materials from the
tion over time and then see how these patterns com- western Basin of Mexico. Ceramics from this group
pared with data on the loci of production for the have a high hafnium (Hf) to iron (Fe) ratios. The
200 ceramics we sampled with INAA. The com- Tenochtitlan reference group consists of ceramics
positional affiliations of all ceramics are listed in produced in the southwestern Basin that includes
Table 3 (Cecil and Glascock 2005). Tables 4, 5, 6, the archaeological site of Tenochtitlan and the sur-
7, 8, and 9 show different distributions (by form rounding area. The Cuauhtitlan reference group
and by type) of ceramic types tested (Figure 3). consists of ceramics produced in the northwestern
Pottery samples were prepared for INAA using Basin that includes the archaeological site of
procedures standard at MURR. Neutron activation Cuauhtitlan and the surrounding area. In bivariate
analysis of ceramics at MURR, which consists of plots, the Tenochtitlan and Cuauhtitlan groups tend
two irradiations and a total of three gamma counts, to intersect on all elements; however, slight, but still
constitutes a superset of the procedures used at overlapping, separation occurs with bivariate plots
most other NAA laboratories (Glascock 1992; Neff of hafnium (Hf) and iron (Fe) and chromium (Cr)
1992, 2000). The pottery samples from Chiconautla and hafnium (Hf).
were compared to previously established compo- The Otumba Macro reference group is com-
sitional reference groups for the Basin of Mexico prised of materials from the northeast Basin of
and Yautepec (Neff and Glascock 1998; Nichols et Mexico with a probable source between Chico-
al. 2002, among others). nautla and Otumba in the Teotihuacan Valley (Neff
Canonical discriminant analysis (CDA) was et al. 2000:Figure 6). Pottery and clay from this ref-
employed instead of the traditional principal com- erence group tend to have lower concentrations of
ponents analysis (PCA) because the clays (and tem- chromium (Cr) and higher concentrations of bar-
pers) used to manufacture the pottery came from ium (Ba) and calcium (Ca) than the Cuauhtitlan and
volcanic sediments within the interior drainage of Tenochtitlan reference groups. Although there are
the Basin of Mexico. These sediments show sub- differences, bivariate plots show that the Otumba
tle differences in elemental composition that are dif- Macro reference group intersects with the Cuauhti-
ficult to detect with traditional principal tlan and Tenochtitlan reference groups.
components analysis (PCA). Canonical discrimi- In addition to these groups, six samples plot
nant analysis is a pattern recognition technique that within the Yautepec reference group located south
provides maximal separation by creating a ratio of of the Basin of Mexico, in the state of Morelos (Neff
between-group variation to within-group variation and Glascock 1998). This reference group has
Table 3. Chemical Group Assignments for Ceramics from Chiconautla, Mexico.
Chemical Group MURR ID AMNH Cat. No.Ceramic Ware Ceramic Type Form Culture
Cuauhtitlan CHC002 30.1/9958 A Figurine Mazapan
Cuauhtitlan CHC006 30.2/1040 Aztec Orangeware Black on Orange spinning bowl Aztec
Cuauhtitlan CHC020 30.2/2481 A01 Aztec Redware black/white on red bowl Aztec
Cuauhtitlan CHC026 30.2/2506 A01 Aztec Redware black/white on red hourglass form/pulque Aztec
Cuauhtitlan CHC040 30.2/2531 A01 Aztec Redware black on red bowl Aztec
Cuauhtitlan CHC062 30.2/2565 A01 Aztec Redware black/white/orange on red bowl Aztec
Cuauhtitlan CHC079 30.2/2643 A04 Aztec Orangeware Black on Orange bowl-molcajete Aztec
Cuauhtitlan CHC100 30.2/2649 A06 Aztec Orangeware Black on Orange bowl Aztec
Cuauhtitlan CHC138 30.2/2688 A01 Aztec Orangeware Black on Orange bowl-pointed foot Aztec
Cuauhtitlan CHC141 30.2/2688 A04 Aztec Orangeware Black on Orange bowl-slab foot Aztec
Cuauhtitlan CHC144 30.2/2691 A03 Aztec Orangeware Black on Orange bowl-pointed foot Aztec
Cuauhtitlan CHC152 30.2/2691 A11 Aztec Orangeware Black on Orange bow Aztec
Cuauhtitlan CHC157 30.2/2711 A01 Aztec Orangeware Black on Orange basin Aztec
Cuauhtitlan CHC158 30.2/2711 A02 Aztec Orangeware Black on Orange basin Aztec
Cuauhtitlan CHC161 30.2/2728 A01 Incense burner-handled Aztec
Cuauhtitlan CHC162 30.2/2731 A01 Incense burner-handled Aztec
Cuauhtitlan CHC179 30.2/2802 A01 Mazapan Buffware Wavy line Red-on-Buff bowl Mazapan
Cuauhtitlan CHC191 30.2/630 Flute Aztec
Cuauhtitlan CHC198 30.2/901 Spindle whorl Aztec
Otumba Macro CHC001 30.1/9654 Figurine Mazapan
Otumba Macro CHC004 30.1/9998 Figurine Aztec
Otumba Macro CHC015 30.2/2469 A01 Aztec Redware black/white on red bowl Aztec
Otumba Macro CHC032 30.2/2515 A01 Aztec Redware black on red bowl Aztec
Otumba Macro CHC047 30.2/2544 A01 Aztec Redware black/white/orange on red bowl Aztec
Otumba Macro CHC049 30.2/2548 Aztec Redware black/white/orange on red bowl Aztec
Otumba Macro CHC052 30.2/2554 A02 Aztec Redware black/white/orange on red copa Aztec
Otumba Macro CHC053 30.2/2555 Aztec Redware orange/brown on red bowl Aztec
Otumba Macro CHC054 30.2/2556 A01 Aztec Redware orange/brown on red bowl Aztec
Otumba Macro CHC055 30.2/2557 Aztec Redware black/brown on red copa Aztec
Otumba Macro CHC056 30.2/2558 Aztec Redware black/orange on red copa Aztec
Otumba Macro CHC058 30.2/2561 A04 Aztec Redware black/brown on red copa Aztec
Table 3. Chemical Group Assignments for Ceramics from Chiconautla, Mexico (continued).
Otumba Macro CHC066 30.2/2566 A01 Aztec Redware white/black/yellow on red copa Aztec
Otumba Macro CHC067 30.2/2566 A02 Aztec Redware orange/black on red bowl Aztec
Otumba Macro CHC069 30.2/2569 Aztec Redware black/white/orange/ copa Aztec
brown on red
Otumba Macro CHC070 30.2/2570 Aztec Redware black/orange/brown on red
copa Aztec
Otumba Macro CHC071 30.2/2574 A01 Aztec Redware black/orange/brown on red
bowl Aztec
Otumba Macro CHC072 30.2/2574 A02 Aztec Redware black/orange/brown on red
bowl Aztec
Otumba Macro CHC091 30.2/2643 A16 Aztec Orangeware Black on Orange bowl Aztec
Otumba Macro CHC092 30.2/2643 A17 Aztec Orangeware Black on Orange bowl-molcajete Aztec
Otumba Macro CHC108 30.2/2658 Aztec Orangeware Black on Orange bowl-molcajete Aztec
Otumba Macro CHC129 30.2/2667 A04 Aztec Orangeware Black on Orange bowl-slab foot Aztec
Otumba Macro CHC142 30.2/2691 A01 Aztec Orangeware Black on Orange plate Aztec
Otumba Macro CHC151 30.2/2691 A10 Aztec Orangeware Black on Orange bowl-molcajete w/slab foot Aztec
Otumba Macro CHC164 30.2/2740 A02 Incense burner-lobed Aztec
Otumba Macro CHC165 30.2/2742 Incense burner-basin Aztec
Otumba Macro CHC166 30.2/2743 A01 Incense burner-basin Aztec
Otumba Macro CHC170 30.2/2745 Incense burner-basin Aztec
Otumba Macro CHC174 30.2/2790 A01 Mazapan Buffware Wavy line Red-on-Buff bowl Mazapan
Otumba Macro CHC177 30.2/2796 A01 Mazapan Buffware Mazapan Red-on-Buff bowl Mazapan
Otumba Macro CHC178 30.2/2796 A02 Mazapan Buffware Mazapan Red-on-Buff bowl Mazapan
Otumba Macro CHC181 30.2/2805 Mazapan Buffware Red and White on Buff bowl Mazapan
Otumba Macro CHC182 30.2/2806 A01 Mazapan Buffware Joroba Orange on Cream bowl Mazapan
Tenochtitlan CHC008 30.2/1049 Aztec Orangeware Black on Orange spinning bowl Aztec
Tenochtitlan CHC009 30.2/1052 Aztec Orangeware Black on Orange spinning bowl Aztec
Tenochtitlan CHC012 30.2/175 Figurine Aztec
Tenochtitlan CHC037 30.2/2525 A02 Aztec Redware black on red bowl Aztec
Tenochtitlan CHC041 30.2/2534 Aztec Redware black on red bowl Aztec
Tenochtitlan CHC044 30.2/2540 A01 Aztec Redware black on red copa Aztec
Tenochtitlan CHC078 30.2/2643 A03 Aztec Orangeware Black on Orange bowl-molcajete Aztec
Tenochtitlan CHC083 30.2/2643 A08 Aztec Orangeware Black on Orange bowl Aztec
Tenochtitlan CHC127 30.2/2667 A02 Aztec Orangeware Black on Orange bowl-slab foot Aztec
Tenochtitlan CHC137 30.2/2682 Aztec Orangeware Black on Orange bowl-slab foot Aztec
Tenochtitlan CHC139 30.2/2688 A02 Aztec Orangeware Black on Orange bowl-slab foot Aztec
Tenochtitlan CHC140 30.2/2688 A03 Aztec Orangeware Black on Orange bowl-pointed foot Aztec
Tenochtitlan CHC153 30.2/2692 Aztec Orangeware Black on Orange bowl-molcajete Aztec
Tenochtitlan CHC172 30.2/2755 A02 Incense burner-handled Aztec
Tenochtitlan CHC173 30.2/2762 Aztec Orangeware Black on Orange copa Aztec
Tenochtitlan CHC189 30.2/540 Whistle Aztec
Tenochtitlan CHC192 30.2/632 Flute Aztec
Yautepec Ref. CHC031 30.2/2514 A02 Aztec Redware black on red bowl Aztec
Yautepec Ref. CHC035 30.2/2524 A02 Aztec Redware black on red bowl Aztec
Yautepec Ref. CHC074 30.2/2574 A04 Aztec Redware black/brown/yellow on red bowl Aztec
Yautepec Ref. CHC146 30.2/2691 A05 Aztec Orangeware Black on Orange bow Aztec
Yautepec Ref. CHC197 30.2/870 Spindle whorl Aztec
Yautepec Ref. CHC200 30.2/934 Spindle whorl Aztec
Unassigned CHC003 30.1/9987 Figurine Aztec
Unassigned CHC007 30.2/1048 Aztec Orangeware Black on Orange spinning bowl Aztec
Unassigned CHC016 30.2/2469 A02 Aztec Redware black/white on red bowl Aztec
Unassigned CHC019 30.2/2480 A02 Aztec Redware black/white/orange on red bowl Aztec
Unassigned CHC028 30.2/2507 A01 Aztec Redware black/white on red hourglass form/pulque Aztec
Unassigned CHC029 30.2/2507 A02 Aztec Redware black/white on red hourglass form/pulque Aztec
Unassigned CHC030 30.2/2514 A01 Aztec Redware black on red bowl Aztec
Unassigned CHC042 30.2/2535 Aztec Redware black on red bowl Aztec
Unassigned CHC068 30.2/2568 Aztec Redware white/black on red bowl Aztec
Unassigned CHC073 30.2/2574 A03 Aztec Redware gray/red bowl Aztec
Unassigned CHC075 30.2/2575 A01 White on buff jar Aztec
Unassigned CHC076 30.2/2643 A01 Aztec Orangeware Black on Orange bowl-molcajete Aztec
Unassigned CHC077 30.2/2643 A02 Aztec Orangeware Black on Orange bowl Aztec
Unassigned CHC128 30.2/2667 A03 Aztec Orangeware Black on Orange bowl-slab foot Aztec
Unassigned CHC134 30.2/2667 A09 Aztec Orangeware Black on Orange bowl-slab foot Aztec
Unassigned CHC160 30.2/2727 A01 Incense burner-handled Aztec
Unassigned CHC163 30.2/2740 A01 Incense burner-lobed Aztec
Unassigned CHC171 30.2/2755 A01 Incense burner-handled Aztec
Unassigned CHC180 30.2/2802 A02 Mazapan Buffware Wavy line Red-on-Buff bowl Mazapan
Unassigned CHC183 30.2/2807 Mazapan Orangeware bowl Mazapan
Unassigned CHC184 30.2/2812 Black/Brown Ware jar Mazapan
Unassigned CHC185 30.2/2819 A01 Mazapan Buffware Red and Black on Buff jar Mazapan
Unassigned CHC190 30.2/574 Whistle Aztec
Unassigned CHC193 30.2/680 Pipe Aztec
Unassigned CHC194 30.2/682 Pipe Aztec
Unassigned CHC195 30.2/746 Spindle whorl Aztec
AMNH is the catalogue number of the American Museum of Natural History. Complete INAA data on each speciemen are
available at http://archaeometry.missouri.edu/datasets/datasets.html.
Table 4. Number of Ceramics Tested and Percentage of Ceramics that Belong to One of Four Composition Groups or Were
Unassigned by Time Period for All Time Periods.
Time Period/ Otumba

Source Cuauhtitlan Macro Tenochtitlan Yautepec Unassigned Total
Mazapan 2 8 0 0 4 14
14.3% 57.1% 28.6%
Aztec II/ 7 9 5 1 7 29
Early Aztec 24.1% 31.0% 17.2% 3.4% 24.1%
Aztec II? 1 1
100.0%
Aztec II-III/ 2 3 2 1 4 12
Early-Late Transitional 16.7% 25.0% 16.7% 8.3% 33.3%
Aztec III/ 20 31 28 2 25 106
Late Aztec 18.9% 29.2% 26.4% 1.9% 23.6%
Aztec 4 10 4 2 18 38
10.5% 26.3% 10.5% 5.3% 47.4%
Total 200
Table 5. Percentage of Early Postclassic Ceramics that Belong to One of Two Composition Groups or Were Unassigned .
Form or type Cuauhtitlan Otumba Macro Unassigned No. samples

Figurine 50.0% (1) 50.0% (1) 0 2
Incised Black/Brown Ware 0 0 100.0% (1) 1
Joroba Orange/Cream 0 100.0% (1) 0 1
Red & Black/Buff 0 0 100.0% (1) 1
Red-on-Cream (White) 0 100.0% (1) 0 1
Toltec Red/Buff 0 100.0% (2) 0 2
Cream Slipped 0 0 100.0% (1) 1
Wavy Line Red/Buff 20.0% (1) 60.0% (3) 20.0% (1) 5
Total 14.3% (2) 57.1% (8) 28.6% (4) 14
Number of samples in parenthesis.
Table 6. Percentage of Early Aztec Serving Wares that Belong to One of Four Composition Groups or Were Unassigned .
Otumba Number of
Type Cuauhtitlan Macro Tenochtitlan Yautepec Unassigned samples
Aztec II Black/Orange 26.9% (7) 30.8% (8) 19.2% (5) 0 23.1% (6) 26
Aztec II? Black/Orange 100.0% (1) 0 0 0 0 1
Early Aztec Black/Red 0 0 0 100.0% (1) 0 1
Early Aztec Black & White/Red 0 50.0% (1) 0 0 50.0% (1) 2
Aztec II-III Black/Orange 40.0% (2) 20.0% (1) 20.0% (1) 0 20.0% (1) 5
Early/Late Transitional Black/Red 0 25.0% (1) 25.0% (1) 25.0% (1) 25.0% (1) 4
Early/Late Transitional Black/Red Incised/ 0 50.% (1) 0 0 50.0% (1) 2
Early/Late Transitional Black & White/Red 0 0 0 0 100.0% (1) 1
Table 7. Percentage of Late Aztec Serving Wares that Belong to One of Four Composition Groups or Were Unassigned.
Otumba Number of
Cuauhtitlan Macro Tenochtitlan Yautepec Unassigned Samples
Aztec III Black/Orange 15.8% (9) 17.5% (10) 42.1% (24) 1.8% (1) 22.8% (13) 57
Late Aztec Black/Red 10.0% (1) 10.0% (1) 40.0% (4) 0 40.0% (4) 10
Late Aztec Black & White/Red 40.0% (6) 26.7% (4) 0 0 33.3% (5) 15
Late Aztec Black & White &Orange/Red 40.0 (4) 50.0 (5) 0 0 10.0% (1) 10
Late Aztec Black & Orange/Red 0 100.0 (1) 0 0 0 1
Late Aztec Black & Orange & Brown/Red 0 100.0% (3) 0 0 0 3
Late Aztec Black & Brown/Red 0 100.0% (2) 0 0 0 2
Late Aztec Black & Brown & Yellow/Red 0 0 0 100.0% (1) 0 1
Late Aztec Black & White & Orange 0 100.0% (1) 0 0 0 1
& Brown/Red
Late Aztec Gray/Red 0 0 0 0 100.0% (1) 1
Late Aztec Orange & Black/Red 0 100.0% (1) 0 0 0 1
Late Aztec Orange & Brown/Red 0 100.0% (2) 0 0 0 2
Late Aztec White & Black/Red 0 0 0 0 100.0% (1) 1
Late Aztec White & Black & Yellow/Red 0 100.0% (1)` 0 0 0 1
Late Aztec? White/Buff 0 0 0 0 100.0% (1) 1
Table 8. Percentage of Aztec Period Incense Burners that Belong to One of Three Composition Groups
or Were Unassigned.
Cuauhtitlan Otumba Macro Tenochtitlan Unassigned No. Samples

Incense burner-basin 0 100.0% (6) 0 0 6
Incense burner handled 40.0% (2) 0 20.0% (1) 40.0% (2) 5
Incense Burner-lobed 0 50.0% (1) 0 50.0% (1) 2
Table 9. Percentage of Aztec Figurines and Other Ceramics that Belong to One of Four Composition Groups
or Were Unassigned.
Otumba Number of
Aztec Cuauhtitlan Macro Tenochtitlan Yautepec Unassigned samples
Figurines 0 25.0% (3) 8.3% (1) 0 66.7% (8) 12
Flute 50.0% (1) 0 50.0% (1) 0 0 2
Pipe 0 0 0 0 100.0% (2) 2
Whistle 0 0 50.0% (1) 0 50.0% (1) 2
Spindle Whorl 16.7% (1) 0 0 33.3% (2) 50.0% (3) 6
Table 10. Number and Percentage of All Ceramics for Particular Ceramic Types and Forms Recorded in Three
Proveniences Excavated in the Chiconautla Residence.
West Traverse NT 3 North rooms

Type/Form No. % No. % No. %
Plain Orange 140 5.87 33 5.13 125 17.19
Early Black-on-Orange 112 4.69 25 3.89 1 0.14
Late Black-on-Orange 102 4.27 33 5.13 149 20.50
Early Red ware 214 8.97 101 15.71 55 7.57
Late Red ware & polychrome 50 2.10 15 2.33 111 15.27
Mazapan 730 30.60 84 13.06 46 6.33
Gulf Coast 4 .17 0 .00 0 .00
Other 11 .46 0 .00 1 0.14
Undecorated bowl/basin 411 17.23 140 21.77 80 11.00

Fabric Marked 56 2.35 37 5.75 16 2.20
Comal 361 15.13 111 17.26 87 11.97
Jar 83 3.48 51 7.93 30 4.13
Massive bowl 3 .13 4 .62 9 1.24
Lobed brazier 7 .29 0 .00 0 .00

Long handled incense burner 37 1.55 5 .78 17 2.34
Floor brazier 65 2.72 4 .62 0 .00
Total 2386 100.00 643 100.00 727 100.00
See figure 2 for the location of the proveniences listed.
higher chromium (Cr), cobalt (Co), scandium (Sc), to burn incense in households and temples). All
iron (Fe), and calcium (Ca) concentrations than the three areas probably are chronologically distinct
above reference groups. The Yautepec reference and tell us something about ceramic consumption
group is distinct from the Cuauhtitlan, Tenochtit- over time.
lan, and Otumba Macro groups and does not inter- The first provenience is a sample of ceramics
sect with any of the Basin of Mexico groups. incorporated into the fill of the West Traverse
Rooms upon their demolition and burial beneath a
Chronology and Ceramic INAA Results platform. These rooms should belong to the earli-
from the Aztec Palace est phase of palace construction. We examined
2,386 sherds from the West Traverse Rooms and
found the context contained just over 30 percent
Context of INAA Samples decorated Mazapan/Tollan ceramics, almost 9 per-
We examined three distinct excavated proveniences cent Early (Aztec II) and Late (Aztec III and Aztec
from the palace to provide a point of comparison III/IV) Black-on-Orange, and almost 9 percent
for the INAA data (Table 10). All three areas con- Early Red wares (Black-on-Red and White/Black-
tain food production and storage vessels, decorated on-Red). Thus, these rooms may well have been
serving wares, and incense burners (artifacts used built during the Middle Postclassic and demolished
A D
Figure 3. Major ceramic types identified in the analysis:

(A) Early Postclassic Mazapan Wavy-line (30.2/2790A01),
(B) Early Aztec Black on Orange ware (30.2/2643A07), (C)
Late Aztec Black on Orange ware (30.2/2688A04), (D)
Early Aztec Black &White/Red ware (30.2/2469A01), (E)
Late Aztec Black& White/Red ware (30.2/2501A02). The
AMNH catalogue number is in parenthesis. For ceramic
affiliations see Table 3
during the Late Postclassic, at which time a sub- vated inside the North Rooms. This context dates
stantial amount of Early Postclassic (Mazapan) to the Late Postclassic. About 30 percent of these
rubbish was used as construction fill. sherds are from utilitarian vessels (jar rims and
Another sample that may date to early in the handles, plain bowls, and comals), Black-on-
palace’s history comes from a pit placed under the Orange were just over 20 percent of the sample,
floor of a corridor (“NT 3”) in the North Platform and Red wares and Polychromes accounted for
Rooms. A total of 643 sherds were sealed below almost 23 percent of the sample.
five plaster floors. Here Mazapan sherds account If these contexts contain vessels indicative of
for just over 13 percent of the fill. Most of the types used in the palace, the data suggest a sub-
ceramics are utilitarian vessels (jar rims and han- stantial occupation in this zone in the Early Post-
dles, plain bowls, and comals). Surprisingly, Aztec classic and that Middle Postclassic people had
Red wares and polychromes (18.04 percent) are access to networks supplying Red wares and they
twice as frequent as Black-on-Orange wares (9.02 preferred these ceramics over more commonly
percent). available Black-on-Orange wares. Additionally,
Aztec Red wares and polychromes also pre- the presence of domestic (undecorated bowl,
dominated in a sample of 727 sherds of fill exca- comals, jars, etc.) and ritual pottery (braziers and
censers) further substantiates architectural evi- a Black-on-Red bowl imported from Morelos, one
dence that residential and ritual activities took Black-and-White-on-Red bowl assigned to the
place in the building. Otumba-Macro group, and one Black & White-on-
Red bowl that is unassigned.
INAA Results on Serving Vessels The Aztec II-III Black-on-Orange (Parsons
Our INAA selection focused on decorated serving 1966:90) specimens show a similar distribution to
vessels dating to the Aztec period. The 148 Aztec Aztec II with both bowls and molcajetes assigned
period vessels we sampled include plates, bowls, to the Cuauhtitlan (40 percent) and Otumba Macro
bowls with tri- or tetra-pod supports (some with (20 percent) groups and one Black-on-Orange bowl
scored interiors called molcajetes), hourglass- imported from the Tenochtitlan group. Black-on-
shaped cups, and cups with pedestals. Four of the Red bowls defined as ”Early-Late transitional” (see
bowls—miniature Black-on-Orange bowls were Minc 1994, 2006) include one import from the
used in spinning thread—not as serving vessels Tenochtitlan group, one bowl imported from More-
(two of these grouped with Tenochtitlan, one with los, and one bowl that is unassigned, along with an
Cuauhtitlan, and one was unassigned). incised Black-on-Red bowl from Otumba Macro
We sampled 12 Early Postclassic serving ves- and one incised bowl that is unassigned. The only
sels. We do not know if the Mazapan pottery we ”Early-Late transitional” Aztec Black & White-on-
analyzed came from Trench Z or the fill of the Red bowl is not assigned to a composition group.
palace. The INAA sample included several types Imports of Aztec III Black-on-Orange serving
of decorated serving bowls and jars: one incised wares from the Tenochtitlan composition group
Black-on-Brown jar, one Joroba Orange-on-Cream jump to 42.1 percent in the Late Postclassic, more
bowl, one Red & Black-on-Buff jar, a Red-on- than double the frequency of Black-on-Orange
Cream (white) slipped flat bottom bowl with nub- serving wares from the local Otumba-Macro group
bin supports, two Toltec Red-on-Buff bowls, a (17.5 percent) or the Cuauhtitlan group (15 per-
stamped cream-slipped bowl, and five Mazapan cent). Both Aztec III Black-on-Orange basins in the
Wavy-Line bowls. The only import, a Mazapan INAA sample come from the Cuauhtitlan group.
Wavy-Line bowl, was assigned to the nearby Imports from Morelos continue in low frequencies
Cuauhtitlan composition group. The majority of the (1.8 percent). Four miniature Aztec III bowls for
Mazapan ceramics (57.1 percent) were assigned to spinning cotton were included in the INAA sam-
the local Teotihuacan Valley, Otumba-Macro group. ple: one from the Cuauhtitlan group, two from the
Four sherds, including one Incised Black-on-brown Tenochtitlan group, and one spinning bowl is unas-
jar, one Red and Black-on-Buff jar, one stamped signed. Five Aztec III Black on-Orange molcajetes
cream slipped bowl, and one Mazapan Wavy-Line and two bowls are unassigned.
Red-on-Buff bowl are unassigned. Occupants of Chiconautla’s palace used a wide
The Middle Postclassic sample of Early Aztec variety of Late Aztec Red wares. Black-on-Red
pottery includes both decorated Orange wares and serving wares show a similar distribution pattern
Red wares. About one-third (30.8 percent) of the to decorated Orange wares with the Tenochtitlan
Aztec II Black-on-Orange bowls and molcajetes composition group representing the source of 40
were made in the Teotihuacan Valley and assigned percent of the vessels. Otumba Macro and Cuauhti-
to the Otumba-Macro group. Black-on-Orange tlan each account for 10 percent of the Black-on-
bowls and molcajetes from the Cuauhtitlan com- Red. Four Black-on-Red bowls are unassigned.
position group are nearly as common (26.9 per- Of Black & White-on-Red bowls, four (or 50
cent). This is the first time that ceramic imports percent) are assigned to the Otumba-Macro group,
from the Tenochtitlan composition group are rep- one bowl is from the Cuauhtitlan group, and three
resented in the INAA sample from Chiconautla, and Black & White-on-Red bowls are unassigned.
all are Black-on-Orange, both bowls and molca- Interestingly, most of the remaining fancy Red
jetes. Overall, Black-on-Orange vessels made out- wares consisting of bowls of various color combi-
side the Teotihuacan Valley are more common than nations were made in the Teotihuacan Valley and
those from the local composition group. The INAA assigned to the Otumba-Macro group. Four elab-
sample included only three Early Aztec Red wares: orately decorated Black & White & Orange-on-Red
bowls came from the Cuauhtitlan group and one Red). Most have either “sun” (Figure 4A) motifs
Black & Brown & Yellow- on- Red bowl was or “spiral/step-fret” motifs (Figure 4B), but some
imported from Morelos. Four miscellaneous Red have more elaborate designs (see Brumfiel
ware bowls are unassigned. 2004:251–252 for a discussion of the iconography
of pulque vessels). In the three contexts we ana-
Unassigned lyzed from the palace excavations, pulque vessels
Most of the 58 unassigned ceramic samples show appeared as a significant portion of all Red ware
a greater than 1 percent probability of belonging to ceramics coded: 8 percent of the vessels coded
more than one group; most ambiguities of this type from the WT excavation, 5 percent of the vessels
are the result of affinities with the Otumba Macro coded from the NT 3 excavation, and 25 percent of
and Tenochtitlan groups or with the Otumba Macro the vessels coded from the NT 6, 7, and 10 exca-
and Texcoco and Chalco reference groups. Such vations.
ambiguities are expected given that there is no clear For INAA, we sampled three beautifully deco-
division of the reference groups in canonical or ele- rated pulque vessels with flower and skull motifs
mental space. Although the unassigned samples (Figure 4C) and all three grouped with Cuauhtit-
cannot be assigned to a reference group with sta- lan. Two vessels with spiral-step motifs also
tistical certainty, all but nine of the samples plot grouped with Cuauhtitlan. The production area for
within the Cuauhtitlan, Tenochtitlan, and Otumba two vessels with sun motifs could not be pin-
Macro reference groups. Additionally, when the pointed. Excavation and INAA data allow us to
unassigned samples are compared with all other suggest that Chiconautla’s elites used pulque cups
samples from the Basin of Mexico through Euclid- in palace rituals and obtained them from the
ean distances, they have membership within the Cuauhtitlan area.
established reference groups where they plot. What Copas were used to consume cacao-based
we can say with certainty is that the unassigned drinks (Smith et al. 2003:249). The copas we sam-
samples represent local production of the different pled cover the range of decoration we observed in
Basin of Mexico groups and are not imports. the sample collection. Most are polychrome Aztec
Red ware with black, white, orange, yellow, and
INAA Results on Drinking Vessels brown designs on a red background. Seven of the
Vaillant included hourglass-shaped pulque vessels nine sherds sampled were made in the Teotihuacan
and copas, pedastaled cups or goblets, in the field Valley (Otumba-Macro group) (Figure 4D). One
as part of the total ceramic count. Fortunately, he Black-on-Red copa and one Black-on-Orange copa
separately coded Red ware pulque vessels because (Figure 4E) grouped with Tenochtitlan production
of their form, and we can provide additional data zone.
on their frequency as a portion of Red ware, on their
decoration, and on the INAA results of the vessels INAA results on Ritual and Other Ceramics
sampled. Unfortunately, Vaillant did not code copas Ritual ceramics found in the Chiconautla collec-
(most of these also are Aztec Polychromes) sepa- tion include long-handled incense burners, bra-
rately by form (in other words Polychrome copas ziers, flutes, rattles, rasps, bells, and figurines. Data
were coded with Aztec Red wares), so we can only on these artifacts drawn from excavations and
have information on their decoration and on the INAA support our suggestion that the palace was
INAA results of the vessels sampled. the center of domestic rituals involving just a few
Hourglass vessels are depicted in ethnohistoric family members and public “popular” rituals
sources as containers for pulque, a fermented bev- involving extended families or the community (see
erage made from maguey that was consumed at cer- Smith 2002).
emonial events. Officially, pulque drinking was
restricted to the elderly and nobles, although in Incense Burners and Braziers
actuality it was more widely consumed (Berdan Palace excavations recovered three types of ceram-
2005:24; Smith et al. 2003:245). ics used to burn incense: long-handled “frying pan”
The pulque vessels coded at Chiconautla are incense burners, braziers that would have sat on the
Red ware (either Black-on-Red or White/black-on- floor, and lobed braziers (that also could have been
A D
B E
Figure 4. Ceramics for consuming liquids: (A) Black-on

Re- hourglass-shaped cup with a sun motif used to con-
sume pulque (30.2/2507A02), (B) a Black-on-Red pulque
cup with a spiral motif (30.2/2506A02), (C) a Black on
White pulque cup with skull and flower motifs
(30.2/2564A02), (D) a Black-on-Red pedestal cup used to
consume cacao-based drinks (30.2/2540A01), (E) a Black-
on-Orange pedestal cup used to consume cacao-based
drinks (30.2/2762). The AMNH catalogue number is in
parenthesis. For ceramic affiliations see Table 3.
used as lamps). As Smith (2002:98) points out, arti- daily rites in the Chiconautla palace required the
facts like long-handled incense burners were used use of incense burners.
in both domestic and public “state” ceremonies. We sampled three handles of long-handled
Taube (2001) suggests that both domestic and state incense burners that were made in the shape of a
rituals often were constructed around an Aztec serpent that were not notably different to the eye
notion regarding the conceptual importance of cen- in manufacture (Figure 5A). Workshops at Otumba
tering space by moving, sweeping, lighting incense made such censers (Charlton et al. 1991), but of
to the directions, and through circumambulation. three handles sampled, one grouped with the
For example, Motolinía (1996:443) describes a Cuauhtitlan production zones, one with the
daily ceremony preformed by Aztec women who Tenochtitlan zone, and the third was unassigned.
raised a long-handled incense burner of coals to the A handle with a folded paper fan motif also grouped
four directions thereby making a general offering with Cuauhtitlan (another was unassigned).
to the sun, fire, earth, and gods. We might expect Floor censers or braziers are larger vessels more
commonly described in documents as used in tem-

ple contexts to burn fires or incense (López Luján A
2005). Brazier fragments in the Chiconautla col-
lection come from vessels of different sizes and fin-
ishes, some of them decorated with appliqués in
the form of flowers, circles, and spirals (Figure
5B). All six of the floor censer fragments we sam-
pled fell into the local Otumba group.
Lobed braziers could have been suspended by
cords tied around the vessel’s body or through its
handles and could have been used to burn incense
or to light rooms (Figure 5C). We sampled two
black carved lobed braziers that appeared similar
in manufacture and one grouped with Cuauhtitlan; B
the other was unassigned.
Spindle Whorls
Spinning cotton and maguey cloth was a task Aztec
women worked at regularly and it is not surprising
noble ladies may have imported their spinning
bowls. Three of the six spindle whorls (small
weights used to spin thread) we sampled also were
imports (one grouped with Cuauhtitlan, two with
Morelos and three were unassigned).
Flutes, Rattles, Rasps, and Bells C

