Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-kw2vx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-12T15:44:05.341Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

OBSIDIAN BLADES FROM CERRO PORTEZUELO: SOURCING ARTIFACTS FROM A LONG-DURATION SITE

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 June 2013

William J. Parry  and
Michael D. Glascock
William J. Parry*
Affiliation:
Hunter College - CUNY, Department of Anthropology, 695 Park Ave., New York, NY 10065
Michael D. Glascock
Affiliation:
University of Missouri, Research Reactor Center, Columbia, MO 65211
*
E-mail correspondence to: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper reports source identifications for a sample of obsidian prismatic blades from the site of Cerro Portezuelo, Mexico. Although the sample is highly biased and stratigraphically mixed, some interesting results were obtained. Compared to contemporary sites in the region, the frequency of green Pachuca obsidian was unusually low (65%), while obsidian from the distant Ucareo source was unusually abundant (14%). This pattern appears to hold for both the Classic and the Postclassic periods and differs from Classic Teotihuacan. This contrast implies that Cerro Portezuelo was not importing all of its obsidian directly from Teotihuacan during the Classic period but, rather, was obtaining some quantity of Ucareo obsidian from other sites, most likely located to the west. This trade pattern would eventually spread throughout the Basin of Mexico, after the fall of Teotihuacan, but it is foreshadowed during the Classic period at Cerro Portezuelo.

Type
Special Section: Recent Research at Cerro Portezuelo
Information
Ancient Mesoamerica , Volume 24 , Issue 1 , Spring 2013 , pp. 177 - 184
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2013 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Andrews, Bradford 2002 Stone Tools and the Elite Political Economy at Epiclassic (AD 650–900) Xochicalco. Report to Foundation for the Advancement of Mesoamerican Studies, Inc. (FAMSI). Electronic document, http://www.famsi.org/reports/01029/index.html.Google Scholar
Charlton, Thomas H., Grove, David C., and Hopke, Philip K. 1978 The Paredon, Mexico, Obsidian Source and Early Formative Exchange. Science 201:807–809.Google Scholar
Charlton, Thomas H., and Spence, Michael W. 1982 Obsidian Exploitation and Civilization in the Basin of Mexico. In Mining and Mining Techniques in Ancient Mesoamerica, edited by Weigand, Phil C. and Gwynne, Gretchen. State University of New York, Stony Brook. Published in a Special Issue of Anthropology 6:7–86.Google Scholar
Clayton, Sarah C. 2013 Measuring the Long Arm of the State: Teotihuacan's Relations in the Basin of Mexico. Ancient Mesoamerica 24:87–105.Google Scholar
Cobean, Robert H. 2002 Un Mundo de Obsidiana/A World of Obsidian. Instituto Nacional de Antropología e Historia and the University of Pittsburgh, Mexico City and Pittsburgh, PA.Google Scholar
Cowgill, George L. 2013 Possible Migrations and Shifting Identities in the Central Mexican Epiclassic. Ancient Mesoamerica 24:131–149.Google Scholar
Glascock, Michael D. 2011 Comparison and Contrast between XRF and NAA: Used for Characterization of Obsidian Sources in Central Mexico. In X-Ray Fluorescence Spectrometry (XRF) in Geoarchaeology, edited by Shackley, M. Steven, pp. 161–192. Springer Press, New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Glascock, Michael D., Parry, William J., Charlton, Thomas H., Charlton, Cynthia L. Otis, and Neff, Hector 1999 Obsidian Sources Supplying the Aztec City-States of Otumba and Tepeapulco. Paper presented at the 64th Annual Meeting of the Society for American Archaeology, Chicago.Google Scholar
Healan, Dan M. 1993 Local versus Non-local Obsidian Exchange at Tula, and Its Implications for Post-Formative Mesoamerica. World Archaeology 24:449–466.Google Scholar
Healan, Dan M. 2002 Producer versus Consumer: Prismatic Core-Blade Technology at Epiclassic/Early Postclassic Tula and Ucareo. In Pathways to Prismatic Blades: A Study in Mesoamerican Obsidian Core-Blade Technology, edited by Hirth, Kenneth and Andrews, Bradford, pp. 27–35. Cotsen Institute of Archaeology Monograph No. 45. University of California, Los Angeles.Google Scholar
Hicks, Frederic 2005 Excavations at Cerro Portezuelo, Basin of Mexico. Unpublished manuscript on file, Department of Anthropology, University of California, Los Angeles.Google Scholar
Hicks, Frederic 2013 The Architectural Features of Cerro Portezuelo. Ancient Mesoamerica 24:73–85.Google Scholar
Hicks, Frederic, and Nicholson, Henry B. 1964 The Transition from Classic to Postclassic at Cerro Portezuelo, Valley of Mexico. Actas y Memorias del XXXV Congreso Internacional de Americanistas 3:493–505.Google Scholar
Hirth, Kenneth 2002 Provisioning Constraints and the Production of Obsidian Prismatic Blades at Xochicalco, Mexico. In Pathways to Prismatic Blades: A Study in Mesoamerican Obsidian Core-Blade Technology, edited by Hirth, Kenneth and Andrews, Bradford, pp. 81–90. Cotsen Institute of Archaeology Monograph No. 45. University of California, Los Angeles.Google Scholar
Joyce, Arthur A., Elam, J. Michael, Glascock, Michael D., Neff, Hector, and Winter, Marcus 1995 Exchange Implications of Obsidian Source Analysis from the Lower Rio Verde Valley, Oaxaca, Mexico. Latin American Antiquity 6:3–15.Google Scholar
Levine, Marc N., Joyce, Arthur A., and Glascock, Michael D. 2011 Shifting Patterns of Obsidian Exchange in Postclassic Oaxaca, Mexico. Ancient Mesoamerica 22:123–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nichols, Deborah L., Neff, Hector, and Cowgill, George L. 2013 Cerro Portezuelo: States and Hinterlands in the Pre-Hispanic Basin of Mexico. Ancient Mesoamerica 24:47–71.Google Scholar
Parry, William J. 2001 Production and Exchange of Obsidian Tools in Late Aztec City-States. Ancient Mesoamerica 12:101–111.Google Scholar
Parry, William J. 2002 Aztec Blade Production Strategies in the Eastern Basin of Mexico. In Pathways to Prismatic Blades: A Study in Mesoamerican Obsidian Core-Blade Technology, edited by Hirth, Kenneth and Andrews, Bradford, pp. 36–45. Cotsen Institute of Archaeology Monograph No. 45. University of California, Los Angeles.Google Scholar
Pastrana, Alejandro 1998 La explotación azteca de la obsidiana en la Sierra de las Navajas. Colección Científica 383. Instituto Nacional de Antropología e Historia, Mexico City.Google Scholar
Santley, Robert S., and Barrett, Thomas P. 2002 Lithic Technology, Assemblage Variation, and the Organization of Production and Use of Obsidian on the South Gulf Coast of Veracruz, Mexico. In Pathways to Prismatic Blades: A Study in Mesoamerican Obsidian Core-Blade Technology, edited by Hirth, Kenneth and Andrews, Bradford, pp. 91–103. Cotsen Institute of Archaeology Monograph No. 45. University of California, Los Angeles.Google Scholar
Sidrys, Raymond 1977 Trace-Element Analysis of Obsidian Artifacts from Portezuelo, Mexico. Journal of New World Archaeology 2:47–51.Google Scholar
Smith, Michael E. 1990 Long-Distance Trade under the Aztec Empire: The Archaeological Evidence. Ancient Mesoamerica 1:153–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spence, Michael W. 1979 A Preliminary Typology of Teotihuacan Chipped Stone Artifacts. Unpublished manuscript on file, Teotihuacan Mapping Project Archives, San Juan Teotihuacan.Google Scholar
Stark, Barbara L., Heller, Lynette, Glascock, Michael D., Elam, J. Michael, and Neff, Hector 1992 Obsidian-Artifact Source Analysis for the Mixtequilla Region, South-Central Veracruz, Mexico. Latin American Antiquity 3:221–239.Google Scholar
Sugiyama, Saburo, and Rubén, Cabrera C. (editors) 2004 Voyage to the Center of the Moon Pyramid: Recent Discoveries in Teotihuacan. Consejo Nacional Para La Cultura y Las Artes, Instituto Nacional de Antropología e Historia, and Arizona State University, Mexico City and Tempe.Google Scholar