William Puckett Art History Symposium Teotihuacán as we know it is a large archaeological urban complex nestled in the Basin of Mexico (Carrasco pg. 2001). The reign dates of Teotihuacán run through the first seven centuries Common Era, otherwise known as the Classical period. At it s height it is believed that Teotihuacán (as an urban center) occupied a space as large as twenty kilometers and housed more than half the population of the Basin of Mexico, estimated from 40,000 to 200,000 residents (Carrasco pg. 2001). The city is laid out on two central axes. The north/south axis is known as the Micaotli or the Avenue of the Dead (Miller 72, 2011). An east/west avenue intersects the Micaotli just north of the Ciudadela, and divides the city into four quadrants. The northern two kilometers of the Micaotli (portion north of the east/west axis) houses the religious structures, such as the great Pyramid of the Sun and the Temple of the Moon along with administrative buildings. We can see through Rene Millon s; Teotihuacán Mapping Project that the grid system set up along these avenues was home to more than 2,000 multifamily apartment complexes. Through these apartment complexes we can see a strict division of the city into wards or barrios of specialized interest. Through the Teotihuacán Mapping Project and the excavated sites at Tlamimilopa, Xolopan, and Tepantitla (to name a few) Millon has identified over 500 areas of concentrated raw materials that have been identified as craft production areas (Carrasco pg. 2001). Thus indicating a highly organized socioeconomic structure of guilds or specialized craft houses that would have made up the merchant force of Teotihuacán. We can see through Evelyn Rattray's excavation of the merchants barrio, which lies on the eastern edge of the city, that Teotihuacán was
made up of many communities of immigrants from other regions. Through test pits and partial excavation, Rattray has proposed that the findings in the merchants barrio were identifiably lowland Maya, and that the rounded structures seen there, and not seen elsewhere in Teotihuacán, are similar in style with the buildings seen in Vera Cruz (Clayton 430, 2005). Thus giving us an idea of not only the international feel of the city but that Teotihuacán would have been somewhat of a cultural Mecca for Pre Columbian Mesoamericans, thus creating economic barrios much like the Chinatown or Little Italy of modern day New York City. Various cultures tied together through an economic chain, connecting distant parts of the region through direct and non-direct means. The Art of the Ancient Americas Gallery of the Mint Museum on Randolph Rd. features three ceramic pieces from Teotihuacán. These three ceramics share similar characteristics but were found in varying regions of Mesoamerica. None were actually found in Teotihuacán but range in distance from 100km to 900km away from the urban capitol. In this paper I will focus on Tripod Bowl with Feather Headdress and Tlaloc Signs, from the central Mexican Highlands c. 250-650 CE, as it is the most complete example of Teotihuacán pottery in the collection, but will reference the other two in relation to the expansion of the Teotihuacán culture, specifically the Lidded Bowl with Tlaloc Sign and Water Scroll, found in the Northern Peten Region of what is now modern day Guatamala. I will identify the vessel through structural elements as well as iconographical evidences that it is Teotihuacano, and will explain the findings and occurrence of this style in other parts of the Mesoamerican world, specifically the Mayan region, as will be seen through cultural evidences at Tikal and Copan. Ultimately
defining Teotihuacán as an ever-changing populace of immigrant workers and specialty guilds supported by an interregional economic market of trade established through martial strength. Tripod Bowl with Feather Headdress and Tlaloc Signs is a thinly walled vessel of ceramic with a slightly orange hue that appears to have been coated in a plaster or stucco. The slight chipping along the lip reveals a difference in the texture and color of the base material and the outer coating. This outer layer is a painted plaster, which can be specifically noted at the areas of chipping, creating a visible cross-section of the pottery. The base ceramic has a brownish orange tone while the outer layer consists of a milky white, with a painted surface on the outer most side. We can better understand this technique through Jessica Fletcher s research on the stuccoed vessels of Teotihuacán, where she dissects similar ceramics, which have been coated in plaster and painted, through chemical analysis and Electro Microscopy (Fletcher 143, 2002). The samples Fletcher uses are from Maquixco Bajo, an archaeological site on the western border of Teotihuacán. Fletcher proposes that the first step in stucco decoration is to apply a thin cream-colored coat of plaster to the post fire ceramic. The artist would then apply the red line work into the wet plaster, and would follow that step with the filling in of the negative space with more of the plaster, raising the base level to the same height of the newly applied red line. This technique was continued with each additional color or line added, thus eliminating variables in the surface texture (Fletcher 143, 2002). Plaster, which is made from the firing of limestone, goes through a chemical reaction during the firing stage of production. During this stage of production, all of the Oxygen, Carbon Dioxide, and water are purged from the stone, leaving pure lime. When water is then re-
added it causes another chemical reaction and creates the liquid substance known as stucco. Stucco played a very important role in the culture, and would have been a very common substance in Teotihuacán. All buildings in Teotihuacán were covered from floor to ceiling in stucco, many of which would have been covered with frescoed murals that would have used a very similar technique. Incidentally this practice required the burning of an enormous amount of wood and the subsequent deforestation and erosion is believed to have been a major factor in the demise of Teotihuacán (Miller, history channel?). The imagery used on the vessel Tripod Bowl with Feather Headdress and Tlaloc Signs has been identified as representing the god Tlaloc and the Great Goddess Chalchiutlicue. These were the prominent gods in Teotihuacán; a statue of Chachiutlicue was found at the base of the Pyramid of the Moon and is believed to have at one time adorned the top (Miller 78, 2011). Chalchiutlicue is associated with water and fertility, and is often depicted with a feather headdress or feathered skirt. A feathered headdress can be seen in the center of the primary register and is flanked by what has been labeled as Tlaloc signs, giving a sense of heraldic symmetry. Many Mexican scholars believe that the culture of Teotihuacán is closely related to the later Toltec and Mixeca cultures, and therefore have come to identify the figures in Teotihuacano art by Mixeca names. If we are to define Toetihuacan imagery based on the later Mixeca peoples, and are, by comparison identifying the Teotihuacano examples through shared traits or iconographic similarities with the Mixeca examples, then we must first understand or establish what the Mixecan, or Post Classic standard is. In the case of the Tlaloc imagery, Esther Pasztory identifies the typical Post Classic example through the Codex Borgia and
describes the imagery as follows: all have concentric rings representing eyes, an upper lip turned up at the corners with two long fangs in the corner of the mouth, and three short ones in the middle, a headdress tied into five knots at the forehead and two out of three have a water lily emerging from the mouth (Pasztory 7, 1974). Pasztory goes on to add that the Tlaloc imagery represented on effigy vessels (which our Tripod bowl is an example of) usually have a stylized year sign in their headdress (which ours does not). Pasztory cites examples at Tetitla of a mural fragment and a Talud border at Tepantitla as both featuring the Codex Borgia style Tlaloc (Pasztory 7, 1974). By accepting the iconographical similarities between the Classic (Teotihuacán) and the Post Classic (Mixeca) examples of Tlalocs as true, and thus defining Tlaloc by those standards, then we can see through visual comparison that Tripod Bowl with Feather Headdress and Tlaloc Signs is incorrectly titled. Pasztory suggests that in the Post Classic period that the Tlaloc rings can often represent earth and darkness when not seen in the standard Tlaloc composition. She supports this interpretation through the Post Classic iconographic representation of stars in the night sky as human eyes surrounded by rings (Pasztory 15, 1974). Because the primary gods of Teotihuacán are earth deities, and stellar or night deities, both may have made use of this attribute (Pasztory 15, 1974). Because of the thousands of figurines and effigy vessels found at Teotihuacán at the turn of the twentieth century featuring the goggle eyed personage, and the apparent predominance of this imagery in the Teotihuacán pantheon, the result was the indiscriminate labeling of all grotesque supernatural imagery as Tlaloc (Pasztory 1, 1974).
Structurally the vessel is a cylinder with three tripod legs, which Michael Smyth describes as being widely seen as an indicator of Teotihuacán influence or interaction (Smyth 400, 2008). The cylinder is wider than it is tall which Smyth also describes as being in the Teotihuacán style, versus the vessels found in Oxkintok which are taller than they are wide and are examples of local copies of the Teotihuacán style (Smyth 401, 2008). Though the imagery is perhaps mistakenly labeled as representative of the two specific gods Chalchiutlicue and Tlaloc, they are more likely representative of a specific aspect of a deity or deities, such as fertility and earth, rather than a direct representation of the two gods. However the style and technique of application, as well as the structural elements of this vessel are all clear examples of Teotihuacán influence. Now that we have identified what the iconographical and structural elements are for Teotihuacán pottery, how do we explain the findings of our Teotihuacán ceramics in non-teotihuacán regions? Because Tripod Bowl with Feather Headdress and Tlaloc Signs was found just a couple days journey away from the urban center, let us move to the other ceramic piece, Lidded Bowl with Tlaloc Sign and Water Scroll, while it does not feature the tripod aspect of the Teotihuacán vessel it does utilize the stucco technique and exhibits the Tlaloc imagery Pasztory characterized as Teotihuacán as seen in the goggle eyes, up turned lip, fangs and association with water. Accepting that these are the stylistic tendencies of Teotihuacán, and understanding the socioeconomic layout of the urban center of Teotihuacán, it is relatively easy to surmise that any city that can support and recruit an immigrant work force, and not just labor force but craft specialists, can not only take in the cultures of the surrounding regions but so to would it affect the cultures around it. According to Michael Coe, there are two schools of thought on this
matter; one suggests that Teotihuacán never mounted an actual military intrusion but that the local dynasties merely were emulating the Teotihuacán war cult for their own devices (Coe 96, 2005). Following the 1960 s discovery of Tikal s North Acropolis and the associated stelae, Tatiana Proskouriakoff and Clemency Coggins began an argument for the second and more likely, correct, school of argument that suggests a military take over by Teotihuacán rulers (Coe 95, 2005). Ethno historian Ross Hassig suggests, according to Coe, that this was most likely a more hegemonic rule, in that the local bureaucracies were left in place but were controlled and taxed through threat of military force (Coe 89, 2005). Sarah Clayton points out that Teotihuacán influence can be seen (though direct lines of communication are absent) through cultural evidences found at sites like Tikal and Copan from the Mayan region which is modern day Guatemala and Honduras, approximately 900km from Teotihuacán and located in the Northern Peten, and where our Lidded Bowl with Tlaloc Sign and Water Scroll is from. These examples cited by Clayton can be specifically seen at the Mundo Perdido where evidences of Talud-Tablero architecture has been found, which is the primary form of architecture found at Teotihuacán. Talud-Tablero style architecture has also been found at Copan, and equally important, there is iconographical evidence of Teotihuacán influence as seen in Altar Q which depicts founding ruler K Inich Yax K uk Mo wearing Teotihuacán style warrior attire, including goggles and a war serpent shield, indicators of Tlaloc and Quetzalcoatl, two of the premier gods of Teotihuacán (Clayton 431, 2005). Altar Q depicts sixteen rulers in succession, each on his own name glyph, beginning with K inich Yax K uk Mo. The arrival and the immediate accession to office as well as the honorary title of West Kalomte, or Paramount Ruler of the West given to Yax K uk Mo has led David
Stewart, according to Coe, to interpret as meaning, the founder was a stranger who came from the west, perhaps from Teotihuacán (Coe 96, 2005). A similar example can be found in Tikal s North Acropolis Inscriptions, where according to these inscriptions the eighth ruler of Tikal was Chak Tok Ich aak I, little is known about him but his early death, which took place on January 14, 378 CE. On that very day, according to these same inscriptions, someone named Sihyaj K ahk is mentioned as having arrived from the west (Coe 96, 2005). In both cases the use of the word arrive and the reference to the west, is suggestive of an invading force from the west, presumably from Teotihuacán, as evident, according to Stuart, by the very non-mayan glyph of Sihyaj K ahk depicting a spear thrower connected to an owl (Coe 96, 2005). Both images are used as prominent war iconography in Teotihuacán, The militaristic iconography found at Tikal signifying the Teotihuacán presence would account for the finding of the Lidded Bowl with Tlaloc Sign and Water Scroll in the Northern Peten, and military conquest would certainly account for a vast spread of culture, both in and out of Teotihuacán. Looking back now at the art objects from the Mint Museum, Tripod Bowl with Feather Headdress and Tlaloc Signs, Jar with Figures Wearing Feather Costumes, and Lidded Bowl with Tlaloc Sign and Scroll we can now understand that, through the aesthetic similarities of iconography and physical traits with in these vessels, that they are identifiably Teotihuacán, and we can account for the interregional distribution of these ceramics by the iconographical evidences left behind at sites found as far away from Teotihuacán as Tikal and Copan in the Mayan Empire.
Works Cited: Storrey, Rebecca. Life and Death in the Ancient City of Teotihuacán. Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press. 1992 Miller, Mary Ellen. The Art of Mesoamerica, From Olmec to Aztec: Fourth Edition London. Thames&Hudson. 2011 Carrasco, David. Oxford Encyclopedia of Mesoamerican Cultures vol. 3. Oxford. Oxford Press. 2001 Fletcher, Jessica M. Stuccoed Tripod Vessels From Teotihuacán: An Examination of Materials and Manufacture. Journal of the American Institute for Conservation. Vol 41. No 2. 2002. Pg 139-154. Millon, Clara. Painting, Writing, and Polity in Teotihuacán, Mexico. American
Antiquity. Vol 38. No 3. 1973. Pg 294-319. Clayton, Sarah C. Interregional Relationships in Mesoamerica: Interpreting Maya Ceramics at Teotihuacán. Latin American Antiquity. Vol 16. No 4. 2005. Pg 427-448. Smyth, Michael P. Beyond Economic Imperialism: the Teotihuacán Factor in Northern Yucatan. Journal of Anthropological Research. Vol 64. No 3. Fall 2008. Pg 395-409 Coe, Michael D. The Maya: Seventh Edition. New York. Thames&Hudson. 2005