Chiconautla excavations recovered ceramic flutes
with cylindrical stems, often with decorations
attached to the sound-producing ends. One such
flute is painted with red and black spirals, designs
interpreted as symbolizing the role of music and
breath to conjure wind and rain (Both 2002, 2007;
Taube 2001). Another flute has a probable depic-
tion of the Aztec sun symbol and a third has a red-
painted circle and cross pattern that may represent
the cardinal directions and conceptual shape of the
world. Most ceramic fragments in the collection are Figure 5. Ritual ceramics for burning incense: (A) a han-
carved with patterns or have decorations such as dle in the shape of a snake from a long-handled incense
spirals and flowers. We tested two flute pieces for burner (30.2/2755A02), (B) a floor censer (30.2/2744A01),
(C) a lobed brazier (30.2/2740A02). The AMNH catalogue
INAA and one (a flower) grouped with Cuauhtit- number is in parenthesis. For ceramic affiliations see Table
lan and one (a circular design) grouped with 3.
Tenochtitlan.
Whistle fragments generally are not complete types of artifacts in the INAA sample.
enough for a detailed analysis. One of the two whis-
tles we tested, a human effigy, grouped with Ceramic Pipes and Bone Tubes
Tenochtitlan. The second whistle was not assigned Excavations at Chiconautla recovered fragments of
to a production zone. ceramic pipes used to smoke tobacco. Most pipe
Palace excavations also uncovered fragments of fragments are painted red or black. Two fragments
rattles often decorated with incised concentric cir- are pieces shaped like human feet. A red-painted
cles and ceramic bells. We did not include these and a black-painted pipe tested for INAA were
Figure 6. A fragment of a stone “idol” recovered from inside the North Platform of the Chiconautla palace (30.2/1355).
The AMNH catalogue number is in parenthesis.
unassigned. The Chiconautla collection also con- Most figurine fragments in the Chiconautla col-
tains six polished bones made into hollow tubes. lection date to the Aztec period and are females
Some of the tubes are burnt at one end and may whose dress and hairstyles evoke motifs associ-
have been used as smoking tubes. Sahagún’s infor- ated with deities including Coatlicue (a goddess of
mants (1950–82 Bk 4:117) describe “bowls with spring), Cihuacoatl (invoked in childbirth), and
smoking tubes” as one amenity offered to guests Xochiquetzal (patroness of love, flowers, and
during feasts. In their description of the markets, embroidery). The collection also contains solid
Sahagún’s informants (1950–82 Bk 8:69) state that temple models, animals, and male figures dressed
vendors sold “smoking tubes, pipes, and cigars like warriors. Fourteen figurines (two dating to the
(some) quite resinous and aromatic.” Early Postclassic) were sampled for INAA. Eight
of these were unassigned, four assigned to the
Figurines Otumba Macro group are similar to those mass
Aztec figurines are commonly small, mass- produced in workshops at Otumba (Otis Charlton
produced objects that one could hold in one’s hand. 1994), one grouped with Cuauhtitlan, and one
Scholars suggest a wide range of interpretations for grouped with Tenochtitlan.
figurines stemming from ideas about whether clay
figures of humans represent mortals or gods (see Nonceramic Imported Goods
Millian 1981; Parsons 1972; Pastory 1983; Smith
2002). In general, figurines might have been Our data show that Chiconautla’s nobles were inter-
employed in domestic rituals such as fertility rites, ested in acquiring nonlocal goods for personal con-
healing rites, and in acts propitiating divine beings sumption and for use in community ritual activities.
(gods or ancestors). Figurines also represent ani- The use of imported ceramic goods in feasting and
mals and temple buildings. Many documents also public rituals also was a way for nobles to reinforce
describe larger wood or stone “idols” as objects their position vis-à-vis commoners and lower-
used primarily in temples (see Smith 1992:331). ranking local elites. Exotics like copper, shell, and
Vaillant’s palace excavations produced the head of turquoise probably were in great demand. For
such a stone idol that is carved in soft stone and example, several copper bells—artifacts often asso-
covered in stucco (Figure 6). ciated with the gods Tlaloc, Xipe Totec, Quetzal-
coatl, and Coyolxauqui—were recovered in the ley), produces primarily gray obsidian. Collections
palace (Hosler 1994; Martí 1968; Vargas from sites including Xico, Huexotla, and Otumba
2001:197). show that over the course of the Postclassic green
Items of personal adornment manufactured from obsidian, and in particular green prismatic blades
jadeite, turquoise, copper, and obsidian are recov- and cores made from Pachuca (state of Hidalgo)
erable in archaeological contexts. These items obsidian, predominate the obsidian assemblage
exemplify luxury goods found at marketplaces or even though gray obsidian was considerably closer
obtained by rulers from incorporated regions as (Brumfiel 1986; Milhauser 2005; Parry 1990;
tribute sent to the capital annually, semi-annually, Spence 1985). We have not yet chemically sourced
or quarterly (Berdan 1983:161; Smith and Smith- obsidian artifacts from Chiconautla.
Heath 1994:360). At Chiconautla, the presence or Both grey and green obsidian were collected at
absence of these goods offers another line of evi- Chiconautla and the assemblage shows the same
dence for trade and exchange. predominance of green obsidian detected at other
sites—about 80 percent green vs. 20 percent gray
Copper obsidian. In general, green obsidian is used to make
Copper bells were produced in the Mixtec area blades and gray obsidian is used to make scraper-
from sources in Oaxaca. Copper also came from like tools (green prismatic blades account for just
more far-flung sources in western/northwestern over 60 percent of the green obsidian assemblage
Mexico and the southwest U.S. (Berdan 1983:168; while blades account for only 16 percent of the gray
Hosler 1994; Weigand and Weigand 2001). Two obsidian assemblage).
bells of the three bells recovered at Chiconautla are A number of finely worked personal adornments
elongated and decorated with simulated wirework came from the palace including an earspool; a rod-
while a third has an ovoid or flattened globular shaped lip plug, a style worn by Otomí and others
shape; both are similar to objects illustrated in the in Central Mexico (Brumfiel et al. 1994; Smith
Codex Mendoza (Berdan and Anawalt 1997; Var- 2006); a button-shaped lip plug, similar to a type
gas 2001:198). produced in workshops at Otumba (Otis-Charlton
1994); and three small E-shaped eccentrics, possi-
Turquoise bly made at the Otumba workshops.
Turquoise was imported to the Basin of Mexico
through long-distance trade and marketplace Discussion
exchange from northern Mexico and New Mex-
ico/Arizona (Berdan 1983:169; Weigand and de Our analysis has allowed us to develop ideas about
Weigand 2001: 190). Excavations at Chiconautla exchange and consumption at Chiconautla, a site
produced six turquoise disks (five with holes drilled historically noted as a tlatoani center and an impor-
through he center) and one turquoise bead. tant Aztec trade node. We consider its patterns of
trade and exchange over time with the Triple
Shell Alliance capitals of Tenochtitlan and Texcoco and
One of us, Mikkelsen, identified that the palace with other city-states, including Otumba, the largest
shell was imported from the Gulf Coast, and city-state in the Teotihuacan Valley and a regional
included both freshwater and marine (and in one craft production center. We will describe major pat-
case terrestrial) species, primarily from groups terns we see for each time period in light of cur-
commonly called mussel, olive, and arks (Table rent models.
11). A marine conch shell and a marine cockle
came from palace excavations. Eight worked shells Early Postclassic
are fragments of decorative objects meant to be Sanders (1986) suggested that the Mazapan Wavy-
strung onto jewelry or sewn onto clothing. Line Red-on-Buff style perhaps originated at Teoti-
huacan, the largest Early Postclassic settlement in
Obsidian the Teotihuacan Valley. For Sanders (1986), the
The nearest obsidian source to Chiconautla, appearance of Orange and cream slipped wares that
Otumba (at the eastern end of the Teotihuacan val- have strong parallels to pottery at Tula (and belong
Table 11. Shell Identified in Collections from Chiconautla.
AMNH Cat. # Family Name, Genus/species (common name) Environment Worked?

30.2/1116 Conidae (cone) marine worked
30.2/1117 Noetiidae, Noetia ponderosa (ponderous ark) marine
30.2/1119 Chamidae (jewelbox clam) marine
30.2/1120 (land snail) terrestrial
30.2/1121 Olividae (olive) marine worked
30.2/1122 Tellinidae (tellin) marine
30.2/1123 Not identifiable
30.2/1124 Veneridae, Dosinia discus (disk dosinia) marine
30.2/1125 Unionidae (mussel) freshwater
30.2/1126 Neritidae, Neritina sp. (nerite) marine, brackish worked
30.2/1128 Arcidae (ark) marine
30.2/1130 Strombidae, Strombus raninus (hawk-wing conch) marine
30.2/1132 (mussel) freshwater
30.2/1133 Not identifiable marine worked,
30.2/1134 Cardiidae (cockle) marine worked
30.2/1135 Veneridae, Dosinia discus (disk dosinia) marine
30.2/1136 Olividae (olive) marine
30.2/1141 (mussel) freshwater worked
30.2/1142 (mussel) freshwater worked
30.2/1143 Not identifiable worked
30.2/1145 Arcidae (ark) marine
30.2/1146 Olividae and Arcidae pieces with same number marine
to a late subphase of the Early Postclassic called den and in an early structure (West House Rooms)
Atlatongo) mark the incorporation of the Teoti- sealed under Late Postclassic construction. It is not
huacan Valley into the Early Postclassic Toltec state clear if the association of Mazapan/Tollan and Early
centered at Tula in Hidalgo (cf. Smith and Montiel Aztec (Aztec II) pottery in palace fill was caused
2001). As Sanders anticipated, a majority of Maza- by intermixing or indicates chronological overlap.
pan Wavy-line Red-on-buff bowls originated in the (See Nichols and Charlton [1996]; Parsons and
Teotihuacan Valley; however, Teotihuacan did not Gorenflo [2009] for a discussion of related chronol-
have a monopoly on this production. ogy issues.) The presence of Mazapan/Tollan
No imports of Early Postclassic Orange or ceramics suggests continuity of occupation at
cream-slipped pottery from a composition group Chiconautla from the Early to Middle Postclassic.
outside the Teotihuacan Valley were identified in Mazapan buildings might have been razed as newer
our Chiconautla INAA sample; however, the sam- structures were put up.
ple size was small and we will consider expanding Studies of Early Postclassic ceramics from
our sample of this type in future studies. Ongoing urban centers show a marked increase in exchange
analyses of Mazapan/Tollan ceramics from Cerro between centers compared to the Epiclassic (Gar-
Portezuelo in the eastern Basin show that the Teoti- cía 2004; Nichols et al. 2002, 2008). Chiconautla,
huacan Valley exported this Early Postclassic pot- which was a village and possibly a local ceremo-
tery to urban centers elsewhere in the eastern Basin nial center at this time, however, has only minor
(Nichols et al. 2008). amounts of imported pottery (from the Cuauhtit-
Mazapan/Tollan ceramics were found in a mid- lan composition group). Overall, this is consistent
with patterns at rural sites in the Teotihuacan Val- island center of Xaltocan also saw an increase in
ley where people mostly consumed ceramics made imports from the Cuauhtitlan area, along with
locally (Crider et al. 2007). Perhaps as expected, imports from the southern and southwestern Basin
the pattern suggests limited market exchange of (Nichols et al. 2002:40, Table 5).
pottery and figurines between Chiconautla and At the same time, Early Aztec Red ware from
other subregions of the Basin of Mexico during the the Tenochtitlan composition group began to make
Epiclassic. its way to Chiconautla. Chiconautla also obtained
locally manufactured Early Aztec Red ware, per-
Middle Postclassic haps from workshops at Otumba (Charlton et al.
Prior to Hodge and Minc’s studies, most scholars 1991, 2000; Nichols 1994). For the first time the
associated Middle Postclassic city-states with solar palace’s occupants acquired Black-on-Red bowls
markets (Charlton and Nichols 1997:199–202; from Morelos. Palace occupants consumed a rela-
Hassig 1985:73; Hicks 1987:93; Smith 1979). tively high percentage of Red ware in comparison
Hodge and Minc suggest that the presence of mul- to more commonly made Orange ware.
tiple subregional market systems in the Middle Chiconautla’s trade networks expanded in the
Postclassic coincides with the boundaries of city- midst of a volatile political environment of com-
state confederations (Hodge 1992, Hodge and Minc petition, shifting alliances, and conflicts among
1990, Hodge et al. 1993, Minc et al. 1994). Nichols city-states in the Basin. Notwithstanding the polit-
et al. (2002:70) see evidence that an overlapping ical environment, substantial amounts of pottery
marketing pattern was emerging in the Early Post- moved across confederation boundaries to reach
classic. They found that although subregional mar- Chiconautla (about 44 percent of the decorated
ket systems might have coincided with city-state Early Aztec pottery in our sample came from out-
confederations, pottery also moved across politi- side the Teotihuacan Valley). Garraty (2006:136)
cal boundaries at least along the southern and west- reports that about half of the Early Aztec Plain
ern margins of the Basin. They, along with Blanton Orange pottery he analyzed from Chiconautla was
(1996) and Garraty (2006), date the beginnings of imported from the Texcoco composition group.
Aztec market hierarchies to this time. To us, these findings signal several interrelated
Middle Postclassic Chiconautla does not fit developments (1) increased pottery manufacturing
either the solar market or confederation market for export; (2) market expansion in the Middle Post-
model. The palace received imports from almost classic that was linked to the growth of lake trans-
all the Aztec pottery-making areas in the Basin portation and trade, with Chiconautla becoming an
described in documentary sources—Texcoco, important hub; and (3) in the case of Chiconautla,
Cuauhtitlan, and Tenochtitlan (this composition dual economic ties with the western Basin and its
group actually includes the pottery-making centers ethnically Tepaneca (Atzcalpotzalco-headed) con-
of Culhuacan, Tenochtitlan, and Azcapotzalco federation and with the eastern Basin and its eth-
[Nichols et al. 2002:31]). The only major excep- nically Acolhua (Texcoco-headed) confederation.
tion is Chalco, but our INAA sample included no Our findings provide further evidence for the pat-
Aztec I or early Chalco-Cholula polychrome— tern of overlapping markets and increased subre-
pottery types made at Chalco. gional exchange documented by Nichols et al.
The Cuauhtitlan and Tenochtitlan production (2002:72) during the Middle Postclassic and per-
zones were important suppliers of Aztec II Black- haps also exchange via networks of marriage and
on-Orange pottery to Chiconautla; together these kinship and political alliances.
two account for 46 percent of the vessels sampled
(vs. 31 percent of locally made vessels). Inland Late Postclassic
sites in the Teotihuacan Valley, including rural vil- For the Late Postclassic, Hodge and Minc (Hodge
lages, also received imports of Aztec II Black-on- 1992; Hodge and Minc 1990; Hodge et al. 1993;
Orange pottery from the Cuauhtitlan, Tenochtitlan, Minc et al. 1994) argue that the political bound-
Texcoco, and Chalco production zones (Nichols aries of confederations continued to constrain mar-
and Charlton 2001). Some, if not most, of these ves- ket exchanges of decorated pottery. Minc (2006)
sels probably moved through Chiconautla. The concludes that the Basin was divided into two hier-
archical dendritic networks that conformed to the study of Aztec plainwares determined that Chico-
boundaries between the Acolhua and Mexica ter- nautla’s palace elites used Aztec Plain Orange ware
ritories (who took over the Tepenaca region by from the Texcoco composition group during both
defeating Atzcalpotzalco). the Middle and Late Postclassic (Garraty 2006).
Hassig (1985:130–144) sees greater regional Moreover, we know that in the 1430s Chiconautla
market integration in the Late Postclassic and attrib- had a tlatoani linked to Texcoco’s through marriage
utes it to Tenochtitlan’s restructuring of the econ- (Alva Ixtlilxóchitl 1975–77: 2:89–90; Hodge and
omy in a core-periphery relationship. The increased Blanton 1966:230).
reliance on canoe transport and growth in trade Yet, despite Chiconautla’s incorporation into
with Tenochtitlan as the major production center the Acolhua confederation, palace occupants
“had the effect of shifting the secondarymarket cen- obtained relatively little decorated pottery from
ters toward the lakeshore” (Hassig 1985:135). Texcoco area workshops. Over 40 percent of the
Rather than a dendritic model, Hassig interprets Aztec III Black-on-Orange pottery in the palace
centers such as Chiconautla as gateways, located came from the Tenochtitlan composition group. By
at one end of their hinterlands at nodes where the comparison, Nichols and Charlton (2001) in their
shift from canoes to porters were both a major regional INAA sample from the Teotihuacan Val-
transportation break and break of bulk point (Has- ley found that imports from the Tenochtitlan com-
sig 1985:136). Texcoco’s continuing importance as position group accounted for about 20 percent of
a market and production, despite its inland loca- the Aztec III Black-on-Orange for the Teotihuacan
tion, Hassig argues, was not so much due to its polit- Valley as whole and about 15 percent at the urban
ical position as caused by the seasonal lowering of center of Otumba. Our data show that the palace’s
lake levels that reduced canoe traffic and segmented residents continued to import ceramics, and now
the regional market system (Hassig 1985:142–144). they drank pulque in Black & White-on-Red ves-
Other archaeologists see less political control sels from the Cuauhtitlan region and used elabo-
over the economy and argue that by the Late Post- rately decorated Red ware bowls that were
classic a complex interlocking market system had manufactured in the Teotihuacan Valley, Cuauhti-
developed in the Basin (Blanton et al. 1993; Smith tlan, and Tenochtitlan production zones, and even
2003). Still others recognize increasing commer- in Morelos. Chiconautla obtained incense burners,
cialism and greater market integration, but also braziers, and figurines from Cuauhtitlan, the Teoti-
point to persisting regionalism, especially on the huacan Valley, and Tenochtitlan. We attribute the
Basin’s peripheries, along with increased large volume of Tenochtitlan production zone
exchange between imperial capitals and hinter- imports to several factors: (1) increased production
lands (Charlton et al. 2000; Nichols et al. 2001). and marketing of pottery, especially Black-on-
Given the increasing complexity of the Postclas- orange, made in the southwest Basin; (2) Chico-
sic economy, perhaps it is not surprising that nautla’s lakeshore location and growth as a trade
scholars working with different data sets and look- center; and (3) preferences of Chiconautla’s palace
ing at the production and exchange of different elites. Our findings support some aspects of Has-
classes of goods draw different conclusions about sig’s core- periphery model, but not others.
market organization. Although imports of ceramics from the Tenochti-
We expected that the Texcoco composition tlan production zone increased dramatically, Chico-
group would be well represented in our INAA sam- nautla continued to obtain pottery from other
ple of decorated ceramics from Chiconautla. Minc production zones in the Basin.
(2006) had found that Aztec Red ware in the east- We do not know the consumption patterns of
ern and southern Basin tended to circulate within commoners at the site. Unfortunately, the only com-
confederation boundaries. Additionally, in Nichols parative information from outside Chiconautla’s
and Charlton’s (2001) regional INAA sample, one- palace come from surface collections at the site
fifth of the Aztec II Black-on-Orange and about made in the 1960s. Nichols and Charlton’s (2001)
one-quarter of the Aztec III Black-on-Orange pot- analysis of 23 specimens of decorated pottery
tery from sites in the Teotihuacan valley came from (using INAA) from surface collections at Chico-
the Texcoco composition group. Garraty’s (2006) nautla found two (two Black-on-Orange dishes
typed as Aztec III and Aztec IV) of 23 samples came duct these activities came from the Tenochtitlan and
from the Texcoco composition group. Thus, Chico- Cuauhtitlan production zones.
nautla imported some decorated as well as Plain Chiconautla fits a model suggesting that as the
Orange ware pottery from the Texcoco area. The Triple Alliance took shape, an important factor fuel-
high proportion of Tenochtitlan imports in the ing market growth was the demand for status-linked
palace sample may reflect preferences of Chico- goods that, in turn, increased and intensified link-
nautla’s elites, as well as production factors. ages between elites across city-state boundaries.
Our interpretation of these data is that the expan- INAA data (especially data from Black-on-Orange
sion of a regional market system, combined with pottery) may support historical documentation indi-
Chiconautla’s strategic location in the lake trans- cating direct political and perhaps social ties to
portation system and growth as a trading hub, meant Tenochtitlan, but we also can make a good case that
that Chiconautla had broad access to imports from Chiconautla’s elites, even if not related, were
the western Basin and from the far reaches of the strongly influenced by the likes and desires of cap-
empire. At the same time, the Late Postclassic saw ital elites. Simply put, as Tenochtitlan solidified
an especially dramatic increase in the volume of its position as the capital of the Aztec empire,
pottery exported from the Tenochtitlan composi- ceramic production expanded in the southwest
tion group. Charlton et al. (2008:265) argue that in Basin. This idea is outlined in the work of prior
the Late Postclassic, full-time professional potters scholars who have found that decorated Aztec pot-
made Black-on-Orange Aztec III pottery. The tery in the Late Postclassic flowed west to east and
expansion of production in the Tenochtitlan area that little pottery made in the Acolhua domain (Tex-
coupled with overall growth in the market system coco region and Teotihuacan Valley) was consumed
allowed ceramic exports from the Tenochtitlan in significant amounts in the western Basin (Gar-
composition group and to a lesser extent the raty 2006; Hodge 1992; Hodge and Minc 1990;
Cuauhtitlan composition group to penetrate mar- Hodge et al. 1993; Ma 2003; Minc 2006; Minc et
ket areas in the eastern Basin. However, further al. 1994; Nichols and Charlton 2001; Nichols et al.
inland in the Teotihuacan Valley import levels were 2002). At the same time, products made near the
lower and regionalism persisted (Charlton et al. center of political power became more popular in
2008). the Basin, including among provincial elites like
Chiconautla’s elites probably used their wealth those occupying Chiconautla’s palace.
(some derived from taxing the local market and
some derived from tribute [Minc 2006:93]) to fund Conclusions
architectural expansions of the palace and to engage
in elite activities. We have marshaled excavation An analysis of excavated data and INAA on pot-
data on the palace’s architecture and ritual objects tery from Chiconautla detects a shift from a pat-
to show that by the Late Postclassic, this building tern of exchange through restricted subregional
included domestic and public ritual spaces. Public markets for ceramics in the Early Postclassic; to
rituals used incense burners, braziers, and obsid- continuing expansion of market exchange with sub-
ian blades, and elsewhere Elson and Smith (2001) stantial amounts of decorated serving wares being
have suggested that one public ritual taking place traded beginning in the Middle Postclassic through
in the palace was the celebration of an event called overlapping exchange networks that became more
the New Fire ceremony that took place every 52 hierarchical; to a continuation of these trends in the
years. Other more regularly celebrated rituals incor- Late Postclassic in conjunction with the emergence
porated copas, pulque vessels, pipes, and bone of Tenochtitlan and to a lesser degree Texcoco as
smoking tubes (possibly used in elite feasts). Rasps, dominant markets, craft producers, and political
bells, and flutes produced music to accompany centers.
feasts as well as religious celebrations. Private Based on Chiconautla’s political history and
domestic ceremonies employed long-handled previous studies of Aztec ceramics in the eastern
censers and figurines. Thus, palace elites carried Basin, we expected to find significant imports of
out private events and sponsored events for others. decorated wares from the Texcoco region, mirror-
INAA indicates that some objects needed to con- ing data produced from recent INAA studies of
plain orange ware (Garraty 2006). That we did not References Cited
indicates that the flow of pottery and choices of con- Alva Ixtlilxóchitl, Fernando de
sumers also were influenced by the manufacturing 1975–77 Obras históricas, 2 vols. (Edmundo O’Gorman,
power and political status of urban centers and by ed.). Universidad Autónoma Nacional de México, Mex-
ico.
geography. The persistent regionalism seen in the Baxter, Michael J.
Otumba city-state and elsewhere in the northeast- 1992 Archaeological Uses of the Biplot—A Neglected
ern periphery of the Basin (Charlton and Nichols Technique? In Computer Applications and Quantitative
Methods in Archaeology, 1991, edited by G. Lock and J.
1991, 2001) is not evident at Chiconautla because Moffett. BAR International Series S577, 141–148. Tem-
of its lakeshore location and importance as a trad- pvs Reparatvm, Archaeological and Historical Associates,
ing center. Oxford.
1994a Exploratory Multivariate Analysis in Archaeology.
We suspect that the predominance of fancy dec- Edinburgh University Press, Edinburgh.
orated vessels, including bowls, copas, and pulque 1994b Stepwise Discriminant Analysis in Archaeometry: A
vessels from producers other than Texcoco reflects Critique. Journal of Archaeological Science 21:659–666.
2000 Statistical Modelling of Artefact Compositional Data.
Chiconautla’s strategic location, expanded pottery Archaeometry 43:131–147.
manufacturing in the southwestern Basin (espe- Baxter, Michael J., and Caitlin E. Buck
cially in and around Tenochtitlan), and the fact the 2000 Data Handling and Statistical Analysis. In Modern
Analytical Methods in Art and Archaeology, edited by
nobles were very keen to acquire nonlocal items Enrique Ciliberto and Giuseppe Spotto, pp. 681–746. John
for use in their feasts and other activities that Wiley, New York.
demonstrated status to members of their own social Berdan, Frances F.
1983 The Economics of Aztec Luxury Trade and Tribute.
stratum. Chiconautla elites were well-integrated In The Aztec Templo Mayor edited by Elizabeth Hill Boone,
into Basin-wide modes of elite ritual behavior. We pp. 161–183. Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Col-
propose that they probably were less constrained lection, Washington, DC.
2005 The Aztecs. Thomson Wadsworth, Belmont, Califor-
by the political and physical landscape than com- nia.
moners and elites in other area of the eastern Basin. Berdan, Frances F., and Patricia R. Anawalt, eds.
Our research also adds to a growing base of 1992 Codex Mendoza. 4 vols. University of California Press,
Berkeley.
compositional and stylistic studies showing that Berdan, Frances F., and Michael E. Smith
different types of ceramics had different market 1996 Imperial Strategies and Core-Periphery Relations. In
spheres and patterns of production and consump- Aztec Imperial Strategies, edited by Frances F. Berdan,
Richard E. Blanton, Elizabeth Hill Boone, Mary G. Hodge,
tion. Much research has focused on comparing Michael E. Smith, and Emily Umberger, pp. 209–218.
changes from the Middle to the Late Postclassic, Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collections, Wash-
an era associated with the development of the Aztec ington, DC.
Bieber, Alan M. Jr., Dorothea W. Brooks, Garman Harbottle,
empire. Although the sample of Early Postclassic and Edward V. Sayre
pottery analyzed from Chiconautla is small, the 1976 Application of Multivariate Techniques to Analytical
findings are consistent with other studies indicat- Data on Aegean Ceramics. Archaeometry 18:59–74.
Bishop, Ronald L. and Hector Neff
ing that equally substantial economic changes took 1989 Compositional Data Analysis in Archaeology. In
place from the Early to the Middle Postclassic and Archaeological Chemistry IV, edited by R. O. Allen, pp.
that such changes can be explored and explained 576–586. Advances in Chemistry Series 220. American
Chemical Society, Washington, DC.
in future studies. Bishop, Ronald L., Robert L. Rands, and George R. Holley
1982 Ceramic Compositional Analysis in Archaeological
Acknowledgments. This research was supported by a grant Perspective. In Advances in Archaeological Method and
from the Foundation for the Advancement of Mesoamerican Theory, vol. 5, edited by**, pp. 275–330. Academic Press,
Studies, Inc. At the American Museum of Natural History we New York.
thank Charles Spencer, Curator of Mexico and Central Blanton, Richard E.
America, for granting access to the materials and Ananda 1996 The Basin of Mexico Market System and the Growth
Cohen, Anthropology Intern, for imaging and drawing the of Empire. In Aztec Imperial Strategies, edited by Frances
ceramics. The William J. Bryant 1925 Professorship of F. Berdan, Richard E. Blanton, Elizabeth Hill Boone, Mary
G. Hodge, Michael E. Smith, and Emily Umberger, pp.
Anthropology, Dartmouth College, also provided assistance.
47–84. Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collec-
Elizabeth Brumfiel and Michael Smith provided helpful sug- tions, Washington, DC.
gestions, as did an anonymous reviewer. The abstract was Blanton, Richard and Mary Hodge
translated by Oralia Cabrera C. and Kristin Sullivan prepared 1996 Appendix 2: Date on Market Activities and Produc-
the map of the Basin of Mexico. tion Specialization of Tlatoani Centers. In Aztec Imperial
Strategies, edited by Frances F. Berdan, Richard E. Blan-
ton, Elizabeth Hill Boone, Mary G. Hodge, Michael E.
Smith, and Emily Umberger, pp. 243–246. Dumbarton Albany, Albany.

