Ancient Tollan: The Sacred Precinct

Transcription

100
RES 38 AUTUMN
2000
Figure 12. Upper section of Pillar 3: Personage with attributes of
Tezcatlipoca. Photograph: Humberto Hiera.
Ancient Toi Ian
The sacred precinct
ALBAGUADALUPEMASTACHEand ROBERTH. COBEAN
and Tenochtitlan, was
Tula, along with Teotihuacan
one of the most important cities inMexico's Central
Highlands. During Tula's apogee between a.d. 900-1150,
the city covered nearly 16 square kilometers.
Its area of
over
influence extended
much of Central Mexico
along
areas
with other regions of Mesoamerica,
of
including
the Baj?o, the Huasteca,
the Gulf Coast, the Yucatan
on
peninsula, and such distant places as the Soconusco,
the Pacific Coast of Chiapas and Guatemala,
and El
Salvador. From a cultural and ethnic perspective, Tula
two different
constituted a synthesis of principally
traditions: the preceding urban culture from Teotihuacan
in the Basin of Mexico,
and another tradition from the
northern Mesoamerican
the Baj?o
periphery, especially
and the Zacatecas-Jalisco
border area (Mastache and
Cobean
1989; Hers and Braniff 1998).
InMesoamerican
cities, as in urban sites of many
other cultures, the monumental
precinct was the heart of
the city, constituting
its religious, political, and
administrative
center, the seat of divinity and of the
the place where
the order and the spatial
cosmos
was
of
the
materialized
and
configuration
At
the
of
the
monumental
Tula,
reproduced.
importance
center of
precinct as the symbolic axis and architectonic
the city ismanifested
its
central
The
by
position.
at the physical
principal plaza is located essentially
center of the city, at the midpoint of Tula's hypothetical
north-south
is approximately
six kilometers
axis, which
The
hierarchical
is given
1).
long (fig.
precinct's
position
in being placed at the highest and
also by its elevation
most prominent part of the city, thus physically
the urban space. Building this vast
dominating
an enormous public
architectural complex constituted
government,
works
of the
project, which entailed the modification
mesa
with
surface
artificial
original
terracing systems,
fills of up to seven to eight meters deep
using man-made
to level the area for the plaza and to construct platforms
as bases for buildings.
that at Tula the placement
of the
center is strategic, not only because
it
monumental
an easily defended
occupies
place but also because of its
central setting at a dominant point that had great visual
impact, being visible to inhabitants in every part of the city
that functioned
It is evident
and within view of many rural sites. Lefebvre observes that
a city's habitational
zone ismade on a human scale,
zone has a superhuman
whereas
the monumental
scale,
which
them,
goes beyond human beings?overwhelming
dazzling them. The monumental
buildings' scale is the
scale of divinity, of a divine ruler, of abstract institutions
that dominate
human society (Lefebvre 1982:84).
The volume of the two pyramids of the precinct
is not
to that of the Pyramids of the Sun
very large if compared
or to that of the principal
and Moon at Teotihuacan
at
but
the
location of the precinct
Cholula,
pyramid
center
for this, because Tula's monumental
in its totality a huge pyramidal structure, with
the original elevation of the hill increased by the
extensive
the
system of terraces and platforms on which
was
the
built.
dimensions
of
Therefore,
apparent
plaza
compensates
constitutes
the pyramids were
complex on which
increased by the great architectonic
they were built, with the whole
a
great pyramidal structure crowned
complex
forming
two
the
by
pyramids (fig. 2). This situation is different
or Tenochtitlan, where all of the
from that of Teotihuacan
ancient city including the monumental
center was
distributed over a uniform elevation.
We
know
that Tula experienced
several changes and
its
during
long life, but it is evident that
the city's conception
and urban structure were defined
to a master plan when the monumental
according
was
built. At the place where
the sacred
precinct
there very probably was a
precinct was constructed,
transformations
center corresponding
to the city's initial
coeval with
development
stage, that is, an occupation
Tula Chico (the city's first ceremonial
center), over
which
theTollan phase monumental
center was built
Coyotlatelco
We thank the Instituto Nacional
e Historia for
de Antropolog?a
allowing
us to
illustrations
from the reports of Jorge R. Acosta
and
reproduce
Elizabeth Jim?nez. "Reproducci?n
Autorizada
de
por el Instituto Nacional
e Historia"-Conaculta-INAHM?xico. We
thank Arq. Jesus
Antropolog?a
of the INAH for
Acevedo
programming
sharing his computer
knowledge.
(Mastache and Crespo
1994). This last center
1982, Diehl 1983, Cobean
is the topic of this paper.
RES 38 AUTUMN
102
I
O
2000
corners open in
not completely
joined, leaving the
were
corners
the principal
These
open
diagonals.
to the plaza (figs. 3-4). The largest right angle
entrances
140 meters on a side is
measuring
approximately
formed by Pyramids C and B and by adjacent structures
halls. The lesser right angle (of about
with columned
120 meters on a side) is constituted
by Building K and
Ballcourt 2.
is
In a sense, we can say that the sacred precinct
in two zones of distinct hierarchy and differing
divided
is the most
character. The northeast complex
important,
2Km.
N
D
of its greater dimensions
and, above all else,
it?
of the nature of the buildings that comprise
with
the
two
which
the
together
pyramids,
especially
are without doubt the most important
adjacent buildings
in the entire precinct. Thus this
architectural elements
because
because
D
Zona monumental
C~
L?mites: antigua ciudad de Tula
==^
Rios Tula y Rosas
Figure 1. Tula: city limits during its apogee
showing
Fernando
the
location
of
the monumental
can be considered
sacred
the most essentially
center.
The
lesser
of
the
monumental
symbolic and
part
is
section
the
southwest
of
architectonic
hierarchy
and in
in
its
and
smaller
volume
dimensions,
expressed
a different level of internal articulation. While
Pyramids
B and C are articulated with other structures (vestibules
and columned
halls), Building K and Ballcourt 2 can be
considered
separate units, which are integrated only in
the sense that they were built on the same platform.
Thus the plaza was surrounded by several types of
still have not been well
the functions of which
buildings,
in all cases.
defined
section
(a.D. 900-1150)
center.
Drawing:
Getino.
inMesoamerican
As is common
cities, the pyramidal
in Tula's monumental
structures and other buildings
stages and
precinct contain various construction
Acosta
In
found several
his
excavations,
enlargements.
in the majority of the
substructures and additions
precinct and its buildings
buildings. The monumental
and four construction
between
three
have
generally
to
theTollan
phase (a.D. 900-1150)
stages corresponding
that was Tula's apogee
(Acosta 1942-1944,
1945, 1956;
and
Getino
Cobean
n.d.).
1994;
Figueroa
that the principal buildings on the
There is evidence
ceremonial
intentionally burned at the end
precinct were
of the Tollan phase (circa a.D. 1150) and that some
structures were
looted and partially reoccupied during
The reoccupations
the Late Postclassic
(a.D. 1200-1520).
are
in the so-called
evident
this
principally
period
during
the
central
Palacio Quemado,
altar, and
Building K,
Ballcourt 2 among other buildings
(Acosta 1942-1944,
1994) (fig. 4).
a; Cobean
1945, 1956, 1956-1957,1961
a
is
The monumental
huge quadrangle,
precinct
It
is open on its northwest and southeast corners.
which
that have the form of
of two complexes
is composed
or
two capital Ls that are
of
two opposing
right angles
A noteworthy
aspect in the planning of the
in
center is the placement
of both pyramids
monumental
relation to the structure of the total precinct. The
to one side instead of
pyramids appear to be displaced
a central position, especially
if they are
in
being
if
from a point inside the plaza. Nevertheless,
observed
into
is analyzed,
the general plan of the precinct
taking
account
its external
limits, it is clear that Pyramid C is
not only because
architectural element,
the fundamental
it is the largest structure in the city, but also because of
in the
its location and relationship with other buildings
is
the
entire
monumental
When
compound
plaza.
in its totality as an architectonic
considered
unit, the
the two
of
and
of
asymmetry
displacement
impression
it
is
evident
and
in
the
precinct disappears,
pyramids
that Pyramid C is clearly the principal structure, the
element on the
the predominant
probable axis mundi,
basis of which all the plaza and possibly the rest of the
on the other hand, has a
city was planned. Pyramid B,
its smaller size and less
because
of
secondary position
within
the
precinct.
prominent setting
Mastache
Figure
2. A view
of Tula's
Sacred
Precinct.
Courtesy
of Alba
Both pyramids are placed adjacent to each other,
forming a 90 degree angle, with their main facades
facing the plaza: Pyramid C toward the west and
are notable
Pyramid B toward the south. There
similarities with the Pyramids of the Sun and Moon at
not only because of the existence of two
Teotihuacan,
one larger than the other, but because
in
with
pyramids,
as in Tula, the largest pyramid faces west
Teotihuacan
and the smallest faces south, and above all because
they
possess the same spatial setting with regard to each
other (as can be seen in figure 5).
In contrast to Tula, at Teotihuacan
the two pyramids
are not on the same plaza, but the pyramids at both sites
are placed
in relation to each other.
in similar positions
is the general
that
coincides
Another
aspect
important
like Teotihuacan,
Tula's
orientation of the precincts:
17 degrees
center is aligned approximately
monumental
east of astronomical
Gali
north (Acosta 1942-1944:147;
inAcosta
It is obvious
that these
1942-1944).
refer to a
similarities are not casual and do not merely
formal aspect of urban planning, but instead indicate a
and fundamental
ideological
continuity of cosmovision
Guadalupe
and Cobean: Ancient Tollan
103
Mastache.
that were shared by both cultures and also are
concepts
to be
in iconography and other elements
evident
later.
discussed
On the other hand, many other aspects of planning
in the two cities are different. The
and urbanism
center has
planning of Teotihuacan's monumental
fundamental differences with that of Tula, the most
evident being that it is not structured around a central
plaza, but instead along the great axis of the Street of
the Dead, where
the Pyramids of the Sun and the Moon
are located even though they are not adjacent to each
is
the smallest,
other. The Pyramid of the Moon,
nevertheless
by its placement
hierarchically
emphasized
as the central point where the Street of the Dead begins.
is the city's symbolic and
The Street of the Dead
axis articulating
the various plazas and
architectonic
precincts of different sizes and importance that
zone.
constitute the monumental
in scale
there also is a great difference
Obviously
and those of Tula,
between
the pyramids of Teotihuacan
in proportion between
the two
but the difference
structures
is similar at both sites, that is, the difference
in
104
RES 38 AUTUMN
2000
the general plans
and the Pyramid of the Moon, because
are
A
structures
of both
very much alike.
probable
Pyramid C and the Pyramid of the
similarity between
Sun is that both probably are constructed with five
taluds, although a debate still exists concerning whether
the Pyramid of the Sun originally
itwas
had five taluds before
restored.
Pyramid C is one of the most badly damaged
on Tula's precinct. Acosta's
1945,
(1942-1944,
buildings
in the 1940s found great destruction
1956) investigations
looting. A large
apparently caused by pre-Hispanic
trench had destroyed much
sections of the west facade,
also at the summit and the
north side was more intact
of the stairway and other
and there were
looting pits
east side of the pyramid. The
than the south. Acosta
(1945)
four different construction
phases for Pyramid
including remains of three interior substructures.
Pyramid C very probably was covered with relief panels
like those of Pyramid B,
and other sculptured elements
and
but most of this sculptural program was dismantled
looted in pre-Hispanic
times; thus what we know
this pyramid's appearance
concerning
during its last
construction
stage is very incomplete. The only relief
was on the west facade at the base of
panel found in situ
the south balustrade; Acosta
(1956:1am. 5) interpreted the
as
a
cross-section
of a conch shell, a symbol
decoration
identified
C,
Figure
itwas
Fernando
3.
of Tula's
map
Topographie
on Acosta
excavated.
Based
Sacred
(1941).
Precinct
before
Drawing:
Getino.
It is
the larger and smaller pyramid.
volume between
worth noting that in terms of scale and dimensions,
Pyramid B are more similar to
Pyramid C and especially
at Teotihuacan
than to the
the Temple of Quetzalcoatl
much
larger Pyramids
of the Sun and Moon.
Pyramid C
Pyramid C is a building formed by five vertically
talud platforms. On its principal
(west)
superimposed
facade supporting the stairway is a lateral platform that
in the central
Acosta
(1956:55) called cuerpo adosado
part of the facade. This element constitutes another
as
important similarity between Tula and Teotihuacan:
Acosta
(1956) stated, the cuerpo adosado o? Pyramid C
is similar "with those of the two great pyramids of San
if one studies maps of these
Juan Teotihuacan." Actually,
the major similarity is between Pyramid C
buildings,
to whom Acosta
and the god Quetzalcoatl,
was
dedicated
(fig. 6).
proposed the pyramid
In the hallway at the north edge of Pyramid C, Acosta
(1956:1am. 49) found a headless Chac Mool and a small
incomplete Atlante sculpture. Another Chac Mool
(ibid.) proposed
fragment was recovered nearby. Acosta
that these sculptures originally were on Pyramid C.
Previously, he had stated that the various fragments
(mainly feet and legs of giant Atlante sculptures at Tula
which were
of Anthropology),
and the National Museum
of Venus
similar to the Atlantes of Pyramid B but of greater
were
looted from
dimensions,
probably originally
it is also
Of course,
Pyramid C (Acosta 1942-1944:146).
Atlante fragments
possible that these unprovenienced
to an earlier construction phase of Pyramid B.
correspond
Pyramid
B
a
Pyramid B faces south and also has five taluds and
the
(1956:89) emphasized
square ground plan. Acosta
difficulty he had interpreting what appear to have been
in
three principal construction
stages for this building;
some cases, there are partial, superimposed
platforms,
Mastache
Figure
4.
Locations
of
the principal
on Tula's
buildings
Sacred
Precinct.
