Society for American Archaeology

The Distribution of Late Postclassic Spindle Whorls in the Valley of Mexico

Author(s): Mary Hrones Parsons
Source: American Antiquity, Vol. 40, No. 2 (Apr., 1975), pp. 207-215
Published by: Society for American Archaeology
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/279617
Accessed: 22-05-2017 01:03 UTC

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted
digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about
JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
http://about.jstor.org/terms

Society for American Archaeology is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to
American Antiquity

This content downloaded from 148.223.96.146 on Mon, 22 May 2017 01:03:13 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 REPORTS 207

experimental
experimental work
work
by flint-knappers
by flint-knappers
is neededis needed
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
to
to clarify
clarify when,
when,and and
underunder
what circumstances,
what circumstances,
they
theyemploy
employoblique
oblique
impact
impact
in direct
in percus- Several interesting conclusions, relevant to
direct percus-
sion; and to determine what, if any, effects the study of hard-hammer percussion flaking
oblique impact may have on the size and shape emerge from this brief experiment. For a giv
of flakes. The information currently available in hammer size and impact velocity, flakes pro-
duced by striking the core obliquely will be
the literature concerning impact angles is very
unclear and often contradictory. A series of shorter, but probably not significantly thinner,
than flakes made by striking the core normal to
experiments is currently being conducted by
the platform. In addition, in order to produce a
the author to investigate the influence of the
flake at all, the impact in the oblique case must
platform angle on the size and shape of
be confined to a narrower zone along the edge
hard-hammer percussion flakes.
of the platform. It also would appear that a
Fig. 3 compares the relationship between
platform thickness and maximum flake thick-
flake produced by oblique impact is less likely
to be damaged by shattering or multiple
ness (the maximum thickness of the central
spalling than a flake produced by a comparable
spherical "lens") of flakes produced by vertical
vertical blow. And finally, this experiment
and by oblique impact. Although the plots for
the two groups of flakes are very similar, it is suggests that the platform angle is of greater
clear from the graph that, for comparable importance to the flint-knapper than the angle
values of platform thickness, flakes in the of impact for controlling the size of a direct
oblique group are consistently slightly thinner percussion flake.
than flakes in the vertical group. The mean Additional experimental work is needed to
difference between platform thickness and verify the tentative conclusions presented here,
maximum flake thickness for the vertical group and to clarify the importance of numerous
is 0.0153 in (0.0389 cm), and 0.0066 in other attributes routinely measured by the
(0.0168 cm) for the oblique group. Thus, archaeologist
a concerned with the analysis of
flake produced by oblique impact, on the prehistoric stone tools.
average, is approximately 0.0087 in (0.0221
cm) thinner than a flake of comparable plat- Acknowledgments. I would like to thank Are Tsirk
form thickness produced by vertical impact. of the Department of Civil and Environmental Engi-
This very slight difference in the average maxi-
neering, Newark College of Engineering, for his con-
mum flake thickness of the two groups maytinuing interest in this research and for his helpful
comments and suggestions.
reflect a real difference in the thickness of the
central "lens"; it is more likely, however, that
Lawn, B. R.
the difference reflects only the minor reduction
1967 Partial cone crack formation in a brittle
in prominence of the Hertzian cone which
material loaded with a sliding spherical in-
accompanies oblique impact (Speth 1972:38; denter. Royal Society, Proceedings 299A:307-
Lawn 1967:309-310). This latter conclusion 316.
Speth,
would indicate that flakes produced by oblique John D.
1972 Mechanical basis of percussion flaking.
impact are shorter, but not significantly thinner
American Antiquity 37:34-60.
(except in the immediate area of the cone), 1974 Experimental investigations of hard-hammer
than flakes produced by vertical impact. percussion flaking. Tebiwa (in press).