Oaks Research Library and Collections, Washington, DC. 2000 The Aztecs and Their Contemporaries: The Central
Both, Arnd Adje and Eastern Mexican Highlands. In The Cambridge His-
2002 Aztec Flower Flutes: The Symbolic Organizaton of tory of the Native Peoples of the Americas Volume II
Sound in Late Postclassic Mesoamerica. Orient Archäe- Mesoamerica, Part 1, edited by Richard E. W. Adams and
ologie 10:279–289. Murdo J. Macleod, pp. 500–558. Cambridge University
2007 Aztec Music Culture. In Music Archaeology: Press, Cambridge.
Mesoamerica, edited by Max Peter Baumann, Arnd Edje Charlton, Thomas H., and Deborah L. Nichols
Both, and Julia L. J. Sanchez, pp. 91–194. The World of 1997 Diachronic Studies of City-States: Permutations on a
Music, Vol. 49 (2). University of Bamberg, Bamberg. Theme—Central Mexico from 1700 BC to AD 1600. In
Brumfiel, Elizabeth M., The Archaeology of City- States: Cross- Cultural
1987 Elite and Utilitarian Crafts in the Aztec State. In Spe- Approaches, edited by Deborah L. Nichols and Thomas
cialization, Exchange, and Complex Societies, edited by H. Charlton, pp. 169–208. Smithsonian Institution Press,
Elizabeth M. Brumfiel and Timothy K. Earle, pp. 102–118. Washington, D.C.
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Charlton, Thomas H., Deborah L. Nichols, and Cynthia Otis
2004 Meaning by Design: Ceramics, Feasting, and Figured Charlton
Worlds in Postclassic Mexico. In Mesoamerican Archae- 1991 Craft Specialization within the Aztec City-State of
ology Theory and Practice, edited by Julia A. Hendon and Otumba, Mexico: The Archaeological Evidence. World
Rosemary A. Joyce, pp. 238–263. Blackwell Publishing, Archaeology 23:98–114.
Oxford. 2000 Otumba and Its Neighbors: Ex Oriente Lux. Ancient
2005 Opting In and Opting Out: Tula, Cholula, and Xalto- Mesoamerica 11:247–266.
can. In Settlement, Subsistence, and Social Complexity: Charlton, Thomas H., Cynthia L. Otis Charlton, Deborah L.
Essays Honoring the Legacy of Jeffrey R. Parsons, edited Nichols, and Hector Neff
by Richard E. Blanton, pp. 63–88. Cotsen Institute of 2008 Aztec Otumba, AD 1200–1600: Patterns of the Pro-
Archaeology UCLA, Los Angeles. ductiono, Distribution, and Consumption of Ceramic Prod-
Brumfiel, Elizabeth M., and Mary D. Hodge ucts. In Pottery Economics in Mesoamerica, edited by
1996 Interaction in the Basin of Mexico: The Case of Post- Christopher A. Pool and George J. Bey III, pp. 237–266.
classic Xaltocan. In Arqueología Mesoamerican: Home- University of Arizona Press, Tucson.
page a William T. Sanders, edited by Alba Guadalupe Coe, Sophie D.
Mastache, Jeffery R. Parsons, Robert. S. Santley, Mari 1994 America’s First Cuisines. University of Texas Press,
Carmen Sera Puce, pp. 417–437. Mexico City: Instituto Austin.
Nacional de Antropología e Historia. Crider, Destiny
Brumfiel, Elizabeth M., Tamara Salcedo, and David K. Schafer 2002 Coyotlatelco Phase Community Structure at Teoti-
1994 The Lip Plugs of Xaltocan. In Economies and Poli- huacan. MA Paper in Anthropology. Department of
ties in the Aztec Realm, edited by Mary G. Hodge, and Anthropology, Arizona State University, Tempe.
Michael E. Smith, pp. 113–131. Institute for Mesoameri- Crider, Destiny, Deborah L. Nichols, Hector Neff, and Michael
can Studies, SUNY-Albany, Albany. D. Glascock
Cecil, Leslie G., and Michael D. Glascock 2007 In the Aftermath of Teotihuacan: Epiclassic Pottery
2005 Instrumental Neutron Activation Analysis of Pottery Production and Distribution in the Teotihuacan Valley,
from Chiconautla, Mexico. Archaeometry Laboratory, Mexico. Latin American Antiquity 18:123–144.
Missouri University Research Reactor, Columbia. Elec- Cyphers, Ann
tronic document, http://archaeometry.missouri.edu/ 2000 Cultural Identity and Interregional Interaction during
datasets/datasets.html the Gobernador Phase: A Ceramic Perspective. In The
Charlton, Cynthia Otis Xochicalco Mapping Project, edited by Kenneth Hirth,
1994 Plebeians and Patricians: Contrasting Patterns of Pro- pp. 11–16. Archaeological Research at Xochicalco Vol. 2.
duction and Distribution in the Aztec Figurine and Lap- University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.
idary Industries. In Economies and Polities in the Aztec Elson, Christina M.
Realm, edited by Mary G. Hodge and Michael E. Smith, 1999 An Aztec Palace at Chiconautla, Mexico. Latin Amer-
pp. 195–220. Studies on Culture and Society Vol. 6, Insti- ican Antiquity 10:151–167.
tute for Mesoamerican Studies, SUNY-Albany, Albany. Elson, Christina M., and Michael E. Smith
Charlton, Cynthia Otis, Thomas. H. Charlton, and Deborah L. 2001 Archaeological Deposits form the Aztec New Fire
Nichols Ceremony. Ancient Mesoamerica 12:157–174.
1993 Aztec Household-Based Craft Production: Archaeo- Evans, Susan T.
logical Evidence from the City-State of Otumba, Mexico. 1988 Excavations at Cihuatecpan: An Aztec Village in the
In Prehispanic Domestic Units in Western Mesoamerica: Teotihuacan Valley. Vanderbilt University Publications in
Studies in Household, Compound, and Residence, edited Anthropology No. 36. Nashville, Tennessee.
by Robert S. Santley and Kenneth. G. Hirth, pp. 147–172. 1991 Architecture and Authority in an Aztec Village: Form
CRC Press, Boca Raton, Florida. and Function of the Tecpan. In Land and Politics in the
Charlton, Thomas H. Valley of Mexico: A Two Thousand Year Perspective, edited
1968 Post-Conquest Aztec Ceramics: Implications for by Herbert R. Harvey, pp. 63–92. University of New Mex-
Archaeological Interpretation. Florida Anthropology ico Press, Albuquerque.
21:96–101. 2001 Aztec Period Political Organization in the Teotihua-
1994 Economic Heterogeneity and State Expansion: The can Valley: Otumba as a City-State. Ancient Mesoamer-
Northeastern Basin of Mexico during the Late Postclassic ica 12:89–100.
Period. In Economies and Polities in the Aztec Realm, 2004 Aztec Palaces and Other Elite Residential Architec-
edited by Mary G. Hodge and Michael. E. Smith, pp. ture. In Palaces of the Ancient New World, edited by Susan
221–256. Institute for Mesoamerican Studies, SUNY- Toby Evans, and Joanne Pillsbury, pp. 7–58. Dumbarton
Oaks Research Library and Collections, Washington, D.C. 1990 The Spatial Patterning of Aztec Ceramics: Implica-
García Chavez, Raul E. tions for Prehispanic Exchange Systems in the Valley of
2004 De Tula a Azcapotzalco: characterization arque- Mexico. Journal of Field Archaeology 17:415–437.
ológica de los Altepetl de la Cuenca de México del 1991 Aztec-Period Ceramic Distribution and Exchange Sys-
Posclásico Temprano y Medio, a travéz del studio cerámico tems. Final Report to the National Science Foundation,
regional. Tesis doctoral, Facultad de Filosofía y Letras, Washington, D.C.
Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Mexico D.F. Hodge, Mary G., and Hector Neff
Garraty, Christopher P. 2005 Xaltocan in the Economy of the Basin of Mexico: A
2006 The Politics of Commerce: Aztec Pottery Production View from Ceramic Tradewares. In La producción local
and Exchange in the Basin of Mexico, A.D. 1200–1650. ye el poder en el Xaltocan Posclásico, Production and
Ph.D. Dissertation, School of Human Evolution and Social Power at Postclassic Xaltocan, edited by Elizabeth M.
Change, Arizona State University, University Microfilms, Brumfiel, pp. 320–348. INAH and University of Pitts-
Ann Arbor. burgh, Mexico D.F. and Pittsburgh.
Gibson, Charles Hodge, Mary G., Hector Neff, M. James Blackman, Leah D.
1964 The Aztecs Under Spanish Rule. Stanford University Minc
Press, Palo Alto. 1992 A Compositional Perspective on Ceramic Production
Glascock, Michael D. in the Aztec Empire. In Chemical Characterization of
1992 Characterization of Archaeological Ceramics at Ceramic Pastes in Archaeology, edited by H. Neff, pp.
MURR by Neutron Activation Analysis and Multivariate 203–231. Monographs in World Archaeology No. 7. Pre-
Statistics. In Chemical Characterization of Ceramic Pastes history Press, Madison, Wisconsin.
in Archaeology, edited by Hector Neff, pp. 11–26. Pre- 1993 Black-on-Orange Ceramic Production in the Aztec
history Press, Madison, Wisconsin. Empire’s Heartland. Latin American Antiquity 4:130–157.
Harbottle, Garman Hosler, Dorothy
1976 Activation Analysis in Archaeology. Radiochemistry 1964 The Sounds and Colors of Power: The Sacred Metal-
3:33–72. The Chemical Society, London. lurgical Technology of Ancient West Mexico. MIT Press,
Hassig, Ross Cambridge.
1985 Trade, Tribute, and Transportation. University of Ixtlilxóchitl, F. de Alva
Oklahoma Press, Norman. 1975/1977 Obras históricas, edited by Edmundo O’Gor-
Hick, Frederic man. 2 vols. Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México,
1978 Los calpixque de Nezahualcoyotl. Estudios de Cul- Mexico City.
tural Náhuatl 13:129–152. López Luján, Leonardo
1987 First Steps Toward a Market-Integrated Economy in 2005 The offerings of the Templo Mayor of Tenochtitlan.
Aztec Mexico. In Early State Development, edited by Henri Translated by B. R. Ortiz and T. O de Montellano. Uni-
J. M. Classen and Peiter van de Velde, pp. 91–107. E. J. versity of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.
Brill, Leiden López Pérez, Claudia M.
Hodge, Mary G. 2003 Análisis cerámico de las areas de actividad el la
1984 Aztec City-States. Museum of Anthropology Mem- “Cueva de las Varillas,” Teotihuacan. Tesis de Licenciada
oir 18. University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. en Arqueología, Escuela Nacional de Antropología e His-
1991 Land and Lordship in the Valley of Mexico: The Pol- toria, Mexico D.F.
itics of Aztec Provincial Administration. In Land and Pol- Ma, Marina K. S.
itics in the Valley of Mexico, edited by Herbert R. Harvey, 2003 Examining Prehispanic Ceramic Exchange in the
pp. 113–139. University of New Mexico Press, Albu- Basin of Mexico: A Chemical Source Analysis from
querque. Azcapotzalco. Senior Honors Thesis in Anthropology,
1992 The Geographical Structure of Aztec Imperial-Period Dartmouth College, Hanover.
Market Systems. National Geographic Research & Explo- Martí, Samuel
ration 8:428–445. 1968 Instumentos musicales precortesianos. Instituto
1996 Political Organization of the Central Provinces. In Nacional de Antropología e Historia. Mexico D.F.
Aztec Imperial Strategies, edited by Frances F. Berdan, Milhauser, John
Richard E. Blanton, Elizabeth Hill Boone, Mary G. Hodge, 2005 Classic and Postclassic Chipped Stone at Xaltocan.
Michael E. Smith, and Emily Umberger, pp. 17–45. Dum- In Production and Power at Postclassic Xaltocan, edited
barton Oaks Library and Collection, Washington, D.C. by Elizabeth M. Brumfiel, pp. 267–317. Instituto Nacional
1997 When Is a City-State? Archaeological Measures of de Antropología e Historica and Department of Anthro-
Aztec City-States and Aztec City-State Systems. In The pology University of Pittsburgh, Mexico D.F. and Pitts-
Archaeology of City-States: Cross Cultural Approaches, burgh.
edited by Deborah L. Nichols and Thomas H. Charlton, Minc, Leah D.
pp. 209–228. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, 1994 Political Economy and Market Economy Under Aztec
D.C. Rule: A Regional Perspective Based on Decorated Ceramic
1998 Archaeological Views of Aztec Culture. Journal of Production and Distribution Systems in the Valley of Mex-
Archaeological Research 6:197–238. ico. Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, Uni-
Hodge, Mary G., and Richard E. Blanton versity of Michigan. University Microfilms, Ann Arbor.
1996 Appendix I: Data on Political Organization of the 2006 Monitoring Regional Market Systems in Prehistory:
Aztec Empire’s Central Provinces. In Aztec Imperial Models, Methods, and Metrics. Journal of Anthropologi-
Strategies, edited by Frances F. Berdan, Richard E. Blan- cal Archaeology 25:82–116.
ton, Elizabeth Hill Boone, Mary G. Hodge, Michael E. Minc, Leah D., Mary G. Hodge, and M. J. Blackman
Smith, and Emily Umberger, pp. 229–241. Dumbarton 1994 Stylistic and Spatial Variability in Early Aztec Ceram-
Oaks Research Library and Collections, Washington, D.C. ics: Insights into Pre-Imperial Exchange Systems. In
Hodge, Mary G., and Leah Minc Economies and Polities in the Aztec Realm, edited by Mary
G. Hodge and Michael E. Smith, pp. 134–173. Institute Archaeology 21:25–82.

for Mesoamerican Studies, State University of Albany, Nichols, Deborah L., and Thomas H. Charlton
Albany. 1996 The Postclassic Occupation at Otumba: A Chrono-
Moctezuma, Eduardo Matos, and Felipe Solis Olguin logical Assessment. Ancient Mesoamerica 7:231–244.
2002 Aztecs. Thames and Hudson Ltd., London. 2001 Processes of Aztec State Formation in the Northeast-
Neff, Hector ern Basin of Mexico: Materials Analysis. Final Report to
1992 Introduction. In Chemical Characterization of the National Science Foundation. Washington, D.C.
Ceramic Pastes in Archaeology, edited by H. Neff, pp. Nichols, Deborah L., and John McCullough
1–10. Prehistory Press, Madison, Wisconsin. 1986 Excavations at Xometla (TT–21). In The Teotihuacan
1994 RQ-mode Principal Components Analysis of Ceramic Valley Project—Final Report Vol. IV: The Toltec Occupa-
Compositional Data. Archaeometry 36:115–130. tion of the Valley, edited by W. T. Sanders, pp. 53–194.
2000 Neutron Activation Analysis for Provenance Deter- Occasional Papers in Anthropology 13. The Pennsylvania
mination in Archaeology. In Modern Analytical Methods State University, University Park.
in Art and Archaeology, edited by Enrico Ciliberto and Nichols, Deborah L., Mary Jane McLaughlin, and Maura Ben-
Giuseppe Spoto, pp. 81–134. John Wiley and Sons, Inc., ton
New York. 2000 Production Intensification and Regional Specializa-
2002 Quantitative Techniques for Analyzing Ceramic Com- tion: Maguey Fibers and Textiles in the Aztec City-State
positional Data. In Ceramic Source Determination in the of Otumba. Ancient Mesoamerica 11:267–292.
Greater Southwest, edited by Deborah M. Glowacki and Nichols, Deborah L., Hector Neff, and Destiny Crider
Hector Neff,pp. **. Monograph 44, Cotsen Institute of 2008 Cerro Portezuelo and the Development of Postclas-
Archaeology, UCLA, Los Angeles. sic City-States in the Eastern Basin of Mexico. Paper pre-
Neff, Hector, Ronald L. Bishop, Edward B. Sisson, Michael D. sented at the 73rd Annual Meeting of the Society for
Glascock, and P. R. Sisson American Archaeology, Vancouver.
1994 Neutron Activation Analysis of Late Postclassic Poly- Nicolás Careta, Claudia
chrome Pottery from Central Mexico. In Mixteca-Puebla: 2003 Análisis cerámico del la Cueva del Pirul: Transición
Discoveries and Research in Mesoamerican Art and entre el complejo Coyotlatelco y el complejo Mazapa en
Archaeology, edited by H. B. Nicholson and Eloise Teotihuacan. Tesis de Licenciada en Arqueología, Escuela
Quiñones Keber, pp. 117–142. Labyrinthos, Culver City, Nacional de Antropología e Historia. Mexico D.F.
California. Parsons, Jeffery R.
Neff, Hector, and Michael D. Glascock 1966 The Aztec Ceramic Sequence in the Teotihuacan Val-
1998 Compositional Analysis of Ceramic from Yautepec, ley, Mexico. Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthro-
Morelos, Mexico. Missouri University Research Reactor, pology, University of Michigan. University Microfilms,
University of Missouri, Columbia. Ann Arbor.
2000 Provenance Analysis of Aztec Period Ceramics from 1971 Prehistoric Settlement Patterns in the Texcoco Region,
the Basin of Mexico. Missouri University Research Reac- Mexico. Museum of Anthropology Memoir 3. University
tor, University of Missouri, Columbia. of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
Neff, Hector, Michael D. Glascock, Thomas H. Charlton, Cyn- Parsons, Jeffery R., Elizabeth Brumfiel, Mary H. Parsons, and
thia Otis Charlton, and Deborah L. Nichols David J. Wilson
2000 Provenience Investigation of Ceramics and Obsidian 1982 Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in the Southern Val-
from Otumba. Ancient Mesoamerica 11:207–322. ley of Mexico: The Chalco-Xochimilco Region. Museum
Neff, Hector, and Mary G. Hodge of Anthropology Memoir 14. University of Michigan, Ann
*2009 Serving Vessel Production at Chalco: Evidence from Arbor.
Neutron Activation Analysis. In Place of Jade: Society Parsons, Jeffrey R., and Larry J. Gorenflo
and Economy in Ancient Chalco, edited by M. G. Hodge. 2009 Why is Aztec II Black-on-Orange Pottery so Scarce
Latin American Archaeology Report. Department of in the Zumpango Region?: A Regional Perspective from
Anthropology, University of Pittsburgh and Instituto the Basin of Mexico on Tula’s Collapse and Its Aftermath.
Nacional de Antropología e Historia. Pittsburgh and Mex- In Homenaje a Guadalupe Mastache, edited by Robert
ico D.F., in press. Cobean. INAH, Mexico DF, in press.
Nichols, Deborah L. Parsons, Mary Hrones
1994 The Organization of Provincial Craft Production and 1972a Aztec Figurines from the Teotihuacan Valley, Mex-
the Aztec City-State Otumba. In Economies and Polities ico. In Miscellaneous Studies in Mexican Prehistory, edited
in the Aztec Realm, edited by Mary G. Hodge and Michael by Michael W. Spence, Jeffrey R. Parsons, and Mary H.
E. Smith, pp. 175–194. Studies on Culture and Society Vol. Parsons, pp. 81–125. Museum of Anthropology Papers
6, Institute for Mesoamerican Studies, SUNY-Albany, 45. University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
Albany. 1972b Spindle Whorls from the Teotihuacan Valley, Mex-
1997 Post-Classic Period in Mesoamerica. In The Oxford ico. In Miscellaneous Studies in Mexican Prehistory, edited
Companion to Archaeology, edited by Charlotte Beck, by Michael W. Spence, Jeffrey R. Parsons, and Mary H.
George Michaels, Chris Scarre, and Neil Asher Silber- Parsons, pp. 45–80. Museum of Anthropology Papers 45.
man, pp.447–448. Oxford University Press, New York. University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
2004 The Rural and Urban Landscapes of the Aztec State. 1975 The Distribution of Late Postclassic Spindle Whorls
In Mesoamerican Archaeology, edited by Rosemary Joyce in the Valley of Mexico. American Antiquity 40:207–215.
and Julia Hendon, pp. **. Blackwell, Oxford. Rattray, Evelyn C.
Nichols, Deborah L., Elizabeth M. Brumfiel, Hector Neff, Mary 1966 An Archeological and Stylistic Study of Coyotlatelco
Hodge, Thomas H. Charlton, and Michael D. Glascock Pottery. Mesoamerican Notes 7–8:87–211.
2002 Neutrons, Markets, Cities, and Empires: A 1000-Year 1996 A Regional Perspective on the Epiclassic Period in
Perspective on Ceramic Production and Distribution in the Central Mexico. In Arqueología Mesoamericana: Home-
Postclassic Basin of Mexico. Journal of Anthropological naje a William T. Sanders, edited by Alba Guadalupe Mas-
tache, Jeffrey R. Parsons, Robert S. Santley, Mari Carmen in the Valley of Mexico: A Central Place Analysis. Amer-
Serra Puche, pp. 213–231. INAH, Mexico D.F. ican Antiquity 44:110–125.
2001 Teotihuacan: Ceramics, Chronology, and Cultural 1980 The Role of the Marketing System in Aztec Society
Trends. I.N.A.H. and University of Pittsburgh, Mexico and Economy: Reply to Evans. American Antiquity
D.F. and Pittsburgh. 44:110–124.
Rautman, Marcus L., Basil Gomez, Hector Neff, and Michael 1992 Archaeological Research at Aztec-Period Rural Sites
D. Glascock in Morelos, Mexico, Volume 1. Memoirs in Latin Ameri-
1993 Neutron Activation Analysis of Late Roman Ceram- can Archaeology No. 4, University of Pittsburgh, Pitts-
ics from Kalavasos-Kopetra and the Environs of the Vasi- burgh.
likos Valley. In Report of the Department of Antiquities, 2002 Domestic Ritual at Aztec Provincial Sites in Morelos.
Cyprus 1993. Pp. 233–265. press and location? In Domestic Ritual in Ancient Mesoamerica, edited by
Robinson, David G. Patricia Plunket, pp. 93–114. Cotsen Insititute of Archae-
2004 Petrographic Analysis of Prehistoric Ceramics from ology, University of California, Los Angeles.
two sites in La Junta Archaeological District, Presidio 2003a The Aztecs. 2nd ed. Basil Blackwell, Oxford.
County, Trans-Pecos, Texas. In The Arroyo de la Presa Site: 2003b Small Polities in Postclassic Mesoamerica In The
A Stratified Late Prehistoric Campsite Along the Rio Postclassic Mesoamerican World, edited by Michael E.
Grande, Presidio County, Trans-Pecos Texas. Reports in Smith and Francis F. Berdan, pp. 35–39. University of
Contract Archaeology 9. Center for Big Bend Studies, Sul Utah Press, Salt Lake.
Ross State University, Texas. 2003c Aztec City-States in the Basin of Mexico and More-
Sahagún, Bernardino de los. In The Postclassic Mesoamerican World, edited by
1950–82 Florentine Codex: General History of the Things Michael E. Smith and Francis F. Berdan, pp. 58–60. Uni-
of New Spain. Translated by Arthur J. O. Anderson and versity of Utah Press, Salt Lake.
Charles E. Dibble. University of Utah Press and School of 2006 Excavaciones de cases postclásicas en la zona urbana
American Research, Salt Lake City and Santa Fe. de Yautepc, Morelos: informe final. 2 vols. Report sub-
Sanders, William T. mitted to the Consejo de Arqueología, Insituto Nacional
1965 The Cultural Ecology of Teotihuacan Valley. Depart- de Antropología e Historia.
ment of Anthropology Pennsylvania State University, Uni- 2008 Aztec City-State Capitals. University of Florida Press,
versity Park. Gainesville.
1986 Ceramic Chronology. The Teotihuacan Valley Pro- Smith, Michael E., and Cynthia Smith-Heath
ject, Final Report, Volume 4: The Toltec Period Occupa- 1994 Rural Economy in Late Postclassic Morelos: An
tion, edited by William T. Sanders, pp. 367–373. Archaeological Study. In Economies and Polities in the
Occasional Papers in Anthropology No.13. Department of Aztec Realm, pp. 349–376, University of Texas Press,
Anthropology, Pennsylvania State University, University Austin.
Park. Smith, Michael E. and Lisa Montiel
Sanders, William T. (Editor) 2001 The Archaeological Study of Empires and Imperial-
1994–96 The Teotihuacan Valley Project Final Report, Vol. ism in Pre-Hispanic Central Mexico. Journal of Anthro-
3. The Teotihuacan Period Occupation of the Valley. 4 pological Archaeology 20:245–284.
parts. Occasional Papers in Anthropology Department of Smith, Michael E., Jennifer B. Wharton, and Jan Marie Olson
Anthropology, Pennsylvania State University, University 2003 Aztec Feasts, Rituals, and Markets: Political Uses of
Park. Ceramic Vessels in a Commercial Economy. In The
Sanders, William T., and Susan Toby Evans (Editors) Archaeology and Politics of Food and Feasting in Early
2001 The Teotihuacan Valley Project Final Report, Vol. 5. States and Empires, edited by Tamara L. Bray, pp.
The Aztec Period Occupation of the Valley. 3 parts. Occa- 235–270. Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers, New
sional Papers in Anthropology Department of Anthropol- York.
ogy, Pennsylvania State University, University Park. Spence, Michael W.
Sanders, William T., Jeffrey Parsons, and Robert S. Santley 1985 Specialized production in rural Aztec society: Obsid-
1979 The Basin of Mexico: Ecological Process in the Evo- ian workshops of the Teotihuacan Valley. In Contributions
lution of a Civilization. Academic Press, New York. to the Archaeology and Ethnohistory of Greater
Sanders, William T., and Robert S. Santley Mesoamerica, edited by William J. Folan. pp.76–125.
1983 A Tale of Three Cities: Energetics and Urbanization Southern Illinois University Press, Carbondale.
in Pre-Hispanic Central Mexico. In Prehispanic Settle- Steponaitis, Vincas, M. James Blackman, and Hector Neff
ment Patterns: Essays in Honor of Gordon R. Willey, edited 1996 Large-scale Compositional Patterns in the Chemical
by Evon Z. Vogt and Richard M. Levanthal, pp. 243–291. Composition of Mississippian pottery. American Antiquity
University of New Mexico Press and Peabody Museum of 61:555–557.
Archaeology and Ethnology, Cambridge. Taube, Karl
Sayre, Edward V. 2001 The Breath of Life: The Symbolism of Wind in
1975 Brookhaven Procedures for Statistical Analyses of Mesoamerica and the American Southwest. In The Road
Multivariate Archaeometric Data. Brookhaven National to Aztlan: Art From A Mythic Homeland, edited by Victo-
Laboratory Report BNL-23128. New York. ria M. Fields and Victor Zamudio-Taylor, pp. 102–123.
Skoglund, Thanet, Barbara L. Stark, Hector Neff, and Michael University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.
Glascock Vaillant, George C.
2006 Compositional and Stylistic Analysis of Aztec Era 1962 The Aztecs of Mexico. Doubleday, New York.
Ceramics: Provincial Strategies at the Edge of Empire, Vaillant, George C., and William T. Sanders
South-central Veracruz, Mexico. Latin American Antiquity 2000 Excavations at Chiconautla. In The Teotihuacan Val-
17:541–560. ley Project Final Report, Vol. 5: the Aztec Period Occu-
Smith, Michael E. pation of the Valley, Pt. 2: Excavations at T.A. 40 and
1979 The Aztec Marketing System and Settlement Pattern Related Projects, edited by William T. Sanders and Susan
Toby Evans, pp. 757–787. Occasional Papers in Anthro- Homeland, edited by Victoria M. Fields and Victor
pology 26. Pennsylvania State University, University Park. Zamudio-Taylor, pp. XX. University of New Mexico Press,
Vargas, Victoria D. Albuquerque.
2001 Mesoamerican Copper Bells in the pre-Hispanic Whalen, Michael E., and Jeffrey R. Parsons
Southwestern United States and Northwestern Mexico. In 1982 Ceramic Markers Used for Period Designations. In
The Road to Aztlan; Art From A Mythic Homeland, edited Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in the Southern Valley of
by Victoria M. Fields and Victor Zamudio-Taylor, pp. XX. Mexico: The Chalco-Xochimilco Region, edited by Jeffrey
University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque. R. Parsons, Elizabeth M. Brumfiel, Mary H. Parsons, and
Weigand, Phil C., Garman Harbottle, and Edward V. Sayre David J. Wilson, pp. 385–460. Memoirs of the Museum
1977 Turquoise Sources and Source Analysis: Mesoamer- of Anthropology No. 14. University of Michigan, Ann
ica and the Southwestern U.S.A. In Exchange Systems in Arbor.
Prehistory, edited by Timothy K. Earle and Jonathan E.
Ericson, pp. 15–34. Academic Press, New York.
Weigand, Phil C., and Acelia Garcia de Weigand
2001 A Macroeconomic Study of the Relationships between
the Ancient Cultures of the American Southwest and Submitted: March 11, 2008; Revised: June 23, 2008;
Mesoamerica. In The Road to Aztlan; Art from A Mythic Accepted: July 12, 2008

Chiconautla Mexico A Crossroads of Aztec PDF

Transféré par

Informations du document

Titre original

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Chiconautla Mexico A Crossroads of Aztec PDF

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

LAQ20(3) Nichols:Layout 1 7/6/09 3:42 PM Page 1

Deborah L. Nichols, Christina Elson, Leslie G. Cecil, Nina Neivens de Estrada,

Latin American Antiquity 20(3), 2009, pp. XX-XX

2 LATIN AMERICAN ANTIQUITY [Vol. 20, No. 3, 2009

Nichols et al.] CROSSROADS OF AZTEC TRADE AND POLITICS 3

4 LATIN AMERICAN ANTIQUITY [Vol. 20, No. 3, 2009

Nichols et al.] CROSSROADS OF AZTEC TRADE AND POLITICS 5

6 LATIN AMERICAN ANTIQUITY [Vol. 20, No. 3, 2009

Field No. Condition Sex/ Position Offering

Nichols et al.] CROSSROADS OF AZTEC TRADE AND POLITICS 7

8 LATIN AMERICAN ANTIQUITY [Vol. 20, No. 3, 2009

Nichols et al.] CROSSROADS OF AZTEC TRADE AND POLITICS 9

Table 3. Chemical Group Assignments for Ceramics from Chiconautla, Mexico.

10 LATIN AMERICAN ANTIQUITY [Vol. 20, No. 3, 2009

Nichols et al.] CROSSROADS OF AZTEC TRADE AND POLITICS 11

12 LATIN AMERICAN ANTIQUITY [Vol. 20, No. 3, 2009

Time Period/ Otumba

Nichols et al.] CROSSROADS OF AZTEC TRADE AND POLITICS 13

Form or type Cuauhtitlan Otumba Macro Unassigned No. samples

Cuauhtitlan Otumba Macro Tenochtitlan Unassigned No. Samples

14 LATIN AMERICAN ANTIQUITY [Vol. 20, No. 3, 2009

West Traverse NT 3 North rooms

Undecorated bowl/basin 411 17.23 140 21.77 80 11.00

Lobed brazier 7 .29 0 .00 0 .00

Nichols et al.] CROSSROADS OF AZTEC TRADE AND POLITICS 15

Figure 3. Major ceramic types identified in the analysis:

16 LATIN AMERICAN ANTIQUITY [Vol. 20, No. 3, 2009

Nichols et al.] CROSSROADS OF AZTEC TRADE AND POLITICS 17

18 LATIN AMERICAN ANTIQUITY [Vol. 20, No. 3, 2009

Figure 4. Ceramics for consuming liquids: (A) Black-on

Nichols et al.] CROSSROADS OF AZTEC TRADE AND POLITICS 19

commonly described in documents as used in tem-

Flutes, Rattles, Rasps, and Bells C

20 LATIN AMERICAN ANTIQUITY [Vol. 20, No. 3, 2009

Nichols et al.] CROSSROADS OF AZTEC TRADE AND POLITICS 21

22 LATIN AMERICAN ANTIQUITY [Vol. 20, No. 3, 2009

Table 11. Shell Identified in Collections from Chiconautla.

AMNH Cat. # Family Name, Genus/species (common name) Environment Worked?

Nichols et al.] CROSSROADS OF AZTEC TRADE AND POLITICS 23

24 LATIN AMERICAN ANTIQUITY [Vol. 20, No. 3, 2009

Nichols et al.] CROSSROADS OF AZTEC TRADE AND POLITICS 25

26 LATIN AMERICAN ANTIQUITY [Vol. 20, No. 3, 2009

Nichols et al.] CROSSROADS OF AZTEC TRADE AND POLITICS 27

Smith, and Emily Umberger, pp. 243–246. Dumbarton Albany, Albany.

28 LATIN AMERICAN ANTIQUITY [Vol. 20, No. 3, 2009

Nichols et al.] CROSSROADS OF AZTEC TRADE AND POLITICS 29

G. Hodge and Michael E. Smith, pp. 134–173. Institute Archaeology 21:25–82.

30 LATIN AMERICAN ANTIQUITY [Vol. 20, No. 3, 2009

Nichols et al.] CROSSROADS OF AZTEC TRADE AND POLITICS 31

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi