Overview
The interlocking complexities of Tezcatlipoca’s nature, multiple roles, and metaphorical attributes illustrate the extent to which his influence penetrated Aztec belief and social action across all levels of late Postclassic central Mexican culture. Tezcatlipoca examines the results of archaeological investigations—objects like obsidian mirrors, gold, bells, public stone monuments, and even a mosaic skull—and reveals new insights into the supreme deity of the Aztec pantheon and his role in Aztec culture.
Product Details
| ISBN-13: | 9781607322887 |
|---|---|
| Publisher: | University Press of Colorado |
| Publication date: | 01/15/2015 |
| Sold by: | Barnes & Noble |
| Format: | eBook |
| Pages: | 296 |
| Sales rank: | 996,091 |
| File size: | 30 MB |
| Note: | This product may take a few minutes to download. |
About the Author
Read an Excerpt
Tezcatlipoca
Trickster and Supreme Deity
By Elizabeth Baquedano
University Press of Colorado
Copyright © 2014 University Press of ColoradoAll rights reserved.
ISBN: 978-1-60732-288-7
CHAPTER 1
The Archaeology of Tezcatlipoca
MICHAEL E. SMITH
DOI: 10.5876/9781607322887.c001
From the seminal nineteenth-century works of Eduard Seler (1990–98) through the present day, scholars have emphasized the works of the chroniclers (primarily Sahagún and Durán) as primary sources on Aztec gods, myths, and ceremonies, coupled with ample use of the ritual or divinatory codices to illustrate religious themes and activities. This body of scholarship can be considered the standard or dominant approach to Aztec religion. Although intellectual perspectives and paradigms have changed through the decades, scholars return again and again to this same small set of primary sources. As a result, ethnohistorians and art historians now pose questions far more sophisticated and detailed than their predecessors of a few decades ago. Fortunately, the primary material is quite rich, and we are far from exhausting its potential to add to our understanding of Aztec religion.
The continuing reliance on a small number of sources by scholars working in the dominant scholarly approach to Aztec religion comes at a cost, however. Although our understanding of the details of Aztec iconography and symbolism has advanced greatly, we still know very little about many important topics that — for whatever reason — are not featured in the works of the chroniclers or the codices. Unless scholars can begin to incorporate other kinds of information, research on Aztec religion could become so detailed, involuted, and esoteric that it ceases to contribute to the wider task of illuminating the Prehispanic past. Fortunately, a nascent trend suggests that scholars are beginning to move beyond the confines of the chroniclers and codices to produce important new insights into Aztec religious beliefs and practices. The chapters in this book are part of that trend.
It is no accident that the new scholarly trend focuses on the deity Tezcatlipoca. Not only is the Lord of the Smoking Mirror one of the most important Aztec deities, but he is the god whose scholarship has clearly surpassed that of his siblings in quantity and quality. Although a number of significant studies of Tezcatlipoca have appeared in recent years (e.g., Carrasco 1991; Heyden 1989; Matos Moctezuma 1997; Olivier 2002; Saunders 1990; Valencia Rivera 2006), the majority of the credit for advancing scholarship on this deity must go to Guilhem Olivier. His detailed book-length examination of Tezcatlipoca is an important breakthrough in many ways (Olivier 1997); subsequent citations to this work will be to the English translation (Olivier 2003). Strange as it may seem, Olivier's book is the first comprehensive book-length treatment of an Aztec deity.
Among the significant accomplishments of Olivier's book are its systematic comparisons among sources (e.g., tables of attributes of the deity images of Tezcatlipoca in the codices), the breadth of written sources consulted, the judicious analyses and evaluations of data and interpretations, and a serious regard for the material manifestations of the Tezcatlipoca cult. Olivier treats cult objects not just as objects that may contain iconographic texts but as important sources of material and contextual data in their own right. Although his approach to such objects is not as systematic or comprehensive as an archaeologist might hope, Olivier does demonstrate the very real advances in scholarship that can come when new kinds of data — beyond the chroniclers and codices — are brought to bear systematically on a topic in Aztec religion.
The chapters in this book build on the foundation of Olivier's book, and they illustrate diverse ways of expanding traditional emphases on the standard sources. Olivier's own chapter expands the perspective to incorporate another major deity, Quetzalcoatl. Careful comparative analysis is always a productive way to increase understanding of a topic, and the juxtaposition of these two deities is a productive approach. Susan Milbrath also applies a comparative framework in her comparison between Tezcatlipoca and the Maya deity Kawil. Her analyses encompass a much broader range of symbols and associations, and this is both a strength and a weakness. On the positive side, her study provides wider contextualization of the deities and their symbolism than the other chapters do, but on the negative side, this broad perspective makes specific comparisons more difficult to evaluate.
Juan José Batalla Rosado works within the framework of the standard sources — codices — but his work departs from past studies in its minute attention to visual detail in a highly systematic framework. He has shown the value of this approach in a variety of publications (Batalla Rosado 1997, 2002a, 2002b, 2007), and that tradition continues in the present chapter. The systematic comparisons and analyses carried out by Olivier (2003) and Batalla Rosado (this volume) represent a valuable method for continuing to derive insights from the standard sources. Elizabeth Baquedano's chapter confirms the notion that the codices and chroniclers are far from exhausted as sources of continuing insight. The military and warfare associations of Tezcatlipoca have long been recognized in the literature, but numerous iconographic and symbolic details have remained unclear. By focusing on gold and bells, Baquedano extends our knowledge of an important aspect of Tezcatlipoca's domain.
Two chapters move far beyond the standard documentary sources on Tezcatlipoca. Emily Umberger focuses on large stone public monuments, many of which have some sort of Tezcatlipoca imagery. She shows that these depictions relate less to the Tezcatlipoca cult than to the political rhetoric and propaganda that employed Tezcatlipoca as an icon of imperial power. The simple presence of images or attributes of this deity cannot therefore be assumed to relate to religion or ritual per se. This insight comes only by analyzing these monuments in their spatial and visual contexts. Cecelia Klein moves so far beyond the standard sources that her chapter is not really about the Aztec period at all but rather concerns the relevance of Tezcatlipoca for Christian representations in the Colonial period.
THE MATERIAL CULTURE OF AZTEC RELIGION
One of the limitations of the standard approach to Aztec religion as outlined above is many scholars' seeming avoidance of archaeological evidence — objects and their context. The big exception, of course, centers on research at the Templo Mayor of Tenochtitlan since 1978 (Boone 1987; López Luján 2005 [1994]; Matos Moctezuma 1982, 1995). This project has clarified many aspects of Mexica ritual and religion, and the resulting archaeological data have been embraced and used extensively by non-archaeologists (e.g., Aveni, Calnek, and Hartung 1988; Broda 1987; Carrasco 1987; Graulich 2001; Umberger 1987a). Unfortunately for the purposes of this volume, Tezcatlipoca is poorly represented in the offerings and other finds of the Templo Mayor project. A few images of the deity are found on objects (see discussion below), and some of the excavated cult items could well derive from rituals dedicated to Tezcatlipoca, but overall, research at the Templo Mayor has taught us little about this important deity.
In this chapter I examine several archaeological aspects of the Tezcatlipoca cult. I focus on obsidian mirrors, ceramic flutes, and momoztli altars and on the archaeological evidence for the antiquity and extent of Tezcatlipoca and his cult. My treatment of the archaeology of Tezcatlipoca must be seen as preliminary because I run up against some of the basic problems that plague the analysis of Aztec material culture. In considering the lack of archaeological input to research in the dominant tradition of Aztec religious studies (beyond the Templo Mayor project), one is initially tempted to argue that ethnohistorians, art historians, and religious studies scholars simply need to take sites and artifacts into greater account in their analyses. But even a cursory glance at the archaeological literature reveals that few of the relevant objects and sites are analyzed or published in a format that can be used by other scholars. It is simply not reasonable to expect the contributors to this volume, or other scholars of Aztec religion, to root around in the dusty storage collections of museums or to find all of the relevant archaeological reports — typically published in obscure places, if at all — to see whether obsidian mirrors or flutes have been excavated at Aztec sites. As archaeologists, art historians, and museum curators, we have not done our jobs compiling and analyzing information on Aztec material culture, and this hinders our understanding of Aztec religion.
This chapter is an exploratory essay to see what kind of insights might be gained from a more systematic consideration of the materiality and context of the elements of Tezcatlipoca's cult. Although my coverage of obsidian mirrors, ceramic flutes, and altars is far from complete, it is still possible to advance our understanding of some aspects of Aztec ritual practice simply by looking at a wide range of items instead of focusing solely on the best-known and finest examples. I discuss this approach in more general terms in Smith (2011). In some ways, this chapter can be considered an extension of Olivier's monograph on Tezcatlipoca. I provide a few more examples than he considers, and I take a closer look at some of the material objects of the Tezcatlipoca cult.
The problems that limit the contribution of material culture to research on Aztec religion are (1) an art historical focus on a few of the finest objects instead of study of a wider range of less fine examples, (2) a lack of information on museum holdings, and (3) a lack of publication of key archaeological projects and collections.
Problem 1: The Art Historical Focus on Only a Few of the Finest Objects
Most art historians and museum curators focus their analysis on a small number of the finest objects, ignoring the range of variation within categories of material culture. For example, there are probably thousands of Aztec stone sculptures in museums in Mexico, the United States, and Europe, yet only a small subset of these are included over and over in museum exhibits and catalogs (e.g., Eggebrecht 1987; Matos Moctezuma and Solís Olguín 2002; Solís Olguín 2004; Solís Olguín and Leyenaar 2002). From such works, one cannot get any idea of the variation that exists within the corpus of Aztec sculptures; for this, one needs complete catalogs and documentation of individual museum collections. Unfortunately, only a few examples exist. Felipe Solís Olguín cataloged sculptures in the museum at Santa Cecilia Acatitlan (Solís Olguín 1976), and he also published a catalog of sculptures from Castillo de Teayo (Solís Olguín 1981). The recent catalog of sculptures in the new Musée du quai Branly in Paris (López Luján and Fauvet-Berthelot 2005) is another very useful work in this tradition. From this work we can begin to suggest that most sculptures of deities housed in temples throughout Postclassic central Mexico were cruder and far more variable than the finely made examples we see in all the books (Smith n.d.b).
Another example of this phenomenon is the Tlaloc jar. The small number of fine Tlaloc jars excavated at the Templo Mayor is reproduced and analyzed endlessly in books and articles, and one might easily think these were typical of Aztec ceramic vessels depicting this deity. Far more common in museum storerooms, however, is a very different type of vessel with crude Tlaloc features. Examples have been excavated at Nahualac and Tenenepango (Charnay 1888; Lorenzo 1957), Cerro Tlaloc (Wicke and Horcasitas 1957), Calixtlahuaca (Smith, Wharton, and McCarron 2003), and other sites. Leonardo López Luján (2006, 1: 140–43; 2: 454–55) has published illustrations and discussions of the variety of Tlaloc vessels used throughout Mesoamerica, including both the fancy and the crude Aztec forms. Prior to the publication of that work, however, one would never know that the crude vases are the most typical form of Aztec Tlaloc effigy because of the two other problems with Aztec material culture research: lack of information on museum collections and lack of publication.
Problem 2: The Hidden Treasure of Museum Collections
Fine Aztec objects were among the first Mesoamerican items brought from Mexico to Europe after the Spanish conquest, and Aztec objects remained popular with museums in Europe and the United States during the heyday of artifact collecting in the nineteenth century (Boone 1993). Needless to say, Mexican museums have many more examples in their storerooms. With a few exceptions, however (Baer 1996; Baer and Bankmann 1990; Carrandi, Granados Vázquez, and Garduño Ramírez 1990; Solís Olguín 1976; Solís Olguín and Morales Gómez 1991), museum holdings remain largely undocumented. A few years ago I contacted curators at a number of museums, looking for possible collections from Calixtlahuaca. Some were able to supply information, but most replied that they simply didn't know what they might have and had no convenient way to find out (given current staffing and budgets).
I have discussed the problem of undocumented museum collections in other papers (Smith 2004, n.d.b). In those papers I focus on the importance of whole objects (in museums) for interpreting the fragments excavated by archaeologists. Here, I am emphasizing the related issue of understanding the range of variation within key categories of objects. One consequence of the lack of knowledge of museum collections is the absence of a systematic catalog (or corpus) of any category of Aztec object. In Classical and Mediterranean archaeology, many categories of material objects — from Greek vases to Persian stamps to Byzantine coins — have a published corpus. Such works make many dispersed objects known and provide a standardized reference for scholars in many disciplines.
Problem 3: The Lack of Publication
The lack of publication of both museum collections and excavations is another obstacle to using material objects in the analysis of Aztec religion. Complete publication of key collections can open up new interpretive windows and advance our understanding of Aztec religion and society. One example is the so-called volador offering, a collection of many hundreds of ceramic vessels and other objects excavated in downtown Mexico City in the 1930s. Solís Olguín and Morales Gómez (1991) published all of the volador objects in the Museo Nacional (unfortunately, they did not include numerous other objects from the volador that had been exchanged with other museums around the world). By examining the composition of the offering in terms of vessel forms, my colleagues and I were able to offer a new social interpretation of the deposit (Smith, Wharton, and Olson 2003) that would have been impossible without a systemic accounting of the several hundred objects. The situation with respect to many key Aztec sites is even worse. For example, there is simply no documentation of the early excavations at Teopanzolco and Santa Cecilia Acatitlan, and many other sites remain poorly published (see discussion in Smith 2008). We need far more richly illustrated systematic works like López Luján (2006) if we are to begin to understand the forms and variation in Aztec material culture.
One positive development in the analysis of the material component of Aztec religion is a trend toward the systematic analysis of material culture items from the codices. Jacqueline de Durand-Forest, in particular, has carried out very useful analyses of cult items in the trecenas (Durand-Forest 1998; Durand-Forest et al. 2000). Other scholars have taken systematic looks at the depictions of a number of different kinds of material culture in the codices (Batalla Rosado 1997; Durand-Forest and Eisinger 1998; Heyden 2005; Matos Moctezuma 1996), and Frances Berdan (2007) considers the economic implications of the nature and diversity of material culture used in Aztec rituals. For the Tezcatlipoca cult, of course, Olivier's (2003) book should be mentioned here.
THE MATERIALITY OF THE TEZCATLIPOCA CULT
Olivier (2003) discusses the various items associated with the cult of Tezcatlipoca. These items include sculptures of the deity, obsidian mirrors, precious stones, human femurs, staffs, shields, arrows, flutes, momoztli altars, and a variety of specific items and attributes of jewelry, costume, and body paint. To these, Han Roskamp (2010) adds metallurgy in west Mexico. Of these I single out obsidian mirrors, ceramic flutes, and momoztli altars for discussion, based on two criteria: (1) they seem to have strong associations with the deity (based on the codices and writings of the chroniclers), and (2) they are relatively well represented in archaeological excavations and museum collections of Aztec material. These objects illustrate the limitations discussed in the previous section, but they also suggest the potential to transcend those limitations through systematic and comprehensive analysis.
(Continues...)
Excerpted from Tezcatlipoca by Elizabeth Baquedano. Copyright © 2014 University Press of Colorado. Excerpted by permission of University Press of Colorado.
All rights reserved. No part of this excerpt may be reproduced or reprinted without permission in writing from the publisher.
Excerpts are provided by Dial-A-Book Inc. solely for the personal use of visitors to this web site.