Chapter

12

Urban and Rural Dimensions of the Contact Period

Central Mexico, 1521-1620
THOMAS

H.

CHARLTON AND PATRICIA FOURNIER

G.

INTRODUCTION
The conquest and transformation of Mesoamerican civilizations during the Colonial and Republican periods provide one of the most dynamic and widespread examples of acculturation known to anthropology. Ethnologists, ethnohistorians, and historians have studied in some detail both the processes and the results of this acculturation (e.g., Farriss 1984; Foster 1960; Gibson 1964, 1981; Hassig 1985; lovell 1985; Macleod 1973). Archaeologists, despite statements about interest in processes of culture change and cultural evolution (e.g., Blanton et al. 1981; Sanders, Parsons, and Sandey 1979; Wolf 1976), with few exceptions (e.g., Gasco 1987), have either neglected or overSimplified the processes and the results of the postconquest changes. This is most unfortunate. In Mesoamerica during the Colonial and Republican periods there is a cycle of culture change involving the devolution of indigenous civilizations, their reformulation within an acculturative context, and the subsequent evolution and elaboration of the resulting cultural syntheses. Historically well-documented proTHOMAS H. CHARLTON Department of Anthropology, University of Iowa, Iowa. City, Iowa 52242. PATRICIA FOURNIER G . Escuela Nacional de Antropologia e Historia, Instituto Nacional de Antropologfa e Historia, Mexico, D.F.

201

J. D. Rogers et al. (eds.), Ethnohistory and Archaeology Springer Science+Business Media New York 1993

202

THOMAS H. CHARLTON AND PATRICIA FOURNIER G.

cesses of culture change, many frequently cited by archaeologists as significant for an understanding of prehistoric cultural dynamics, are associated with this cycle. These include foreign conquest, the uprising of subject peoples, forced acculturation in selective aspects of culture, the introduction of new crops, livestock, and subsistence technologies, environmental changes that might best be classified as ecological disasters, demographic depression and recovery, and forced settlement relocation. The precise ways in which the above mentioned processes affected cultural changes during the Colonial and Republican periods in

Mezqunal Valley
TULA

Toluca Valley PueblaTlaxcala Area

CUERNAVACA Morelos Area T Teotlhuacan Valley

Amatzlnac-Tenango Valley Km

10

20

Figure 1. The Basin of Mexico and adjacent areas of Central Mexico. Adapted from Lorenzo
(1968:54).

CENTRAL MEXICO, 1521-1620

203

different areas and at different times are, of course, still a matter of discussion. However, as a result of extensive archaeological research in Central Mexico, it is now possible to delineate some general patterns associated with the Colonial and Republican periods. In this chapter we examine, from the perspective of the archaeological evidence, the processes of culture change operative during the Early Colonial period (1521-1620). This period begins with the completion of the military conquest in 1521 and ends with the effective relocation of the depressed rural population in a few congregacwn centers by 1620 (Charlton 1986). We shall examine archaeological data from two urban areas and two rural settings. All are within or adjacent to the Basin of Mexico (Figure 1).

URBAN SETTINGS
Archaeological research conducted in Mexico City and Cuernavaca has yielded important information on the Early Colonial period.

Mexico City
Archaeological data are available from numerous excavations conducted in Mexico City by the Instituto Nacional de Antropologia e Historia (INAH). These include, but are not limited to, salvage operations carried out during the Metro construction (Arana A. and Cepeda C. 1967; Gussinyer 1969; L6pez Wario y D. 1987; Lister and Lister 1974, 1975; L6pez Cervantes 1976), the stabilization of the Metropolitan Cathedral and the sagrario (Lister and Lister 1982; Vega sosa 1979), the excavation of the Templo Mayor (Hernandez Pons 1982; L6pez Cervantes 1982; Noguera 1934), and the building of the Complejo Hidalgo (Chairez A. and Nicholson Martinez 1981; sodi 1988). Between 1976 and 1980 Roberto Garda Moll of INAH directed excavations in the former Convent of San Jer6nimo. The convent was founded in 1585 within the southern limits of the original traza defined by the Spaniards for European settlement within Tenochtitlan. The archaeological project was designed primarily to provide data to aid in the architectural restoration of the nineteenthcentury neoclassic cloister and adjacent structures. However, all of the artifacts encountered during excavation were catalogued and intensively studied. The collection of more than 400,000 sherd and glass fragments dating from the Early Colonial period to the twentieth century is probably one of the largest samples froto these periods ever studied in Latin America. The collection consisted of local products and those imported from Europe and the Far East (Colin 1981; Corcuera 1981; Fournier G. 1981a,b, 1985a,b, 1990; Hernandez A. 1980; sala 1981a,b).

204

THOMAS H. CHARLTON AND PATRICIA FOURNIER G.

Cuemavaca
In Cuernavaca archaeological studies have focused primarily on the Palacio de Cortes and the adjacent streets and Z6calo. Between 1970 and 1972 Jorge Angulo V. directed excavations within the Palacio de Cortes in connection with the remodeling of the building. Subsequently in 1973 and 1974 he directed excavations in the area directly in front of the building facing Z6calo (J. Angulo V. and C. Angulo 1979). Later, in 1979 and 1980, Wanda Tommasi carried out excavations in the streets and the Z6calo opposite the Palacio de Cortes. All of the excavations were carried out under the auspices of the Centro Regional MorelosINAH. In 1985, along with Judith Hernandez A. and Cynthia Otis Charlton, we studied the post-Conquest materials from the 1970-1972 and 1979-1980 excavations along with some of the same materials from the 1973-1974 excavations. Included were studies of local and imported ceramics (Charlton 1987a,b,c,d; Fournier G. 1987), glass (Hernandez A. 1987), figurines (Otis Charlton 1987), and coins (Charlton 1987e).

Urban Contexts
In Mexico City, in all the examples known to us, the materials come from mixed deposits resulting from several cycles of construction, demolition, and renovation. A similar situation occurs in the Palacio de Cortes and Z6calo excavations in Cuernavaca. Unfortunately these circumstances are common in urban settings where rebuilding resulting from occupational continuity must be considered a fundamental formation process of the archaeological record. As a result, it has been necessary to date and determine the place of origin of the archaeological materials through technological and stylistic attributes. The possibility of using urban archaeological materials to develop or refine post-Conquest ceramic sequences is limited.

RURAL SETTINGS
We are using data from two rural areas, the Otumba region of the eastern Teotihuacin Valley, and the Mezquital Valley just north of the Basin of Mexico.

The Otumba Region

This region includes the modem municipios of Otumba, Axapusco, and Nopaltepec in their entireties and portions of the municipios of San Martin de las Pinimides and Tepetlaoxtoc. Geographically the region forms the eastern end of the Teotihuacin Valley and is clearly bounded on the south and east by well-

CENTRAL MEXICO, 1521-1620

205

defined sierras. To the north and northeast the watershed is less clearly marked and runs over low ridges connecting isolated extinct volcanoes. To the west there are no topographic barriers. Elevations range from about 2,300 meters on the Middle Valley alluvial plain to about 3,000 meters in the eastern mountains (see Charlton [1991a], Lorenzo [1968], and Sanders [1970] for detailed descriptions). The region lacks permanent rivers and springs. All drainages are seasonal. Before the drilling of deep wells all cultivation depended upon the relatively low and precarious annual rainfall in the region. The areas of highest agricultural production combine deep soils and floodwater irrigation. The most extensive such zone is the Middle Valley alluvial plain. A smaller, but still extensive zone is the Upper Valley alluvial plain. The area was heavily occupied during the fifteenth century. Gibson (1964) included the region in his study of the Aztecs after the conquest. Research into the archaeology and ethnohistory of the post-Conquest period in the eastern Teotihuacin Valley began in 1966. Surface surveys were conducted and collections made during the summers of 1966-1968. In 1969 excavations supplemented the survey data. The main objective of the fieldwork was to gather abundant, well-controlled (provenience and chronology) surface and excavated data from sites for which there existed good documentary data. Information on contemporary settlement patterns and ceramics was also recorded (Charlton 1972, 1975, 1986). The data include a continuous sequence of settlement patterns, ceramics, and artifacts from A.D. 900 to A.D. 1969. Surveys, surface collections, and excavations conducted from 1987 to 1989 within the Aztec city-state of Otumba have provided additional data on the post-Conquest archaeology of the region (Charlton 1988, 1991b; Otis Charlton 1990).

The Mezquital Valley

The Mezquital Valley is located north of the Basin of Mexico, at the southernmost extension of the Chihuahuan Desert. Thin soils and a scarcity of rain and subsurface water have been major influences on the economic and social strategies of the cultures in the area. Native Otomi speakers have inhabited this and other areas of Central Mexico since the thirteenth century according to ethnohistorical sources (Fournier G. and Perez Campa 1991). Studies of the ethnohistory of the area were carried out by Mendizabal (1947) and Quezada (1976). In 1985 the Escuela Nacional de Antropologia e Historia (ENAH) began a long-term archaeological project in the Mezquital Valley. The main objective of the project is to define changes in the occupation of the region with reference to ethnicity, lifeway patterns, and relationships with Central Mexican political and economic systems both before and after the Spanish Conquest (L6pez Aguilar et al. 1985).

206

THOMAS H. CHARLTON AND PATRICIA FOURNIER G.

From 1985 to 1991 more than 350 sites and 130. surface concentrations were located in the Itzmiquilpan-Actopan, Huichapan-Tecozautla, and Tepetitlan-Chapantongo districts of the valley (L6pez Aguilar and Trinidad 1987; L6pez Aguilar et al. 1988a; L6pez Aguilar and Fournier G. 1989). Surface collections were taken from all sites, and excavations were carried out at several of these. The materials appear to consist mainly of late Prehispanic-Historical period ceramics of a local Otom{ tradition. Few Early Colonial-period Spanish-related ceramics were recovered. Because the excavations discovered only eroded and mixed deposits, the dating of the local ceramic tradition remains uncertain. The preliminary ceramic sequence proposed for the Mezquital Valley is based on comparative typology. Except for Tula (Cobean 1978), a major Postclassic urban center, and Chingu (Diaz O. 1980), a Teotihuacan-period settlement, ceramicbased chronologies are not currently available for this area.

Rural Contexts
The contexts of archaeological materials from the rural areas usually consist of shallow, nonstratified deposits, of a Single period. Occasionally, some stratified contexts occur. The mixing of occupations is usually not a problem except within continuously occupied larger towns or those areas highly favorable for human occupation.

ACCULTURATION: CONTENT AND CONTEXT

Models
Models of Colonial-period acculturation in Mesoamerica have been based primarily on available historical and ethnographic data from there and from the Iberian Peninsula. Few studies have examined the archaeological record. Nevertheless there are some important points of convergence between models derived from historical and ethnographic data and those derived from archaeological data. Foster's comprehensive study of acculturation in Hispanic America (1960) formulated a model that emphasizes the reduction in complexity of the donor culture to form a "conquest culture" that then was transmitted during contact (1960:10-20). This reduction in complexity and the subsequent transmission of the donor culture occurred within a very complex context. The contact situation varied in terms of the social stratification systems and the urban and rural components of each culture. It also varied diachronically, from initial contact to "cultural crystallization," the formation of well-integrated colonial cultures (1960:232-234).

CENTRAL MEXICO, 1521-1620

207

In the very first years of the Conquest, acculturation must have been marked by much direct transmission from Spaniards to Indians all along this continuum, and from Spaniards to Spaniards. But as Spanish cities were founded and native cities rebuilt, the picture changed. The native urban-elite authority structure was replaced by the Spanish equivalent so that, instead of a continuum, both poles of which represented variants of a single culture, there now existed a continuum for which the authority pole was Spanish. After this modified continuum was established, and after the initial culturally mixed mestizo populations came into being, the acculturation process took the familiar pattern of flow of influence downward and outward, from the urban-elite pole to lower classes and peasants. Spanish, hispanicized, and partly hispanicized peoples all along this continuum therefore continued to be exposed to new Spanish influences as they were passed along from cities, and these peoples in turn became a point of diffusion of the items they accepted, to other populations less influenced by Spain. (Foster 1960:228)

Foster deals with the complete sequence of acculturation, whereas we are treating only the Early Colonial period. However, with a few modifications, such as the recognition of the differential impact of Hispanic culture on urban and rural areas during the Early Colonial period, his model parallels that which we are proposing here. Our model, previously set forth in oudine form on the basis of archaeological data from the Otumba region and a few urban sites, suggests that "there is evidence of a delayed cultural impact on the Aztecs, outside of religious structures, in the rural areas and among the lower classes. In the urban centers and among upper classes the situation was undoubtedly different. The impact on the rural population did not corne until epidemics had reduced their numbers by 90% and many of the survivors had been relocated in a few designated centers" (Charlton 1979:31). Recent advances in the urban historical archaeology of Mexico City and Cuernavaca, along with the extension of historical archaeology to rural areas of the Mezquital Valley through the ENAH research project, provide new data relevant to the clarification of the very complex culture contact situation described above.

Archaeological Concepts and Methods

Archaeologists have, of course, dealt with situations of culture contact and culture change in the archaeological record. Papers edited by lathrap (1956) and Thompson (1956) present useful categories of types of culture contact and culture change that can be tested archaeologically. In our discussion of the sequence of Early Colonial-period culture contact and change we utilize concepts presented in those papers.

208

THOMAS H. CHARLTON AND PATRICIA FOURNIER G.

THE EARLY COWNIAL PERIOD: 1521-1620

In Central Mexico, the period begins with the Conquest and ends with the relocation of populations remaining after a devastating series of epidemics. During this period the bulk of the Spanish conquerors and colonists lived in urban settings such as Mexico City and Cuernavaca, usually in districts separated from the Indian inhabitants. In rural areas indigenous peoples continued to live in preconquest communities but became subject to new religious, economic, and political leaders. The indigenous elites were eliminated, displaced, or reduced in power both in their local settings and within the region (see Charlton [1986: 1241271 for details of these changes). At the same time New Spain formed part of the Spanish Empire and became linked to a world trade network. This conformed to mercantile policy of the time. Trade to New Spain was run through a commercial monopoly held by Spain. Initially merchant ships crossed the Atlantic to cater to the constant and evergrowing demands of the Spanish settlers in the colonies (Cue O.novas 1980:9293; Stein and Stein 1980:50). They provided, however, an irregular supply of goods. The flow of goods was further restricted with the development of the system of the annual fleet to and from Spain after 1561 (Bravo Urgarte 1970:285-289; Cue Cinovas 1980:92-93; Haring 1979:251-252; Ots Capdequi 1976:39; Parry 1977: ll5). Established in 1565, the route between the Philippines and Acapulco incorporated direct trade with China by 1576. After 1576, this regular trans-Pacific trade was successfully established through the Manila Galleon or Nao de la China system and transported Oriental luxury goods yearly (Almazan 1971: ll; Alvarez de Abreu 1977:286; Arcilla Farias 1974:43). However, the generally inefficient trade networks both limited the availability of imported goods and increased their costs. As a result, consumption trends were affected in New Spain, and local substitutes were promoted. According to the historical records, most goods imported for consumption in New Spain involved perishable items, in particular textiles (Diaz Trechuelo 1980: 141; Lerdo de Tejada 1967). The archaeological record has preserved none of these. Thus we shall focus on those that are found, ceramics, with reference to production and consumption patterns.

THE URBAN SETTING: 1521-1620

The gradually accumulating archaeological data from Mexico City and Cuernavaca indicate that in both centers it is possible to define a situation of culture contact involving both site-unit intrusion and trait-unit intrusion. A site-unit is "a site or an occupation level in a site, which is sufficiently homogeneous to be

CENTRAL MEXICO, 1521-1620

209

regarded as representing the culture of a single place at a single time" (Lathrap 1956:7). "A trait-unit is an object modified or transported by human agency, a stylistic or technological feature or complex, or a characteristic archaeological association" (Lathrap 1956:8).

The Spanish Presence

In Mexico City, the Spanish occupation is clearly represented within the center of the city (la traza) as a site-unit intrusion. In Cuernavaca a similar situation exists at the Palacio de Cortes. Both of these urban settings were centers for Spanish settlement. That settlement is reflected in the destruction of indigenous religious and secular structures in the centers of Tenochtitlan-Tlatelolco and Cuahnahuac and in the construction of abundant new religious and secular structures with the numerous diagnostic artifacts that occur in them (Angulo V. and C. Angulo 1979; Charlton 1979, 1986; Charlton et al. 1987; Fournier G. 1985a, 1990; Gussinyer 1969; Lister and Lister 1982; Lopez Cervantes 1982).

Spanish Social and Economic Patterns: Majolicas and Porcelains

The artifacts that have been found include abundant ceramics. The ceramics found in post-Conquest contexts in Mexico City and Cuernavaca include unglazed and lead-glazed wheel-thrown vessels, most of which cannot be dated (Fournier G. 1990). Other intrusive ceramics include olive jars. Because Spanish copper and iron cooking vessels were scarce in New Spain, Indian ceramics were also frequently used (Goggin 1968; Gomez de Orozco 1983:34). Excavations by Jiirgen K. Briiggemann in Villa Rica, Veracruz, have demonstrated that the first Spanish settlers mainly used tablewares brought from Europe. A similar situation may have prevailed in Mexico City and Cuernavaca during the sixteenth century. In both Mexico City and Cuernavaca sixteenthcentury Spanish majolicas from Seville have been found. Italian majolicas occur in Mexico City but not in Cuernavaca (Charlton 1987a; Lister and Lister 1982). Undoubtedly both types of imports were quite expensive and were restricted to very few settlers (d. Moreno Toscano 1976:52-54). By 1540, shortly after the conquest, a Mexico City industry had developed to provide the bulk of majolicas found there and in Cuernavaca during the Early Colonial period (Charlton 1987a; Lister and Lister 1982). These wares included both fine grade and common grade vessels (Lister and Lister 1982). They provided inexpensive substitutes for the imported Sevillan and Italian majolicas. With the establishment of trade with China, Chinese porcelains reached New Spain after 1576. Chinese ivory white Fukien, polychrome Wu t'sai (traditionally five colors but usually trichrome), and blue-on-white Swatow and Kraak porcelains, dating to the Wan-Li Ming period (1573-1619) were widely

210

THOMAS H. CHARLTON AND PATRICIA FOURNIER G.

consumed by the upper class in New Spain (Alvarez de Abreu 1977:187). Oriental porcelains dating to the late sixteenth century have been recovered in Mexico City and Cuernavaca (Fournier G. 1985a, 1987, 1990). These wares replaced imported majolicas as sumptuary wares for the upper classes. Majolicas were relegated to the urban middle and lower classes (Obreg6n 1968:61; Toussaint 1974:96) The majolicas, imported and local, along with the porcelains mark the presence of an intrusive culture in the urban settings of Mexico City and Cuernavaca during the Early Colonial period as clearly as the architectural destruction and replacement. The variable costs of these ceramics reflect the internal social and economic diversity that developed within the intrusive Spanish population during the sixteenth century. They are also evidence that persons belonging to the intrusive cultural tradition participated in both local and quite distant ceramic production spheres.

The Indian Presence

Insofar as Indian residential areas were spatially separate from the area of Spanish occupation, we suspect that initial contact may be represented by traitunit intrusion. The most likely trait-units would be Spanish artifacts, including ceramics, within a predominantly indigenous cultural context. To the best of our knowledge, however, no such urban context has yet been found or studied,. due no doubt, to the generally mixed urban archaeological deposits. After initial contact and the spread of such trait-units, there is evidence for a florescence within the Aztec ceramic tradition. This florescence represents an initial retention of some aspects of "cultural identity with marked stimulation of the resident culture" (Lathrap 1956:23). In this case, the result of the stimulation was the development of Aztec IV Black-on-Orange ceramics within the stylistic canons of pre-Conquest ceramics (Charlton 1986) and the development of fine, polished redwares such as those made in Cuauhtitlan in 1566 for the dinner celebrating the baptism of Martin Cortes's twins (Benitez 1953:221; Juan Suarez de Peralta, Noticias de la Nueva Espafia, cited in G6mez de Orozco 1983:31). The presence, in Mexico City, of lead glazing on tripod molcajetes and other prehispanic forms, such as jars with indigenous deSigns, reflects such stimulation and technological fusion as does the presence of a slipped and glazed ware decorated with prehispanic naturalistic elements (Lister and Lister 1982:34-37, 96). Although glazing technology spread to indigenous ceramics, another aspect of ceramic technology, wheel throwing, did not (Charlton 1976). Foster (1959:112-113) has noted the reluctance of contemporary rural potters to use the wheel. It is possible that Indian potters made use of it only to manufacture vessels needed in specific production settings such as sugar mills and mines (cf. Barret 1977:132). We suspect that design and form changes in Black-on-Red

CENTRAL MEXICO, 1521-1620

211

wares in Cuernavaca mark a similar development in the Tlahuica culture (Charlton 1987d). The urban indigenous elite in Mexico City and other urban centers such as Texcoco probably participated in these aspects of material culture to a greater extent than did Indians of lower social and political standing (Charlton 1979:28-29). Later developments in ceramics in the urban contact situation are marked by "fusion with dominance of the intruded trait-unit in the aspect of culture involved" (Lathrap 1956:8). In Mexico City, indigenous ceramic forms and designs become less variable and complex. Undecorated glazed earthenwares and unglazed Colonial Plain Orange ceramics become the dominant types. The indigenous ceramic tradition became less complex and converged with a Hispanic ceramic tradition that was also less complex and variable than that in the Iberian Peninsula (Foster 1960; Thompson 1956:42-45). We suspect, but cannot demonstrate, that a similar pattern occurred in Cuemavaca. The urban indigenous elite participated less in this reduced and simplified tradition than did the other Indians and retained access to Spanish ceramics and to some of the few remaining elaborated Indian wares.

Summary
The archaeological data from the first 100 years after the Conquest suggest that the impact of the intrusive Hispanic culture on indigenous culture in an urban setting was marked by (1) the intrusion of Spanish site-units and traitunits; (2) the stimulation and elaboration of indigenous elements, with some fusion; and (3) the reduction, for most Indians, in the cultural tradition to create a colonial culture, a cultural crystallization in Foster's terms (1960:232-234).1 There is some evidence to indicate that these changes affected elite and nonelite Indians differentially. Just as urban Spanish colonial society was marked by striking social and economic differences so was the urban Indian society.

THE RURAL SETTING: 1521-1620

The archaeological data from the Otumba region of the Teotihuacan Valley and the Mezquital Valley differ from those in the urban contexts of Cuernavaca and Mexico City for the same period. Although we suspect that there was some local differentiation between smaller urban centers, such as Otumba and Tula, and their rural dependencies, we lack the archaeological data to determine the
lIn a study of maps ofIndian origin, Gruzinski (1987) has documented a siIililar sequence of cultural retention, florescence, disintegration, and crystallization in Central Mexico during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries.

212

THOMAS H. CHARLTON AND PATRICIA FOURNIER G.

degree to which it existed. Thus we shall draw our comparisons only between the rural areas and the larger cities of Cuernavaca and Mexico City.

The Spanish Presence

The Spanish presence in rural areas is definitely marked by a site-unit intrusion during the Early Colonial period. The most widely spread site-unit in both the Otumba region and the Mezquital Valley is the church, convento, and cemetery complex. In the Mezquital Valley, less elaborated structures such as capillas or visitas also occur. These site-units occur either as ruins or as churches that still function after numerous remodelings (Mondrag6n et al. 1991). Another complex, the estancia, occurs in the Mezquital Valley and may occur in the Otumba region (Charlton 1979, 1986). Because the Mezquital Valley, unlike the Otumba region, was the focus of Spanish controlled mining systems to extract metals through the exploitation of the Otomf Indian labor force (Mendizabal 1947), mines and reales are additional site units present there but absent from the Otumba area. Extremely limited amounts of Spanish artifacts occur in association with the site-units mentioned (Charlton 1979, 1986). In both regions, the intrusive religious site-units replace the indigenous temple complexes.

Spanish Social and Economic Patterns: Ceramics

Unlike the urban centers, very few Spanish artifacts 'dating to the Early Colonial period are found in association with the religious site-units and the estancias. In the Mezquital Valley, Mexico City majolicas and lead-glazed wares were associated with the estancias and the visitas. The ceramic complex is formed mainly of local Indian ceramics used to transport fresh agave sap, to ferment it, and to store the pulque produced (L6pez Aguilar et al. 1988a). In the Otumba region, limited Early Colonial majolicas occur at the possible estancia sites. At the church complexes, there are only a few fragments of majolica, glazed earthenwares, glass, and metal artifacts. We are speaking of 1 to 2 examples of each of these in an artifact complex that is predominantly Indian in origin. The small amounts of intrusive ceramics and other artifacts suggest that the Spaniards who were present in the Mezquital Valley and the Otumba region were relatively impoverished or few in numbers and depended heavily upon Indianmanufactured pottery and other artifacts. From the documents we know that the permanent Spanish presence in rural areas during the Early Colonial period was restricted to necessary religious and governmental officials and to encomenderos and estancia holders. There is a striking contrast in social and economic status between the urban and rural Spaniards of the Early Colonial period. Although this could be explained by religiOUS rules of the various orders of monks who carried out the

CENTRAL MEXICO, 1521-1620

213

conversion program, no one could claim that the encomenderos and holders of estancias had taken vows of poverty. We suspect that in those cases the actual holders of the encomiendas and estancias did not live on their holdings but were absent most of the time. They relied upon a few individuals who were less well-off socioeconomically to administer their holdings.

The Indian Presence

In both areas Indian communities continued to be occupied during the Early Colonial period. In these communities, initial contact is marked by site-unit intrusions of the types previously described and by low frequency trait-unit intrusions, both at the intrusive site-units and in the indigenous communities. In the Otumba region, the intrusive trait-units include majolicas, glazed earthenwares, metal tools, coins, and glass in association with indigenous structures and ceramics. These trait-units were adopted "without modification and without fusion of the introduced trait unit with the corresponding elements in the receiving culture" (I..athrap 1956:8). Associated with the intrusive trait-units in the Otumba region, there is some evidence for the stimulation and elaboration of aspects of Aztec ceramics. In the rural area, this involves the presence of Aztec IV Black-on-Orange ceramics and some modifications in Black-on-Red forms and designs under the influence of Spanish ceramics. We have described these changes for the urban settings examined. In the Otumba region, unlike the urban settings, these changes appear to have involved only minimal introduction of lead-glazing technology to indigenous forms and the modification of indigenous Red Ware ceramics to incorporate high polish and Hispanic designs at this time. Indigenous wheel-thrown pottery does not occur. In the Mezquital Valley, a less elaborated development of Aztec wares includes Aztec IV Black-on-Orange ceramics made with local clays and decorated with designs peculiar to the area, along with a local tradition of red wares with typical Aztec forms but with unpolished and unburnished surfaces. The subsequent reduction in complexity of the indigenous ceramic complex, noted as a third stage in this process in urban areas, was barely underway in the Otumba region by the end of the Early Colonial period. The degree of fusion and convergence with the Hispanic ceramic tradition found in urban areas prior to 1620 did not occur in the rural areas until the middle seventeenth century.

Summary
In the 100 years after the conquest the impact of Hispanic culture on indigenous cultures in the rural areas was much less obvious than in the urban settings. Although not as heavily affected during the Early Colonial period, the rural areas were marked by the same sequence as the urban areas. These include

214

THOMAS H. CHARLTON AND PATRICIA FOURNIER G.

the intrusion of 0) Spanish site-units and trait-units, (2) the stimulation and elaboration of indigenous cultural elements, and (3) the reduction, for most Indians, of the cultural tradition to create a colonial culture, a cultural crystallization in Foster's terms 0960:232-234). In the rural areas, the first two occurrences wee much more limited in their impact, and the third was barely underway by 1620. Substantial archaeological evidence of contact, acculturation, and fusion is lacking in rural areas. Although direct evidence of differential access to Hispanic goods by the rural elite at Otumba has not been noted for the Early Colonial period, there is some evidence that suggests that differential treatment did occur. Aztec IV-style Black-on-Orange ceramics, a development of the Early Colonial period, occur in the core of the city-state center in significantly lower frequencies than in the periphery. This might well be the result of the movement of the elite of Otumba to the new colonial town founded north of the Aztec town prior to or just as Aztec IV Blackon-Orange ceramics appeared in this region (Charlton and Nichols 1987).

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

The archaeological data we have reviewed support an elaborated version of Foster's (1960) model of acculturative processes during the Early Colonial period. In Central Mexico, it is quite evident that the sequence of acculturation followed the same stages in both urban and rural areas. However, the major archaeologically demonstrated impact is found earlier and stronger in the urban centers and is only weakly reflected in rural sites. Interaction between Spaniards and Indians in the cities was more intense and more complicated than in the rural areas. In the rural areas, interaction was primarily with religious, governmental, and encomienda personnel. Although significant changes occurred in indigenous society in rural areas, the archaeological record indicates that intensity and complexity of contact was much less than that in the urban settings. The processes of contact and change operated in both settings. However, they were differentially effective, depending on the social and economic status of both Spaniards and Indians, and on the urban or rural settings of their contact. Rural and lower-class Indians were affected later and less than urban and elite Indians. This should not be too surprising because Frank (1979) has documented the intent of the conquerors to create a dual economy that would leave the "economic and social organization of the conquered peoples as undisturbed as possible" (1979:5). This pattern of an urban-rural, elite-commoner dichotomy in the archaeologically demonstrated effects of conquest and acculturation during the Early Colonial period is probably applicable to most regions of Central Mexico where Spaniards either occupied indigenous cities or established new cities. We expect,

CENTRAL MEXICO, 1521-1620

215

for example, that when comparable studies are carried out in other urban-rural units, such as the Texcoco region, and expanded to rural areas around cities already studied, such as Cuernavaca, data confirming the general applicability of this model will be found.

EPIWGUE
During the Early Colonial period, the indigenous population underwent a massive demographic depression, as a result of epidemics of European diseases. This contributed to the devolution or reduction in indigenous rural culture during the Middle Colonial period (1621-1720). It also brought about increased contact with middle- and lower-class Spaniards. These ran the developing ranchos and haciendas for absentee landlords. Some owned or rented ranchos for their own use. Variable numbers of Spaniards also moved into Indian communities. In the rural areas, the Indian elite aspired to sumptuary goods that the now-resident Spaniards used. These included Mexican-produced majolicas, polished red wares, glazed earthenwares, and a few pieces of porcelain and glass. The rest of the indigenous rural population used an extremely impoverished ceramic complex that was comprised, for the most part, of undecorated glazed and unglazed earthenwares. By this time, however, the pattern proposed by Foster (1960:228) of a continuum of influence from an urban-elite pole to lower classes and indigenous people, both urban and rural, was fully operative.
AcKNOWLEDGMENTS

The archaeological data on which this chapter is based are derived from numerous investigators and their projects. Of particular importance was the Proyecto Arqueol6gico Ex-Convento de San Jer6nimo carried out under the auspices of the Direcci6n de Monumentos Hist6ricos-INAH and directed by Roberto Garcia Moll. Fernando A. Miranda of the Departamento de Salvamento-INAH provided pertinent information about materials recovered in rescue operations in Mexico City. Materials from the Palacio de Cortes in Cuernavaca were graciously made available by Jorge Angulo v., the late Wanda Tommasi, and Norberto Gonzalez c., the director of the Centro Regional Morelos-INAH. Our colleagues, Judith Hernandez A. and Cynthia L. Otis Charlton, helped in the analyses of those materials and prOvided us with numerous suggestions about their interpretation. Judith Hernandez A., then of the Direcci6n de Monumentos Prehispanicos-INAH, provided relevant information about the excavations directed by Jiirgen K. Brtiggemann in Villa Rica, Veracruz. Cynthia L. Otis Charlton and Marcia Bakry prepared the map. The Proyecto Arqueol6gico Valle del Mezquital (ENAH-INAH) is directed

216

THOMAS H. CHARLTON AND PATRICIA FOURNIER G.

by Fernando L6pez A. T. H. Charlton's research in the Otumba area has been supported by the Canada Council through a Short Term Research Grant (1966), the Associated Colleges of the Midwest through a Non-Western Studies Faculty Research Fellowship (1967), the University of Iowa through three Old Gold Summer Faculty Research Fellowships (1968, 1970, 1985), a Research Assignment (1975) and two Developmental AsSignments (1982, 1989), the National Science Foundation through Grants GS 2080 (1968-1972), BNS-871-9665 (1988-1990), to Thomas H. Charlton as principal investigator, and Grant BNS-971-8140 (1988-1990) to Deborah L. Nichols as principal investigator, and the National Endowment for the Humanities through three Research Grants, RO-21447-75-138 (1975-1977), RO-20173-81-2231 (1981-1983), and RO-22268-91 (1992-1993). The Direcci6n de Monumentos Prehispanicos and the Consejo de Arqueologia of INAH provided the necessary permits for the research. The junior author, Patricia Fournier G., is a professor at the Escuela Nacional de Antropologia e Historia-INAH. She prepared her portion of the chapter while a Fulbright-lASPAU scholar at the University of Arizona.

REFERENCES
Abbreviations used in references: ENAH-Escuela National de Antropologia e Historia IMCE-Instituto Mexicano Comercio Exterior INAH-Instituto Nacional de Antropologfa e Historia SEP-Secretaria de Educaci6n Publica UNAM-Universidad Nacional Auton6ma de Mexico Almazan, M. A, 1971, EI Gale6n de Manila, Artes de Mtxico 143:4-19. Alvarez de Abreu, A, 1977, Extracto Historical del Comercio Entre Filipinas y Nueva Espana, Volume 1, IMCE, Mexico, D.F. Angulo v., j., and Angulo, C, 1979, Una VisiOn del Museo de Cuauhnahuac, Palacio de Cortes, SEPINAH, Mexico, D.F. Arana A, R. M., and Cepeda C, G., 1967, Rescate Arqueol6gico en la Ciudad de Mexico, INAH, Boletln 30:3-9, Mexico, D.E Arcilla Farias, E., 1974, RefoTmas Econ6micas del Siglo XVIII en Nueva Espaiia, Volume 1, SEP, Mexico, D.F. Barrett, w., 1977, La Hacienda Azucarera de los Marqueses del Valle, Siglo Veintiuno, Mexico, D.F. Benitez, E, 1953, La Vida Criolla en el Siglo XVI, El Colegio de Mexico, Mexico, D.F. Blanton, R. E., Kowalewski, S. A., Feinman, G., and Appel, j. 1981, Ancient Mesoamerica, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Bravo Urgarte, j., 1970, Historia de Mtxico, Volume 2, Editorial Jus, Mexico, D.E Chairez A., A. D., and Martinez, K. N., 1981, Algunas Consideraciones Hist6ricas en la Ciudad de Mtxico a Partir de las Excavaciones Arqueol6gicas en los Terrenos del Complejo Hidalgo, Paper presented at the 14th Annual Meeting of the Society for Historical Archaeology, New Orleans.

CENTRAL MEXICO, 1521-1620

217

Charlton, T. H., 1972, Post-Conquest Developments in the Teotihuacin Valley, Mexico, Part 1, Excavations, Office of the State Archaeologist, Report 5, Iowa City. Charlton, T. H., 1975, Archaeology and History, 1519-1969: The Emerging Picture in the Teotihuacin Valley, Mexico. Actas del xu Congreso Intemacional de Americanistas 1:219-229. Charlton, T. H., 1976, Contemporary Mexican Ceramics: A View from the Past, Man (n.s.), 11:217252. Charlton, T. H., 1979, Historical Archaeology in the Valley of Mexico, Proceedings of the XUI Intemational Congress of Americanists 8:21-33. Charlton, T. H., 1986, Socioeconomic Dimensions of Urban-Rural Relations in the Colonial Period Basin of Mexico, in: Ethnohistory, Supplement to the Handbook of Middle American Indians, Volume 4 (R. Spores, ed.), University of Texas Press, Austin, pp. 123-133. Charlton, T. H., 1987a, Loza May6lica, in: Estudios de Materiales Arqueol6gicos del Periodo Hist6rico, EI Palacio de Cortes, Cuernavaca, Morelos (T. H. Charlton, P. Fournier G.,]. Hernandez A., and C. L. Otis Charlton), Informe submitted to the Consejo de Arqueologia and the Direcci6n de Monumentos Prehispanicos, INAH, Ms. on file, Archivo de la Direcci6n de Arqueologia del INAH, Mexico, D.F., pp. 110-178. Charlton, T. H., 1987b, La Ceramica Rojo Colonial en el Palacio de Cortes, in: Estudios de Materiales Arqueol6gicos del Periodo Hist6rico, EI Palacio de Cortes, Cuemavaca, Morelos (T. H. Charlton, P. Fournier G.,]. Hernandez A., and C. L. Otis Charlton), Informe submitted to the Consejo de Arqueologia and the Direcci6n de Monumentos Prehispanicos, INAH, Ms. on file, Archivo de la Direcci6n de Arqueologia del INAH, Mexico, D.F., pp. 179-18l. Charlton, T. H., 1987c, La Ceramica TonaJa Bruiiida en el Palacio de Cortes, in: Estudios de Materiales Arqueol6gicos del Periodo Hist6rico, EI Palacio de Cortes, Cuemavaca, Morelos (T. H. Charlton, P. Fournier G.,]. Hernandez A., and C. L. Otis Charlton), Informe submitted to the Consejo de Arqueologia and the Direcci6n de Monumentos Prehispanicos, INAH, Ms. on file, Archivo de la Direcci6n de Arqueologia del INAH, Mexico, D.F., pp. 182-185. Charlton, T. H., 1987d, La Ceramica Rojo Colonial en el Palacio de Cortes (Tradici6n Local de Cuernavaca), in: Estudios de Materiales Arqueol6gicos del Periodo Hist6rico, EI Palacio de Cortes, Cuemavaca, Morelos (T. H. Charlton, P. Fournier G.,]. Hernandez A., and C. L. Otis Charlton), Informe submitted to the Consejo de Arqueologia and the Direcci6n de Monumentos Prehispanicos, INAH, Ms. on file, Archivo de la Direcci6n de Arqueologia del INAH, Mexico, D.F.,
pp. 185-196.

Charlton, T. H., 1987e, Las Monedas, in: Estudios de Materiales Arqueol6gicos del Periodo Hist6rico, EI Palacio de Cortes, Cuemavaca, Morelos (T. H. Charlton, P. Fournier G.,]. Hernandez A., and C. L. Otis Charlton), Informe submitted to the Consejo de Arqueologia and the Direcci6n de Monumentos Prehispanicos, INAH, Ms. on file, Archivo de la Direcci6n de Arqueologia del INAH, Mexico, D.F., pp. 331-335. Charlton, T. H., 1988, Reconocimientos de Superficie del Sitio de TA-80, Otumba, Informe Tecnico Final, submitted to the Consejo de ArqueoIogia and the Direcci6n de Monumentos Prehispanicos, INAH, Ms. on file, Archivo de la Direcci6n de Arqueologia del INAH, Mexico, D.F. Charlton, T. H., 1991a, Land Tenure and Agricultural Production in the Otumba Region, 1785-1803, in: Land and Politics in the Valley of Mexico, A Two Thousand Year Perspective (H. R. Harvey, ed.), University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque, pp. 223-263. Charlton, T. H., 1991b, Ceramica de Superficie, TA-80, Muestreo de 1%, Ocupaciones Post-Azteca, in: Informe con Resultados Preliminares del Analisis de los Datos Arqueol6gicos del Estado Azteca de Otumba, Parte 3 (T. H. Charlton et aI.), Research Report No.5, Mesoamerican Research Colloquium, Department of Anthropology, The University of Iowa, Iowa City, pp. 67-69. Charlton, T. H., and Nichols, D. L., 1987, Late Post-Classic and Colonial Period Elites at Otumba, Mexico: The Archaeological DimenSions, Paper presented at the 86th Annual Meeting of the American Anthropological Association, Chicago.

2IB

THOMAS H. CHARLTON AND PATRICIA FOURNIER G.

Charlton, T. H., Fournier G., P., Hernandez A., J., and Otis Charlton, C. L., 1987, Estudios de Materiales Arqueo16gicos del Perfodo Hist6rico, El Palacio de Cortes, Cuernavaca, Morelos, Informe submitted to the Consejo de Arqueologia and the Direcci6n de Monumentos Prehispanicos, INAH, Ms. on file, Archivo de la Direcci6n de Arqueologfa del INAH, Mexico, D.F. Cobean, R. H., 1978, The Pre-Aztec Ceramics of Tula, Hidalgo, Mexico, unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Harvard University, Cambridge. Colin, B., 1981, Caldlogo de Ceramica Vidriada, Ex-Convento de Sanjer6nimo, Ms. on file, Direcci6n de Monumentos Hist6ricos del INAH, Mexico, D.E Corcuera, M. S., 1981, Caldlogo de Mayolica, Ex-Convento de Sanjer6nimo, Ms. on file, Direcci6n de Monumentos Hist6ricos del INAH, Mexico, D.E Cue anovas, A., 1980, Historia Social y Econ6mica de Mexico, Editorial Trillas, Mexico, D.F. Diaz 0., C. L., 1980, Chingu: Un Sitio CIasico del Area de Tula, Hgo., Colecci6n Cieritffica 90, INAH, Mexico, D.F. Diaz Trechuelo, Ma. de Lourdes, 1980, Relaciones en Oriente en la Edad Modema, Veinte Alios de Comercio entre Filipinas y China, in: La ExpansiOn Hispanoamericana en Asia, Siglos XVI y XVII CE. de la Torre Villar, compiler), Fondo de Cultura Econ6mica, Mexico, D. E, pp. 134-148. Farriss, N. M., 1984, Maya Society under Colonial Rule, Princeton University Press, Princeton. Foster, G. M., 1959, The Potter's Wheel: An Analysis of Idea and Anifact in Invention, Southwestern

journal of Anthropology 15:99-119.

Foster, G. M., 1960, Culture and Conquest, Viking Fund Publications in Anthropology 27, New York. Fournier G., P., 1981a, Caldlogo de Ceramica Oriental, Ex-Convento de San jer6nimo, Ms. on file, Direcci6n de Monumentos Hist6ricos del INAH, Mexico, D.F. Fournier G., P., 1981b, Caldlogo de Ceramica Europea, Ex-Convento de San jeronimo, Ms. on file, Direcci6n de Monumentos Hist6ricos del INAH, Mexico, D.F. Fournier G., P., 1985a, Evidencias Arqueol6gicas de la ImportaciOn de Ceramica en Mexico con Base en los Materiales del Ex-Convento de San jer6nimo, Unpublished Licenciatura Thesis, ENAH, Mexico, D.E Fournier G., P., 1985b, Arqueologia Hist6rica en la Ciudad de Mexico, BoleUn de Antropologta Ameri-

cana 11:27-31.
Fournier G., P., 1987, Lozas Importadas y Mexicanas, in: Estudios de Materiales Arqueologicos del Periodo Hist6rico, El Palacio de Cortes, Cuernavaca, Morelos (T. H. Charlton, P. Fournier G., J. Hernandez A., and C. L. Otis Charlton), Informe submitted to the Consejo de Arqueologia and the Direcci6n de Monumentos Prehispanicos, INAH, Ms. on file, Archivo de la Direcci6n de Arqueologfa del INAH, Mexico, D.E, pp. 43-109. Fournier G., P., 1990, Evidencias Arqueol6gicas de la Importaci6n de Ceramica en Mexico con Base en los Materiales del Ex-Convento de San Jer6nimo, Colecci6n Cientifica 213, INAH, Mexico, D.E Fournier G., P., and M. Perez Campa, 1991, Fuentes e Indicadores Hist6ricos acerca de los Otomies, Ms. submitted for publication, INAH, Mexico, D.E Frank, A. G., 1979, Mexican Agriculture, 1521-1630: Transformation of the Mode of Production, Cambridge University Press and Editions de la Maison des Sciences de I'Homme, Cambridge and Paris. Gasco, J. L., 1987, Cacao and the Economic Integration of Native Society in colonial Soconusco, New Spain, Ph.D. disserration, University of California, Santa Barbara, University Microfilms, Ann Arbor. Gibson, c., 1964, The Aztecs under Spanish Rule: A History of the Indians of the Valley of Mexico, 15191810, Stanford University Press, Stanford. Gibson, c., 1981, Heritage of Conquest: New Spain/Mexico, in: Latin America Today: Heritage of Conquest (D. C. Hazen, T. H. Holloway, and D. M. Jones, eds.), Latin American Studies Program and New York State Latin Americanists, Ithaca, pp. ~-27. Goggin, J. M., 1968, Spanish Majolica in the New World, Types of the Sixteenth to Eighteenth Centuries, Yale University Publications in Anthropology 72, New Haven.

CENTRAL MEXICO, 1521-1620

219

G6mez de Orozco, F., 1983, EI Mobiliario y la Decoraci6n en la Nueva Espana en el Siglo XVI, UNAM, Mexico, D.F. Gruzinski, S., 1987, Colonial Indian Maps in Sixteenth-Century Mexico, Res 13:46-61. Gussinyer,]., 1969, El Salvamento Arqueol6gico en las Excavaciones del "Metro" en la Ciudad de Mexico, Boletfn Bibliografico de Antropologfa Americana 32:89-96. Haring, C, 1979, Comerico y Navegaci6n entre Espana y las Indias, Fondo de Cultura Econ6mica, Mexico, D.F. Hassig, R., 1985, Trade, Tribute, and Transportation, University of Oklahoma Press, Norman. Hernandez A., j., 1980, Cawlogo de Vidrio, Ex-Convento de San Jer6nimo, Ms. on file, Direcci6n de Monumentos Hist6ricos del INAH, Mexico, D.F. Hernandez A., j., 1987, Vidrio en el Palacio de Cortes, in: Estudios de Materiales Arqueol6gicos del Perfodo Hist6rico, EI Palacio de Cortes, Cuemavaca, Morelos (T. H. Charlton, P. Fournier G., j. Hernandez A., and C l. Otis Charlton), Informe submitted to the Consejo de Arqueologia and the Direcci6n de Monumentos Prehispanicos, INAH, Ms. on file, Archivo de la Direcci6n de Arqueologia del INAH, Mexico, D.F., pp. 241-330. Hernandez Pons, E. C, 1982, Excavaciones en el Ex-Convento de Sta. Teresa La Antigua, in: EI Templo Mayor: Excavaciones y Estudios (E. M. Moctezuma, ed.), INAH, Mexico, D.F., pp. 283292. Lathrap, D. W. (ed.), 1956, An Archaeological Classification of Culture Contact Situations, in: Seminars in Archaeology: 1955 (R. Wauchope, ed.), Society for American Archaeology, Memoir 11:130. Lerdo de Tejada, M., 1967, Comercio Exterior en Mexico Desde la Conquista Hasta Hoy, Banco Nacional de Comercio Exterior, SA, Departamento de Publicaciones, Mexico. Lister, F. C, and Lister, R. H., 1974, Majolica in Colonial Spanish America, Historical Archaeology 8:17-52. Lister, F. C, and Lister, R. H., 1975, Non-Indian Ceramics from the Mexico City Subway, EI Palacio 81(2):25-48. Lister, F. C, and Lister, R. H., 1982, Sixteenth Century Majolica Pottery in the Valley of Mexico, Anthropological Papers of the University of Arizona 39. LOpez Aguilar, F., Mercado, N., and Trinidad, M. A., 1985, Proyecto Valle del Mezquital, Ms. on file, Archivo de la Direcci6n de Arqueologia del INAH, Mexico, D.F. L6pez Aguilar, F., and Trinidad, M. A., 1987, Informe de la Primera Temporada del Proyecto Valle de Mezquital, Ms. on file, Archivo de la Direcci6n de Arqueologia c;Iel INAH, Mexico. L6pez Aguilar, F., Fournier G., P., and Paz, C, 1988a, Contextos Arqueol6gicos y Contextos Momento: El Caso de la Alfareria Otomi del Valle de Mezquital, Boletfn de Antropologla Americana 17:99-131. LOpez Aguilar, F., Fournier G., P., Trinidad, M. A., and Paz, C, 1988b, Informe de la Segunda Temporada de Trabajo de Campo: 1988, Proyecto Valle de Mezquital, Ms. on file, Archivo de la Direcci6n de Arqueologfa del INAH, Mexico, D.F. LOpez AgUilar, F., and Fournier G., P., 1989, Informe de la Tercera Temporada de Trabajo de Campo: 1989, Proyecto Valle de Mezquital, Ms. on file, Archivo de la Direcci6n de Arqueologia del INAH, Mexico, D.F. LOpez Cervantes, G., 1976, Ceramica Colonial de la Ciudad de Mexico, ColecciOn Cientijica, Arqueologfa 38, INAH, Mexico, D.F. L6pez Cervantes, G., 1982, Informe Preliminar Sobre los Materiales Colonial.es, in: El Templo Mayor: Excavaciones y Estudios (E. Matos Moctezuma, ed.), INAH, Mexico, D.F., pp. 255-282. L6pez Wario yD., l. A., 1987, El Hospital de San Lazaro, Investigaciones en Salvamento Arquo16gico 2:71-93. (Cuaderno de Trabajo 6), INAH, Mexico, D.F. Lorenzo, j. l. (ed.), 1968, Materiales Para la Arqueologfa de Teotihuacan, Serie Investigaciones 17, INAH, Mexico, D.F.

220

THOMAS H. CHARLTON AND PATRICIA FOURNIER G.

Lovell, W. G., 1985, Conquest and Survival in Colonial Guatemala: A Historical Geography oj the CuchumaUin Highlands, 1500-1821, McGill-Queen's University Press, Kingston and Montreal. Macleod, M.]., 1973, Spanish Central America: A Socioeconomic History, 1520-1720, University of California Press, Berkeley and Los Angeles. Mendizabal, M. O. de, 1947, Evoluci6n Econ6mica y Social del Valle de Mezquital, in: Obras Completas, Talleres Graficos de la Naci6n, Mexico, D.F., Torno 6:7-258. Mondrag6n, L., Noguera, N., and Fournier G., P., 1991, Cultura Material de los Hniihnii de Santa Maria del Pino, Hidalgo: La Arquitectura Religiosa, Paper presented at the XXII Mesa Redonda of the Sociedad Mexicana de Antropologia, Chiapas, Mexico. Moreno Toscano, A., 1976, El Siglo de la Conquista, in: Historia General de Mixico, Volume 2, El Colegio de Mexico, Mexico, D.F., pp. 1-8l. Noguera, E., 1934, Estudio de la Ceramica Encontrada Donde Estaba El Templo Mayor de Mexico, Anales del Museo Nacional de Arqueologia y Etnologia, 5a. Epoca, Torno 1:267-282, Mexico, D.F. Obreg6n, G., 1968, La Mesa Mexicana, in: Artes de Mexico, 107(1):60-63, Mexico, D.F. Otis Charlton, C. L., 1987, Las Figurillas, in: Estudios de Materiales Arqueol6gicos del Periodo Hist6rico, El Palacio de Cortes, Cuernavaca, Morelos (T. H. Charlton, P. Fournier G.,]. Hernandez A., and C. L. Otis Charlton), Informe submitted to the Consejo de Arqueologia and the Direcci6n de Monumentos Prehispanicos, INAH, Ms. on file, Archivo de la Direcci6n de Arqueologia del INAH, Mexico, D.F., pp. 197-240. Otis Charlton, C. L., 1990, Operation 4, Field 39, Figurine Workshop Zone, in: Preliminary Report on Recent Research in the Otumba City-State, Part 1 (T. H. Charlton and D. L. Nichols, eds.), University oj Iowa, Mesoamerican Research Colloquium, Research Report 3, Volume 1, Iowa City, pp. 115-122. Ots Capdequi,]. M., 1976, El Estado Espanol en las Indias, Fondo de Cultura Econ6mica, Mexico, D.F. Parry,]. M., 1977, The Spanish Seaborne Empire, Hutchinson, London. Quezada, N., 1976, El Valle del Mezquital en el Siglo XVI, Anales de Antropologia 13:185-197. Sala, M., 1981a, CaUilogo de Cerdmica del Contacto, Ex-Convento de Sanjer6nimo, Ms. on file, Direcci6n de Monumentos Hist6ricos del INAH, Mexico, D.F. Sala, M., 1981b, CaUilogo de Cerdmica Alisada, Ex-Convento de Sanjer6nimo, Ms. on file, Direcci6n de Monumentos Hist6ricos del INAH, Mexico, D.F. Sanders, W. T., 1970, The Geography of the Valley of Teotihuacan, in: The Natural Environment, Contemporary Occupation and 16th Century Population of the Valley, The Teotihuacan Valley Project, Final Report Volume 1 CW. T. Sanders, A. Kovar, T. H. Charlton, and R. Diehl), Pennsylvania State University, Occasional Papers in Anthropology 3, University Park, pp. 69-101. Sanders, W. T., Parsons,]. R., and Santley, R. S., 1979, The Basin ojMexico, Academic Press, New York. Sodi, M. F. A. C. A., 1988, La Cerdmica Novohispana Vidriada y con Decoraci6n Sellada del Siglo XVI, Unpublished Licenciatura Thesis, ENAH, Mexico, D.F. Stein, S., and Stein, B., 1980, La Herencia Colonial de America Latina, Siglo Veintiuno, Mexico, D.F. Thompson, R. H. (ed.), 1956, An Archaeological Approach to the Study of Cultural Stability, in: Seminars in Archaeology: 1955 (R. Wauchope, ed.), Society jor American Archaeology, Memoir 1l:31-57. Toussaint, M., 1974, Arte Colonial en Mexico, UNAM, Mexico, D.F. Vega Sosa, C. (Coordinator), 1979, El Recinto Sagrado de Mixico-Tenochtitldn, Excavaciones 1968-69 y 1975-76, SEP-INAH, Mexico, D.F. Wolf, E. R. (ed.), 1976, The Valley oj Mexico, University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.