Based
and Cobean: AncientTollan
105
on Acosta
(1956-1957,
1967), Matos (1976), Diehl (1983), and Cobean (1994). A: Ballcourt 1, B: Pyramid B,
C: Pyramid C, D: The Palacio Quemado, E: Ballcourt 2, F: Tzompantli, G: The South Vestibule of
J: Building J, K: Building K, L:
Pyramid B, H: The Adoratorio, I:The Palace of Quetzalcoatl,
Unexcavated
probable
ballcourt,
M:
Palacio
Charnay.
Fernando
Getino.
built only on one or two sides of the
pyramid during different periods. Acosta clearly
identified two interior substructures,
the first of which
was covered by unsculptured
stone panels painted
creature having human, reptile, and avian attributes,
which Acosta
(1946) consider to be
(ibid.) and Moedano
a representation of Tlahuizcalpantecuhtli,
the god
as
in
his
the
embodiment
Quetzalcoatl
planet Venus, the
white. The second and third (last?) stages of the pyramid
were covered with relief panels having the same
of canines and felines,
sculptural elements: processions
or
a composite
of
vultures
and
depictions
eagles
evening star (figs. 7-8).
The rich diversity of iconographie elements associated
in detail and
with Pyramid B has been described
Acosta
and
scholars.
other
Among the
analyzed by
which
were
Drawing:
106
RES 38 AUTUMN
2000
PIR?MIDE
DE LA LUNA
PIR?MIDE
DEL SOL
Figure 6. Relief panel from the south balustrade of Pyramid C
at Tula. Acosta (1956) interpreted this relief as representing the
cross-section
of a conch
shell
symbolizing
Venus
and
the god
Based on Acosta (1956:fig. 5). From Jim?nez
Quetzalcoatl.
113).
(1998:fig.
Reproduced courtesy of the Instituto Nacional
de Antropolog?a
O
_500
Escola:
e Historia,
m.
1:10,000
The pillars of Pyramid
Figure 5. The Pyramid of the Sun and the Pyramid of the
Moon
atTeotihuacan.
Fernando
Based
on Mill?n
Mexico.
(1973).
Drawing:
Getino.
B
Perhaps the most important sculptural elements
associated with Pyramid B are the pillars on its summit,
because of their iconographie
and probable
complexity
historical content. The four pillars are covered with
reliefs on all four sides, which apparently were
originally painted. On each pillar, there are four
relief panels,
outstanding elements are the just-mentioned
which covered the facades along with other associated
features, such as the pillars,
sculptural and architectonic
and
monumental
columns,
sculptures that were
integral
of
the
and
of
the temple that very probably
parts
pyramid
existed on its summit. The best-known
sculptures at Tula
are the so-called Atlantes or "caryatids," presently placed
on top of Pyramid B, which consist of anthropomorphic
of human figures, with two personages
representations
on the lower section and two personages
on the upper
half of each pillar, totaling sixteen figures on the original
four pillars; only twelve personages
have been preserved
two other figures.
with
of
completely
along
fragments
All these personages
attributes
of warriors along
possess
in
with other shared aspects, such as being depicted
act
in
the
of
but
also
have
profile
walking,
they
specific
columns
(4.60 meters high) that apparently supported the
original temple roof. Atlantes represent high-ranking
costumes have
Toltec warriors. Their elaborate ceremonial
in detail by Acosta (1941, 1943, 1961b).
been analyzed
include the cylindrical
Important costume elements
the
breast plate or pectoral,
headdress,
butterfly-shaped
that differentiate each figure. We have
these sculptures at length elsewhere
and Healan n.d.). Here we will cite
(Mastache, Cobean,
some
this investigation. We propose that
of
aspects
only
the anthropomorphic
figures on the lower sections of
the pillars may represent the kings or principal
rulers of
the disk (tezcacuitlapilli)
divided in four sections and
decorated with fire serpents (Xiuhcoatl) on the warrior's
such as a dart thrower (atlatl), a
back, and weapons
a
and
knife. Kristan-Graham
(1989) also
fending stick,
elements
the
of
Atlantes'
dress.
analyzes key
Tula, while the personages
depicted on the upper
to rulers of
sections of the pillars may correspond
to that of the
rank
secondary
(fig. 9), perhaps equivalent
or
a
to
Mexica
the
Cihuacoatl
kind
of
among
great
elements
discussed
pontiff described
by Kirchhoff
(1955).
Mastache
107
Figure 7. Reliefs on north facade of Pyramid B. After Acosta (1942-1944, 1945, 1956-1957).
From Jim?nez (1998:fig.11 6). Reproduced courtesy of the Instituto Nacional de
Antropolog?a
e Historia,
Mexico.
is based principally on the fact that
Our interpretation
on the lower registers of the pillars
all of the personages
have glyphs near their heads that identify them along
with distinctive costume attributes. Only one of the
in the upper sections of the pillars
figures represented
has some of these features. These attributes are
(1) a helmet with angular steps near the
principally:
wearer's
by two types of feathers and
temples decorated
a small bird (usually in descending
in front;
position)
and (2) leggings (rodilleras) made of a series of tied
knots on the front of the lower legs. In addition, because
in the directions
that the four
there are differences
on
two
with
each
walk,
personages
pillar
figures (one
from the upper section and one from the lower section)
always going toward the left and the other two toward
the right, we suggest that for each pillar the personages
in the same direction could have been coeval,
walking
one being the king and the other the secondary
ruler
(figs. 9-10).
as
that Tula had a dual government,
The possibility
also proposed by Luis Reyes Garcia (2000:5) in his
is of
recent analysis of the Historia Tolteca-Chichimeca,
interest:
great
The two principal military priests of theToltec:
Quetzalteueyac
and
in one
Icxicouatl
. . . have
many
pictorial
is depicted
Ixicouatl
as a
occasion,
representations;
in
dressed
his mantle,
but Quetzalteueyac
male with
appears
a woman's
From this we can understand
that theToltec
huipil.
had a type of dual government, the (personage dressed as a)
Figure 8. Pyramid B at Tula: Relief panel of a being with
human,
avian
and
reptile,
considered
(1942-1944)
attributes,
to represent
Acosta
which
Tlahuizcalpantecuhtli.
courtesy of the
From Jim?nez (1998:fig. 116A). Reproduced
Instituto
man
Nacional
was
in charge
(was
of masculine
for)
responsible
feminine.
considered
which
e Historia,
de Antropolog?a
internal
This
affairs,
and
and
refers
the other
affairs
administrative
to a situation
later is found among theTenochca
Tlacateuhctli
Mexico.
figure
that were
similar
to that
(Mexica) with their
their Ciuacoatl.
a
Likewise, on this subject it is important to mention
Itza
frieze in the Temple of the Jaguar at Chichen
(cited by Schele and
analyzed by Linnea Wren
1998:223-224,
Mathews,
figs. 6, 19), inwhich a leader
is depicted with a skirt of serpents and women's
breasts.
108
RES 38 AUTUMN
A
Figure
9.
Pillar
2000
B
4 on
the
C
summit
of
Jim?nez (1998:fig. 50). Reproduced
Nacional
de Antropolog?a
Figure
o
e Historia,
Pyramid
10. Some
on
personages
the pillars
of Pyramid
B at
Tula, who have glyphs near their heads identifying them,
B at Tula.
From
courtesy of the Instituto
Mexico.
along
with
other
specific
attributes
(1998:fig. 176). Reproduced
de Antropolog?a
e Historia,
mentioned.
From
Jim?nez
courtesy of the Instituto Nacional
Mexico.
is a prototype for the
that this personage
proposes
In our opinion,
it
Cihuacoatl
(ciuacoatl) o? the Mexica.
also is significant that this figure is shown with attributes
of a Toltec warrior, as are the three personages
facing
him in the frieze.
Another conclusion
of our analysis of the pillars
concerns
in the 1980s
the fragmentary pillar recovered
by a conservation
project directed by Roberto Gallegos
zone. Although
in Tula's archaeological
this
incomplete,
pillar is of great interest in terms of its iconography,
because a relief on one side represents a personage with
pillar group that Acosta had placed on the summit of
that this
Pyramid B, and we tentatively concluded
fragment came from an earlier sculpture complex. This
in
impression mainly was due to the apparent differences
sculptural style and quality of the new fragment compared
to the other pillars.1 Nevertheless,
in our analysis we
the physical and costume elements of the god
while on the opposite
side there is a figure
Tezcatlipoca,
with attributes of Tlaloc (figs. 11-13). The other two
sides of the pillar depict spear bundles similar to those
represented on the known Pyramid B pillars.
When
the newly found pillar fragment was exhibited
for the first time, we did not think that it formed part of the
1. In the 1980s, a conservation
project directed by Professor Roberto
in a pre-Hispanic
this pillar fragment
trench on the
recovered
Gallegos
north edge of Pyramid B. This fragment was on display for several years
zone and also was exhibited
at the museum
in Tula's archaeological
Wren
that this fragment iswithout doubt the upper
concluded
section of the incomplete pillar on Pyramid B (Pillar 3
The
according to the system of Jim?nez [1998:113-116]).
inMexico
of Anthropology.
It is
City at the National Museum
in the catalogue
of Castillo and Dumaine
244, fig,
(1988:222,
published
number
2) as sculpture
12, and Jimenez
(1998:125-132,
fig. 51 )
it "Pilastra 5 (incompleta)."
describes
and illustrates
it, calling
briefly
Mastache
%
;i"-^.
109
'
\- ?>lL'3 "ja ->*"i*;' Sfc jft-j!hi>^--*?^.i.
i i
r**r "TT r ft iiSffIT
"VTu
y ifitMi
* '<
,.
section of Pillar 3,
Figure 11. Pyramid B at Tula. The upper
with
of
reliefs
two
shown
personages?one
as Tezcatlipoca
and the other with attributes of Tlaloc. From Jim?nez
of the Instituto Nacional
(1998:fig. 51). Reproduced courtesy
de Antropolog?a
e Historia,
*
'^^H9HSI^^^h9B^SS9HI^^^H^BBm^S^B?b?'9^?l.?&.
Mexico.
"
? S^^^!^^^^^â^5g^^HH|^BB|HIÎP^^^S?yy ? ,-**.
^^W?^S|^Hh|^H^b^H|^^H^^^BHHh|^^s9P9w^
A
C
B
D
The lower section of Pillar 3,
Figure 14. Pyramid B at Tula.
with the relief of a bearded figure accompanied by a feathered
serpent glyph, which Acosta (1967) proposes very probably
From Jim?nez (1998:fig. 49).
represents TopiItzin Quetzalcoatl.
Instituto
Nacional de
the
of
Reproduced courtesy
Antropolog?a
e Historia,
Mexico.
of the fragment coincide with those of Pillar
on the four sides of Pillar 3
the
and
3,
sculptured elements
and the fragment correlate perfectly. The side of the
a personage with attributes of Tlaloc
fragment that displays
lacks the personage's
feet, which appear on the upper
west
of
Pillar 3. In addition, the missing
the
side
of
edge
elements on the lower section of the fragment's
appear on the upper part of
representation of Tezcatlipoca
in relief the single
the east side of Pillar 3, which displays
foot along with parts of
sandal of the god's only complete
measurements
?
?99Êjh|^HH|^^^^HHR^||^^
Figure 13. Upper section of Pillar 3: Personage with attributes
of Tlaloc. Photograph: Humberto Hiera.
the circular smoke rings coming out of the smoking mirror
that has replaced his other foot. Also, the upper parts of
the north and south faces of Pillar 3 contain reliefs of the
on two
missing end sections of the spear bundles depicted
sides of the fragment.
Pillar 3 is that same sculpture with a bearded figure
that Acosta
(1967) thought very probably
represents
this
(fig. 14b), surely because
Topiltzin Quetzalcoatl
a
feathered
has
and
is
bearded
serpent glyph
personage
above his head. It is very significant that this pillar has
110
RES 38 AUTUMN
2000
the first depiction
of Tezcatlipoca
identified in Tula and
the oldest
known
for
this
image
god in the Central
no
It
is
other sculptures of
that
surprising
Highlands.
at
have
been
the
found
Tula, considering
Tezcatlipoca
open only toward the principal plaza (Acosta 1945:38-40).
Itsnorth, east, and west sides were closed by adobe walls
with benches and cornices, which originally were covered
with sculptured panels having polychrome
reliefs. A total of
importance of this deity in the chronicles
concerning
history of Tollan and the legendary conflict
involving
cult that took place in this city.
50 rectangular columns supported the roof that covered the
entire vestibule (fig. 15).
to Acosta
(1945), the vestibule was built
According
same
as
the
during
period
Pyramid B and, like that
structure, consists of several construction
phases, the first
the
his
it of great
importance that the fragment
is the missing
section of
representing Tezcatlipoca
of images of Tezcatlipoca
and
Pillar 3.2 The placement
on
same
on
one
the
and
column,
Topiltzin Quetzalcoatl
Likewise,
buildings at Tula,
in the indigenous
and ancient Tollan
of the two most
indicates
sacred monumental
that the narratives written
chronicles
theToltec
concerning
are
in the iconography and
represented
definitely
accounts
of
these
describe
whether
Tula,
writing
historical events or are purely legendary. The complete
sculptural group of Pillar 3 suggests the probable
did not have benches. During the last phase,
benches were added along all three walls
of the vestibule along with an altar near the eastern edge
of Pyramid B's stairway. The southeast section of the
vestibule contains two stepped platforms, which go
of which
the decorated
nearly to the level of the plaza and, on the
several meters wide,
southeast, adjoin a passageway
which separates the vestibule from Pyramid C. Two lower
stairways, one on the south edge and another on the east
down
with the cult of
of Topiltzin Quetzalcoatl
that the
and supports the possibility
Tezcatlipoca
this king and the followers of
conflict between
in the chronicles
described
really could
Tezcatlipoca
edge, permit access from the plaza to the vestibule. The
axis of
southern stairway is aligned with the north-south
access
to
B
the
while
and
the
gives
Pyramid
pyramid,
of
ending with the expulsion
his
from
Tula.
and
faction
Quetzalcoatl
Italso is very significant that on the same pillar and
is
the Tezcatlipoca
figure, a warrior
exactly opposite
called
coexistence
have occurred,
represented with attributes of Tlaloc (figs. 12-13). The
presence of this figure on one of Pyramid B's columns
is related to the Tlaloc Warrior cult of
very probably
is the same cult to which
Teotihuacan
tradition, which
Karl Taube (n.d.) proposed
the offering with the shell
was
in Sala 2 of the Palacio Quemado
garment
dedicated. The presence of aWarrior Tlaloc on Pyramid
B further supports Taube's emphasis
of this cult in ancient Tula.
on the importance
(1956)
stairway is an access to what Acosta
"The Palace to the East of the Vestibule."
the walls of the vestibule
The benches
that bordered
eastern
nearly totally survived, but the friezes that covered
in a section covering about
them only were preserved
corner. The cornice of
meters
in
the
northwest
eight
is decorated with
serpents, a common
this frieze
reliefs of undulating,
motif on the existing
at Tula. The polychrome
cornices
B's vestibule
is known as the "Friso
plumed
sculptured bench
frieze of Pyramid
de los Caciques"
(Acosta 1945, Moedano
1947) (fig.
in some detail by a number
16) and has been analyzed
of scholars
(1989),
including Kristan-Graham
(1987), and Klein (1987), who have
Umberger
the similarity of these reliefs with those of
at Chichen
Itza and the sacred precinct of
In the opinion of Moedano
Tenochtitlan.
(1947:133),
discussed
benches
The South Vestibule
on the south by an L-shaped,
Pyramid B is limited
meters
54
vestibule
columned
long and 12 meters wide,
and its
its longest section oriented east-west
with
This vestibule was
shortest section oriented north-south.
2. Originally we thought that the pillar fragment found by
a different
from the
technique
sculptural
project possessed
now it is clear that most
Acosta
but
recovered
(1945),
by
pillars
were due to the eroded
state of the original
differences
pillars, which
Gallegos's
have
been
exposed
on
top of Pyramid
B for nearly
50 years.
who
excavated
of the frieze
this sculpture
represents:
group,
the preserved
part
A procession of principal nobles (se?ores)...
of the
. . . because
principal peoples subject to Toltec domination.
of this we find personages with headdresses and other
attributes of diverse forms and richness, ranging from a
noble with a simple headdress to one who wears a
Xihuitzolli (crown) . . . (and others with) headdresses and
attributes
of warriors,
because
chiefs
these
possessed
among their principal functions that of the military
command,
although
just nominal,
of
their
own
armies.
Mastache
111
Figure 15. Tula: Pyramid B and the South Vestibule. Courtesy of Alba Guadalupe Mastache.
Kristan-Graham
1993) proposes that
(1989:274-275;
the persons represented
in this frieze could be pochteca
(merchants) and not noble lords or warriors. To support
this interpretation, she cites Sahagun's description
(Book
before
IX)of a ritual that the pochteca
performed
leaving
for a journey inwhich
they formed two rows facing
on one side and young
each other, with old merchants
ones on the other; but she notes that this
ritual
pochteca
differs from scene in the Friso de los Caciques
in that all
the merchants where
seated.
We agree with these authors that the personages
in
are
the Friso de los Caciques
not
and
warriors,
probably
that the
especially with the suggestion of Moedano
in the representation
presence of some military elements
mean that these
of some figures does not automatically
are warriors
in the
(1947). Some elements
personages
Friso de los Caciques
that have been identified as arms
more likely appear to be banners, staffs,
scepters, and
elaborate
rattles similar to the ones described by
the Mexica
used
Sahagun and other chroniclers, which
in processions,
and
other
rituals.
festivals,
In the eastern sector of the vestibule, Acosta
l?m. 2) found fragments of another bench
(1956:74,
frieze representing personages walking
from right to left,
and in the southeast
limit of the vestibule,
he found a
two figures walking
in this
panel in situ depicting
direction. On the basis of this, both Acosta and
Moedano
(1947) propose that the bench friezes in the
one starting from the
vestibule
show two processions:
extreme west and another from the east, with the two
processions
meeting at the stairway of Pyramid B. Thus it
seems
beyond doubt that the bench friezes in the
vestibule
but it is not clear
represent two processions,
that these met at the pyramid stairway, and we believe
it
ismore probable that the meeting point of the
processions was the altar directly east of the stairway.
Various authors (Klein 1987:300-301;
De la Fuente
1990) propose
that the central motif
at the confluence
112
RES 38 AUTUMN
2000
Figure 16. The "Friso de los Caciques." After Acosta (1945). From Jim?nez
(1998:fig. 95). Reproduced courtesy of the Instituto Nacional de Antropolog?a e
Historia,
Mexico.
of the two processions
very probably was a
a ball of grass
(a symbol representing
zacatapayolli
out
it
for
of
with maguey
autosacrifice),
spines jutting
bench
of the similarity with Mexica
because
near Tenochtitlan's
Temple Mayor, such as
processions
a procession
the reliefs analyzed
by Beyer (1955) and
in the Casa de las?guilas (Matos 1999), both of which
are centered
(1957:141,
on a zacatapayolli,
and because Acosta
l?m. 21) found a dismantled
panel with a
motif thatDe la Fuente (1990) identifies as a
in the
in the balustrade of a stairway
zacatapayolli
it should be noted that Acosta
vestibule.
Nevertheless,
and
(1957) identified this symbol as a cuauhxicalli,
that this panel was part of the bench
that it is uncertain
it had been reused with the
frieze, because
motif on its reverse side. However,
cuauhxicalli
in
although we do not know what the central motif
that the ritual
it is possible
these bench reliefs was,
in the vestibule
represented
concerns
autosacrifice
bench
ceremonies
processions
and penitence
rites
functionaries
by Tula's king and his principal
performed
to
rituals
the
or councilors,
similar
penitence
perhaps
could have taken place
that Klein (1987) proposes
Casa de las ?guilas, which we will
Tenochtitlan's
mention
later.
in
Building 4 or "The Palace to the Eastof the Vestibule"
there is an
On the east side of the vestibule,
to a building
Acosta
that
entrance
only
complex
and which
he called "Building
partially excavated
the Palace to the East of the Vestibule"
4 or
He describes
this structure as an
(1957:44-46;77-80).
was
he
able to
"enormous
only
palace," where
explore parts of four rooms, but his project reports do
not explain why more sectors of this "complicated
"The discovery
system of rooms" were not excavated:
led
of a wide entrance on the east side of the vestibule
us to an enormous
and complicated
system of rooms
having (preserved) walls
in height"
reached four meters
It isworth emphasizing
that the
(Acosta 1964:60).
to this room complex measured
"wide entrance"
inwidth and was subdivided
almost nine meters
by
with
constructed
sometimes
which
adobe
Mastache
two pillars supporting
the lintels. Thus this was no
a very special access of great
but
ordinary entrance,
in
three sections
similar to the
dimensions
divided
entrance
in the
that Acosta
(1967) proposed
on
reconstruction
for the temple
the summit of
?
s
?,
are still visible on
of Building 4, which
in the maps of Acosta,
Tula's precinct and especially
rooms (fig.
consist only of sections of four different
in
that the adobe walls
17). Acosta
(1967) mentions
to a height of four
the third room were preserved
B
&
D ID
meters
and that he found in situ the wooden
beams
to this room. We only know that part
for the entrances
of this building consisted
of a long narrow room,
which
for the entire length of the vestibule's
extended
east side, and beyond
this narrow room to the east,
there are sections of three other rooms, two of them
located on the north. We do not know the complete
d
d
j
a
a
'a
a
d
g
a
d
I
i a
i
a
d
? a
a
a
d
d
a
d
d
*
internal structure of the building,
a very important
which, without
doubt, constituted
on
structure
Tula's sacred precinct because
of its
access to
two
to
its
the
and
direct
proximity
pyramids
u
and the
dimensions
o
d^d
a
do
D
DID
B.
i
the base of the interior wall of the first
Embellishing
room was a rectangular
altar with a cornice, which
is
Both
aligned with the great entrance of the building.
the main register and the cornice of the altar originally
were covered with reliefs, the surviving panels of
cover part of its main
which
(west) face and its south
side. The reliefs of this altar depict a procession
of
]D
from east to west
personages
richly costumed
walking
and from south to north toward a central motif,
in this case,
is a human figure with his torso
which,
sculpted
frontally and his head facing south toward
in the procession.
the personages
An undulating
blue
a
"S"
surrounds
the
serpent forming
plumed
capital
central figure, which Acosta
l?ms 28,
(1956:74-80,
the
Priest
calls
"Great
29)
("el Gran
Quetzalcoatl"
Sacerdote Quetzalcoatl").3
The rest of the relief on the
main face and the north side of the altar has been
but on the north edge of the central figure
destroyed,
are depictions
are part of a
of feathers that probably
or
for another
banner
headdress
(missing) figure,
DlD
D
D
D
a
a
d
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
Figure 17. Vestibule and the "Palace to the East of the
Vestibule" at Tula. Based on Acosta (1960). Drawing:
3. We
in the art of Tula, the serpents
in the form of a
"S" are symbols of royalty, possibly
the title of ruler,
capital
signifying
and that personages
with
the serpent behind
them represent Toltec
and Healan
n.d.).
kings (Mastache, Cobean,
think that
11 3
"PALACIOAL ESTE"
Pyramid B.
The remains
Pyramid
Fernando
Getino.
L
114
RES 38 AUTUMN
2000
10
Figure
18. Reliefs
9
from
a
procession
showing
a central
toward
walking
the altar
costumed
richly
the "Palace
personages
to the East of
the Vestibule."
From Jim?nez (1998:fig. 97). Reproduced
Instituto
Nacional
are especially
similar
serpent. The reliefs in the Mercado
to the Building 4 reliefs, because
benches
the Mercado
have cornices with plumed serpents like those of most
Tula bench cornices
including those of Building 4.
de Antropolog?a
After
Acosta,
of
motif
at
(1956).
courtesy of the
e Historia,
Mexico.
indicates that there probably was another
in the opposite
of personages
procession
going
on the
direction with both processions
converging
18
).
serpent
plumed
figure (fig.
which
The costumes,
central personage
and other attributes of the
placement,
in the altar
and the other members
that
this
relief
may
suggest
processions
represent an
where
the
consist of
ceremony,
important
protagonists
the king (perhaps recently enthroned)
and lords from
other regions, who are greeting or paying homage to
the newly
invested sovereign. This scene suggests a
situation similar to a ceremony
described
by Sahagun
in the election of a new
that was part of the festivities
Mexica
emperor
who
".
. . sent
his
ambassadors
to all
to
from Quautimalan
surrounding
Kingdoms,
and from sea to sea, and then came the
Michoacan,
same lords or their dignitaries
to attend . . . the festival
of the election,
all the invited participants were
some
together
days before the festival" (Sahagun
1956:11, libra 8, 324).
There is a notable similarity between
this altar frieze
and the bench reliefs at the Mercado
and the friezes in
the Temple of the Jaguar at Chichen
Itza (Marquina
l?m. 272), both of which depict
1964:fotos 435, 436,
of richly dressed figures centered around a
processions
surrounded by an undulating feathered
great personage
Several investigators have discussed
correlations
in the Casa de las
between
the sculptured benches
and those of two
?guilas
(Building E) inTenochtitlan
structures at Tula: the vestibule
(the Friso de los Caciques
the
bench) and the Palacio Quemado,
emphasizing
existence on bench reliefs of processional
of figures with
similar style, ritual themes, and iconography, along with
the presence of cornices decorated with plumed serpents
(Klein 1987; Umberger
1987; Kristan-Graham
1989;
De
Fuente
la
Klein
1990).
(1987:307)
1993;
L?pez
observes that the east room of the Casa de las ?guilas
to the halls in
has a sunken patio with drains comparable
at Chichen
Tula's Palacio Quemado
and the Mercado
the compositional
and
Itza; especially emphasizing
near
similarities
bench
between
the
friezes
iconographie
at Tula.
the Templo Mayor and the Friso de los Caciques
also
the
idea
that
the
(1993:82)
supports
L?pez Lujan
the
distribution
of
Casa
de
las
spatial
?guilas
(Building E)
and the form, proportions,
and decoration of its benches
are reminiscent of the Palacio Quemado
inTula and the
in Chichen
Mercado
Itza.4
Even taking into account that the correlations
proposed by the just-cited authors do exist, we are in
(1987) and
agreement with Augusto Molina Montes
Francisco Hinojosa
(cited inMolina
1987:102), who
show that the spatial organization
of the Casa de las
to
is
similar
the
that
of
?guilas
building excavated
by
Acosta to the east of the vestibule,
stating that in "both
cases the access
is up a stairway, through a portico
. . . this
is part of an L-shaped colonnade.
which
portico
entrance
is gained through a doorway
located axially
with the stairway into a long, narrow chamber. From
into the patio through a doorway not
here one proceeds
to one side. . . ."
located on the same axis but displaced
It is important to note that the similarities between
these
are
not
to
limited
the
building complexes
just
and iconographie
aspects of their
compositional
shared
also
benches,
they
specific room forms and
structural proportions.
4. L?pez Lujan subsequently
made
las ?guilas
for his doctoral
dissertation,
because
the author was
us more
information
when
a detailed
but we
it for publication
revising
we consulted
him.
study of the Casa de
have not seen this text
and could
not give
Mastache
11 5
We also want to emphasize
that besides the existence
an
with
columns
and other
of
?.-shaped vestibule
Montes
Molina
similarities described by
(1987), there
these
elements
between
exist additional
shared
In
the
both complexes,
principal axes are
buildings.
a
east-west
with
oriented
secondary axis oriented
north-south,
having square pillars
including colonnades
two
and
stairways, one on the north side and the other
on the east side. In addition,
in Tula and at the Templo
rooms
is
the
located on the east side of
group of
Mayor,
entrance
at
of these rooms, there
and
the
the vestibule,
an altar placed
narrow
with
is long
rectangular space
In
altar is aligned
its
inner
both
the
wall.
cases,
against
and
the
architectonic
with the principal entrance,
the building entrance and the altar
relationship between
east
with the
(all are roughly
stairway of the vestibule
same.
is
the
aligned)
In the Casa de las ?guilas,
the first room on
adjoining
the northeast
is another room, which on its south side
connects with a sunken patio having columns. At Tula, we
can observe
in the same location part of a room that
to
have a similar form (for example, Room 3,
appears
Acosta
where
[1956] found the doorway beams in situ).
to the north by a smaller room,
This room is adjoined
a
in its northwest corner,
second
which has
doorway
room in the Casa
like
the
of
the
equivalent
plan
apparently
D in figures 17
and
The
letters
de las?guilas
B, C,
(fig. 19).
and 19, indicate the doorways of the two structures, which
are similarly placed.
InTula, the sector to the south of
Room 3, where the columned
patio would be, was not
in pre-Hispanic
have
been
excavated
(and may
destroyed
we
not
rest
if
Thus
the
of
this building
do
know
times).
as is
was
to
Casa
the
in
las
similar
de
also
?guilas,
plan
even
near
in
the
correlations
the
but
the part
so,
portico,
terms of general plan and location are notable.
is the fact that the
Probably even more significant
location and spatial relationship of both buildings with
and
the nearby pyramids are the same. The placement
the
with
of
South
Vestibule
architectural
relationship
Pyramid C are clearly the same as those the Casa de las
In both complexes,
has with the Templo Mayor.
?guilas
are
rooms
its
and
the vestibule
placed on the northwest
in a location near the pyramid but
side of the pyramid,
a
it
hallway.
by
separated from
It is important to state that the sizes and forms of
these two buildings are not entirely known and that
different sections of each structure were preserved at
In the case of the Casa de las
Tula and Tenochtitlan.
rooms
east wing are known almost in
its
the
of
?guilas,
Figure 19. Map of the Casa de las?guilas
of Tenochtitlan.
Mayor
the "Piano
Matos
General
Redrawn
del Templo
by
Fernando
Mayor."
at the Templo
Getino,
Courtesy:
from
Eduardo
Moctezuma.
is
their totality except for the northern limit, which
street of Justo Sierra. Because of
covered by the modern
this, the length and width of the building's north wing
are unknown as is the total number of columns
in this
a row of six
uncovered
section. The existing excavation
columns, but there may have been more. At Tula, in
contrast, much of the "east wing"
(consisting of Acosta's
has
"Palace to the East of the Vestibule") of the complex
not been excavated,
but we know the size and
of the adjoining sector (the vestibule),
characteristics
and we know the nature of the building to the north
this complex was integrated?Pyramid
with which
B, for
which
the vestibule was the only direct access.
116
RES 38 AUTUMN
2000
If the north wing of the Casa de las ?guilas
really was
a long, narrow portico similar to the South Vestibule of
this
Pyramid B, then it is logical to ask whether
columned
hall was articulated with another building to
the north, and if this is the case, what was the specific
identityof this building?According toMarquina's (1964)
map,
the Temple
of Tezcatlipoca
would
be
located
nearby, and it is interestingthat Klein (1987) identified
as the Tlacochcalco
las ?guilas
and
that the buildings with this name were
to Tezcatlipoca.
is that
Another possibility
the Casa de
observed
dedicated
there
directly to the north of the Casa de las ?guilas,
was a plaza or other open area like those at Chichen
Itza north of the colonnade
(which also has small
stairways) to the southeast of the Temple of theWarriors,
or to the north of the vestibule on the west side of
Chichen's
plaza. On the other hand, itmay be possible
an independent
that the Casa de las ?guilas
constituted
unit in itself, in the form of a capital L, and
architectural
was not specifically
integrated with another building to
the north. Without
knowing the total plan and
of the Casa de las ?guilas,
including
it is highly speculative,
in our
its north wing,
especially
an
to
to
make
architectural
attempt
opinion,
reconstruction
of this building.
case
In the
that
of Tula, it is important to emphasize
of the "Palace to the East of the
only the occupants
had direct access to Pyramid B and the
Vestibule"
itwas
temple on its summit; from this structure,
to walk directly to the stairway of the pyramid
possible
dimensions
without
going down to the plaza. No other building
had such direct access to this pyramid. The great
columned
doorway of this palace probably was the
processions
starting point for ceremonial
going to the
summit of the pyramid.
It is evident therefore, that the
an
and the "Palace to the East" constituted
unit that was
with
architectonic
Pyramid B. It
integrated
it
isworth adding that even though, on first impression,
vestibule
and the Palace
might appear that the Palacio Quemado
of Quetzalcoatl
also had direct access to Pyramid B,
this was not so because,
despite the proximity of these
different
barriers exist
types of architectural
buildings,
between
The Palace
them.
of Quetzalcoatl
or Building
1
Building 1, inwhich he identified three principal
construction
phases, some of them covering part of the
lower two taluds or tiers of Pyramid B on its east side.
to Acosta
this building
(1964:58-61),
According
measures
meters
60
and its
east-west,
approximately
east base ended
in a stuccoed
some
in
which
talud,
sectors was
on
at least two meters high,
apparently with a
its upper edge and remains of connecting
walls at its base. On the east face of this talud, there was
a mural painted on a
clay surface of which only the
lower portion survived, representing
the feet of two
cornice
toward the south along with
personages walking
a circular motif
the two figures.
placed between
On the basis of Acosta's
topographic map
1), it appears that the Palace of
(1956-1957:mapa
a compound
similar
Quetzalcoatl
probably constituted
to the Palacio Quemado,
Acosta's
excavations
although
hall of this first
totally exposed only one columned
structure. The elevation
of this hall is about 4.5 meters
the base of Pyramid B; this room was slightly
like Salas 1 and 3 in the Palacio Quemado,
rectangular
although smaller, with only one row of columns
sustaining the roof. To the west, this hall adjoins
above
Pyramid B, but it is important to note that its floor
was several meters above the
pyramid base.
The Palacio Quemado
or "Burned
level
Palace"
the columned
Among
buildings on the sacred
the largest and perhaps the most important is
precinct,
called the Palacio Quemado.
This architectonic
complex
has a rectangular form measuring
90
approximately
meters by 60 meters, and it is located directly west of
it is separated by a narrow
Pyramid B, from which
This structure basically consists of three
columned
halls with central sunken
great quadrangular
are independent and do
halls
These
patios (impluvios).
not interconnect
in common entrances or passageways.
Each hall possesses
its own entrance on different sides:
Sala 1 on the east, Sala 3 on the west, and Sala 2 on the
that only Sala 2 had direct access
south, which means
passageway.
the main plaza (see fig. 20). These halls are
adjoined on the north by a row of six long narrow
rooms. The three rooms (numbers 1, 5, and 6) on the
western
and eastern ends of the row have doorways only
toward
the north and do not connect with the main
whereas
the central three rooms (2, 3, and 4) are
halls,
with
closed on the north but have direct communication
Sala 2 on the south.
toward
to Pyramid B on the east, and in some sense
Adjacent
is the building that
with
part of the pyramid,
overlapping
or
Acosta
(1964) called the "Palace of Quetzalcoatl"
part of
Mastache
11 7
ooooooooooooooooooooo
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
i
d
oooooooooooooooooooo
ITI
o
o o o
CUARTO 6
o
o
o
o
SALA 3
o .o o
o
o |
o
o
o
o
o
o
O
o
d
|oo
o o
D
o
o
o
o
3?EL
???
o o o
CUARTO5
o
~? o-" o
o
[
?Jk
D D D D
SALA 2
q n n..
u
D
u
t
D O D D
o
o
o
o
o
SALA1
o, o p
o
o
:
o
o
?
:
o
o
o
o._o
b
o
D
O?
D
D
5T
Figure
20.
Plan
of
the Palacio
Quemado
at Tula.
that a significant
(1956-1957)
emphasized
structure
is
existence
of
this
the
of columned
aspect
it on three
vestibules
which
surround
(columnatas),
sides: south, north, and west. These vestibules are
independent or isolated, with transverse walls that block
Acosta
communication
them and separate them from
between
one another. The existence of architectural barriers
between
the vestibules
conditioned
the possibilities
of
circulation
for most spaces in the Palacio Quemado
complex. Most of the Palacio Quemado
apparently did
not have direct access to Pyramid B, because
the
vestibules of both buildings were separated by a walled
to the
passageway
(fig. 21), which blocked circulation
its
Sala
southern
entrance,
2, through
pyramid. Only
would
have had access to Pyramid B via the plaza.
Some differences
exist in the columns and pillars
supporting the roofs of the three halls and the vestibules.
The halls (1 and 3) on the extremes of the Palacio
have circular columns as do the north and
Quemado
west vestibules
that communicate
with them. In
2
Sala
and
the
southern
vestibule
of the Palace
contrast,
Based
on Acosta
(1960).
Fernando
Drawing:
Getino.
have square columns.
Probably the reason for placing
columns with the same forms in specific halls and the
was not merely
vestibules with which
they communicate
or
in
to achieve greater architectural
unity,
harmony
was
a
means
sectors
but
also
of
the
structure,
particular
of marking two different categories of space. Only the
spaces with square columns had direct access to the
(figs.
plaza, that is, Sala 2 and the southern vestibule
Sala 2 was without
(1961a) observed,
20-21). As Acosta
doubt the most important room in the Palacio
this is indicated by its central location and its
Quemado:
In
the
only hall with direct access to the plaza.
being
rooms
on
to
its
2
is
three
small
connected
Sala
addition,
was
north side, one of which
(Room 4)
directly aligned
axis and has a stairway.
the palace's north-south
The room is described by Acosta
37) as
(1961a:34,
with
surely
constituting
"...
a
sanctuary
where
the most
sacred rites were celebrated."
In the interior of this small room, there was a bench
some polychrome
or altar from which
friezes survived
that represent figures dressed as warriors. The two
118
RES 38 AUTUMN
2000
Figure 21. Perspective of the Palacio Quemado.
Courtesy of Alba Guadalupe Mastache.
are depicted
frontally instead of in
preserved personages
are
most
shown with
Tula
friezes.
like
They
profile
and
characteristic Toltec weapons
(atlatl
fending stick)
a Tezcacuitlapilli
back
along with butterfly pectorals and
mirror. One figure is surrounded by a undulating,
plumed serpent forming an inverted capital S motif,
lacks a serpent but is followed
while
the other warrior
a
the relief of the tail of another
with
by
panel fragment
feathered serpent. Thus originally this frieze probably
consisted of alternating figures with one personage
one lacking the
having a plumed serpent and the next
that
each
which
suggests
serpent (ibid.),
figure had a
different status. We agree with Acosta that this room was
an important
no ordinary place.
Itclearly constituted
ritual setting that had restricted access (perhaps only for
roles in the
the sovereign) and played significant
functions of Sala 2.
ceremonial
halls (salas) of the Palacio
The three great columned
can
in some detail on the
be
reconstructed
Quemado
basis of Acosta's excavation
reports. He found the roofs
fallen on the floors and damage by burning. The roofs
a central open section (impluvio), which
originally had
light to the interior of each hall. The upper
provided
of
these
open patios were decorated with
parts
three
relief
panels, which possessed
polychrome
human
motifs:
figures, great solar
reclining
principal
disks like the dorsal disks of the Atlantes, and
or vessels with
of Cuauhxicalli,
representations
sacrificed hearts (Acosta 1956). Fallen sculptures of
Chalchihuites
(precious stones or drops of water) and
bundles of columns
(atados de columnillas) were also
found. The patio roofs were decorated with merlons
(almenas) in the form of a capital G, which Acosta
the cut cross-section
(1956) interpreted as depicting
conch shell, and thus being a Venus-Quetzalcoatl
of a
symbol (fig. 22).
In Sala 1, Acosta
(1956, 1957) recovered fragments
to
eight solar disks and four Cuauhxicalli.
corresponding
Even more numerous were the panels with reclining
totaled at least 20, of which only
personages, which
seven were reconstructed. These reclining figures are
armed and have costume elements of Toltec warriors.
Mastache
Figure
22.
Different
decorative
elements
and
symbols
that
11 9
formed
the frieze in the upper section of the patio in Sala 1 of the Palacio
Quemado. From Acosta (1956:fig. 16). Reproduced courtesy of the
Instituto
Nacional
de Antropolog?a
Some are surrounded by feathered serpents, and others
wear a large, transversely cut conch shell as a pectoral.
Most of the figures looking toward the right have
serpents, while the other figures look toward the left,
that, in the original sculpture group, the
suggesting
in rows of
(fig. 23) were divided
reclining personages
same
in
with
the
direction,
groups of
figures looking
to
to
left
and
the
the
right arranged
figures looking
around central motifs, which could have been the
or both.
or the solar disks (Tezcacuitlapilli)
Cuauhxicalli
It is significant that four of the reclining figures have
leggings with tied bows, which may constitute symbols
and Healan n.d.; Kristan
of royalty (Mastache, Cobean,
have
1989:159-161
The
other
Graham
).
personages
or
knee
rounded
(rodilleras).
protectors
leggings
plain,
attributes of the reclining
and costume
Anatomical
suggest that they may
figures in the Palacio Quemado
same
some
the
of
personages who are depicted
represent
e Historia,
Mexico.
on the pillars of Pyramid B. Like the figures of the Pyramid
roof panels may represent
B pillars, the Palacio Quemado
or rulers and
two
different
of
personages
categories: kings
other personages having a lesser status or function. Only a
detailed analysis of all the restored panels and the
hundreds of fragments found on the palace floors would
if these proposals are viable.
determine
located in the
The benches and altars originally
interior of Salas 1 and 2 were similar in size and
to those of the Pyramid B
architectural characteristics
benches and altars
vestibule. The Palacio Quemado
were
with
covered
also
friezes, but these
doubtlessly
reliefs were preserved only in three areas of Sala 2 and
in Room 4 to the north (which already were mentioned).
the three vestibules
surrounding the Palacio
all
Quemado
sculptured benches
probably possessed
and altars, but only a few reliefs have survived in situ in
the north vestibule
(Acosta 1957, 1961a).
In addition,
120
RES 38 AUTUMN
2000
Figure 23. Reclining figures from the patio friezes of Sala 1 in the Palacio Quemado, Tula. Based on Acosta (1956, 1957). From
Jim?nez (1998:figs. 55, 56, 59, 61). Reproduced courtesy of the Instituto Nacional de Antropolog?a e Historia, Mexico.
The principal preserved friezes in Sala 2 include an
important relief panel in the northeast corner at the east
side of the entrance for Rooms 2 and 3, which depicts
two warriors walking
is
from left to right, one of whom
bowed
like an elderly person (fig. 24). Surely this frieze
length of the bench until it
connected with the surviving relief panels on the east
side of the hall's principal entrance. Here Acosta found
a section of bench friezes representing six personages
in
on
to
the
from left
procession
right, with three figures
north face of the bench and three figures on the east
on the north
face at the main entrance. The procession
face turns the corner at the entrance and is shown
leaving the building on the east bench face (Acosta
continued
for the entire
l?ms. 8, 31).
who
leads this procession out of the
the eye goggles characteristic of the
building possesses
god Tlaloc and iswithout doubt the most important figure
in the frieze (fig. 25). His high status is expressed
in his
his being represented with greater
leading the procession,
stature than the other figures, and his having the most
1957:131,153,168,
The personage
This leader also has the most elaborate
in
the procession,
and it is noteworthy that
speech scroll
one of the figures following him wears a xihuitzolli. All
are armed (usually
the surviving figures in this procession
with fending sticks or spears) but do not have butterfly
pectorals or other attributes of high status Toltec warriors.
On the west side of the entrance to Rooms 2 and 3, a
elaborate
costume.
from
frieze section shows 13 personages walking
to
series
This
is
left (fig. 26).
relief
interesting,
right
because some of the undulating serpents on the cornice
above the human figures have white scrolls on their
bodies instead of feathers. Acosta (1957) suggests that
these are cloud serpents and constitute a reference to the
legendary lord or god Mixcoatl.
in the Sala
Acosta concludes
that the two processions
2 friezes (one going from left to right and the other from
right to left) surrounded the entire hall going in opposite
in the
directions and then met at the main entrance
enter
to
the south
the
hall
south, probably finally leaving
bench
vestibule
(Acosta 1957:168-169).
in the two processions
personages
He considers
the
to be warriors, but
in
Mastache
121
our opinion, only one figure (num. 2) in the west
is armed, and instead of weapons,
the others
procession
carry what appear to be long banners or ceremonial
staffs (scepters), decorated
rattles, round banners (which
may be shields), and at least one conch shell trumpet. It
in the west procession
is significant that no personage
has a speech scroll coming from his mouth, but there
are speech scroll-like
elements associated with the shell
trumpet and the rattles, which probably represent the
music or sounds produced by these instruments.
In contrast, the personages
in the procession
led by
the Tlaloc figure on the east side of Sala 2 do carry
have cotton armor) and almost
(and sometimes
surely represent warriors. Of the eight surviving figures
in this procession,
five have speech scrolls coming from
In our opinion,
in Sala
their mouths.
the two processions
2 possess different character or functions. The figures in
the west procession
appear to represent high-ranking
lords who are not warriors
(fig. 26). These personages
weapons
in any of
have the most sumptuous costumes depicted
Tula's friezes, and instead of weapons,
they carry what
instruments or noisemakers.
The
appear to be musical
east procession
is composed
of warrior figures, and the
speech scrolls coming from their mouths,
including that
dressed as Tlaloc, could well
of the leading personage
be symbols of song or of prayer. These friezes suggest a
ritual similar to a ceremony
(for the sixth month called
in
Etzalqualiztli) described by the informants of Sahagun
which priests formed processions
led by the high priest
of Tlaloc, while they sang, chanted prayers, and played
instruments (including rattles) in honor of this
musical
1, bk. 2, p. 169). With this citation, we
god (1956:vol.
do not mean to suggest that the reliefs in Sala 2
represent the specific ceremony described by Sahagun,
or that the friezes are related to these festivals, but only
in honor of
that the reliefs could depict a ritual, perhaps
included processions with songs, music,
Tlaloc, which
and prayers.
The importance of rites to Tlaloc in Sala 2 of the
is further supported by the nature of
Palacio Quemado
the offerings recovered there. During the 1990s, a
conservation
n.d.) found
project (Cobean and Mastache
in the center of this hall under the floor a massive
included an elaborate
offering of marine materials, which
ceremonial
garment made of hundreds of finely carved
shell plaques, and in a subsequent offering at the same
central point, a large pyrite mirror with turquoise mosaic
fire serpents (that is, a solar disk or Tezcacuitlapilli,
like
the disks sculptured on the fallen roof panels of Salas 1
Figura
Quemado,
24.
of
Personages
who
apparently
the east
frieze
formed
of Sala
the end
of
2
in the
Palacio
the procession
led by theTlaloc figure. Based on Acosta (1957). From
Jim?nez (1998:fig. 93). Reproduced courtesy of the Instituto
Nacional
de Antropolog?a
e Historia,
Mexico.
and 2). In an analysis of these ritual deposits, Taube (n.d.)
considers the offering with the cut-shell garment to be a
at Tula of theTeotihuacan
manifestation
tradition cult of
as
a
war
Tlaloc
earlier. This
god, as was mentioned
in
interpretation is further supported by the existence
2
Sala
of the frieze procession
showing warriors being
led by a personage with Tlaloc attributes.
Besides the turquoise mosaic mirror in the latest Sala
2 offering, an undecorated
pyrite mirror was deposited
on top of the shell garment in the earlier
offering
(Cobean and Mastache
n.d.). These are not the only
mirrors found in Sala 2. During the 1950s, Acosta
(1957)
recovered another turquoise mosaic mirror and several
small pyrite mirrors among a group of offerings under the
Chac Mool found in situ in front of the eastern altar in
Sala 2. On the north side of Sala 2, Acosta
(1957)
most of another Chac Mool, which
encountered
in front of another altar
originally may have been placed
a thorax fragment of
in this hall. In Sala 1, he excavated
a Chac Mool near the entrance
(Acosta 1956:70).
Inour opinion,
in
the iconography of the sculptures
Sala 2, together with its offerings and architectural
features, suggests that itsmain functions were not related
even though several authors (for
to rites of autosacrifice,
De
la Fuente 1990) have proposed
example, Klein 1987,
this interpretation. The presence of two Chac Mools
(with
122
RES 38 AUTUMN
2000
Figure 25. Bench frieze on the east side of Sala 2 in the Palacio Quemado,
Tula.
This
apparently
represents
a
procession
of warriors
led by
a personage
with attributes of Tlaloc. From Jim?nez (1998:fig. 94). Reproduced
the
Instituto
Nacional
de Antropolog?a
one placed
Cuauhxicalli
in front of an altar) and the panels with
(vessels with sacrificed hearts) in the patio
roof friezes probably
indicate human sacrifice rather than
It is pertinent for this
and autosacrifice.
penitence
conclusion
that Miller and Samayoa (1998; Miller 1985)
to be elements for cults of human
consider Chac Mools
sacrifice and especially
the sacrifice of war prisoners.
Peter Schmidt's recent recovery of a Chac Mool with its
arms tied like a war prisoner in the Group of the
at Chichen
Itza supports this
in
and
Mathews
Schele
1998:358).
interpretation (cited
In addition, both Miller (1985) and Graulich
(1984)
propose a ritual relationship between Chac Mools and
Tlaloc cults, which correlates well with the associations
in the Palacio Quemado.
of sculptures and offerings
inTenochtitlan
in
Likewise, the find of Chac Mools
in front of the temple of Tlaloc
situ at the Templo Mayor
directly relates them to the cult of this god, as does, of
Thousand
Columns
recovered
Tlaloc Chac Mool
course, the well-known
streets
Venustiano
Carranza
of
and
under the modern
Pino Suarez, which has irrefutable attributes of this deity
e Historia,
courtesy of
Mexico.
Miller and
(Matos 1988; De la Fuente 1990:49-52;
1998:67-69,
Samayoa
fig. 15). Thus even though the
Chac Mools of Tula are representations
of warriors that
to a
lack specific attributes directly
them
linking
it
is
the
association
particular deity,
probable that
between
this type of sculpture and cults to Tlaloc, which
in the Templo Mayor, goes back to Tula?
is evident
when
that the only Chac Mool
especially
considering
found in situ at Tula is next to the bench frieze
led by a Tlaloc figure.
procession
Kristan-Graham
that the
(1989:288-289)
proposes
reliefs could
reclining figures in the Palacio Quemado
represent vanquished warriors and that the halls
a function related to the funeral rites of dead
possessed
dead
warriors,
heroes, or fallen leaders. She and Klein
(1987) identified the functions of the Palacio Quemado
as similar to those of the Mexica
Tlacochcalco
("Dart
House"), based on Klein's (1987) studies of sixteenth
ceremonies
of newly
century accounts of autosacrifice
elected Aztec kings and of the funeral rites for Aztec
rulers and high-ranking warriors. Klein (1987) also notes
Mastache
frieze
Bench
Palacio
26. Tula,
Quemado.
Figure
on the east
side. The west
from the relief figures
or ceremonial
be
staffs, decorated
long banners
trumpet. Based on Acosta
Historia,
on
the west
procession
rattles,
side
of Sala
represents
round
banners,
2
sumptuously
which
may
(1957). From Jim?nez (1998:fig. 92). Reproduced
a
in the opposite
direction
going
procession
to
what
dressed
appear
personages
carrying
a conch
shell
and probably
be shields,
e
de Antropolog?a
courtesy of the Instituto Nacional
Mexico.
that the Tlacochcalco was the place where the Mexica
was
emperor's cadaver was dressed and masked before it
as
and Duran
cremated, and she cites Mendieta
stating
that the dead king and funerary images of dead warriors
were
that, according
put in this building. She concludes
to various ethnohistorical
sources, the Tlacochcalco
to the god Tezcatlipoca,
and
buildings were dedicated
inTenochtitlan's Casa de
that war captives were sacrificed
las?guilas
(which she considers to have been a
after Mexica military victories.
Tlacochcalco)
that the
Klein's and Kristan-Graham's
hypothesis
had similar ritual functions to those of
Palacio Quemado
is highly suggestive but
Tlacochcalco
Tenochtitlan's
for Tula, we do not have the
difficult to confirm, because
sources that exist for Tenochtitlan,
vast ethnohistorical
nor the detailed descriptions
of chroniclers
concerning
that
specific structures, rituals, festivals, and ceremonies
of
reconstructions
make possible nearly ethnographic
in the
and function of the buildings
the appearance
the Templo Mayor.
great precinct surrounding
least basic information, and the existing excavation
some contexts and
reports lack key data concerning
narrow
a
structure
had
finds. This
stairway on its
its
southwest side. Apparently
principal entrance did not
was
on the south facade
instead
face the plaza, but
remains
of stairway
Acosta
where
(1961 a) found
a
In
reconstruction
balustrades.
drawing made by
is
Ponciano Salazar (Acosta 1968:fig. 17), this building
a
two
south stairway and
shown with
small, open
in the
interior patios (which are not mentioned
reports).
published
On the south of this building, an important series of
stone relief panels were recovered, which have key
the iconography of this sector of
information concerning
describes
these reliefs
Acosta
the precinct.
(1960:68-69)
as
contexts
follows:
and their probable original
Over all the explored surface (of the south part of the
building) a series of sculptured stones appeared thatwithout
doubt belonged to relief panels which decorated the south
face
Building
depicting
123
J or "The Building
to the South of Pyramid C"
South of Pyramid C (and separated from it by a
is a long, rectangular
several meters wide)
passageway
Acosta
which
J,"
"Building
platform designated
(1961 a:54) describes as "a big building of the 'Palace'
on its front (west
colonnade
type with an enormous
facade) which extends for the entire length of the
one of the structures at Tula with the
platform." This is
of
locations
... A
the platform.
were
where
they
sculptured
decorate
panels
Pyramid
study
found,
the
reliefs,
and
shows
that
these
of
of
the
to those which
to have been
similar
ought
is
do not know
B. . . . But now, what we
specifically where the three different motifs were placed,
the god Tlaloc and the reclining
that is,Quetzalcoatl,
personages;
the
first elements
are easy
to
place
because
they
only could be set in the (sunken) section of the panel group.
. ..
hypothetically the (other) two motifs (Tlaloc and the
were
one
reclining
personages)
in the intermediate
other
panels.
in the
...
upper
frieze
(I suppose)
and
that
the
the
124
RES 38 AUTUMN
2000
of this god found in other structures of Tula's main
in that the face of the god has what appears to
precinct,
be a large buccal mask with a long tube-like snout
in a hook (Acosta 1960:l?ms.
curling upward ending
that the
Acosta
XIX).
XVI, XVII,
(ibid., p. 68) observed
are
noses
of
these
curved
27)
great
figures (fig.
reminiscent of Maya Chac images inYucatan, but Karl
the Tlalocs of Building J
Taube (pers. comm.) considers
to ?mages of the
to be more similar iconographically
In the recent
rain god at El Tajin than to Chac.
excavation
of Building K (to the southwest of Building J),
a relief fragment was recovered with a Tlaloc
image
identical to the version of this god found in
essentially
Figure 27. Tula relief panel from Building Jdepicting Tlaloc
with a long, hooked nose. Based on Acosta (1960). From
Jim?nez (1998:fig. 76). Reproduced courtesy of the Instituto
Nacional
de Antropolog?a
e Historia,
Mexico.
reclining personages were (directly displayed) in the middle
part of the panel group, while the images of Tlaloc formed
a
procession
in the
upper
frieze.
is
refers to as Quetzalcoatl
The image that Acosta
in the friezes of Pyramid
identical to the representations
B?that
is, the composite man-bird-reptile
being that
Acosta and Moedano
identify as Tlahuizcalpantecuhtli
or not this identification
is correct, the
(fig. 8). Whether
presence of this motif on Building J is very significant,
it indicates that the man-bird-reptile
because
symbol
was used in other structures on the sacred precinct that
were not pyramids, suggesting
that Pyramid B may not
to this possible deity.
have been dedicated
principally
The presence of panels with the man-bird-reptile
that the
motif on Building J also suggests the possibility
with
this
C
panels
possessed
Pyramid
originally
nearby
its
This
that
facades.
the
covered
friezes
among
image
in Tula than has been
motif probably was more common
relief
itwas recovered
Another
depicting
panel
thought.
in the northeast
at the El Corral residential compound
1989:fig. 12.11), and
city (Mandeville and Healan
found another sculpture with this ?mage on the
Cobean
80 meters east of the
urban zone surface approximately
Tula Chico plaza (Mastache and Cobean n.d.). However,
these two reliefs from the eastern city have stylistic
from the man-bird-reptile
differences
panels of Pyramid
B and Building J.
of Tlaloc that formed part of the
The representations
are
from nearly all the images
friezes
different
J
Building
Building J (Cobean 1994).
in Building
The panels representing reclining personages
are
in
to
the upper
similar
those
of
J
reclining figures
quite
but the
friezes of the patios in the Palacio Quemado,
is
Building J figures are unarmed. One of the personages
Acosta
which
the
(1960)
by
glyph "9-Hand,"
accompanied
name of this lord.
is the calendrical
proposes
Building K
Building K is a long, narrow rectangular structure
limit of the main plaza, which was
marking the southern
from
but
found to be very damaged
excavated
recently
and
colonial
1994).
(Cobean
(Aztec)
looting
pre-Hispanic
was
it
Like most buildings on the ceremonial
precinct,
burned at the end of the Tollan phase (circa a.D. 1150)
and has partial reoccupations
during Late Postclassic and
times.
The
Colonial
original structure has at least
early
three construction
stages: the first associated with the
culture
(Corral phase, circa a.d. 800) and
Coyotlatelco
two constructions
during the Tollan phase.
The final Tollan phase version of Building K consists
taluds (tiers), with the upper
of three overlapping
a
hall and vestibule
long, columned
platform supporting
similar to those of Building J south of Pyramid C. The
limit by a long
vestibule was closed on its southern
adobe wall with a bench that originally was covered by
in other structures on the
like the benches
relief panels
were
in situ, but several
No
recovered
friezes
precinct.
relief fragments were found fallen on floors including
Tlaloc
the just-mentioned
?mage. A long row of square
north side,
columns supported the roof of the vestibule's
which was open toward the plaza.
South of the vestibule,
apparently there was a long,
narrow columned
hall (that was badly damaged
rows of pillars placed
subsequently), which had two
Mastache
125
He found a burial
(1885) excavations.
Aztec
from
the
and
reoccupation)
(probably secondary
the Adoratorio. Clear architectural
underneath
similarities exist between
and the much
the Adoratorio
at
Itza
Venus
de
Chichen
Plataforma
(Marquina
larger
together
in two groups of six around a central space
an entrance, or an open patio (impluvio).
functioning as
in the west with a
hall was connected
This columned
narrow
lacked other
which
room,
probably
long,
accesses. The walls of the columned
hall form two
before Charnay's
in terms of its placement
capital Ls, the largest of which,
and shape, repeats the capital L formed by the vestibules
on the north side of the plaza, especially
that of the
vestibule of Pyramid B.
On the south side, the limits of Building K extended
1964:886). The Chac Mool was found by Acosta
in rubble on the east side of the
(1942-1944:148)
It is a large fragment lacking the head, like
Adoratorio.
most Chac Mools
from Tula. In various sectors of the
altar, Acosta recovered shattered relief panels, one of
representing a warrior with a feather cape in
is among the finest sculptures known from
polychrome,
he found a
Tula (ibid., fig. 26). In further excavations,
Tollan
altar
within
the
Adoratorio
badly damaged early
inwhat appears to
beyond the edge of itsmain platform
have been a great lateral stairway platform (or "cuerpo
the damaged
like that of Pyramid C. Despite
adosado"),
nature of this area, it is clear that the principal entrance
for Building K was on its south facade and not toward
for a
the plaza on the north. There is no evidence
on
access
or
the north facade of
other forms of
stairway
this structure, the lower platform of which was over two
which,
forming a barrier. The only
high, essentially
found adjoining this platform was
lateral construction
two meters wide.
small, low altar approximately
Two ballcourts
have been excavated
and restored at
Tula. The largest, Ballcourt 2 (excavated by Eduardo
Matos
the
[1976] at the end of the 1960s), occupies
western
limits of the main plaza in front of Pyramid C;
a smaller structure, Ballcourt
1 (excavated by Acosta
meters
a
Thus Building K was a construction
having several
tiers, with a narrow hall bordered by a long vestibule.
This structure probably was quite similar to the nearby
Building J and very different from the Palacio Quemado.
No contexts were found indicating that Building K
functioned as a residence
(Cobean 1994). Its central
location on the south side of the plaza and its exact
(in
alignment with the transverse axis of the Adoratorio
in the
its importance
the center of the plaza) emphasize
the fact that
plan of the precinct. Nevertheless,
Building K's entrance stairway is on the south facade
outside the main plaza suggests that its architectonic,
in some ways
functional, and symbolic
importance was
status within the sacred precinct, but
of secondary
the axis of the south
perhaps Building K constituted
overall
plaza that may well have been the site of Tula's royal
palace. We propose that the palace explored by Charnay
(1885) in the south plaza, or an adjacent unexcavated
a royal residence, because of this
building, perhaps was
(Acosta
1945:46-48).
The ballcourts
1940, 1941, 1945), lies outside the plaza directly north
of Pyramid B in an area called the Plazoleta Norte. Also
outside the plaza to the northeast of Pyramid B is a
structure
small (almost miniature)
unexcavated
meters
30
which
approximately
probably
long,
a third ballcourt.
constitutes
The two excavated
ballcourts
have
interesting
architectonic
relationships with the two pyramids.
Ballcourt 2 obviously was the most important structure,
because of its larger dimensions
and location within the
main plaza, directly opposite
the largest pyramid (C).
On the other hand, the smaller ballcourt
is outside the
to
is
and
related
the smaller pyramid (B). Even
plaza
1
is
behind Pyramid B and not in front,
though Ballcourt
a
there is clear spatial relationship between
the two
main
the east-west
dimensions
of Pyramid B and
Ballcourt 1 are the same, and the east and west
limits of
the two structures are exactly aligned.
There are many similarities between
Ballcourt 2 and
The Adoratorio
Itza. The proportions
the great Ballcourt of Chichen
and
features of the two structures are closely
architectural
locations of temples
analogous,
including the specific
area's prominent elevated setting, its proximity to the
of associated
plaza, and the characteristics
structures (Mastache, Cobean, and Healan n.d.).
The Adoratorio was the main plaza's central altar, of
Itprobably had stairs and a Chac
which
little is known.
Mool sculpture, but apparently
it had been badly looted
structures:
and other
lateral buildings
(Patino 1994; Marquina
l?m.
The
264).
1964:855,
probable
temple on the east
facade has essentially
the same location as the Temple
of the Jaguars in Chichen,
and the small platforms on
126
RES 38 AUTUMN
2000
shell garment of Offering 2 further suggests the existence
the Palacio Quemado
of important ritual ties between
its
and
Sala
2)
particular ceremonial
(especially
functions with Ballcourt 1, and suggests a link between
this ballcourt and the Tlaloc Warrior cult.
The Tzompantli
Figure
Acosta
28.
The
Tlaloc
Warrior
statue
from
Ballcourt
1. After
From Jim?nez (1998:fig. 34).
courtesy of the Instituto Nacional de
(1942-1944).
Reproduced
Antropolog?a
e Historia,
Mexico.
the north and south sides of Ballcourt 2 possess the
same proportions
and forms as the north and south
at Tula the
temples of the Chichen ballcourt, although
In
the
addition,
spatial
temples did not survive.
C is the same
relationship of Ballcourt 2 with Pyramid
Itzawith the Temple
as the great Ballcourt at Chichen
centers
the Tzompantli
and at both
of the Warriors,
(skull rack) is situated in the same location in relation to
the ballcourt.
Ballcourt 1was the first building extensively
explored
from what
in Tula by Acosta, who found it very damaged
appear to have been systematic pre-Hispanic
programs that removed most of the panels
dismantling
on the facades, along with associated
sculptures. The
a
relief representing a ball
included
surviving sculptures
with the
player (Acosta 1941:fig. 1) and another
a
motif along with
cut-conch-shell
probable numeral
most
The
2A).
(Acosta 1942-1944:fig.
impressive
is a three
sculpture recovered from this ballcourt
a
Warrior
Tlaloc
of
dimensional
(fig. 28)
representation
a vest very similar to the shell mosaic garment
wearing
found recently inOffering Number 2 of the Palacio
1994). Even though it is
(ibid., fig. 1; Cobean
Quemado
was
statue
found in situ, its
not certain that the Tlaloc
1
be
could
association with Ballcourt
significant. The
a
is
costume
that
fact that it has
nearly identical to the
are structures for cults of
Tzompantli or skull altars
human sacrifice and war that became frequent in
ancient Mexico
(a.D.
during the Late Postclassic
At
are
ballcourts.
with
associated
and
often
1200-1520)
is located next to Ballcourt 2 to the
Tula the Tzompantli
and was excavated by Matos
west of the Adoratorio
the
InNorth Mexico,
1960s.
the
(1976) during
in
the Central
to
than
earlier
be
cult
appears
Tzompantli
an
skull
Classic
Hers
identified
(1989)
Early
Highlands.
rack at Cerro del Huistle, Jalisco, and Spencer (1982)
reports one for the Late Formative in the Cuicatl?n
Ca?ada, Oaxaca,
although Hers and Braniff (1998)
of this Tzompantli.
dispute the chronology
associated
The apparent absence of a Tzompantli
with Ballcourt 1 may be specious, because various
sectors directly north and west of this structure never
If real, this absence
excavated.
have been systematically
could be another indicator of a hierarchical difference
1 and 2 and suggests that perhaps
Ballcourts
within the plaza, was involved
located
Ballcourt
2,
only
in human sacrifice rites, such as those extensively
and codices
chronicles
in sixteenth-century
documented
and other centers. At present, with the
for Tenochtitlan
exception of the skull rack at Cerro del Huistle, Jalisco
the
(Hers 1989), which has different characteristics,
its kind
structure
of
is
Tula
oldest
the
of
Tzompantli
and iswithout doubt
known for north-central Mexico
between
the prototype
for Aztec
Tzompantli.
The Coatepantli
called "the serpent
This structure, which the Mexica
the sacred
defined
and
wall," physically
symbolically
Late
some
the
cities'
of
space
precincts during
at Tula is the oldest serpent
Postclassic. The Coatepantli
and surely was
wall known for the Central Highlands
the prototype for this feature present in some Aztec
and
centers. Acosta
1945) excavated
(1942-1944,
and Diehl
restored the Coatepantli,
(1989) presents an
Some scholars have
insightful analysis of this structure.
restored by Acosta are only
assumed that the elements
Mastache
no other
a larger wall. Nevertheless,
fragments of
sections of this wall have been found in other parts of
that the existing structure
the precinct, and it is probable
the complete
length of the original
are aligned exactly with
its
limits
because
Coatepantli,
the width of Pyramid B and the length (east-west) of
constitutes
Ballcourt
1.
does mark a sacred
the Coatepantli
Symbolically,
limit at Tula, indicating that the most sanctified area
the plaza but does
consists of the buildings surrounding
not include the Plazoleta Norte and Ballcourt 1. The
indicates the separation of
of the Coatepantli
placement
these two zones, showing that the Plazoleta Norte
a different status from the plaza in terms of
possessed
Besides
function and surely also in terms of accessibility.
an
from
sacred
the
space,
Coatepantli,
limiting
the relation
architectonic
point of view emphasizes
B
1.
The
and
focus of
Ballcourt
between
Pyramid
B is not on the plaza, where Pyramid C
as the central architectonic
unit but is
predominates
it is the
directed toward the Plazoleta Norte, where
Pyramid
fundamental
architectural
element.
The main precinct of Tula is thus limited both on the
north and the south by two smaller plazas, which
of
it and constitute a kind of prolongation
complement
the sacred zone,
including the Plazoleta Norte and the
other plaza to the south, which has buildings of
unknown characteristics
except for theToltec Palace
excavated by Charnay (1885). If this building was a
as we have suggested,
then Building K
royal palace,
between
the point of communication
would constitute
the south plaza and the sacred precinct,
that is, between
two different realms of the state. On the other side of the
to the north
precinct, the Plazoleta Norte is articulated
with
the compound
called
was
which
1974),
partially
Little is known concerning
the Plaza Charnay (Matos
reoccupied by the Aztec.
the characteristics
of this
of
Tula, but its
complex during the Tollan phase apogee
to
and
its
monumental
the main plaza
setting
proximity
an
suggest
important function, which may have been as
the city's market.
investigated with
But this hypothesis
excavations.
needs
to be
Accesses
two obvious entrances,
Tula's main plaza possesses
in diagonal. What doubtlessly was the
which are placed
main entrance
is in the extreme southeast between
K
and
the platform south of Pyramid C
Building
12 7
20 meters wide
approximately
(Building J),measuring
and connecting with a great stairway, which climbed
Tula's acropolis from the lower terraces near the Tula
is in the plaza's northwest
River below. The other access
the north end of Ballcourt 2 and the
corner, between
this is a narrow passage, which
Palacio Quemado;
the main plaza with the Plazoleta Norte.
communicated
Another secondary entrance appears to have been
located between
K, which
(fig. 4 ).
Building
plaza
We
the south end of Ballcourt
connected
2 and
the precinct with
the south
inwhich
the precinct
do not know the manner
entrances articulated
this zone with the rest of the city,
areas and more distant
including immediately adjacent
zone.
in
is the level of
the
urban
Also
uncertain
points
access which
the city's non-elite
inhabitants had to the
the
The great height of the acropolis,
of entrances, and the sacred nature of
it
the monumental
plaza suggest that, although
area
the
have
been
dominated
urban space, this
may
sacred precinct.
limited number
somewhat
alien and
inaccessible
for much
of the
Castells
that the
(1982) observes
center of a city is composed
of great open
are
areas.
There
with
closed
spaces along
public
domains, but also inaccessible domains, which are
population.
monumental
restricted
to all but a few persons.
Final comments
The previous analysis shows that Tula's sacred
of different types of buildings,
precinct was composed
in
the specific functions of which have not been defined
all cases. The two pyramids, arranged adjacently
forming
a 90 degree angle, were without doubt the most
in the compound, with
elements
important architectonic
Pyramid C being the principal building and the
on the basis of which all the
component
predominant
center was planned, possibly along with
monumental
the rest of the city. Pyramid B, which
faces south, has a
or
status
in its
that ismanifested
secondary position
its specific
location
be emphasized
that the
the two pyramids concern not only
placement within the plaza but also
structures are conceptually
distinct.
smaller
size and
It should
within
the precinct.
between
differences
their volumes
that both
and
these
Pyramid C, probably
in a sense
the axis mundi o? the sacred precinct,
an entity in itself, that is, an independent
constituted
unit that was not articulated with other
architectural
Even
buildings.
though Pyramid C was flanked by two
128
RES 38 AUTUMN
2000
in both cases these buildings are separated
structures,
from the pyramid by passageways.
The smaller scale of
these side structures highlights the size and volume of
its frontal vestibule, would
have
space. Pyramid B, with
been a more private and restricted space for performing
different kinds of rites and ceremonies
from those of the
Pyramid C.
As stated earlier, Pyramid C is architecturally
to the Pyramids of the Sun and the Moon at
other pyramid. Probably Pyramid B was above all else a
monument
related to royalty, government,
and power,
exalting the royal dynasties and the institution of war,
which was closely tied to the leadership and
similar
a lateral
like these, it possesses
in the center of its
stairway platform (cuerpo adosado)
same architectonic
therefore
the
facade,
principal
being
on
a
of
smaller scale as
course,
conception,
although,
Teotihuacan,
because,
In this sense, Pyramid C
the great Classic pyramids.
a
with
Teotihuacan,
represents
continuity
constituting
conservative
architectonic
element
that conceptually
Tula with Classic Teotihuacan
architectural
traditions.
in the
Thus there is a clear Teotihuacan
presence
a
ties
structure of Tula's sacred precinct.
is architecturally
innovative,
Pyramid B, in contrast,
a
distinct entity, which
constituting
integrates in a single
principal
a vestibule,
complex a pyramid-temple,
and halls with benches and altars, thus uniting three
in the same structural unit.
kinds of spaces and functions
From this perspective,
Pyramid B represents essentially
innovative aspects characteristic
of Toltec culture. Just as
architectonic
one can say that
Pyramid C links Tula with Teotihuacan,
an
B
Toltec
represents
Pyramid
essentially
building and
its ties to northern
Tula's northern origins with
traditions. This new concept of a pyramid
architectural
a vestibule places a portico
in front of a pyramidal
most
its
of
thus
structure,
covering
principal facade and
of
the
visual
the
impact
pyramid toward the
obstructing
its volume and
the
effect
of
diminishing
plaza, creating
to some degree the magnificence
of these
characteristic
structures.5 Hers and Braniff (1998:65) have shown that
in front of a pyramid
is
of a portico
this combination
with
it
because
surprising and apparently contradictory,
makes the pyramidal structure look like the second story
of the portico (fig. 29).
we believe that this apparent
Nevertheless,
is due to the two pyramids probably
contradiction
as the
having different specific functions, because
itwas important for
principal building on the precinct,
to
the sacred
thus
C
be
uncovered,
dominating
Pyramid
of a pyramid with a frontal portico also occurs
5. This combination
at this site
at Chichen
in the Temple of the Warriors
Itza, although
to the East of
to
no
Palace
the
equivalent
adjacent
building
apparently
existed. At Tula, as we have emphasized,
the Vestibule
Pyramid B, the
an architectural
unit.
and the Palace to the East constituted
Vestibule,
of Tula. It should not be forgotten that the
government
in
the
pillars
temple on Pyramid B's summit apparently
Tula's
represent
kings and other nobility; the Atlantes
idealized versions of high ranking
with
being along
Toltec warriors.
As we showed before, the great vestibule and the
an architectural
to the East clearly constituted
with
B.
Even
integrated
Pyramid
though the specific
are
functions of the Palace to the East of the Vestibule
Palace
unit
the iconographie
elements associated with
unknown,
and
this building
the vestibule,
its similarity with the
at Tenochtitlan,
Casa de las ?guilas
and the fact that it
was the only structure
access to Pyramid B
direct
having
in its summit, strongly suggest that the
the Palace to the East, and
(the vestibule,
a
constituted
kind
of
B)
Pyramid
royal sanctuary, that is,
a special temple for the
his priests and
and
king
were
where
and
rituals
ceremonies
dignitaries,
and the temple
three buildings
related to the functions of the sovereign.
performed
These ceremonies
probably were centered around
and
war, and government,
enthronement,
penitence,
were
to
rites
similar
which
Klein
(1987)
perhaps
took place in Tenochtitlan's
Casa de las ?guilas
proposes
in sixteenth-century
based on descriptions
chronicles.
Perhaps the existence of two large pyramids at
Teotihuacan
and Tula, with the before-mentioned
in placement
is related to the
correlations
and orientation,
in pairs of
of
the
universe
with
structured
concept
duality,
was
a
which
and
entities,
opposing
complementary
in the cosmovision
in the
of peoples
fundamental concept
It is
Central Highlands and other areas of Mesoamerica.6
two
in
centers
both
that the
express
probable
pyramids
this duality and the existence
of two principal cults in
the same way that in the Templo Mayor of Tenochtitlan
in other cities of the Late Postclassic,
this binary
a
in
is
conception
single pyramid having two
expressed
on
summit.
its
temples
and
6. Regarding
of duality
concepts
see Lopez Austin
of ancient Mexico,
and also discusses
topic thoroughly
opposition
in the Nahua
cosmovision.
in the universe
the peoples
among
this
(1973,
1980), who analyzes
the most common
types of
Mastache
Figure
29.
Antropolog?a
Reconstructive
e Historia,
drawing
Mexico.
of Pyramid
B at Tula.
From Acosta
InTeotihuacan
the two pyramids are separated;
at
centuries
later
Tula, the pyramids are together on the
same plaza, and at Tenochtitlan,
apparently what was
once two entities becomes one, that is, one
pyramid
with two temples on its summit. It is likely that because
of this, in the Mexica Templo Mayor, the north temple
to Tlaloc was smaller than the south
dedicated
temple
to Huitzilopochtli,
dedicated
probably as a
remembrance
that the north pyramid-temple
should
the smallest and possess a different hierarchy.7 This
be
7. See
on the dual pattern of the
L?pez Lujan (1993:95-101)
a summary and
Mayor,
including
analysis of different
from diverse
and the controversy
proposals
investigations
concerning
on this pyramid's
the significance
of the temples or "double chapels''
summit. This author also discusses
the notable preeminence
of the cult
Templo
to Huitzilopochtli
at the Templo Mayor,
of
that indications
showing
this superior status can be observed
in the frequent generic
reference
as the "Cu of
to the Templo Mayor
in the early
Huitzilopochtli"
and in the greater size of the "chapel" of Huitzilopochtli
in the remains of the Templo Mayor at Tenochtitlan
and
and in sixteenth-century
Tlatelolco
illustrations of these structures
sources,
evident
(ibid., p. 98).
(1968).
Reproduced
courtesy
of
the
Instituto
Nacional
129
de
appears to have been a process that lasted several
in the
the continuity
centuries, which manifests
cosmovision
and the fundamental
ideological concepts
shared by these three cultures; this is also evident
in
some
and
other
aspects, although many
iconography
central features, such as the urban conception
and
are
the
of
three
different.
cities,
planning
We do not possess sufficient information to determine
if the deities and cults of both pyramids at Teotihuacan
and Tula were similar to the gods of the Templo Mayor at
because this problem still is the object of
Tenochtitlan,
and
Itoften has been assumed
controversy.
speculation
that the Pyramid of the Moon could have been dedicated
to Tlaloc or to an aquatic goddess fundamentally,
because of the great importance of Tlaloc inTeotihuacan
statue of
iconography and the recovery of a monumental
a female water
near
in
the
It
this
deity
plaza
pyramid.
also is significant that eight Tlaloc effigy vessels were
in the recently found of
recovered
inside the
offerings
the
Moon
of
in press).
and
Cabrera,
Pyramid
(Sugiyama
to
With
the
the
of
the
Sun,
Pyramid
regard
general
absence of representations
of deities or other
130
RES 38 AUTUMN
2000
inmural paintings or sculptures
elements
iconographie
associated with this building makes this subject even
more speculative.
some indications exist
Nevertheless,
to a
that this monument
could have been dedicated
are the descriptions
solar deity. Among
this evidence
of
Boturini and Clavijero
stating that in the eighteenth
century there still was a monumental
sculpture on the
summit of the Pyramid of the Sun that had a large
golden disk on itschest; Seler (1915:407) considered
in
it is important to mention
that some pyrite
However,
were
in the recently found
mirrors also
recovered
inside the Pyramid of the Moon
offerings
(Sugiyama and
1999, in press).
At Tula, Acosta
that Pyramid
(1956:1am. 5) proposed
as Venus the Morning
to Quetzalcoatl
C was dedicated
Star on the limited basis that the only preserved
Cabrera
sculpture associated with this structure was the
balustrade
relief of a symbol, which he interpreted as
a
cut conch shell characteristic
of this deity
depicting
a
It
that
similar
is
worth
symbol called
(fig. 6).
observing
in Teotihuacan
is common
"estrella de cinco puntas"
mural art (see De la Fuente 1995, I (1):63, l?m. 8; 66,
l?m. 19, 77, fig. 6.13 among other illustrations).
Acosta
(1946) proposed
(1943) and Moedano
was
B
dedicated
Pyramid
toTlahuizcalpantecuhtli,
that
or
as the planet Venus the
embodied
the god Quetzalcoatl
on
based
evening star,
mainly
supposed
representations
of this deity in the pyramid's reliefs showing a man-bird
reptile composite
being (fig. 8), the identification of
is not at all clear
which with Tlahuizcalpantecuhtli
(Taube n.d.). Recent research has shown that the Tlaloc
warrior cult of Teotihuacan
tradition could be very
or attributes of
in
Tula.
The
representations
important
on the offerings
this deity in the north ballcourt
28),
(fig.
associated
It isworth noting that
this pyramid.
of armed Tlalocs until now have been
representations
on
found only
the north side of the precinct, given that
thank Karl Taube for informing us of this discussion
by Seler,
us on the
of the giant sculpture
for advising
possible
significance
with
the Pyramid of the
mirror on its chest associated
with a probable
comments
and
his valuable
Sun. We
also appreciate
very much
on this text.
suggestions
8. We
with
the Tlalocs in Buildings Jand K are stylistically different
and do not carry weapons.
art of Teotihuacan,
which has been cited for decades
of
(Armillas 1950), is the similarity of the processions
canines
domesticated
and
felines
seemingly
accompanied
by eagles or vultures on this pyramid's
facades with processions
in Teotihuacan
of animals
no
at
Even
those
Atetelco.
murals, especially
though
murals or reliefs with files of animals have been found at
the Pyramid of the Moon,
the recently recovered
in its interior consist of skeletal canines,
offerings
jaguars, and eagles and other birds of prey (Sugiyama
and Cabrera 1999, in press:167), which emphasizes
this
similarity or continuity and suggests that both pyramids
were the focus of similar cults and rites.
Nearly twenty years ago, Sanders and Santley (1983)
in their essay "A Tale of Three Cities" presented an
the continuities
and
eloquent
synthesis concerning
discontinuities
between Teotihuacan,
and
Tula,
in terms of economic
and
principally
The
of
Tula's
sacred
processes.
analysis
indicates that there also were continuities
precinct
in these
and cosmovision
involving ideological concepts
as Calnek
three cities. However,
the crucial question,
is how these kinds of continuity were
observes,
Tenochtitlan
urbanistic
The investigation of this problem
requires
studies
of the iconography and urbanism of
profound
these centers and their historical processes,
along with
the crucial factor of their ethnic compositions.
We also
achieved.9
should
take
into consideration
the possibility
that many
institutions of these cities
and
key ideological concepts
could be far older than Teotihuacan.
9. This observation
which
greatly
and
and on the
pillars of Pyramid B open the possibility that his cult was
A continuity in the iconographyof Pyramid B and the
this a descriptive
But
fantasy of these chroniclers.8
account
into
of
the
several
recovery
taking
large mirrors
in the
(some with reliefs probably
warriors)
representing
cave
in
the
under
this
offering
pyramid (Heyden
and the importance of mirrors and
1973:figsr3^4),
related solar cults that Taube (1992) has documented
it is plausible
Teotihuacan
that the
iconography,
involved a solar deity.
principal cult of this pyramid
(ibid.) and reliefs of the Palacio Quemado,
Edward Calnek
appreciate
was
made
comments
part of a series of valuable
on an earlier version of this text. We
his kindness.
Mastache
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Acosta, Jorge R.
1940 "Exploraciones en Tula, Hidalgo, 1940." Revista
Mexicana de Estudios Antropol?gicos 4:172-194.
1941 "Los ?ltimos descubrimientos arqueol?gicos en Tula,
Hidalgo, 1941." Revista Mexicana de Estudios
Antropol?gicos 5:239-243.
1942-1944
"La tercera temporada de exploraciones
arqueol?gicas en Tula, Hgo.1942." Revista Mexicana
6:125-164.
de Estudios Arqueol?gicos
1943 "Los colosos de Tula." Cuadernos Americanos
1(2):133-146.
1945 "La cuarta y quinta temporada de exploraciones
arqueol?gicas en Tula, Hgo." Revista Mexicana de
Estudios Antropol?gicos 7:23-64
1956 "Resumen de los informes de las exploraciones
arqueol?gicas en Tula, Hidalgo durante lasVI, Vil y
VIII temporadas 1946-1950." Anales del INAH
131
Castillo, Noem?, and Alfredo Dumaine
1988 "Escultura en piedra procedente de la zona
arqueol?gica de Tula, Hidalgo, Mexico." Beitrage zur
Allgemeinen und Vergleichenden Arch?ologie
8:213-282.
Charnay, Desire
1885 Les Anciennes
Villes du Nouveau Monde.
Hachette,
Paris.
Cobean, Robert H. (Coordinador)
1994 Proyecto: Mantenimiento, Conservaci?n y Estudio de
laZona Arqueol?gica de Tula, Hidalgo, 6 vols.
Informe al INAH,M?xico.
Cobean, Robert H., and Alba Guadalupe Mastache
1995 "Tula," inXochicalco y Tula, Leonardo L?pez Lujan,
Robert H. Cobean, and Alba Guadalupe Mastache,
pp. 143-237. Jaca Book, Milan.
8:37-115.
Cobean, Robert H., and Alba Guadalupe Mastache, eds.
n.d. Ofrendas en un Palacio Tolteca: Turquesa y Concha
en el Palacio Quemado de Tula, Hidalgo. INAH,
1956-1957
"Interpretaci?n de algunos de los datos
obtenidos en Tula relativos a la ?poca tolteca."
Revista Mexicana de Estudios Antropol?gicos
M?xico.
14:75-110.
1957 "Resumen de los informes de las exploraciones
arqueol?gicas en Tula, Hidalgo, durante las IXy X
temporadas, 1953-54." Anales del INAH 9:119-169.
1960 "Las exploraciones en Tula, Hidalgo durante la XI
temporada, 1955." Anales del INAH 11:39-72.
1961
a
"La doceava
de
temporada
en Tula,
exploraciones
Hidalgo." Anales del INAH 13:29-58.
1961b "La indumentaria de los cari?tides de Tula," in
Homenaje a Pablo Mart?nez del Rio, pp. 221-228.
INAH,M?xico.
1964
"La d?cimo
tercera
temporada
de
en
exploraciones
Tula, Hgo." Anales del INAH 16:45-76.
1967 Tula (Guia). INAH,M?xico.
1968 Tula: Official Guide. INAH,M?xico.
De
la Fuente, Beatriz
1990
"Retorno
?poca
De
al pasado
7:36-53.
tolteca."
Arfes
nueva
efe M?xico,
la Fuente, Beatriz (Coordinator)
1995 La Pintura Mural Prehisp?nica en M?xico, I,
Teotihuacan, 2 vols. UNAM-INAH, M?xico.
Diehl, Richard A.
1983 Tula: The Toltec Capital of Ancient Mexico.
and
Hudson,
Thames
London.
1989 "Previous investigations at Tula," in Tula of the
Toltecs:
pp.
Excavations
13-29.
and
of
University
ed.
Survey,
Iowa Press,
Dan
M.
Healan,
Iowa City.
Armillas, Pedro
1950
"Teotihuacan,
arcaicas
Tula
y pre-aztecas
excavaciones
y
los toltecas:
del
y estudios,
centro
las culturas
post
de M?xico:
1922-1950."
RUNA
3:37-70.
Getino,
Fernando
1994 "Informe de excavaci?n
de la Estrutura K," in
Proyecto: Mantenimiento, Conservaci?n y Estudio de
laZona Arqueol?gica de Tula, Hidalgo, ?d. Robert H.
Cobean,
Beyer,
vol.
1, pp.
7-46.
INAH, M?xico.
Hermann
1955 "La procesi?n de los se?ores." ElM?xico Antiguo
8:8-42.
Castells, Manuel
1982 La Cuesti?n Urbana. Siglo XXI, M?xico.
Getino, Fernando, and Javier Figueroa
n.d. "LasOfrendas del Palacio Quemado: Una
interpretaci?n," inOfrendas en un Palacio Tolteca:
Turquesa y Concha en el Palacio Quemado de Tula,
Hidalgo, ed. Robert H. Cobean and Alba Guadalupe
Mastache.
INAH, M?xico.
132
RES 38 AUTUMN
2000
Graulich, Michel
1984 "Quelques observations sur les scupltures
mesoamericanes
dites "Chac Mool." Jaarboek, pp.
51-72. Vlaamse InstituntVoor Amerikaanse Kulturen.
Dan
Healan,
ed.
M.,
1989 Tula of the Toltecs: Excavations and Survey. University
of Iowa Press, Iowa City.
Hers,
en
Los Toltecas
Tierras
Chichimecas.
Marquina, Ignacio
1964 Arquitectura Prehisp?nica.
U.N.A.M.,
M?xico.
y Pol?tica."
Hers, Marie-Areti, and Beatriz Braniff
1998 "Herencias chichimecas." Arqueolog?a
INAH,M?xico
Mastache, Alba Guadalupe
1996 "El Estado Tolteca: Una Investigaci?n Sobre su
Proceso de Desarrollo y Estructura Social, Econ?mica
Marie-Areti
1989
Mandeville, Margaret, and Dan M. Healan
1989 "Architectural Remains in the El Corral Locality," in
Tula of the Toltecs: Excavations and Survey, ed. Dan
M. Healan, pp. 171-199. University of Iowa Press,
Iowa City.
19:55-80.
Heyden, Doris
1973 "?Un Chicom?stoc en Teotihuacan? La Cueva bajo la
Pir?mide del Sol." Bolet?n del INAH, segunda ?poca
Ph.D.
Mastache, Alba Guadalupe, and Robert H. Cobean
1989 "The Coyotlatelco Culture and the Origins of the
Toltec State," inMesoamerica After the Decline of
Teotihuacan: a.D. 700-900, ed. Richard A. Diehl and
Janet C. Berlo, pp. 49-67. Dumbarton Oaks,
6:3-18.
D.C.
Washington,
n.d.
Jim?nez, Elizabeth
1998 Iconograf?a de Tula: El Caso de la Escultura. INAH,
"Proyecto Tula y Su Area Directa de Interacci?n:
Informe al INAH,M?xico.
Temporada 1984-1985."
Mastache, Alba Guadalupe,
M?xico.
M?xico.
U.N.A.M.,
diss.,
Robert H. Cobean,
and Dan M.
Healan
Kirchhoff, Paul
1955 "Quetzalcoatl, Huemac y el Fin de Tula." Cuadernos
Americanos 84(6): 163-196.
F.
Klein, Cecilia
1987 "The Ideology of Autosacrifice at the Templo Mayor,"
in The Aztec Templo Mayor, ed. Elizabeth H. Boone,
pp.
293-370.
Dumbarton
Oaks,
Washington,
n.d.
Mastache, Alba Guadalupe, and Ana Mar?a Crespo
1982 "An?lisis sobre la traza general de Tula, Hgo.," in
Estudios Sobre laAntigua Ciudad de Tula, pp. 11-36.
INAH,M?xico.
D.C.
Matos
Kristan-Graham,
Moctezuma,
Eduardo
1974 "Excavaciones en lamicroarea: Tula Chico y la Plaza
Cynthia
1989 "Art, Rulership and the Mesoamerican
Body Politic at
Tula and Chichen Itza." Ph.D. diss., University of
California at Los Angeles.
1993 "The Business of Narrative at Tula: An Analysis of the
Vestibule Frieze, Trade, and Ritual." Latin American
Antiquity
"Ancient Tollan: A Regional Perspective of the Toltec
State." Unpublished manuscript, INAH,M?xico.
Charnay,"
Eduardo
in Proyecto
Matos
Tula,
Moctezuma,
Lefebvre, Henri
1982 La Revoluci?n Urbana. Alianza
1980 Cuerpo Humano
los Antiguos
177-192.
al Templo Mayor,"
Matos
Eduardo
Moctezuma,
in Estudios
vol.
1, pp.
El Colegio Nacional, M?xico.
of the Mesoamerican
Chacmool."
Arf?u//ef/7?67(1):7-17.
e Ideolog?a: Las Concepciones
2 vols.
ed.
Miller, Mary
1985 "A Re-examination
M?xico.
Nahuas,
INAH,
M?xico.
Mexicas,
Editorial, Madrid
Religi?n y Pol?tica en el Mundo
U.N.A.M.,
ed.
Parte,
61-69.
1976 Tula (Gu?a). Editorial Orto, M?xico.
1988 The Great Temple of the Aztecs. Thames and Hudson,
1999 "Los edificios aleda?os
N?huatl.
pp.
London.
4(1):3-21.
L?pez Austin, Alfredo
1973 Hombre-Dios,
Primera
U.N.A.M.
M?xico.
L?pez Lujan, Leonardo
1993 LasOfrendas del Templo Mayor de Tenochtitlan.
INAH,M?xico.
de
Miller, Mary, and Marco Samayoa
1998 "Where Maize May Grow: Jade, Chacmools, and the
Maize God." RES:Anthropology and Aesthetics
33:54-72.
Mastache
Mill?n, Rene
1973 Urbanization at Teotihuacan, Mexico. Vol. 1, The
Teotihuacan Map. University of Texas Press, Austin.
1981 "Teotihuacan: City, State and Civilization," in
Handbook of Middle American Indians. Supplement
1, Archaeology, ed. Victoria Bricker and Jeremy A.
Sabloff, pp. 198-243. University of Texas Press,
Austin.
Moedano, Hugo
1946 "Tollan."Masters Thesis, Escuela Nacional de
Antropolog?a e Historia, M?xico.
1947 "El friso de los caciques." Anales del INAH
11:113-136.
Molina Montes, Augusto
1987 "Templo Mayor Architecture: SoWhat's New?" in The
Aztec Templo Mayor, ed. Elizabeth H. Boone, pp.
97-107. Dumbarton Oaks, Washington, D.C
Patino, H?ctor
1994 "La conservaci?n del Juego de Pelota 2," in Proyecto:
Mantenimiento Conservaci?n y Estudio de laZona
Arqueol?gica de Tula, Hidalgo, ed. Robert H.
Cobean,
vol.
4.
INAH, M?xico.
Reyes Garc?a, Luis
2000 "Notas sobre organizaci?n social y pol?tica de los
Toltecas seg?n fuentes hist?ricas." Paper presented at
the 65th Annual Meeting of the Society for American
Archaeology,
Philadelphia.
Sahag?n, Fray Bernardino de
1956 Historia General de las Cosas de Nueva Espa?a, 4
vols.,
ed. Angel
Mar?a
Garibay.
Editorial
Porrua,
M?xico.
Sanders, William T., and Robert Santley
1983 "ATale of Three Cities," in Prehistoric Settlement
Patterns, ed. Evon Vogt and Richard Leventhal, pp.
243-291. University of New Mexico Press,
Albuquerque.
Schele, Linda, and Peter Mathews
1998 The Code of Kings: The Language of Seven Sacred
Maya Temples and Tombs. Scribner, New York.
Seier, Eduard
1915 "DieTeotihuacan-Kultur des Hochlands von Mexiko,"
inGesammelte Abhandlungen zur Amerikanischen
Sprach-und-Alterthumskunde,
Berlin.
Ascher,
vol.
5, pp.
405-585.
133
Spencer, Charles S.
1982 The Cuicatl?n Ca?ada and Monte Alb?n: A Study of
Primary State Formation. Academic Press, New York.
Sugiyama, Saburo, and Rub?n Cabrera
1999 "Se descubren dos ofrendas de notable importancia
en la Pir?mide de la Luna en Teotihuacan."
Arqueolog?a MexicanaVW (40):71-73
in press "El Proyecto Pir?mide de la Luna: Algunos
Resultados de la Segunda Temporada 1999."
Arqueolog?a 2 3:161 -172.
Taube, Karl A.
1992 "The Iconography of Mirrors at Teotihuacan," inArt,
Ideology, and the City of Teotihuacan, ed. Janet C.
Berlo, pp. 169-204. Dumbarton Oaks, Washington,
D.C.
n.d.
"TheMirrors of Offerings 1 and 2 of Sala 2 in the
Palacio Quemado at Tula: An Iconographie
Interpretation," inOfrendas en un Palacio Tolteca:
Turquesa y Concha en el Palacio Quemado de Tula,
Hidalgo, ed. Robert H. Cobean and Alba Guadalupe
Mastache.
INAH, M?xico.
Umberger, Emily
1987 "Antiques, Revivals, and References to the Past in
Aztec Art." RES:Anthropology and Aesthetics
13:62-105.

Ancient Tollan: The Sacred Precinct

Transcription

Similar documents

Pharaoh Khufu: The Pyramid Builder

The Pyramid Model

Old Kingdom PDF

Revisiting the construction of the Egyptian pyramids

The Ancient Egyptian Pyramids of Giza

BUILDING AN EGYPTIAN PYRAMID

about - Scan Pyramids

The Pyramids of Giza

Retracing Khufu`s Great Pyramid. The “diamond matrix” and the