THE DISTRIBUTION OF LATE POSTCLASSIC SPINDLE WHORLS

IN THE VALLEY OF MEXICO

MARY HRONES PARSONS

Settlement pattern surveys over a large portion of the Valley of Mexico by Sanders, Blanton, and Parsons
have produced a sample of over 600 Aztec spindle whorls with good provenience data. This paper examines the
distribution of both cotton and maguey whorls, and their variation from sub-region to sub-region within the

This content downloaded from 148.223.96.146 on Mon, 22 May 2017 01:03:13 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
208 AMERICAN ANTIQUITY [Vol. 40, No. 2, 1975

Valley of Mexico. Particular attention is given to the maguey whorls. These clearly fa
stylistic groups, each of which appears to be restricted to a limited area within the Valley of
is made to explain this distribution in terms of the prehispanic Aztec market system.

Systematic settlement pattern surveys in the is possible to correlate the spinning of ixtli, the
Valley of Mexico began in 1960 with Sanders' coarse fiber of the maguey plant, with the
work in the Teotihuacan valley (Sanders 1965). large whorls, and the spinning of cotton with the
J. Parsons continued this work in the Texcoco small whorls (Fig. 2). Since cotton cannot be
region in 1967 (J. Parsons 197 la), followed by grown in the Valley of Mexico, it must have
surveys in 1969 by Blanton in the Ixtapalapa been imported. Its presence is indicated
region (Blanton 1972) and J. Parsons in the archaeologically by the small ceramic spindle
Chalco region (J. Parsons 1971b). The whorls which were used to spin cotton.
Amecameca valley and the Xochimilco region We know from documentary sources that
in the southern valley were surveyed by J. the spinning of cotton was a tribute service
Parsons in 1972 (J. Parsons 1973). During rendered by some towns in the Valley of
1973, survey was extended to the Zumpango Mexico (Zorita 1963:187; Alva Ixtilxochitl
region in the northwest valley (Fig. 1). The 1952(1): 146-147) and that cotton cloth was a
immediate aim of these surveys was to delineate high status material not used by the common
prehispanic settlement patterns as far as people (Duran 1964:131). Therefore the geo-
modern conditions permitted. The survey tech- graphic distribution of cotton whorls within the
niques were purposely standardized, so that Valley of Mexico should indicate the prevalence
survey data from each area are readily compar- of one tribute service performed by people
able. Spindle whorls were picked up when seen within the Valley of Mexico-the spinning of
by survey crews, although no special effort was raw cotton into yarn. The fact that slightly over
made to find them. This paper compares the a third of the Teotihuacan valley spindle whorls
Late Postclassic (A.D. 1400-1520) spindle were cotton whorls suggests that the spinning
whorl data from all areas in an effort to see of cotton was a tribute service of some im-
what differences there might be in the distribu-
portance performed by the Aztec population of
tion and frequencies of spindle whorls, and the Teotihuacan Valley.
more specifically, whether or not spinning was
localized in one section of the Valley of THE DISTRIBUTION
Mexico. OF MAGUEY WHORLS
It must be noted that in the southern half of Examination of spindle whorls recovered
the Valley of Mexico many fewer spindle during the settlement pattern surveys suggests
whorls were found, probably because the larger regional variation of Aztec maguey whorl styles
Aztec towns are covered over by modern in the Valley of Mexico (M. Parsons 1972). It
towns. This problem affects the number of seems clear that in the Teotihuacan valley a
spindle whorls recovered from those areas so hemispherical polished black or brown whorl,
that our data may be said to give a good idea of often with a distinctive punctate or dentate
the spinning activities of rural Aztec settle- stamped design (Type I) was the predominant
ments in the southern Valley of Mexico. The form of maguey whorl (Fig. 3, center). In the
urban pattern may well have been different. Texcoco Region, however, polished, completely
red whorls with modeled designs (Types
PREVIOUS WORK IIA,B,D), were the predominant forms (Fig. 3,
IN THE TEOTIHUACAN VALLEY
right). Very few spindle whorls were found on
The Teotihuacan valley spindle whorls the Ixtapalapa
have region survey, but again Type I
been described previously in some detail (M. predominated. Farther south, in both the
Parsons 1972), but I will summarize briefly Chalco and Amecameca regions, a new type of
some of our findings. First, the clear bimodal maguey whorl, a truncated conical, red and
distribution of the following spindle whorl black whorl with incised decoration (Type IIC),
attributes-weight, hole diameter, and total and sometimes molded decoration (Type IICC),
diameter-indicated that we were dealing with was the predominant form. The incised variant
whorls used to spin two different fibers. Using of this whorl, "Type IIC" (Fig. 3, left, M.
both documentary and ethnographic sources, it Parsons, 1972:51) has a very low frequency in

This content downloaded from 148.223.96.146 on Mon, 22 May 2017 01:03:13 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 REPORTS 209

the Teotihuacan valley, and continues to occur

whorls found; and in the Amecameca valley the
in very low, although greater frequency frequency
in theis 64.2%. The frequencies for the
Texcoco region. In the Chalco region Type Teotihuacan valley and the Texcoco region are
IIC-CC accounts for 50% of all Aztec maguey1.5% and 3.8% respectively (Table 1). No Type

N
kms
0w I I I I I I
0 4 8 1 2 16 20 24 28 32

Fig. 1. Contour map of the Valley of Mexico with the survey a

City is shown as the shaded area.

This content downloaded from 148.223.96.146 on Mon, 22 May 2017 01:03:13 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
210 AMERICAN ANTIQUITY [Vol. 40, No. 2, 1975

Fig. 2. Shows the size of a

ECMI -
cotton whorl (left) as compared
to a maguey whorl (right).

t_ CM -

Fig. 3. A comparison of Typ

This content downloaded from 148.223.96.146 on Mon, 22 May 2017 01:03:13 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 REPORTS 211

t
II
I
t
\I
\'
\I
9*II' I
I
tI
nln',

%%
Type I __mm,
%
Type IIA,B,D _-
Type IIC-CC 111111..l

35

20

15

10

0
o o o 0
C

a w 0. w

L S E
o a - 0
a

o a - a
- 0 0
0
x E
i-
0
_ <,S

Fig. 4. Shows
the the
total percentage
number of of
ma
Type IIA,B,D, and Type IIC-CC.

IIC-CC whorls were found in the Zumpango spinning maguey, we see a clear association of
region. Fig. 4 shows the percentage of each each type with a specific region of the Valley of
type of maguey whorl from each area. In two Mexico (Fig. 4). Thus, Type I is associated with
survey areas, Ixtapalapa and Xochimilco, the north and northeastern part of the Valley
(the Zumpango area and the Teotihuacan
maguey whorls were extremely rare, indicating
that very little maguey spinning was taking valley); Type IIA,B,D with the central eastern
place. If we eliminate these two areas from portion (the Texcoco area); and Type IIC-CC
consideration to avoid distortion caused by with the southeastern portion (the Chalco and
small samples from areas not committed to Amecameca areas). When the physical at-

This content downloaded from 148.223.96.146 on Mon, 22 May 2017 01:03:13 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
212 AMERICAN ANTIQUITY [Vol. 40, No. 2, 1975

Table 1. Shows the percentage of the total number of Aztec maguey whorls from each survey area which be-
long to each of the three major maguey whorl types.

Total number of Aztec maguey

Survey Unit Type I Type IIA,B,D Type IIC-CC whorls from survey area

Zumpango Region 100% 36

(36 whorls)

Teotihuacan Valley 62.1% 24.2% 1.5%

(82 whorls) (32 whorls) (2 whorls) 132

Texcoco Region 34.8% 57.6% 3.8%

(55 whorls) (91 whorls) (6 whorls) 158

Ixtapalapa Region 41.7% 25.0% 16.7%

(5 whorls) (3 whorls) (2 whorls) 12

Chalco Region 18.8% 25.0% 50.0%

(6 whorls) (8 whorls) (16 whorls) 32

Amecameca Valley 11.9% 17.9% 64.2%

(8 whorls) (12 whorls) (43 whorls) 67

Xochimilco Region 60.0% 20.0%

(3 whorls) (1 whorls) 5

tributes of weight, hole diameter, and total Chalco-Amecameca regions; Type I over the
diameter are plotted, all three types fall withinTeotihuacan-Zumpango regions with lesser
the same range (M. Parsons 1972:62-64). Thispeaks in the areas of Ixtapalapa and Xochimil-
suggests that we are dealing with stylistic co. This threefold division of Aztec maguey
differences rather than functional differences to whorls and their very definite geographical
produce threads of varying degrees of fineness. associations may reflect aspects of the Late
Our spindle whorl samples were obtained Postclassic market and political structure in the
from surface survey, and not stratified excava-Valley of Mexico. The center for distribution of
tions; nevertheless, there seems to be a definite Type IIA,B,D, whorls is very clearly the
correlation between Late Aztec occupation of a Texcoco-Huexotla area (M. Parsons 1972:76).
site (the presence of Aztec III black-on-orange Prior to the Spanish Conquest, Texcoco was an
pottery) and the presence of whorl Types I andextremely important Aztec urban center, a
IIA,B,D. Type IIC-CC whorls often occurred on member of the Triple Alliance, and would have
mixed Early and Late Aztec sites where both been an important market center.
Aztec I and Aztec III black-on-orange pottery Type IIC-CC whorls are confined to the
(Vaillant 1938) were found. There is a possibil- Chalco-Amecameca area, a sociocultural unit of
ity, then, that Type IIC-CC whorls are earlier. some time depth, often acting in opposition to
Thus we are dealing with either two or three Texcoco or Tenochtitlan in Late Postclassic
contemporary types which can be viewed as times. These whorls are most prevalent in the
distinctive regional variations of a single artifact Amecameca valley, which was also the only
type. Considering the remarkable uniformity insurvey area where there appeared to be an
the rest of the Late Aztec ceramic assemblage almost total concentration on spinning maguey
in the Valley of Mexico, this marked regional (84.8% maguey whorls). The center for produc-
variation in large ceramic spindle whorl styles istion and distribution of these whorls may have
somewhat surprising, and may provide some been Amecameca itself, or Chalco, whose
insights into regional distributional mechan- history and economy were closely tied to that
isms. of the Amecameca valley (Gibson 1964;
Fig. 4 reveals three very clear peaks in Brundage 1972).
maguey whorl distribution. Type IIA,B,D peaksType I whorls present more of a problem,
over the Texcoco region; Type IIC-CC over the mainly because modern Mexico City covers

This content downloaded from 148.223.96.146 on Mon, 22 May 2017 01:03:13 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 REPORTS 213

Lcms -

Fig. 5. Some of the variation in Type III cotton whorls.

such a large area, including the probable valley and south

centerto the Ixtapalapa peninsula.
of distribution for these whorls, the TypeTenochtit-
IIC-CC would correspond to the Chalca
lan-Tlatelolco area. I was able to examine sphere, extending from the Ixtapalapa penin-
spindle whorls from George Vaillant's excava- sula south to the high mountains that mark the
tions at Nonoalco (Fig. 1), now in the Ameri- edge of the Valley of Mexico, with important
can Museum of Natural History. Although there cities at Chalco, Tlamanalco, and Amecameca.
were only five Aztec maguey whorls in this
collection, they were all Type I. Bernal Diaz THE DISTRIBUTION OF COTTON WHORLS
and Cortes both described the large market-
place in Tlatelolco (Diaz 1908:71-73; Cortes Cotton whorls, although they are also clea
1962:195), which could well have been the most common on Late Aztec sites, do not show
distribution point for Type I whorls. The the same regional variation as the maguey
presence of Type I whorls in the Xochimilco whorls. They are small buff to brown un-
and Ixtapalapa areas (Table 1) may indicate that polished whorls, usually lacking any surface
these areas have a closer link with Tenochtit- decoration or slip. They vary a good deal in
lan-Tlatelolco than with Texcoco-at least as shape from hemispherical to truncated conical
regards the distribution and use of maguey to those with a composite silhouette, but the
whorls. variation in shape is found in all parts of the
Our three maguey whorl types can perhaps Valley (Fig. 5).
be seen in a larger sense, as approximately Table 2 is a comparison of the percentage of
delineating three spheres of economic-political cotton and maguey whorls from each survey
influence. Type I would correspond to the area. The Xochimilco region has an extremely
Tenocha sphere, including the cities of high percentage of cotton whorls (78.3%),
Tenochtitlan, Tlatelolco, and Tlacopan, as well while the Amecameca valley has a relatively
as the area north and northeast of them. Type small percentage of cotton whorls (15.2%).
IIA,B,D would correspond to the Alcolhua Nearly all of the whorls from the Xochimilco
sphere with its center in Texcoco, but ex- survey were found on the lakeshore plain,
tending north to the edge of the Teotihuacan rather than in the rough piedmont area. This

This content downloaded from 148.223.96.146 on Mon, 22 May 2017 01:03:13 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
214 AMERICAN ANTIQUITY [Vol. 40, No. 2, 1975

Table 2. Shows percentages of cotton and maguey whorls from all survey areas.

Survey Unit Cottons Whorls Maguey Whorls Total Sample Number

Zumpango Region 30.8% 69.2%

(16 whorls) (36 whorls) 52

Teotihuacan Valley 37.1% 62.9%

(78 whorls) (132 whorls) 210

Texcoco Region 28.8% 71.7%

(64 whorls) (158 whorls) 222

Ixtapalapa Region 36.8% 63.2%

(7 whorls) (12 whorls) 19

Chalco Region 38.5% 61.5%

(20 whorls) (32 whorls) 52

Amecameca Valley 15.2% 84.8%

(12 whorls) (67 whorls) 79

Xochimilco Region 78.3% 21.7%

(18 whorls) (5 whorls) 23

would seem to indicate a specialization in structure within the Valley of Mexico. Spindle
spinning cotton on the lakeshore plain. The whorl data suggest that these market centers
Amecameca valley, on the other hand, seems to probably were:
have specialized in spinning maguey with very
1. Tlatelolco, the largest prehispanic market-
little spinning of cotton. In the Teotihuacan,
Texcoco, Ixtapalapa, Chalco, and Zumpango
place in the Valley of Mexico, located
north of and adjacent to Tenochtitlan,
survey areas about one third of all the whorls
found were cotton whorls, indicating a definite for Type I maguey whorls;
2. Texcoco, the most powerful center on
participation in spinning cotton, but a much
the eastern edge of Lake Texcoco, for
larger commitment to the spinning of maguey.
Type IIA,B,D maguey whorls;
CONCLUSIONS
3. Chalco or Amecameca, the large Aztec
towns in the extremely fertile agricultural
The distribution of Late Postclassic cotton area south and southeast of the lake
and maguey whorls within the Valley of Mexico system, for Type IIC-CC maguey whorls.
reveals a predominance of maguey whorls in all
survey areas except for the Xochimilco region, In a broader way, the distribution of maguey
but also an involvement in spinning cotton in spindle whorls may be an archaeological mani-
all areas, except the Amecameca valley. The festation of Late Postclassic socio-political
types of cotton whorls remain virtually thedivisions within the Valley of Mexico. If this is
same from north to south across the Valley of so, then Type I whorls would reflect the
Mexico. Maguey whorls, on the other hand, can Tenocha zone of influence; Type IIA,B,D
be divided into three distinct types on the basis whorls the Acolhua zone; and type IIC-CC
of decorative style and surface treatment. Two whorls the Chalca zone. If Type IIC-CC is
of these types (Type I and Type IIA,B,D) are chronologically earlier, then we have a twofold
chronologically contemporary. The third type division within the Valley of Mexico, reflected
(Type IIC-CC) may also be contemporary, or it in spindle whorl distribution, between the two
may be a chronologically earlier style. Each big power centers in the Triple Alliance,
type correlates with a geographical area of the Mexico-Tenochtitlan, and Texcoco.
Valley of Mexico, and may indicate a basic An examination of the distribution of cot-
twofold or, depending on the chronological ton whorls within the Valley of Mexico is seen
position of Type IIC-CC, threefold market as one way to get at the prevalence and the

This content downloaded from 148.223.96.146 on Mon, 22 May 2017 01:03:13 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 REPORTS 215

geographical distribution of one tribute Blanton, Richard E.

service-the spinning of cotton. The occurrence 1972 Prehispanic settlement patterns of the
Ixtapalapa peninsula region, Mexico. Pennsyl-
of 29-39% cotton whorls in most areas surveyed
vania State University, Occasional Papers in
indicates considerable time and energy ex- Anthropology 6.
pended in rendering this tribute service. It also
Brundage, Burr C.
indicates that all sections of the Valley of 1972 A rain of darts. University of Texas Press,
Mexico, with the exception of the more remote Austin.

Amecameca valley, were committed to this Cortes, Hemando

1962 Five letters of Cortes to the emperor,
spinning on a proportionately equal scale. No
translated by J. B. Morris. Norton, New York.
one area seems to have specialized more than
Diaz de Castillo, Bernal
any other, except perhaps the Xochimilco 1908 The true history of the conquest of New
lakeshore plain. Spain, edited by Genaro Garcia, translated by
Cotton was an imported crop, grown outside Alfred P. Maudslay. The Hakluyt Society,
the Valley of Mexico on the Gulf Coast or in Series 2 (2).
Duran, Fray Diego
Morelos and brought into the Valley through
1964 The Aztecs-the history of the Indies of
tribute or trade, and its use in the form of cloth
New Spain, translated by Doris Heyden and
was restricted to certain ranking groups (Duran Fernando Horcasitas. Orian Press, New York.
1964:131). Maguey was a locally abundant Gibson, Charles
crop, grown in all parts of the Valley of 1964 The Aztecs under Spanish rule. Stanford
Mexico, and used by the vast majority of University Press, Stanford.

people for the production of cloth. These Parsons, Jeffrey R.

1971a Prehistoric settlement patterns in the
factors may have influenced the marked varia-
Texcoco region, Mexico. University of Michigan
tion in maguey whorl styles and the lack of Museum of Anthropology, Memoirs 3.
such variation in cotton whorl styles. 1971b Prehispanic settlement patterns in the
It should be remembered that our data are Chalco region, Mexico, 1969 season. mimeo-
based on surface survey, and that our interpre- graphed.
1973 Reconocimiento superficial en el sur del
tations of the data are merely offered as one Valle de Mexico, temporada 1972. mimeo-
way of explaining the distribution of spindle graphed.
whorls in the Valley of Mexico. Parsons, Mary H.
1972 Spindle whorls from the Teotihuacan Val-
Acknowledgments. I thank Gordon Ekholm for his ley, Mexico. University of Michigan Museum of
help in locating the Vaillant collection in the Ameri- Anthropology, Anthropological Papers 45.
can Museum of Natural History, and also the Instituto Vaillant, George C.
Nacional de Antropologfa y Historia for allowing me 1938 A correlation of archaeological and histori-
to examine some of their material. Thanks also go to cal sequences in the Valley of Mexico. Ameri-
Elizabeth Brumfiel, David J. Wilson, and Jeffrey R. can Anthropologist 40:535-573.
Parsons for their comments on this paper. Zorita, Alonso de
1963 Life and labor in ancient Mexico: the brief
Alva Ixtlilxochital, Fernando de and summary relation of the lords of New
1952 Obras historicas, 2 vols, edited by Alfredo Spain, translated by Benjamin Keen. Rutgers
Chavero. Editora Nacional, Mexico City. University Press, New Brunswick.

TECHNIQUES FOR SKELETONIZING VERTEBRATES

FREDERICK C. HILL

Clean, odor free vertebrate skeletons can easily be prepared in from two days to a week by using bacterial
enzyme maceration in conjunction with other techniques.

For several years I have been preparing prepare a large series of skeletons which are free
skeletons for use in identification of animal of fat and any other foreign materials. Several
remains from archaeological sites. For com- techniques for processing such skeletons have
parative purposes, it is often necessary to been described. Friedman (1973:113) suggests

This content downloaded from 148.223.96.146 on Mon, 22 May 2017 01:03:13 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms