Puebla Prehistory

C 2005)
Journal of Archaeological Research, Vol. 13, No. 2, June 2005 (

DOI: 10.1007/s10804-005-2485-5
Recent Research in Puebla Prehistory

1
Patricia Plunket1,2 and Gabriela Urunuela
This review of recent research in the state of Puebla, Mexico, focuses on six issues:
(1) reevaluations of the Tehuacan Valley Archaic; (2) rural household archaeology
at Tetimpa; (3) the impact of Popocatepetls eruptions; (4) the city of Cholula;
(5) the Nahua-Otomangue frontier; and (6) new perspectives on the MixtecaPuebla art style. Not only do these topics illustrate the scope of archaeological
work, but they can be linked to broader anthropological themes like the origins
and spread of agriculture, relationships between rural populations and emergent
cities, the environmental, social, and cultural impact of natural disasters, the
operation of geographical frontiers and ethnic interfaces, the construction of
cultural landscapes, and the connections between political organization and art
style. Pueblas location along numerous environmental and cultural divides makes
it an excellent laboratory for the study of human interaction across diverse kinds
of frontiers.
KEY WORDS: volcanism; Cholula; frontiers; Mixteca-Puebla.
INTRODUCTION
The central Mexican state of Puebla, located between the Basin of Mexico
and the Mixteca of Oaxaca, most often is treated as a footnote in surveys of
Mesoamerican prehistory. Key developments the evolution of agricultural subsistence economies; the rise of elaborate chiefdoms; the emergence of major cities
and pilgrimage centers; the industrial production of ceramics, obsidian, basalt,
tecalli and salt; and the elaboration of international iconographic and stylistic
communication systemstook place here, yet with few exceptions, archaeological
1 Departamento
de Antropologa, Universidad de las Americas-Puebla, Sta. Catarina Martir, Puebla,

Mexico.
2 To whom correspondence should be addressed at Departamento de Antropologa, Universidad
de las Americas-Puebla, Sta. Catarina Martir, 72820 Cholula, Puebla, Mexico; e-mail: plunket@
mail.udlap.mx.
89
C 2005 Springer Science+Business Media, Inc.
1059-0161/05/0600-0089/0
90
Plunket and Urunuela
research of the last 50 years has not resulted in a clear, synthetic understanding
of Pueblas prehispanic past. In large part, this situation results from the enormous environmental and cultural diversity of the states seven major regions
(Fig. 1).
Puebla sits at the very heart of the Mesoamerican culture area, straddling
the central highlands along the southeastern edge of the Mesa Central, and has
served as a major crossroad between north and south, east and west. The northern
Fig. 1. Geographic regions of the state of Puebla showing sites mentioned in the text (based on
Fuentes 1972, p. 129).
91
extreme includes the humid, forested Atlantic slope that leads down to the Gulf
Coast, whereas the southern area is composed of a series of small valleys separated
by dry mountain ranges that step down into the Rio Balsas drainage that empties
into the Pacific; the broad highland valleys of the center of the state lie along
the eastern side of the neo-volcanic axis, which forms a significant geographical
barrier between them and the Basin of Mexico. The frontier between the Nahua
and Otomangue worldsa major cultural divide within Mesoamericaspans the
eastern periphery, along the border with the states of Veracruz and Oaxaca.
Like the Basin of Mexico and the Valley of Oaxaca, the Puebla region was
the focus of major archaeological research programs during the 1960s and early
1970s. The first of these, Richard MacNeishs Tehuacan Archaeological-Botanical
Project, has been well published (Byers, 1967a,b; Johnson, 1972; MacNeish, 1970,
1972, 1981) and until recently has stood as the unquestioned sequence for our understanding of the transition from hunting-gathering to agriculture subsistence
strategies during the Mesoamerican Archaic. The second investigation was the
Proyecto Arqueologico Puebla-Tlaxcala directed by Peter Tschohl for the Fundacion Alemana para la Investigacion Cientfica (Tschohl, 1977; Tschohl and
Nickel, 1972). With the notable exception of Angel Garca Cooks (1981) summary in the first supplement to the Handbook of Middle American Indians, the
German project did not result in a synthetic treatment of settlement patterns, ceramic sequences, economic systems, or political development in the region, and to
date the results remain poorly published. The same is true of the second phase of
INAHs3 Proyecto Cholula,4 first directed by Miguel Messmacher (1967) and then
by Ignacio Marquina (1970, 1975; Lopez et al., 1976); consequently Cholula
one of the major cities of Mesoamericahas not played a significant role in any
anthropological consideration of the prehispanic past. Because its Great Pyramid
is the largest pre-Columbian structure in the New World (Fig. 2), Cholula is assumed to have been a thriving metropolis and potential rival of Teotihuacan during
the Classic period (ca. A.D. 200700) and a core zone with high population and
concentrated political power (Smith and Berdan, 2003a, pp. 2526) during the entire Postclassic, but the archaeological evidence that might allow a reconstruction
of urban planning, residential patterns, population size, craft specialization, or
socioeconomic variation lies buried beneath the modern city.
During the past decade there have been few attempts to remedy this situation.
The rate of development, particularly in the western part of the state, is extremely
intense, and archaeological sites are being impacted at an alarming rate. Most of
the archaeological research in the state of Puebla has been undertaken in response
to activities such as highway and airport construction, housing projects, water and
3 Instituto Nacional de Antropologa e Historia, the government agency that oversees cultural patrimony
in Mexico.
first Proyecto Cholula, also directed by Ignacio Marquina (1981, pp. 115129), began work in
1931.
4 The
92
Fig. 2. View of the south side of the Great Pyramid (Tlachihualtepetl) of Cholula, Puebla; the
church dedicated to the Virgen de los Remedios crowns the prehispanic structure.
sewage installation, electrification, tourism initiatives, and mining; very little of

the work has been research oriented, although this does not mean that research
interests have been ignored entirely.
Although it is difficult to find common themes in the archaeological research
undertaken during the past decade in the state of Puebla, in this short review
we focus on six specific issues: (1) the Mesoamerican Archaic and the Tehuacan
sequence; (2) household archaeology at the Formative village of Tetimpa; (3)
the impact of volcanic eruptions of Popocatepetl on prehispanic communities;
(4) Cholula; (5) the Nahua-Otomangue frontier; and (6) new perspectives on
the Mixteca-Puebla phenomenon. These topics not only illustrate the nature of
archaeological work in Puebla during the last 10 years but they also can be used
to link the prehistory of this area to broader anthropological themes such as
the origins and spread of agriculture, the relationship between rural populations
and emergent cities, the impact of natural disasters on human communities, the
significance and operation of frontiers and ethnic divides, the construction of
cultural landscapes, and the connections between political organization and art
style.
TEHUACAN AND THE MESOAMERICAN ARCHAIC
For almost 40 years the Tehuacan Valley sequence has provided archaeologists with a model for the gradual development of maize agriculture in
93
Mesoamerica during the Coxcatlan phase (50003400 B.C. [uncalibrated]

[Johnson, 1972, p. 40]). These solid foundations were challenged by the publication of 12 Accelerator Mass Spectrometer (AMS) dates on corn cobspersonally
selected by Richard MacNeish from well-dated levels of the Coxcatlan and San
Marcos caves (Long et al., 1989, p. 1036)that were about 1500 years younger
than radiocarbon dates the original excavators had obtained on charcoal associated
with the same stratigraphic proveniences (Long et al., 1989; Long and Fritz, 2001;
MacNeish, 2001). Four of the AMS dates from Archaic contexts fell within the
Terminal Formative, Classic, and Postclassic periods. This discrepancy has led
several authors to suggest that some of the ecofacts recovered by the Tehuacan
Project are more recent intrusions into earlier levels (e.g., Benz and Long, 2000,
p. 464; Fritz 1994, p. 306). MacNeish (Flannery and MacNeish, 1997) first considered the AMS dates to be unacceptable due to sample contamination from the
use of bedacryl as a consolidant by INAH conservators; he later decided that the
problem was more likely a result of flawed protocols at the University of Arizona
radiocarbon laboratory, which processed these and other AMS dates he likewise
considered questionable (MacNeish, 2001, pp. 103104).
The Tehuacan Valley sequence also has been contested on other grounds. In
an attempt to take a fresh look at the preceramic period in central Mexico, Karen
Hardy (1993, 1996, 1999) questioned some of the basic premises, methodological procedures, and final results of the Tehuacan Project, particularly Flannerys
(1967) faunal analysis and MacNeishs lithic typology (Byers, 1967b). In spite of
some unfortunate problems with Hardys reevaluation (Fennell, 2001; Flannery
and MacNeish, 1997), she did draw attention to a very real need to promote further
study of the Mesoamerican Archaic.
As indicated above, the advent of AMS techniques has made it possible to
directly date the botanical remains from Middle Holocene sites in Mesoamerica and elsewhere (e.g., Flannery, 1999; Kaplan and Lynch, 1999; Smith, 1997).
This dating is an essential part of reconstructing the domestication process and
improving our understanding of the origins of New World agriculture; it would
seem unwise, however, to throw out the Tehuacan Valley sequence (Fritz, 1994,
p. 305) and interpretations (Hardy, 1996) just yet. The new dates do suggest that
the traditional, gradualist models for agricultural origins derived from the Tehuacan data should be reconsidered in light of evidence that the Middle Holocene
consisted of two temporally and developmentally distinct cultural transitions
the initial domestication of plants and the subsequent emergence of economies
centered on food production (Smith, 1997, p. 379). New excavations in other
areas of Pueblasuch as the Valsequillo Depression (Garca Moll, 1977) or the
swamp lands of the Puebla-Tlaxcala Valleymight provide valuable information
on the apparently prolonged period of low-level food production (Smith, 1997,
p. 379) and how this relates to both earlier hunting-gathering subsistence strategies
(Pichardo, 2000) and the subsequent settled agricultural villages of the Formative
period. Indeed, it may turn out that the accelerated rate of morphological change
94
in maize in the period between 3555 and 3370 B.C. that Benz and Long (2000,
p. 462) cite is evidence for both human selection and genetic drift involved in a
late and rapid origin of maize agriculture. But there are many new techniques to
be applied to both stored and recently excavated materials and many additional
questions to be asked before we should decide to adjust the period of earliest agriculture in Mesoamerica to 35003000 B.C. as suggested by Fritz (1994,
p. 308).
Chronological challenges to the long-established Tehuacan Valley Archaic
sequence demonstrate the importance of bolstering existing data on the transition
to agricultural subsistence economies in highland Mesoamerica. Although the dry
caves of Tehuacan and the Valsequillo Depression undoubtedly provide the best
situations for the preservation of organic materials, the natural swamp lands of the
Puebla-Tlaxcala Valley may present additional opportunities for research on the
changing nature of human subsistence patterns under less arid conditions between
5000 and 2000 B.C.
Linguists also have found reasons to reevaluate the Archaic of central Mexico.
In a recent study by Jane Hill (2001), Puebla is implicity, if not explicitly, suggested as a homeland for the Proto-Uto-Aztecan speech community, which according to her formed sometime between 5600 and 4500 BP and participated
in the primary domestication of maize. In opposition to the prevailing view that
Uto-Aztecan languages originated in the southwestern United States and moved
south at a much later date (Fowler, 1983), Hill and others (e.g., Diamond and
Bellwood, 2003) link the spread of this language group to a northward expansion
of early farmers out of the Mesoamerican heartland during the fourth millennium B.C. Whether the specific merits of the linguistic argument are valid or
not, they concur with Bellwood and Renfrews (2003) claim that widespread,
multibranched language groups may represent the trace of human expansions
driven by Neolithic technological innovations, especially cultivation, not only in
Mesoamerica but worldwide (Diamond and Bellwood, 2003). Hills study implies
that many Aztecan speakers were central to the development of the Mesoamerican
worldview and not latecomers who acculturated to civilized patterns in recent
prehistory.
Few projects have focused on the succeeding Early Formative period in
the state of Puebla. During the late 1980s, abundant Early Formative ceramics
like those described by Niederberger (1976) for the southern Basin of Mexico
were found in test excavations at Colotzingo in the Atlixco Valley (Urunuela,
1989b). More recently, Pailles (2000; Pailles et al., 2000) has undertaken a limited
program of test pitting and a small extensive excavation at the heavily looted
Olmec horizon site of Las Bocas. Early Formative remains include floors, a hearth
that was possibly used for firing ceramics, fragments of baby face figurines, and
burials. In the adjoining state of Tlaxcala, Richard Lesure (2002) has initiated a
project to explore the transition to sedentary life around the lakes of the Apizaco
area. Both of these projects, however, are in their initial stages.
95
HOUSEHOLD ARCHAEOLOGY AT THE FORMATIVE

VILLAGE OF TETIMPA
About the middle of the first century A.D. a major Plinian eruption of
Popocatepetl devastated the agricultural communities settled along the volcanos
northeastern flank. This was a huge natural disaster. But by sealing the Formative period landscape under more than 1 m of pumitic ash, the remains of
fragile domestic buildings were protected from the predation of later groups and
the erosive natural forces that alter and destroy archaeological evidence. During
the past 10 years, archaeologists at the Universidad de las Americas in Cholula,
Puebla, have recorded data from 29 operations that include household units, detached kitchens, ritual structures, and agricultural fields from the ancient village
of Tetimpa (Aguirre, 2000; Aguirre and Quintana, 1998; Clear and Plunket, 1998;
Hernandez, 1998, 2000; Lopez, 2000; Panfil, 1996; Panfil et al., 1999; Plunket
and Urunuela, 1998a,b,c,e,f, 1999a,b, 2000a,b, 2001, 2002a, 2003; Urunuela and
Plunket, 1998, 2001, 2002a,b, 2003; Urunuela et al., 1998).
Tetimpa was occupied from the late eighth century B.C. until the eruption
in the first century A.D. The site offers an opportunity to study the structure
and organization of a large, dispersed village during a period of colonization and
population build-up along both the eastern (Garca Cook, 1981, pp. 248262) and
western flanks (Sanders et al., 1979, pp. 97104) of the Sierra Nevada that peaked
just prior to the first century B.C. More importantly perhaps, Tetimpa witnessed the
succeeding demographic decline of this area, a process that was evidently related to
impressive population increases both at Teotihuacan (Sanders et al., 1979, p. 107)
in the northeastern corner of the Basin of Mexico and at Cholula (Plunket and
Urunuela, 2000a) in the western Puebla Valley during the following two centuries.
Thus, the data retrieved from Tetimpa relate to two important issues: (1) village
organization prior to and contemporary with the formation of the urban centers
at Teotihuacan and Cholula, and (2) unequivocal evidence of a natural disaster
that must have played a significant role in the abandonment of the Sierra Nevada
piedmont and the massive migrations to these emerging cities. In this section we
focus on the first of these two topics.
The houses of Tetimpa utilize a highly standardized building program (Plunket
and Urunuela, 1998a) that, as Flannery (2002, p. 431) has recently noted, combine
the flexibility of growth on demand with the formality of a stereotypic module
in a pattern suggesting population growth with segmentation at the nuclear family
level. The mature house uses the same format as Plaza One, a first century A.D.
Three Temple Complex in Teotihuacan (Cook de Leonard, 1957, 1971, p. 192;
Plunket and Urunuela, 2002c). This consists of a large central platform flanked
by two smaller lateral structures that together frame a courtyard (Fig. 3). An altar
or shrine marks the midpoint of the courtyard, and in some cases, an elongated
platform located opposite the central building serves to restrict access to the compound. The stone-faced platforms, usually about 0.72.0 m high, have a central
96
Fig. 3. Plan of Operation 2, a typical Terminal Formative house compound at the village of Tetimpa,
Puebla.
staircase and use talud-tablero architecture, a feature that although long considered diagnostic of Classic period Teotihuacan religious constructions, appears on
both domestic (Plunket and Urunuela, 1998a) and civic-ceremonial (Garca Cook,
1981, p. 252) structures in western Puebla during the Late Formative. The presence
of the talud-tablero temple diagnostic on the residential platforms of Tetimpa
leads us to believe that the earliest first century A.D. three-temple-complexes of
Teotihuacan were originally elite houses and not specialized religious structures,
although they subsequently seem to have acquired temple status (compare with
Grove and Gillespie, 2002; Kirch, 2000).
At Tetimpa, the three-to-four room modules apparently form clusters that
include one larger house and a nonresidential building. We have interpreted these
as social subdivisions of the village, perhaps extended lineages or maybe some
version of a social house (Joyce and Gillespie, 2000), where junior residential
compounds are grouped around a senior or elite house and a specialized structure
97
that may have been used for communal activities and/or as an ancestor hall for
lineage ritual (Plunket et al., n.d.).
At most houses the central room is distinguished from the lateral ones primarily by size but also usually by the floor assemblages that include censers. In
a single casea house we have identified as a senior lineage residence based on
mortuary patternsa talud-tablero altar was attached to the rear wall of the main
room (Urunuela and Plunket, n.d.-a). Thus it appears that certain rituals only took
place at the senior lineage house and not at the junior houses, and that ceremonial
activities, like the lineage itself, were hierarchically structured. The altar may have
been used to display the bundled corpse of an important individual for a period of
time before interment, but the singularity of this feature indicates that the largest
house was distinguished from other residences by more than size alone.
Although the courtyards of the Tetimpa houses were used for a variety of
domestic tasks (Urunuela and Plunket, 1998), the midpoint is always marked by
a small shrine or at least a stone cobble; this is true for all houses and detached
kitchens. The shrines are highly variable and probably reflect aspects of individual
family history, but most include carved anthropomorphic or zoomorphic stones
set on top of subfloor chimneys. In five cases, shrine stones were placed on top
of effigy volcanoes, a reference that obviously relates to Popocatepetl (Smoking
Mountain) whose crater lies only 13 km to the southeast (Plunket and Urunuela,
1998c). Ritual activity around these shrines is manifested in the presence of incense
burners (Urunuela and Plunket, 2002a, p. 28, Fig. 3.8), ash, reddened areas of burnt
earth, prismatic obsidian blades, concentrations of small stones, and cremated bird
remains inside the chimneys (Plunket and Urunuela, 2002a).
The village was probably composed of patrilineages. The orientation towards
the paternal line is reflected in the mortuary program. Only a few individuals,
almost always adult males, were buriedoften with abundant grave goodsin
tombs or pits located under the floor of the central room of each house compound
(Urunuela and Plunket, 2001, 2002a,b). The incense burners that frequently are
included in these interments also have been found on the floors of the room above
or at the patio shrine, providing a ritual link between the living and the dead within
this structure and at the sacred center of the family compound. The few women
and children buried in the houses of Tetimpa were generally excluded from the
ritually significant central room.
The existence of patrilineages at Tetimpa is supported further by the distribution of imported ceramics associated with the burials (Plunket et al., n.d.).
Members of senior lineage houses appear to have engaged in a variety of reciprocal
trading partnerships that are evidenced by the ceramics brought back home and
ultimately inhumed with important individuals who may have been lineage heads.
Neutron activation analyses of these ceramics indicate that the villages traded
locally for most of their serving vessels, but a significant number of items were
imported from the northeastern Basin of Mexico, the area between Huejotzingo
and Tlaxcala and the Tepexi region of southern Puebla, which provided early
98
(ca. 300 B.C.) examples of Thin Orange wares (Plunket et al., n.d.). Although each
cluster of houses was affiliated with two or more distinct regions, all of them forged
alliances to the north in order to procure obsidian from the mines of Otumba and
Paredon.
Although we know next to nothing about the domestic organization of Classic
period Cholula, the city of Teotihuacan offers many intriguing parallels to Tetimpa
that seem to reflect the village on a monumental scale. The very specific triadic
format of the three-temple-complex at Teotihuacan is a mirror of the residential
architecture at Tetimpa and probably other Formative villages and towns. We and
others have suggested links between this architectural format and lineage structures, both along the Street of the Dead and within the apartment compounds of
Teotihuacan (Headrick, 1999, 2001; Plunket and Urunuela, 1998a, 2002c). The
talud-tablero system used on every platform at Tetimpa served no practical purpose. The tablero embellishment that wraps around the facade of the sloping wall
of the platform can be viewed best as a symbolic divide between the underground
quarters of deceased family members and those of their living descendants who
occupy the surface (Urunuela and Plunket, n.d.-a). Urban Teotihuacan adopted
this ancient symbolic device (dated as early as 300 B.C. at Tlalancaleca, Puebla
[Garca Cook, 1984]) for use on most of the citys temples, enhancing the tablero
with a thin stone frame and painted stucco. Rather than create an entirely new
symbol, Teotihuacan drew upon the canons of the pastthe emblem of house and
lineagein order to deal with the problems of continuity and change in a complex
urban environment.
We believe that the city embraced this traditional configuration as one of
several strategies designed to incorporate the tremendous influx of immigrants
that arrived at the beginning of the first century A.D.; the modular nature of the
building program was well suited to rapid growth and could bridge the imposing
chasm between village and city, between past and present. At the same time,
Teotihuacan appears to have established this triadic structure as a cornerstone
of its emerging state ideology, converting it into a formula that was repeated on
a monumental scale along the Street of the Dead, perhaps to provide lineage
representation at the very heart of the city (see Headrick, 1999).
Traces of ancient agricultural systems are usually not preserved in the archaeological record, their imprint having been erased long ago by more recent
activity. The furrowed fields of the Tetimpa region, however, have provided new
insights into prehispanic agricultural systems. There are two temporally distinct
sets of fields, one that was covered by the first century A.D. eruption (Plunket
and Urunuela, 1998a) and a second that was impacted by a later volcanic event
sometime between A.D. 700 and 850 (Hirth, 2001; Panfil, 1996). The early fields
occupy all of the space between house compounds, and they were designed to
arrest the erosive force of torrential rains on the sandy piedmont soil. The majority
of the furrows are spaced regularly at intervals of 1.0 to 1.3 m apart and probably represent milpa agriculture (Aguirre, 2000). Others are more compact with
99
only 0.450.85 m between furrows; these most likely are vestiges of orchards and
gardens (Lopez, 2000). On the basis of the size of corn cobs recovered from the
houses and the spacing of the furrows in Tetimpas milpas, agricultural productivity at this time period (Lopez et al., 2001) was less than estimates derived for the
Basin of Mexico (Sanders et al., 1979, p. 373).
The Classic period furrows are limited in extent due mainly to the meager soil
development on top of the pumitic ash deposits of the Formative period eruption;
indeed, the reoccupation of the Tetimpa area during the Classic seems to have been
fairly limited. After the initial blast of the second volcanic event, farmers tried to
rescue these furrow systems and replant, but they were forced to abandon their
fields and homes by subsequent pyroclastic flows that devastated the northeastern
side of Popocatepetl (Hirth, 2001).
THE IMPACT OF VOLCANIC ERUPTIONS
ON THE WESTERN PUEBLA VALLEY
One theme that has generated interest since the 1994 eruption of Popocatepetl
is the impact of the volcanos activity on human settlement (Panfil, 1996; Panfil
et al., 1999; Plunket and Urunuela, 1998a,b,c, 1999a,b, 2000a,b, 2002a, 2003;
Siebe, 2000; Siebe et al., 1996; Urunuela and Plunket, 2003, n.d.-a). Although
the volcano has erupted over 30 times since the fourteenth century (Simkin and
Siebert, 2000, p. 1379), none of these events had major destructive consequences.
Geologists and archaeologists have documented two earlier eruptions, however,
whose volcanic explosivity indices were of a different order and can be classified
as major eruptions (e.g., Panfil, 1996; Plunket and Urunuela, 1998a; Seele, 1973;
Siebe et al., 1996). The earliest of these was a Plinian event that took place during
the first century A.D., the second a series of pyroclastic flows and subsequent mud
flows, or lahars, that rushed down the slopes of Popocatepetl in the eighth century
A.D.
Research has focused on two initial problems: (1) accurate dating of the
eruptions visible in local stratigraphy, and (2) determination of the lateral impact
of the volcanic events. The Tetimpa area has provided the best dating for the
eruptive sequence because of the primary contexts offered by the village setting.
At present the most precise date for the early eruption is an AMS determination of
2010 40 BP (Beta-146572) on a carbonized corn cob found inside a sealed olla.
The 2 sigma range is between cal 100 B.C. and A.D. 70. On the basis of this date
and a suite of 13 others, we have established that the Terminal Formative event
took place towards the middle of the first century A.D. The second eruption is less
securely dated5 to ca. A.D. 700 (Panfil, 1996; Siebe et al., 1996).
5 Charcoal
samples from the Classic period furrowed fields and floors of a contemporary residence are
being dated at this time.
100
The first century event has been classified as a VEI-6 eruption (Volcanic
Explosivity Index) (Siebe, 2000, p. 61). It produced over 3.2 km3 of pumitic
lapilli that collapsed across an area extending at least 25 km east of the crater;
the eruption column has been estimated at between 20 and 30 km (Panfil, 1996,
p. 16). Following this Plinian phase, lava flows covered 50 km2 of the eastern
piedmont of the volcano with between 30 and 100 m of rock that dammed and
diverted drainages, altering the surface hydrology of the western Puebla Valley
(Panfil, 1996, pp. 1620).
Although the eastern slopes of the volcano were strongly impacted by the
Plinian fallout and lava, the northwestern sector (the southeastern corner of the
adjacent Basin of Mexico) was devastated by pyroclastic flows that led to massive migrations of survivors (Siebe, 2000, p. 61). Indeed, archaeological surveys
of this area have documented an enormous population decline between 100 B.C.
and A.D. 100 (Sanders et al., 1979, p. 183). We believe that the first century
eruption was ultimately responsible for the displacement of some 50,000 people
in the Basin of Mexico and that these refugees contributed heavily to the extraordinary population build-up at Teotihuacan, situated far from the volcanically
active mountains that ring the southern basin. Although Millon (1981, p. 217)
and Sanders (Sanders et al., 1979, p. 107) both argue that Teotihuacans aggressive bid for political control of the countryside was the principal factor involved in the rapid growth of the city, we believe that the emergent state was
confronted with an ecological disaster of unprecedented proportions that accelerated social and ideological processes already underway, including population
nucleation and modifications of prevailing belief systems (Plunket and Urunuela,
2002d).
According to Siebe et al. (1996), the second volcanic event dated to the eighth
century A.D. resulted in massive lahars that rushed into the western Puebla Valley
and destroyed the city of Cholula. They base their reconstruction on an inspection
of the deposits that overlie the Classic period architecture on the southern side of
Cholulas Great Pyramid; they identify these as the lahars. Although it is unquestionable that the eruptions would have impacted Cholula socially, politically, and
environmentally, it is very doubtful that the city was buried under immense mud
flows. Excavations in the low-lying fields at the northeastern corner of the pyramid
(Lopez et al., 2002a) show no sign of destructive lahars, nor do explorations in the
area between the Great Pyramid and the Palacio Municipal located to the west of
the monumental architecturebetween the Pyramid and the volcano a zone that
would necessarily show remains of these deposits if they had covered the Pyramid
(Lopez et al., 2002b; Plunket and Urunuela, 1993, 2002b; Plunket et al., 1994).
Although the volcano has been invoked by geologists in a wave of catastrophism
stimulated by present-day activity, it is unlikely that Cholula was devastated in the
way Siebe and his colleagues propose. Integrating archaeological and geological
observations of Cholulas complex stratigraphy will form an important part of
assessing the effects of volcanic activity on this pre-Columbian city.
101
With the advent of Schiffers (1987) work on formation processes and subsequent publications by Cameron (1991; Cameron and Tomka, 1996), abandonment
has evolved into an important area of investigation, particularly for household
archaeology. Tetimpa has provided an excellent laboratory for understanding both
rapid and gradual abandonment (Plunket and Urunuela, 2000b, 2003; Urunuela
and Plunket 2003). Our analysis of the distribution and placement of artifacts at
the first century houses demonstrates that some families were absent when the
eruption occurred while others were immersed in their daily chores, perhaps indicating that inhabitants were aware of the imminent danger posed by the volcano
and were already establishing alternate living arrangements elsewhere (Plunket
and Urunuela, 2000b). The scarcity of portable, exotic goods in relation to large or
heavy craft items at most houses points to the possibility that householders were
selectively removing valuables while leaving behind items useful for daily life
during the relocation process; the presence of high proportions of improvised,
recycled or waiting-to-be-recycled artifacts that would not be taken to new homes
and the lack of caching behavior are both consistent with our interpretation that
abandonment was imminent and there was little anticipation for return (Plunket
and Urunuela, 2003).
CHOLULA
Archaeological work in Cholula almost always occurs in response to development projects or maintenance of protected areas around the Great Pyramid (Fig. 2),
and most of what has been done can be found only in unpublished technical reports (e.g., Hernandez et al., 1998; Lopez et al., 2002a,b; Plunket et al., 1994;
Plunket and Urunuela, 1993), theses (e.g., Edelstein, 1995; Hermosillo, 1992;
McCafferty, 1992), or abbreviated summaries published in symposia memoirs
(e.g., Suarez, 1992). One exception to this pattern is McCaffertys (1992, 1994,
1996b, 2001c; McCafferty and McCafferty, 2000) analysis of Daniel Wolfmans
1968 excavations on the Universidad de las Americas campus at the eastern edge
of the city (Wolfman, 1968). The random nature and limited extent of salvagegenerated exploration, however, makes it difficult to find common themes in
this work.
The Great Pyramid, or Tlachihualtepetl, was the focus of archaeological
research from the 1930s until the 1970s; since then most efforts have been directed
at the maintenance of this enormous structure (e.g., Rodrguez, 1999, 2000, 2001;
Vela and Solanes, 1991). Recent work in fields abutting the northeast corner
of the pyramid (Lopez et al., 2002a) has produced evidence of early colonial
and Postclassic houses constructed on top of the ruins of earlier Classic period
platforms that represent the initial occupation of this swampy zone; however,
Noguera (1956) reported Late Formative materials from the adjacent Templo
Rojo so earlier buildings may have existed in this area.
102
Until last year, the dating of the pyramid relied entirely on ceramic studies
of materials from selected areas of fill, a situation that has created controversy
about the buildings construction sequence (Marquina, 1970, 1975; McCafferty,
1996a). In an effort to assess the possibility that the first century A.D. eruption
of Popocatepetl led to enhanced strategies of tempering divine justice and new
political agendas that were partially manifested in an acceleration of monumental construction within the city, the Tetimpa Project has begun to explore the
developmental sequence of the Great Pyramid (Urunuela and Plunket, 2002b).
The first part of the work has involved the detailed recording of an unreported
excavation of a tunnel about 2 m underneath what has been referred to as the
initial construction phase (Marquina, 1970). The tunnel terminates in a room
with remains of wooden beams that McCafferty (1996a, p. 5) has referred to as
an interior chamber . . . that may relate to an artificial cave as a symbolic portal
to the underworld (see also McCafferty, 2001a, p. 286). In fact, the stratigraphy
of the tunnel clearly indicates that it was excavated into an adobe construction
that predates the first stage (A) of the Great Pyramid; a 14 C determination on
the remnants of the beams provided a date of 110 50 BP (Beta-162996). It
appears that the modern tunneling ended in an adobe-walled celltypical of platform construction in Cholulathat may have contained an offering that merited
the reinforcement of the ceiling with beams for excavation. Charcoal from the
adobe fill underneath the chamber has been dated to 1810 40 BP (AMS Beta162997), providing a 2 sigma range of cal A.D. 110330, considerably later than
McCaffertys (2001a, p. 285) second century B.C. estimates. A third date that was
obtained from the fill placed directly on top of Marquinas initial construction
phase (A) yielded a determination of 1700 60 BP (Beta-162998) with a 2 sigma
range of cal A.D. 220450, suggesting that the first pyramid was built during the
second century A.D. More dates are necessary to validate these initial findings, but
the construction of an independent chronological sequence for the pyramid and
surrounding structures is essential for our understanding of Early Classic urban
development in the central highlands.
Other monumental architecture in Cholula also has been dated to this time
period. Salvage excavations immediately south of the junction between the kitchen
of the Franciscan monastery of San Gabriel and its Portal de Peregrinos uncovered
a well-preserved staircaseover 12-m wide with more than 13 stepsof a large
east-facing platform that continues under the 16th century building and the adjoining school yard (Plunket and Urunuela, 2002b). A 14 C determination on charcoal
from a hearth associated with the superstructure of this platform provided a date
of 1890 80 BP (I-17,627) with a 2 sigma range of cal 41 B.C. to A.D. 268 and cal
A.D. 273 to 336. Importantly, this platform is constructed directly on top of sterile
tepetate, and no Formative period remains were found in the excavations. Farther
to the northwest, in the patio of the building adjacent to the Casa del Caballero
Aguila, salvage excavations found no evidence of monumental architecture and
103
no occupation prior to the latter part of the Classic (Lopez et al., 2002b). The
Formative and Classic remains of the city center apparently lie primarily to the
east and south of the present-day main square of Cholula.
The eastern limits of the settlement coincide with the campus of the Universidad de las Americas. Salvage excavations there have documented Classic
period burials and midden deposits, but the soil is so thin that most structural
remains have been destroyed by agricultural activities. The western edge of the
campus is pocked with huge pits excavated into the tepetate during Classic times
apparently to extract building material for platform constructionthat were then
filled with trash during the subsequent centuries. One of these mines was filled
with broken drinking vessels and other elements of a ceramic assemblage similar
to that depicted in the mural of Los Bebedores (Uriarte, 1999), and it appears that
this deposit resulted from the discard of artifacts used on a single ritual occasion
(Salomon et al., 2001, 2002). McCafferty (1996b, 2001b; see also Edelstein, 1995)
has briefly reported on Sergio Suarezs INAH salvage excavation of a Classic period house, but there is still very little that can be said about Cholula during this
epoch.
The transition between the Classic and Postclassic in Cholula represents
an extremely complex problem (Garca Cook and Merino, 1991; Urunuela and
Plunket, n.d.-b). Excavations in Cholula (Dumond and Muller, 1972)in addition
to work at nearby Cerro Zapotecas (Mountjoy, 1987), Cacaxtla-Xochitecatl (Serra,
1998), and the various surveys of the Puebla-Tlaxcala Valleysuggest important
changes at the beginning of the seventh century A.D. that included a cessation of
monumental construction in the city, the establishment of a new political ideology linked to the Olmeca-Xicalanca of Cacaxtla (Ringle et al., 1998), and the
Teotihuacan diaspora (however, see McCafferty, 1996a). Some of this turbulence
may have been caused by the second eruption of Popocatepetl (Siebe et al., 1996).
Excavations on the campus of the Universidad de las Americas have demonstrated
that in areas where stratigraphy is intact, the black clay deposits of the Classic
are consistently sealed by a sterile layer of sandy volcanic ash; materials on top
of this ash include Early Postclassic ceramics, specifically black-on-orange wares
similar to Aztec I.
As in so many other areas of Mesoamerica, the Postclassic of Cholula is generally dealt with from an ethnohistoric perspective rather than an archaeological
one (e.g., Lind, 1994b; McCafferty, 2001a; McCafferty and McCafferty, 2000;
Pinto et al., 2001; Suarez and Martnez, 1993). Most of the important exceptions
have to do with ceramic studies that stem from Michael Linds seminal work on
Cholula polychrome wares (Lind et al., n.d.). On the basis of form and decoration, Lind seriated the complex decorated Postclassic ceramics of Cholula into
three phases: Aquiahuac (A.D. 10001200), Tecama (A.D. 12001350), and Martir
(A.D. 13501519). Although his work is still being tested and verified (Hernandez,
1995a; Plunket, 1995; Suarez, 1994, 1995), his basic divisions have been modified

104
by McCafferty (1992, 1994, 2001c) in his analysis of the assemblage from UA-1,
a residence located at the eastern limits of the Postclassic city. McCafferty (2001c,
p. 14) has published a detailed chronological sequence, with new phase names
Early Tlachihualtepetl (A.D. 700900), Middle Tlachihualtepetl (A.D. 9001050),
Late Tlachihualtepetl (A.D. 10501200), Early Cholollan (A.D. 12001400), and
Late Cholollan (A.D. 14001520)based on four radiocarbon dates. Cholula now
has three different Postclassic chronologies, none of which is grounded in sufficient temporal information. We return to a discussion of the Postclassic ceramics
below.
THE NAHUA-OTOMANGUE FRONTIER

Although the linguistic frontier between Uto-Aztecan (Nahuatl) and
Otomangue speakers probably developed late in Mesoamerican culture history
(Hopkins, 1984; however, see Hill, 2001, and Manrique, 2000), it evolved along a
major geographic transition. The Plains of San Juan as well as the southeastern and
southern regions (Fig. 1) lead out of the broad central valleys and into the broken
terrain occupied by Otomangue groups like the Mixtec and Popoloca, or Totonacs.
With the exception of the Tehuacan Valley, these are poorly explored areas even
though they should be considered vital to any discussion of frontiersparticularly
fortified frontiersduring the latter part of the Classic and the Postclassic. We
briefly review several sets of research on two frontier areas: the city of Cantona
situated at the northern rim of the Plains of San Juan (Garca Cook and Merino,
1998), and the nahuatized Popoloca kingdoms of Tepexi (Castillo, 1997, 1998a,b),
La Mesa (Alducn, 1998; Arana, 1995, 1998; Castillo, 1995, 1998c; Chacon, 1995,
1998; Sisson and Lilly, 1994a,b), and Cutha (Castellon, 1995, 1999; Castellon and
Dumaine, 2000) located in the southeastern section of the state.
Cantona
The fortified city of Cantona spreads across 12.6 km2 of rugged volcanic
topography west of Cofre de Perote near the border between the states of Puebla
and Veracruz (Garca Cook and Merino, 1996, 1998). Obsidian from the nearby
mines of Oyameles-Zaragoza was converted into prismatic cores and bifaces in
its numerous obsidian workshops. Rojas (2001, pp. 69, 107) considers Cantona to
have been a major competitor of Teotihuacans obsidian industry, and in certain
areas of Mesoamerica this may have been the case. However, a study of the
distribution of obsidian from Classic contexts in the Tehuacan Valley demonstrates
that while Cantona was the major supplier for this area, Teotihuacans materials
moved through the Tehuacan Valley and on to the Gulf Coast and the Maya
105
lowlands where more exotic luxury goods could be obtained (Drennan et al., 1990).
Cantona may have participated on a limited scale in the long-distance exchange
of obsidian for prestige commodities during the Classic since Oyameles-Zaragoza
artifacts have been identified as far away as Tikal (Moholy-Nagy and Nelson,
1990, pp. 7374), but its role as an important international exporter appears to have
mushroomed primarily during the post-Teotihuacan era. Its workshops contributed
significant percentages of obsidian to the lithic assemblages at sites in the Puebla
Valley, along the Gulf Coast, in the Valley of Oaxaca, and across the southern
Isthmus; its products also occur in minute quantities in the northern Maya area
at sites like Chicanna, Chichen Itza, Uxmal, Ek Balam, and Labna (Braswell,
2003, Table 20.1). Use of Oyameles-Zaragoza obsidian declined at the beginning
of the Postclassic as Cantona was abandoned around A.D. 1000 (Garca Cook and
Merino, 1998, p. 213).
The city was constructed upon a series of superimposed andesitic flows that
form natural terraceseach about 10-m high (Ferriz, 1985)using asymmetrical
architectural layouts to adapt building plans to the highly irregular ground (Garca
Cook and Merino, 1998, p. 197). Most of Cantonas civic and religious buildings
are located on the upper terrace, or Acropolis, that rises at the southern end of
the site while the habitation areas cover the lower two flows along the southern
and western boundaries of the geological formation. The citys public architecture
includes 24 ballcourts and more than 100 plazas. Twelve of the ballcourts were
embedded into an entirely new architectural complex that consists of a plaza with
a stepped platform at one end and the I-shaped ballcourt at the other (Fig. 4); most
of these complex architectural configurations are located on the Acropolis (Garca
Cook and Merino, 1998, pp. 200201). Thirty of Cantonas plazas also were built
on the Acropolis while the remainder were scattered among the residential patio
groups, perhaps functioning as civic and religious hubs for the citys subdivisions. Garca Cook and Merino (1998, p. 197) identified two large rectangular
open areas defined by low walls and platformscovering 11,200 and 16,000 m2 ,
respectivelythat may have functioned as marketplaces.
A complex network of elevated stone-paved streets meanders through the
residential patios that occupy more than 3000 terraces, while clearly defined
roads linked the settlement with a number of neighboring towns (Garca Cook
and Merino, 1998). Over 20 14 C dates place the occupation between the Late
Formative and Epiclassic. The site seems to have become more fortified through
time, reinforcing its frontier status and perhaps reflecting the political turmoil of
the Epiclassic.
Both Cantonas building program and ceramic assemblage are unique in
Mesoamerica and do not employ the canons of the central valleys or Gulf Coast
sites, although certain similarities to the styles of Veracruz, Oaxaca, the central highlands, and West Mexico are present (Garca Cook and Merino, 1998,
pp. 210, 213214). The ethnic composition of Cantona and the nature of the

106
Fig. 4. Plan of ballcourt complex no. 7 at Cantona (redrawn from Talavera et al., 2001, Fig. 50).
settlements outside contacts and alliances remain unresolved; further analysis of

the excavated materials and their contexts (e.g., Rojas, 2001; Talavera et al., 2001)
should provide important insights about this frontier polity and its interaction
with other parts of Mesoamerica. In many ways, the city is like other Epiclassic
centers (e.g., Xochicalco, Cacaxtla, and El Tajn): It is located on a prominent
hill with fortified architecture; it possess a road network with controlled accesses; it focuses strongly on ballcourt ritual; and its artifact assemblages includes
reworked human bone. Unlike the above-mentioned cities, however, Cantona
has little public artwork, which makes ideological and symbolic comparisons
difficult.
Popoloca Region
Ethnic identity also represents an important issue for archaeologists working
in the southeastern corner of the state. Not only are the small polities centered at
sites like La Mesa (Tehuacan Viejo), Cutha, and Tepexi located in a region of both
geographic and cultural transitions, but the area was subject to an influx of Nahuatl
speakers from the northwest early in the 13th century, and two hundred years later
much of it became subject to the Aztec empire (Castillo, 1997, p. 239; Sisson
and Lilly, 1994a, p. 33). Although some authors stress the relevance of an ancient
Popoloca identity (Castillo, 1998c), others have given more importance to the Postclassic Nahua migrants (Sisson and Lilly, 1994a,b). La Mesa has been described
107
as being occupied by either Popoloca (Castillo, 1998c) or Nahua refugees (Sisson

and Lilly, 1994a, p. 33), while Tepexi and Cutha have traditionally been classified
as Popoloca. Some authors propose that the Popoloca kingdoms flourished after
the fall of Tula (Castillo, 1994, p. 18), but Castellon (1999) has recently suggested
that Cutha, one of the most important sites in the area, reached its peak during the
Epiclassic.
Researchers who have worked in the region during the last dozen years
agree that its population was not homogeneous but rather a complex mixture of
the various ethnic groups whose geographic boundaries coalesce in southeastern
Puebla (Castellon, 1999; Castillo, 1998c; Sisson and Lilly, 1994a). Surrounded
by Nahua groups to the north and Mixtecs, Chochos, and Mazatecs to the south,
the Popoloca kingdoms were linked to one another and to their outside neighbors
through marriage alliances (Castillo, 1998c, p. 1876; Sisson and Lilly, 1994a,
p. 33), although they were simultaneously engaged in local conflicts that resulted
in the fortification of many of the major cabeceras, such as Cutha and Tepexi
(Castillo, 1994).
Although a great deal of the recent archaeological work has centered on mapping and the excavation of public architecture at La Mesa (Alducn, 1998; Arana,
1995, 1998; Chacon, 1995, 1998; Sisson and Lilly, 1994a,b), Tepexi (Castillo,
1996, 1997), and Cutha (Castellon, 1999), much of the interpretation reviewed
above is based primarily on legendary accounts in ethnohistoric documents and
ceramic studies. The fact that the ceramics and murals found in the region belong
to the generalized Mixteca-Puebla tradition does not help clarify issues of ethnic
identity. Surface collections at La Mesa include not only local bichromes and
polychromes but also ceramics from Acatlan, Tepeaca, Cholula, Cuauhtinchan,
Tlaxco, the Basin of Mexico, the Mixteca Alta, the Chinantla, and the Huasteca
(Marquez, 1994)a situation paralleled at Cutha (Castellon, 1999). In addition
to ethnic diversity, this suggests the existence of complex exchange networks and
marriage alliances that were fundamental to the social, political, and economic
organization of these often fortified polities that occupied the small valleys of the
region. Ceramics are not particularly good indicators of ethnicity, and more work
needs to be done at the household level to investigate the population mix at these
settlements and how the Nahua migrants affected the political and demographic
structure of the region.
Southeastern Puebla also has witnessed research on productive systems.
Neelys (Neely and Castellon, 2003) continuing work on the fossilized canal
systems of the Tehuacan Valley has shown that spring water was being channeled
to agricultural fields by the beginning of the Late Formative, and organic materials sealed between the travertine layers of the canals should provide important
environmental data for this initial period of agricultural intensification. The canal
water also was employed in salt making that was a major industry of the area
around Cutha (Castellon, 1999).

108
During the Classic period the Popoloca regions interaction with the great
power centers, especially Teotihuacan, revolved around the production of Thin
Orange ceramics (Plunket and Urunuela 1998d) made from clay deposits along
the Ro Carnero drainage. Rattrays survey (Rattray, 1990a,b, 1995) of about
100 km2 of an area between Tepexi and San Juan Ixcaquixtla was designed
to study the production of this ware and the interaction between the Popoloca
and Teotihuacan. She located 83 sites, including three regional centers and nine
cabeceras (Rattray, 1998, p. 80, Fig. 2), and partially excavated a house compound
with a Thin Orange workshop (Rattray, 1990a). Although Rattray (1998, p. 81)
places the earliest appearance of this highly traded ware around A.D. 200, neutron
activation analyses of pink-orange paste vessels from Late Formative contexts at
Tetimpa demonstrate that ceramics chemically identical to Classic period Thin
Orange were in circulation much earlier (Plunket et al., n.d.).
Atlixco
The northern frontier of the Popoloca and Mixtec areas is located at the
southern edge of the Atlixco Valley. Here studies have focused not so much on
the nature of this boundary but rather on the political division that developed between cabeceras conquered by the Aztec empire and the independent kingdoms
of Puebla-Tlaxcala after 1465 (Plunket, 1990; Plunket and Urunuela, 1994). Hostilities between these two groups, known as the xochiyaoyotl or Flowery Wars,
apparently resulted in the episodic abandonment of settlements in the Atlixco
Valley, particularly in the southern area near Quauhquechulan where the Aztecs
installed a garrison (Dyckerhoff, 1988, p. 26). As opposed to the situation in the
Popoloca region, ceramics and probably other goods did not cross this frontier
easily. Aztec III and the cream wares typical of the Mixteca are absent or scarce
in the Puebla Valley to the north, while Cholula polychromes are very uncommon
around Quauhquechulan to the south.
The nature of the Nahua-Otomangue divide seems to have varied considerably according to the political and economic relations between bordering groups.
Internal regional hostilities among peer polities, like those indicated for the southeastern area, seem to be reflected in the defensive position and frequent fortification
of cabeceras without major or long-term effects on economic exchange. Threats
of conquest by a major foreign military alliance, however, appear to have affected
both settlement continuity and commercial activity.
THE MIXTECA-PUEBLA PHENOMENON

In a recent synthesis, Nicholson (2001) reminds us that the origins of the
Late Postclassic International Stylealso known as the Mixteca-Puebla Horizon
109
Styleare still unclear. One group of researchers associates it with the emergence
of the Mixtec kingdoms in Oaxaca and southern Puebla, while others argue for
roots in the turbulent Early Postclassic of Cholula in the western Puebla Valley,
or in the highland-lowland interaction along the Gulf Coast. For many years,
interest in the origins of this art style was interwoven with diffusionist models that
posited a culture core in central Mexico from which Mixteca-Puebla culture
spread (Nicholson, 1960; Vaillant, 1940). Smith and Heath-Smith (1980, p. 15)
challenged this traditional view, arguing that it confuses three distinct phenomena:
(1) the Religious Style of the Early Postclassic; (2) the Mixtec Codex Style of the
Late Postclassic; and (3) the Mixteca-Puebla Regional Ceramic Sphere composed
of local central Mexican ceramic complexes that share certain stylistic features.
They concluded that the conflation of these phenomena has led to inappropriate
models and flawed interpretations, and they propose that trade and developing
communication networks provide better explanations.
A recent volume on Postclassic Mesoamerica (Smith and Berdan, 2000,
2003b) examines the Mixteca-Puebla phenomenon from a world-systems perspective. To distinguish between style and iconography, two categories are used:
(1) the Postclassic International Style (painting styles of codices, murals, and ceramics), and (2) the Postclassic International Symbol Sets (iconography) that have
early and late components (Boone and Smith, 2003). The world-systems approach
reverses the culture core concept that held that traits diffuse outward from a center
and instead contends that the styles and symbols originate outside central Mexico,
but were incorporated into the exchange networks of the Postclassic world system
(Smith, 2003, p. 183). Mixteca-Puebla style is used now to refer to ceramic
decoration, murals, and codices in Puebla, Tlaxcala, and Oaxaca (Smith, 2003,
p. 182).
In Puebla, recent work has sought to separate and define substyles (Castellon
and Dumaine, 2000; Castillo, 1994; Dennis, 1994; Lind, 1994a; McCafferty, 1994,
2001c; Quinones-Keber, 1994; Smith and Berdan, 2000, 2003b), identify loci
where materials were made (Neff et al., 1994; Urunuela et al., 1997), determine the
styles application in different mediacodices, ceramics, and mural(Contreras,
1994; Sisson and Lilly, 1994b), read the iconographic references (Hernandez,
1995a,b; Nicholson, 1994; Sisson and Lilly, 1994a), and understand how this ritually charged symbolism was woven into the social fabric (Pohl, 1998, 2003a,b,c,d;
Pohl and Byland, 1994).
Several studies have demonstrated strong relationships between regional substyles and certain codical traditions, lending weight to arguments about the origins
of particular manuscripts. For example, there is such a strong correspondence between the Late Postclassic polychrome wares and murals of the Puebla-Tlaxcala
Valley and the Codex Borgia that it is highly probable that this pre-Columbian
document was produced in that area (Boone, 2003; Contreras, 1994; Hernandez,
1995a,b; Nicholson, 1994; Pohl, 1998; Quinones-Keber, 1994; Urunuela et al.,
1997).
110
These links between the Codex Borgia and the codex-style ceramics from
the Puebla-Tlaxcala Valley have led several researchers to isolate elements and
motifs in the complex compositions in an attempt to create vocabularies that can
be translated or tied to culturally specific meanings (Hernandez, 1995a,b; Lind,
1994a; Lind et al., n.d.; Nicholson, 1994). Based on Linds (1994a, pp. 9495)
comparative dictionary of motifs that occur on Late Postclassic Mixtec Pilitas
and Cholula Catalina polychromes, these ceramics functioned within two significantly different political systems. According to Lind (1994a, p. 97) the Mixtec
vessels served as drinking vessels at royal weddings and other gatherings of the
political elite; consequently they illustrate distinctive Mixtec rituals, anthropomorphic representations of royalty, and mythological themes that are similar to
those found in the Mixtec Codex Vindobonensis. The Cholula ceramics, on the
other hand, use design motifs that reflect bloody rites, including human and animal
sacrifice; they focus on the ritual paraphernalia like maguey thorns and bone awls
used in these events. Occasional references to deities like Xochipilli, Xochiquetzal, or Tezcatlipoca on drinking vessels and plates are achieved through esoteric
symbols rather than anthropomorphic representations; likewise, representations
of jaguars and eagles allude to the two high priests of Cholula, the Tlalchiach
and the Aquiach, respectively. For Lind, the elegant Catalina polychrome (Fig. 5)
is thematically related to the interests of the religious bureaucracy of the holy
city of Cholula and was not employed in the aggrandizement of the political elite
like the Mixtec Pilitas ware appears to have been. If Lind is correct in his interpretation, an intensive study of vocabularies depicted on the codex style
ceramics produced in the other kingdoms of the Puebla-Tlaxcala Valley should
reveal patterns similar to those of the Mixtec Pilitas polychromes since the sacred
pilgrimage city of Cholula is probably a unique case. Neutron activation analysis
of ceramics decorated with Mixteca-Puebla iconography has shown that these
were made at a number of locations in the Basin of Mexico, the Puebla-Tlaxcala
Valley, the Popoloca area, the Mixteca Alta, the Oaxaca Valley, and the Chinantla
(Neff et al., 1994, p. 129); therefore the signs and symbols should reflect the rituals
and mythology used by the local elites.
In a recent article on the Late Postclassic painted altars in Tlaxcala, Pohl
(1998, pp. 194195) proposes that some of the sacrificial references in these
murals and on local ceramics are related to the Tzitzimitl, fearsome spirits that
personified disease, drought, war, sacrifice, death, and divine castigation who serve
as emblems of the chaos caused by drunkenness and violent discord. He suggests
that drunkenness was common at the palace feasts that played such an important
role in maintaining social relations among the multiethnic kingdoms of highland
Mexico (Pohl 2003a,b,c,d), and that the movable feasts of the 260-day sacred
calendar were celebrated in these palaces and dedicated to the Tzitzimime (Pohl,
1998, pp. 197, 200). In effect, he suggests that, like their Mixtec counterparts,
the Tlaxcalan kingdoms also used ceramics and other art forms depicting the
ritual and mythological themes that were specifically relevant to their own social
111
Fig. 5. Catalina polychrome pulque goblet (courtesy of the

Museo de la Ciudad de Cholula en la Casa del Caballero
Aguila, Cholula, Puebla).
milieu. Hernandez (1995a,b) comparison of the motifs of Cholula, Huejotzingo,

and Tlaxcalan ceramics shows that the Tzitzimitl referencesthe severed hands,
the skulls, and human heartsfrequently appear in Cholula, so it is likely that the
sacred city used the polychrome wares not only as a vehicle for the interests of
the religious bureaucracy but also for promoting the political elite.
The discovery of codex-style murals at La Mesa (Tehuacan Viejo) in 1991
provides significant information about how Mixteca-Puebla style iconography

112
was used in nonpalatial architectural settings. On the back wall of the west room
in a courtyard group, Edward Sisson (Sisson and Lilly, 1994a,b) uncovered a
well-preserved mural painted on mud plaster that depicts eight shields (originally
9) surmounted on diagonally crossed lances and banners. The building has been
interpreted as an armory decorated with the symbolism of the night sun where the
elaborate costumes, shields, and lances of elite warriors were stored (Sisson and
Lilly, 1994a, p. 43). The shields themselves make reference to deities like Xipe
Totec, Tezcatlipoca, and Mixcoatl-Camaxtli and employ metaphors for warfare
and sacrifice like the atl-tlachinolli (burning water), the mitl-chimalli (a shield
on top of atlatl darts), anthropomorphized sacrificial knives, and the aztamecatl
(a feathered rope for binding sacrificial victims). The paintings were probably
made by a Nahuatl-speaking component of the Popoloca region since there are
strong iconographic similarities between the murals and the Codex Borgia (see,
Boone, 2003). Sisson and Lilly (1994a, p. 42) stress that the full meaning of the
murals could be better understood if the surrounding rooms were excavated, but
difficulties in the conservation of the paintings have made archaeologists reluctant
to undertake this exploration. As opposed to the Tlaxcalan palace murals that
emphasize the Tzitzimime motifs, the La Mesa artwork demonstrates that the
Mixteca-Puebla style also articulated military themes for warrior societies whose
ranks probably included members of the political elite.
FINAL COMMENTS
As this review demonstrates, the amount of research-oriented archaeology in
the state of Puebla during the past dozen years has been limited. With the exception
of the Tehuacan Archaeological-Botanical Project, this situation results from the
failure of the large-scale projects of the 1960s and 1970s in the Puebla-Tlaxcala
Valley to produce and publish a coherent chronological framework (however, see
Garca Cook, 1981, 1988), well-established ceramic sequences, and a detailed,
comprehensive analysis of settlement patterns that could serve as a platform from
which to launch more specific research. Forty years ago modern settlement was
not an important impediment to archaeological research, but today the problems
caused by population growth and resource use have made it much more difficult
to obtain the kind of information needed to create the broad outlines that can
generate theoretical discussions. Not only have important sites been impacted by
development projects and squatters settlements, but also the topsoil of a large
section of the western Puebla Valley has been removed and used by cottage
industries to make bricks. It is now almost impossible to record small villages and
hamlets in these zones.
Other areas of the state remain virtually unknown archaeologically. The
Sierra Norte and the Atlantic slope that leads into the Totonac area have many
113
important sites such as Yohualichan and Xiutetelco, but little systematic exploration has been undertaken. The Izucar-Chiauhtla area to the southwest and the
Mixteca Baja to the south are unexplored with the exception of limited work at
Las Bocas (Pailles, 2000; Pailles et al., 2000). The Mixtec kingdom of Acatlan
that apparently produced the Codex Tulane (Smith and Parmenter, 1991) has seen
little archaeological research. The Plains of San Juan around Cantona have been
and continue to be the subject of archaeological survey by Angel Garca Cook
in spite of Leonor Merinos untimely death. The western extreme of the central
valleys around Tepeaca-Acatzingo was intensively surveyed by James Sheehy;
unfortunately, this work remains unpublished and can only be consulted in two
licenciatura theses (Maldonado, 1997; Medina, 2001) and in technical reports to
the Mexican government (Sheehy, 1994; Sheehy et al., 1995, 1996).
The publication of detailed analyses of salvage work has been very inadequate. Major excavations were undertaken during the 1980s in response to the
construction of the Huejotzingo airport. The only published mention of the airport project (Cepeda, 1997) summarizes in one paragraph evidence of an Early
Classic occupation that included the remains of an urban settlement with palaces
surrounded by walls and separated by streets 1.5-m wide, a drainage system to
recycle rainwater, canals for irrigation, domestic artifacts, ceremonial burials, and
more than 4000 ceramic vessels. There are no maps, drawings, or photographs.
During this same period a modern drainage system cut a 4 km long east-west
trench through Cholula two blocks south of the Great Pyramid. With the exception of three midden deposits (Fajardo, 1985) and the burials (Urunuela, 1989a),
the excavated materials from this salvage project were never analyzed and no report was prepared. Occasionally, however, results from these kinds of excavations
are published (e.g., Suarez, 1990, 1995).
In spite of the problems we have mentioned, the state of Puebla has tremendous potential for archaeological research. The Middle and Late Formative saw
impressive population growth and the establishment of numerous chiefdoms. Relations between Teotihuacan and Cholula are still not clearly understood for the
Classic period, and this is an important research problem that needs to be addressed. To the east of Cholula there are several important centers (Hirth and
Swezey, 1976; Medina, 2001, pp. 124132) that may provide significant data
about Teotihuacans relations with lesser highland political structures, a subject
that, having been overshadowed by research on the Teotihuacan-Maya interaction,
requires attention. And finally, Pueblas location along the fringe of the Nahuatlspeaking worldat least during the Postlcassicprovides archaeologists with
excellent opportunities to investigate social, economic, and political interaction
along frontier zones and ethnic divides.
This short review brings together various sets of the recent archaeological
work in the state of Puebla. We have attempted to show that, in spite of the sporadic
and opportunistic nature of many projects, there is much to be learned from this
114
central area; its exclusion from general considerations of Mesoamerican prehistory

due to a lack of regional synthesis shows that our reconstruction and understanding
of basic culture history and social process in this cradle of civilization is far
from adequate.
As Richard MacNeish recognized long ago, certain parts of the state provide
excellent prospects for the study of agricultural origins and the spread of Neolithic
lifeways. Chronological challenges to the long-established Tehuacan Valley Archaic sequence demonstrate the importance of bolstering existing data bases on
the transition to agricultural subsistence economies in highland Mesoamerica.
Although the dry caves of Tehuacan and the Valsequillo Depression undoubtedly provide the best preservation of organic materials, the swamp lands of the
Puebla-Tlaxcala Valley also may present opportunities for research on the changing nature of human subsistence patterns under less arid conditions between 5000
and 2000 BP. More and better archaeological and linguistic data from the Archaic period will help trace the Neolithic expansion so that the Mesoamerican
experience can be compared to similar processes worldwide.
Almost 30 years ago, Flannery (1976) wrote about the early Mesoamerican
village. Some of these early villages in Puebla were tested by the German archaeological project of the 1960s (Aufdermaeur, 1970), but along the eastern base
of the Sierra Nevada there is a string of villages that developed into important
chiefdoms during the Middle and Late Formativesites like Tlalancaleca, San
Francisco Coapan, and Colotzingothat need intensive study in order to make
better sense of the political and economic processes documented in the Basin of
Mexico to the northwest and the Valley of Oaxaca to the southeast. Our studies at
Tetimpa have shown that even the rural settlements that dotted the piedmont were
active participants in Formative exchange networks, and we might expect that the
centers located on the valley floor were prime movers in the political development
of central Mexico.
The population declines documented for both sides of the Sierra Nevada
during the first century A.D.including the large chiefdoms of the western Puebla
Valleymay have been a consequence of a huge eruption of the Popocatepetl
volcano. This natural disaster has direct bearing on the rapid growth of the two
major urban centers of highland Mesoamerica, Teotihuacan, and Cholula, in that
it provides a specific set of circumstances under which decision making took
place at both the impacted communities and the powerful political centers closest
to them. Generally, it has been assumed that the emergent cities of the central
highlands coerced the inhabitants of the towns and villages of their respective
regions to relocate to the urban environment, yet the dating of the VEI-6 eruption
provides an alternate explanation for the massive population movements of the first
century A.D. and requires us to reconsider our ideas about population implosion
and the nature of the Terminal Formative/Early Classic transition in the central
highlands.
115
Ethnic and environmental diversity played major roles in the political and
economic development of Puebla. The northern, eastern, and southern sectors of
this macroregion constitute major linguistic and environmental divides that create
excellent opportunities to study the interaction between environmentally and/or
ethnically distinct territories. In spite of internal regional hostilities, the small
polities of the Postclassic developed communication systems that could function
in multiethnic circumstances to promote alliance formation and maintain active
exchange networks. This kind of social and commercial interaction appears to
have been curtailed, however, by the emergence of the Triple Alliance and the
imperialistic designs of the Aztec empire.
Puebla sits at the crossroads of Mesoamerica, and in a sense, it divides the
ancient culture area in two rather distinct parts, just as it divides the modern nation
of Mexico into the developed north and the impoverished south. The transitions
in environment and language are complex and obviously have deep temporal
roots, but these transitions make Puebla an important laboratory for the study of
interaction across frontiers.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
We thank the Mesoamerican Research Foundation, the Sistema Regional
Ignacio Zaragoza, the Consejo Nacional de Ciencia y Tecnologa, and the Decanatura de Investigacion y Posgrado of the Universidad de las Americas, Puebla,
for their generous support of our research. Kent Flannery, Kenneth Hirth, James
Sheehy, Gary Feinman, and Linda Nicholas all provided helpful suggestions and
sound advice that were much appreciated.
REFERENCES CITED
Aguirre, Z. (2000). Estudios qumicos y paleoetnobotanicos en unidades domesticas arqueologicas del
sitio de Tetimpa, Puebla. Unpublished Masters thesis, Department of Anthropology, Universidad
de las Americas-Puebla, Cholula.
Aguirre, Z., and Quintana, N. (1998). Analisis qumico de cationes de un espacio domestico arqueologico de la region de Tetimpa, Puebla. In Brambila, R. (ed.), Antropologa e historia del
occidente de Mexico: XXIV Mesa Redonda, Vol. III, Sociedad Mexicana de Antropologa and
Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico, Mexico City, pp. 17991820.
Alducn, R. (1998). La Plaza B de Tehuacan Viejo La Mesa. In Brambila, R. (ed.), Antropologa e historia del occidente de Mexico: XXIV Mesa Redonda, Vol. III, Sociedad Mexicana de Antropologa
and Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico, Mexico City, pp. 19391946.
Arana, R. (1995). Sistemas constructivos y consolidacion del Conjunto A de Tehuacan el Viejo, La
Mesa. Revista Mexicana de Estudios Antropologicos XLI: 129148.
Arana, R. (1998). Estructura 4, Plaza C de Tehuacan Viejo La Mesa. In Brambila, R. (ed.),
Antropologa e historia del occidente de Mexico: XXIV Mesa Redonda, Vol. III, Sociedad Mexicana de Antropologa and Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico, Mexico City, pp. 1909
1926.
116
Aufdermaeur, J. (1970). Excavaciones en dos sitios preclasicos de Moyotzingo. Comunicaciones 1:

924.
Bellwood, P., and Renfrew, C. (eds.) (2003). Examining the Framing/Language Dispersal Hypothesis,
McDonald Institute Monographs, McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research, Cambridge.
Benz, B. F., and Long, A. (2000). Prehistoric maize evolution in the Tehuacan Valley. Current Anthropology 41: 459465.
Boone, E. H. (2003). A web of understanding: Pictorial codices and the shared intellectual culture
of Late Postclassic Mesoamerica. In Smith, M. E., and Berdan, F. F. (eds.), The Postclassic
Mesoamerican World, University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City, pp. 207221.
Boone, E. H., and Smith, M. E. (2003). Postclassic international styles and symbol sets. In Smith,
M. E., and Berdan, F. F. (eds.), The Postclassic Mesoamerican World, University of Utah Press,
Salt Lake City, pp. 186193.
Braswell, G. E. (2003). Obsidian exchange spheres. In Smith, M. E., and Berdan, F. F. (eds.), The
Postclassic Mesoamerican World, University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City, pp. 131158.
Byers, D. S. (ed.) (1967a). The Prehistory of the Tehuacan Valley, Vol. 1: Environment and Subsistence,
University of Texas Press, Austin.
Byers, D. S. (ed.) (1967b). The Prehistory of the Tehuacan Valley, Vol. 2: Nonceramic Artifacts,
Cameron, C. M. (1991). Structure abandonment in villages. In Schiffer, M. (ed.), Archaeological
Method and Theory, Vol. 3, University of Arizona Press, Tucson, pp. 155194.
Cameron, C. M., and Tomka, S. A. (eds.) (1996). Abandonment of Settlements and Regions: Ethnoarchaeological and Archaeological Approaches, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Castellon, B. R. (1995). Trabajos arqueologicos en Cutha, antiguo senoro popoloca en Zapotitlan
Salinas, Puebla. Revista Mexicana de Estudios Antropologicos XLI: 165175.
Castellon, B. R. (1999). Cutha, Zapotitlan Salinas, Puebla: arqueologa y etnicidad en el a rea
popoloca, Doctoral thesis, Escuela Nacional de Antropologa e Historia, Mexico City.
Castellon, B. R., and Dumaine, A. (2000). La ceramica de fondo sellado de Tepexi, Cutha y Tehuacan,
Puebla. Arqueologa 24: 6185.
Castillo, N. (1994). Los popolocas y la region mixteca-puebla. In Nicholson, H. B., and QuinonesKeber, E. (eds.), Mixteca-Puebla: Discoveries and Research in Mesoamerican Art and Archaeology, Labyrinthos, Culver City, pp. 175187.
Castillo, N. (1995). Proyecto Sur del estado de Puebla: a rea central popoloca. Revista Mexicana de
Estudios Antropologicos XLI: 115128.
Castillo, N. (1996). Las popolocas de Tepexi El Viejo, Puebla. In Brambila, R., and Monjaras-Ruiz,
J. (eds.), Los arqueologos frente a las fuentes, Instituto Nacional de Antropologa e Historia,
Mexico City, pp. 171179.
Castillo, N. (1997). Tepexi El Viejo: un senoro popoloca al sur de Puebla, y los mexicas. In Manrique,
L., and Castillo, N. (eds.), Homenaje al doctor Ignacio Bernal, Instituto Nacional de Antropologa
e Historia, Mexico City, pp. 237249.
Castillo, N. (1998a). Iconografa en vasijas de Tepexi El Viejo, Puebla. In Barba, B. (ed.), Iconografa
mexicana I, Instituto Nacional de Antropologa e Historia, Mexico City, pp. 93104.
Castillo, N. (1998b). Iconografa en vasijas de Tepexi el Viejo, Puebla: representaciones de serpiente y jaguar. In Barba, B. (ed.), Iconografa mexicana II: el cielo, la tierra y el inframundo:
a guila, serpiente y jaguar, Instituto Nacional de Antropologa e Historia, Mexico City, pp. 247
258.
Castillo, N. (1998c). La zona arqueologica de Tehuacan, Puebla: avances y perspectivas del proyecto
Tehuacan, un senoro popoloca del Postclasico. In Brambila, R. (ed.), Antropologa e historia
del occidente de Mexico: XXIV Mesa Redonda, Vol. III, Sociedad Mexicana de Antropologa and
Cepeda, G. (1997). El salvamento arqueologico en el aeropuerto de Puebla. In de la Lama, E., and
Landa, M. E. (eds.), Simposio internacional de investigacion de Huexotzinco, Instituto Nacional
de Antropologa e Historia, Mexico City, pp. 2735.
Chacon, J. C. (1995). Excavacion de la Estructura 5, altar central de la Plaza C de Tehuacan el Viejo,
La Mesa. Revista Mexicana de Estudios Antropologicos XLI: 149164.
Chacon, J. C. (1998). Estructura 6, Plaza C de Tehuacan Viejo La Mesa. In Brambila, R. (ed.),
Antropologa e historia del occidente de Mexico: XXIV Mesa Redonda, Vol. III, Sociedad
117
Mexicana de Antropologa and Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico, Mexico City,

pp. 19271938.
Clear, K., and Plunket, P. (1998). Las figurillas de Tetimpa. In Brambila, R. (ed.), Antropologa e historia
del occidente de Mexico: XXIV Mesa Redonda, Vol. III, Sociedad Mexicana de Antropologa and
Contreras, E. (1994). Los murales y ceramica polcromos de la zona arqueologica de Ocotelulco,
Tlaxcala. In Nicholson, H. B., and Quinones-Keber, E. (eds.), Mixteca-Puebla: Discoveries and
Research in Mesoamerican Art and Archaeology, Labyrinthos, Culver City, CA, pp. 724.
Cook de Leonard, C. (1957). Excavaciones en la Plaza No. 1, Tres Palos, Teotihuacan. Boletn del
Centro de Investigaciones Antropologicas de Mexico 4: 35.
Cook de Leonard, C. (1971). Ceramics of the Classic period in central Mexico. In Ekholm, G. F.,
and Bernal, I. (eds.), Handbook of Middle American Indians, Vol. 10: Archaeology of Northern
Mesoamerica, Pt. 1, University of Texas Press, Austin, pp. 179205.
Dennis, B. J. (1994). Narrative sequences in the Codex Borgia and the Codex Zouche-Nuttal. In
Nicholson, H. B., and Quinones-Keber, E. (eds.), Mixteca-Puebla: Discoveries and Research in
Mesoamerican Art and Archaeology, Labyrinthos, Culver City, CA, pp. 153173.
Diamond, J., and Bellwood, P. (2003). Farmers and their languages: The first expansions. Science 300:
597603.
Drennan, R. D., Fitzgibbons, P. T., and Dehn, H. (1990). Imports and exports in Classic Mesoamerican
political economy: The Tehuacan Valley and the Teotihuacan obsidian industry. Research in
Economic Anthropology 12: 177199.
Dumond, D. E., and Muller, F. (1972). Classic to Postclassic in highland central Mexico. Science 175:
12081215.
Dyckerhoff, U. (1988). La e poca prehispanica. In Prem, H. J. (ed.), Milpa y hacienda: tenencia de la
tierra indgena y espanola en la cuenca del Alto Atoyac, Puebla, Mexico (15201650), Centro de
Investigaciones Superiores del Instituto Nacional de Antropologa e Historia, Instituto Nacional
de Antropologa e Historia and Secretara de Educacion Publica, Mexico City, pp. 1834.
Edelstein, R. R. (1995). Obsidian exploitation and political economic dynamics from the Classic period through colonial era on the central plateau: An analysis of a lithic collection from Cholula,
Puebla, Mexico. Unpublished Masters thesis, Department of Anthropology, McMaster University, Hamilton.
Fajardo, C. J. (1985). Analisis de tres basureros del sitio arqueologico de Cholula, Unpublished
Licenciaturas thesis, Escuela Nacional de Antropologa e Historia, Mexico City.
Fennell, C. C. (2001). Assessing criticisms of faunal analyses and environmental reconstructions in
the Tehuacan Valley Project. Human Ecology 29: 349359.
Ferriz, H. (1985). Caltonac, a Prehispanic Obsidian-mining center in Eastern Mexico?: A preliminary
report. Journal of Field Archaeology 12: 363370.
Flannery, K. V. (1967). Vertebrate fauna and hunting patterns. In Byers, D. S. (ed.), The Prehistory
of the Tehuacan Valley, Vol. I: Environment and Subsistence, University of Texas Press, Austin,
pp. 132177.
Flannery, K. V. (1999). Los orgenes de la agricultura en Oaxaca. Cuadernos del Sur 5(14): 514.
Flannery, K. V. (2002). The origins of the village revisited: From nuclear to extended households.
American Antiquity 67: 417433.
Flannery, K. V. (ed.) (1976). The early Mesoamerican village, Academic Press, New York.
Flannery, K. V., and MacNeish, R. S. (1997). In defense of the Tehuacan project. Current Anthropology
38: 660672.
Fowler, C. (1983). Lexical clues to Uto-Aztecan prehistory. International Journal of American Linguistics 49: 224257.
Fritz, G. J. (1994). Are the first American farmers getting younger? Current Anthropology 35: 304309.
Fuentes, L. (1972). Regiones naturales del estado de Puebla, Instituto de Geografa, Universidad
Nacional Autonoma de Mexico, Mexico City.
Garca Cook, A. (1981). The historical importance of Tlaxcala. In Sabloff, J. A. (ed.), Handbook
of Middle American Indians, Supplement I: Archaeology, University of Texas Press, Austin,
pp. 244276.
Garca Cook, A. (1984). Dos elementos arquitectonicos tempranos en Tlalancaleca, Puebla. Cuadernos de Arquitectura Mesoamericana 2: 2832.
118
Garca Cook, A., and Merino, L. (1988). Notas sobre la ceramica prehispanica en Tlaxcala. In Serra,
M. C., and Navarrete, C. (eds.), Ensayos de alfarera prehispanica e historica de Mesoamerica:
Homenaje a Eduardo Noguera Auza, UNAM, Mexico City, pp. 275342.
Garca Cook, A., and Merino, B. L. (1991). El Epiclasico en la region Puebla-Tlaxcala. In Garca
Cook, A., and Merino, B. L. (eds.), Tlaxcala: textos de su historia: 2. Los orgenes; arqueologa,
Gobierno del Estado de Tlaxcala, Consejo Nacional Para la Cultura y las Artes, Mexico City,
pp. 387394.
Garca Cook, A., and Merino, B. L. (1996). Investigacion arqueologica en Cantona, Puebla. Arqueologa 15: 5578.
Garca Cook, A., and Merino, B. L. (1998). Cantona: urbe prehispanica en el altiplano central de
Mexico. Latin American Antiquity 9: 191216.
Garca Moll, R. (1977). Analisis de los materiales arqueologicos de la Cueva de Texcal, Puebla,
Coleccion Cientfica 56, Instituto Nacional de Antropologa e Historia-Secretara de Educacion
Publica, Mexico City.
Grove, D. C., and Gillespie, S. D. (2002). Middle Formative domestic ritual at Chalcatzingo, Morelos.
In Plunket, P. (ed.), Domestic Ritual in Ancient Mesoamerica, Monograph 46, The Cotsen Institute
of Archaeology, University of California, Los Angeles, pp. 1119.
Hardy, K. (1993). Preceramic Lithics in Central Mexico: An Examination of the Tehuacan and Oaxaca
Chronological Sequences, Ph.D. dissertation, University of London, London.
Hardy, K. (1996). The pre-ceramic sequence from the Tehuacan Valley: A reevaluation. Current
Anthropology 37: 700716.
Hardy, K. (1999). On the Tehuacan project: Reply to Flannery and MacNeish. Current Anthropology
40: 6369.
Headrick, A. (1999). The street of the dead . . . It really was: Mortuary bundles at Teotihuacan. Ancient
Mesoamerica 10: 6985.
Headrick, A. (2001). Merging myth and politics: The three temple complex at Teotihuacan. In Koontz,
R., Reese-Taylor, K., and Headrick, A. (eds.), Landscape and Power in Ancient Mesoamerica,
Westview Press, Boulder, co, pp. 169195.
Hermosillo, A. (1992). Malacates e industria textil prehispanica de Cholula, Puebla. Unpublished
Licenciatura thesis, Department of Anthropology, Universidad de las Americas-Puebla, Cholula.
Hernandez, G. (1995a). Iconografa de las copas polcromas cholultecas. Arqueologa 1314: 110
120.
Hernandez, G. (1995b). Un acercamiento a la iconografa de la ceramica polcroma tipo codice
de Cholula. Unpublished Licenciatura thesis, Department of Anthropology, Univesidad de las
Americas-Puebla, Cholula.
Hernandez, G. (1998). Forma, funcion, y estilo ceramico en el entorno domestico. In Brambila,
R. (ed.), Antropologa e historia del occidente de Mexico: XXIV Mesa Redonda, Vol. III, Sociedad Mexicana de Antropologa and Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico, Mexico City,
pp. 18591871.
Hernandez, G. (2000). La organizacion domestica en el Formativo Medio-Tardo: el caso de Tetimpa,
Puebla. Unpublished Masters thesis, Department of Anthropology, Universidad de las AmericasPuebla, Cholula.
Hernandez, G., Quintana, N., Urunuela, G., and Plunket, P. (1998). Informe sondeo UA98B: a rea para
instalacion de un sistema de riego. Report submitted to the Consejo Nacional de Arqueologa,
Instituto Nacional de Antropologa e Historia, Archivo Tecnico del INAH, Mexico City.
Hill, Jane H. (2001). Proto-Uto-Azteca: A community of cultivators in central Mexico? American
Anthropologist 103: 913934.
Hirth, K. (2001). Practicas agrcolas y el reclamo del campo en un ambiente volcanico. Paper presented
at the symposium Entre coas y milpas: en busqueda de la diversidad agrcola prehispanica, XXVI
Mesa Redonda of the Sociedad Mexicana de Antropologa, Zacatecas.
Hirth, K., and Swezey, W. (1976). The changing nature of the Teotihuacan Classic: A regional perspective from Manzanilla, Puebla. In Las fronteras de Mesoamerica, Tomo 2: XIV Mesa Redonda,
Sociedad Mexicana de Antropologa, Mexico City, pp. 1123.
Hopkins, N. A. (1984). Otomanguean linguistic prehistory. In Josserand, J. K., Winter, M., and
Hopkins, N. (eds.), Essays in Otomanguean Culture History, Publications in Anthropology No.
31, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, pp. 2564.
119
Johnson, F. (ed.) (1972). The Prehistory of the Tehuacan Valley, Vol. 4: Chronology and Irrigation,
Joyce, R. A., and Gillespie, S. D. (eds.) (2000). Beyond Kinship: Social and Material Reproduction in
House Societies, University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia.
Kaplan, L., and Lynch, T. F. (1999). Phaseolus (Fabaceae) in archaeology: AMS radiocarbon dates
and their significance for pre-Columbian agriculture. Economic Botany 53: 261272.
Kirch, P. V. (2000). Temples as holy houses: The transformation of ritual architecture in traditional Polynesian societies. In Joyce, R. A., and Gillespie, S. D. (eds.), Beyond Kinship: Social
and Material Reproduction in House Societies, University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia,
pp. 103114.
Lesure, R. G. (2002). Segundo informe tecnico parcial del proyecto Investigaciones del Formativo y
Preceramico en Apizaco, Tlaxcala. Report submitted to the Consejo Nacional de Arqueologa,
Instituto Nacional de Antropologa e Historia, Archivo Tecnico del INAH, Mexico City.
Lind, M. D. (1994a). Cholula and Mixteca polychromes: Two Mixteca-Puebla regional sub-styles. In
Lind, M. D. (1994b). The obverse of the Codex of Cholula: Defining the borders of the kingdom of
Cholula. In Marcus, J., and Zeitlin, J. (eds.), Caciques and Their People, Anthropological Papers
No. 89, Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, pp. 87100.
Lind, M. D., Barrientos, C., Turner, C., Caskey, C., McCafferty, G., Martnez, C., and Orea, M. (n.d.).
Cholula polychrome. Unpublished manuscript on file, Archaeology Laboratory, Department of
Anthropology, Universidad de las Americas-Puebla, Cholula, MS 1990.
Long, A., Benz, B. F., Donahue, D. J., Jull, A. J. T., and Toolin, L. J. (1989). First direct AMS dates
on early maize from Tehuacan, Mexico. Radiocarbon 31: 10351040.
Long, A., and Fritz, G. J. (2001). Validity of AMS dates on maize from the Tehuacan Valley: A
comment on MacNeish and Eubanks. Latin American Antiquity 12: 8790.
Lopez, A. (2000). Dos mil anos de tradicion agrcola: tecnologa y organizacion social durante el Formativo Terminal en Tetimpa, Puebla. Unpublished Licenciatura thesis, Department of Anthropology,
Universidad de las Americas-Puebla, Cholula.
Lopez, A., Plunket, P., and Urunuela, G. (2001). Campos y huertos prehispanicos en la Sierra Nevada: la
tecnologa agrcola de Tetimpa, Puebla. Paper presented at the symposium Entre coas y milpas:
en busqueda de la diversidad agrcola prehispanica, XXVI Mesa Redonda of the Sociedad
Mexicana de Antropologa, Zacatecas.
Lopez, A., Talavera, S., Urunuela, G., and Plunket, P. (2002a). Sondeo arqueologico Rancho de la
Virgen 2002. Report submitted to the Consejo Nacional de Arqueologa, Instituto Nacional de
Antropologa e Historia, Archivo Tecnico del INAH, Mexico City.
Lopez, A., Talavera, S., Urunuela, G., and Plunket, P. (2002b). Sondeo arqueologico Colegio Coley
B. Taylor. Report submitted to the Consejo Nacional de Arqueologa, Instituto Nacional de
Antropologa e Historia, Archivo Tecnico del INAH, Mexico City.
Lopez, S., Lagunas, Z., and Serrano, C. (1976). Enterramientos humanos de la zona arqueologica de
Cholula, Puebla, Coleccion Cientfica 44, Instituto Nacional de Antropologa e Historia, Mexico
City.
MacNeish, R. S. (1981). Tehuacans accomplishments. In Sabloff, J. A. (ed.), Handbook of Middle
American Indians, Supplement I: Archaeology, University of Texas Press, Austin, pp. 3147.
MacNeish, R. S. (2001). A response to Longs radiocarbon determinations that attempt to put acceptable
chronology on the fritz. Latin American Antiquity 12: 99104.
MacNeish, R. S. (ed.) (1970). The Prehistory of the Tehuacan Valley, Vol. 3: Ceramics, University of
Texas Press, Austin.
MacNeish, R. S. (ed.) (1972). The Prehistory of the Tehuacan Valley, Vol. 5: Excavations and Reconnaissance, University of Texas Press, Austin.
Maldonado, B. (1997). Las figurillas formativas del a rea de Acatzingo-Tepeaca. Unpublished Licenciatura thesis, Department of Anthropology, Universidad de las Americas-Puebla, Cholula.
Manrique, L. (2000). Lingustica historica. In Manzanilla, L., and Lopez, L. (eds.), Historia antigua
de Mexico, Vol. I: el Mexico antiguo, sus a reas culturales, los orgenes y el horizonte Preclasico,
Instituto Nacional de Antropologa e Historia, Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico and
Miguel Angel Porrua, Librero-Editor, Mexico City, pp. 5393.
120
Marquez, T. (1994). Control de ceramica fina y diferencias de estatus en un senoro del valle de
Tehuacan. Unpublished Licenciatura thesis, Department of Anthropology, Universidad de las
Americas-Puebla, Cholula.
Marquina, I. (1975). Cholula, Puebla. In Matos, E. (ed.), Los pueblos y senoros teocraticos: el periodo
de las ciudades urbanas, primera parte, Secretara de Educacion Publica and Instituto Nacional
Marquina, I. (ed.) (1970). Proyecto Cholula, Serie Investigaciones No. 19, Instituto Nacional de
Antropologa e Historia, Mexico City.
Marquina, I. (1981). Arquitectura prehispanica, Tomo I, Instituto Nacional de Antropologa e Historia,
Mexico City. (Originally published 1951.)
McCafferty, G. G. (1992). The Material Culture of Postclassic Cholula, Puebla: Contextual Interpretations of the UA-1 Domestic Compounds, Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Department of
Anthropology, State University of New York, Binghamton.
McCafferty, G. G. (1994). The Mixteca-Puebla stylistic tradition at Early Postclassic Cholula. In
McCafferty, G. G. (1996a). Reinterpreting the Great Pyramid of Cholula, Mexico. Ancient Mesoamerica 7: 117.
McCafferty, G. G. (1996b). The ceramics and chronology of Cholula, Mexico. Ancient Mesoamerica
7: 299324.
McCafferty, G. G. (2001a). Mountain of heaven, mountain of earth: The Great Pyramid of Cholula as
sacred landscape. In Koontz, R., Reese-Taylor, K., and Headrick, A. (eds.), Landscape and Power
in Ancient Mesoamerica, Westview Press, Boulder, CO, pp. 279316.
McCafferty, G. G. (2001b). Cholula (Puebla, Mexico). In Evans, S., and Webster, D. (eds.), The
Archaeology of Ancient Mexico and Central America, Garland Press, New York, pp. 138
142.
McCafferty, G. G. (2001c). Ceramics of Postclassic Cholula, Mexico: Typology and Seriation of
Pottery from the UA-1 Domestic Compound, The Cotsen Institute of Archaeology, Monograph
43, University of California, Los Angeles.
McCafferty, S. D., and McCafferty, G. G. (2000). Textile production in Postclassic Cholula, Mexico.
Ancient Mesoamerica 11: 3954.
Medina, M. (2001). Las Cuevas de Acatzingo-Tepeaca, Puebla: estudio arqueologico, etnohistorico
y etnografico. Unpublished Licenciatura thesis, Escuela Nacional de Antropologa e Historia,
Mexico City.
Messmacher, M. (1967). Cholula, reporte preliminar, Editorial Nueva Antropologa, Mexico City.
Millon, R. (1981). Teotihuacan: City, state, and civilization. In Sabloff, J. A. (ed.), Handbook of
Middle American Indians, Supplement I: Archaeology, University of Texas Press, Austin, pp. 198
243.
Moholy-Nagy, H., and Nelson, F. W. (1990). New data on sources of obsidian artifacts from Tikal,
Guatemala. Ancient Mesoamerica 1: 7180.
Mountjoy, J. (1987). The collapse of the Classic at Cholula as seen from Cerro Zapotecas. Notas
Mesoamericanas 10: 119151.
Neely, J. A., and Castellon, B. R. (2003). Avance del estudio contextual de los sistemas de canales
prehispanicos fosilizados del Valle de Tehuacan, Puebla. Arqueologa 29: 157160.
Neff, H., Bishop, R., Sisson, E. B., Glasscock, M., and Sisson, P. (1994). Neutron activation analysis of Late Postclassic polychrome pottery from central Mexico. In Nicholson, H. B., and
Quinones-Keber, E. (eds.), Mixteca-Puebla: Discoveries and Research in Mesoamerican Art and
Archaeology, Labyrinthos, Culver City, CA, pp. 117141.
Nicholson, H. B. (1960). The Mixteca-Puebla concept in Mesoamerican archaeology: A reexamination. In Wallace, A. F. C. (ed.), Men and Cultures: Selected Papers of the Fifth International Congress of Anthropological and Ethnological Sciences, University of Pennsylvania
Press, Philadelphia, pp. 612617.
Nicholson, H. B. (1994). The eagle claw/tied doubled maize ear motif: The Cholula polychrome
ceramic tradition and some members of the Codex Borgia group. In Nicholson, H. B., and
121
Nicholson, H. B. (2001). Mixteca-Puebla style. In Carrasco, D. (ed.), The Oxford Encyclopedia

of Mesoamerican Cultures: The Civlizations of Mexico and Central America, Vol. 2, Oxford
University Press, Oxford, pp. 329330.
Niederberger, C. (1976). Zoahapilco: cinco milenios de ocupacion humana en un sitio lacustre de
la cuenca de Mexico, Coleccion Cientfica 30, Instituto Nacional de Antropologa e Historia,
Mexico City.
Noguera, E. (1956). Un edificio preclasico en Cholula. In Estudios antropologicos publicados en
homenaje al Dr. Manuel Gamio, Direccion General de Publicaciones, Universidad Nacional
Autonoma de Mexico, Mexico City, pp. 213224.
Pailles, M. C. (2000). Proyecto arqueologico Las Bocas, Puebla, Report submitted to FAMSI, Crystal
Springs. Available from www.famsi.org/resports/pailles/paillestoc.htm
Pailles, M. C., Velasquez, V., and Bojalil, A. (2000). Las Bocas y la presencia olmeca en el altiplano
mexicano. Diario de Campo 25: 1417.
Panfil, M. S. (1996). The Late Holocene volcanic stratigraphy of the Tetimpa area, northeast flank
of Popocatepetl volcano, central Mexico. Unpublished MS thesis in Geosciences, Pennsylvania
State University, College Park.
Panfil, M. S., Gardner, T. W., and Hirth, K. G. (1999). Late Holocene stratigraphy of the Tetimpa
archaeological sites, northeast flank of Popocatepetl volcano, central Mexico. Geological Society
of America Bulletin 111: 204218.
Pichardo, M. (2000). Redating Iztapan and Valsequillo, Mexico. Radiocarbon 42: 305310.
Pinto, C., Plunket, P., and OLeary, J. (2001). Diseno grafico en ceramica prehispanica cholulteca,
Universidad de las Americas-Puebla, CONACULTA-FONCA-INAH, Cholula.
Plunket, P. (1990). Arqueologa y etnohistoria en el Valle de Atlixco. Notas Mesoamericanas 12: 3
18.
Plunket, P. (1995). Cholula y su ceramica postclasica: algunas perspectivas. Arqueologa 1314: 103
108.
Plunket, P., and Urunuela, G. (1993). Proyecto de salvamento arqueologico: la residencia de monjas
del convento de San Gabriel de Cholula, primera temporada. Report submitted to the Consejo
Nacional de Arqueologa, Instituto Nacional de Antropologa e Historia, Archivo Tecnico del
INAH, Mexico City.
Plunket, P., and Urunuela, G. (1994). The impact of the Xochiyaoyotl in southwestern Puebla. In
Hodge, M., and Smith, M. E. (eds.), Economies and Polities in the Aztec Realm, Studies on
Culture and Society 6, Institute for Mesoamerican Studies, State University of New York at
Albany, Albany, pp. 433446.
Plunket, P., and Urunuela, G. (1998a). Preclassic household patterns preserved under volcanic ash at
Tetimpa, Puebla. Latin American Antiquity 9: 287309.
Plunket, P., and Urunuela, G. (1998b). The impact of the Popocatepetl volcano on Preclassic settlement
in central Mexico. Quaternaire 9: 5359.
Plunket, P., and Urunuela, G. (1998c). Appeasing the volcano gods. Archaeology 51(4): 3642.
Plunket, P., and Urunuela, G. (1998d). Cholula y Teotihuacan. In Rattray, E. C. (ed.), Rutas de intercambio en Mesoamerica, Memorias del III Coloquio Pedro Bosch-Gimpera, Instituto de Investigaciones Antropologicas, Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico, Mexico City, pp. 101114.
Plunket, P., and Urunuela, G. (1998e). Donde se arman las nubes: dos mil anos de culto al Popocatepetl.
In El Popocatepetl: donde se arman las nubes, Universidad de las Americas-Puebla, Cholula,
pp. 1120.
Plunket, P., and Urunuela, G. (1998f). Las unidades domesticas de Tetimpa. In Brambila, R. (ed.),
Antropologa e historia del occidente de Mexico: XXIV Mesa Redonda, Vol. III, Sociedad
Mexicana de Antropologa and Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico, Mexico City,
pp. 17891798.
Plunket, P., and Urunuela, G. (1999a). Bajo el volcan: riesgo y catastrofe en el Preclasico Superior. In
Arechiga, J., Ruz, M., Perez, A., Zurita, J., and Valinas, L. (eds.), Memorias de la XXIII Mesa
Redonda, Sociedad Mexicana de Antropologa, Villahermosa, pp. 1527.
Plunket, P., and Urunuela, G. (1999b). Pueblos sin memoria: lecciones del Popocatepetl. Cuicuilco
5(14): 525.
Plunket, P., and Urunuela, G. (2000a). The archaeology of a plinian eruption of the Popocatepetl
volcano. In McGuire, W. J., Griffiths, D. R., Hancock, P. L., and Stewart, I. S. (eds.), The
122
Archaeology of Geological Catastrophes, Geological Society Special Publication No. 171, Bath,
pp. 195203.
Plunket, P., and Urunuela, G. (2000b). The quick and the dead: Decision-making in the abandonment
of Tetimpa. Mayab 13: 7887.
Plunket, P., and Urunuela, G. (2001). The Tetimpa region. In Evans, S., and Webster, D. (eds.), The
Archaeology of Ancient Mexico and Central America, Garland Press, New York, pp. 737738.
Plunket, P., and Urunuela, G. (2002a). Shrines, ancestors and the volcanic landscape at Tetimpa,
Puebla. In Plunket, P. (ed.), Domestic Ritual in Ancient Mesoamerica, The Cotsen Institute of
Archaeology, Monograph 46, University of California, Los Angeles, pp. 3142.
Plunket, P., and Urunuela, G. (2002b). Antecedentes prehispanicos. In Cholula, un vnculo de sabidura
y fraternidad, Universidad de las Americas, Puebla, Cholula, pp. 1927.
Plunket, P., and Urunuela, G. (2002c). Antecedentes conceptuales de los Conjuntos de Tres Templos.
In Ruiz, M. E. (ed.), Memorias Primera Mesa Redonda de Teotihuacan: ideologa y poltica de
Teotihuacan a traves de materiales, imagenes y smbolos, Instituto Nacional de Antropologa
e Historia and Instituto de Investigaciones Antropologicas, Universidad Nacional Autonoma de
Mexico, Mexico City, pp. 529546.
Plunket, P., and Urunuela, G. (2002d). To leave or not to leave: Human responses to Popocatepetls
eruptions in the Tetimpa region of Puebla, Mexico. Paper presented at the symposium Questioning Catastrophes: the Archaeology of Natural Disasters, LXVII Annual Meeting of the Society
of American Archaeology, Denver.
Plunket, P., and Urunuela, G. (2003). From episodic to permanent abandonment: Responses to volcanic hazards at Tetimpa, Puebla, Mexico. In Inomata, T., and Webb, R. (eds.), Studies of Site
Abandonment Processes in Middle America, University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City, pp.1327.
Plunket, P., Urunuela, G., Glascock, M., and Neff, H. (n.d.). A rural perspective on Mesoamerican
integration during the Late and Terminal Formative. In Powis, T. (ed.), New Perspectives on
Formative Mesoamerican Cultures, British Archaeological Reports, Oxford, MS 2002.
Plunket, P., Urunuela, G., and Hernandez, G. (1994). Proyecto de salvamento arqueologico: la residencia de monjas del convento de San Gabriel de Cholula, segunda temporada. Report submitted
to the Consejo Nacional de Arqueologa, Instituto Nacional de Antropologa e Historia, Archivo
Tecnico del INAH, Mexico City.
Pohl, J. M. D. (1998). Themes of drunkenness, violence, and factionalism in Tlaxcalan altar paintings.
RES: Anthropology and Aesthetics 33: 184207.
Pohl, J. M. D. (2003a). Creation stories, hero cults, and alliance building: Confederacies of central and
southern Mexico. In Smith, M. E., and Berdan, F. F. (eds.), The Postclassic Mesoamerican World,
University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City, pp. 6166.
Pohl, J. M. D. (2003b). Ritual ideology and commerce in the southern Mexican highlands. In Smith,
Pohl, J. M. D. (2003c). Ritual and iconographic variability in Mixteca-Puebla polychrome pottery. In
Smith, M. E., and Berdan, F. F. (eds.), The Postclassic Mesoamerican World, University of Utah
Press, Salt Lake City, pp. 201206.
Pohl, J. M. D. (2003d). Royal marriage and confederacy building among the eastern Nahua, Mixtecs,
and Zapotecs. In Smith, M. E., and Berdan, F. F. (eds.), The Postclassic Mesoamerican World,
University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City, pp. 243248.
Pohl, J. M. D., and Byland, B. E. (1994). The Mixteca-Puebla style and Early Postclassic socio-political
interaction. In Nicholson, H. B., and Quinones-Keber, E. (eds.), Mixteca-Puebla: Discoveries
and Research in Mesoamerican Art and Archaeology, Labyrinthos, Culver City, CA, pp. 189
199.
Quinones-Keber, E. (1994). The Codex Style: Which Codex? Which Style? In Nicholson, H. B., and
Rattray, E. C. (1990a). New findings on the origins of Thin Orange ceramics. Ancient Mesoamerica
1: 181195.
Rattray, E. C. (1990b). Nuevos hallazgos sobre los orgenes de la ceramica anaranjada delgado.
In Cardoso, A. (ed.), La e poca clasica: nuevos hallazgos, nuevas ideas, Instituto Nacional de
Antropologa e Historia, Mexico City, pp. 89106.
123
Rattray, E. C. (1995). The modern and ancient potters of southern Puebla. In Gubler, R., and Hostettler,
U. (eds.), The Fragmented Present, Acta Mesoamericana 9, Verlag von Flemming Mockmuhl,
pp. 116.
Rattray, E. C. (1998). Rutas de intercambio en el periodo Clasico en Mesoamerica. In Rattray, E. C.
(ed.), Rutas de intercambio en Mesoamerica: III Coloquio Pedro Bosch Gimpera, Instituto de Investigaciones Antropologicas, Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico, Mexico City, pp. 77
100.
Ringle, W. M., Gallareta, T., and Bey, G. J. (1998). The return of Quetzalcoatl: Evidence for the spread
of a world religion during the Epiclassic period. Ancient Mesoamerica 9: 183232.
Rodrguez, D. (1999). Los efectos de los fenomenos naturales en la pintura mural prehispanica de
Cholula, Puebla. Boletn Informativo: La Pintura Mural Prehispanica en Mexico 5(1011): 44
47.
Rodrguez, D. (2000). La pintura mural de la gran piramide de Cholula: los secretos de la Tlachihualtepetl. Boletn Informativo: La Pintura Mural Prehispanica en Mexico 6(1213): 17
22.
Rodrguez, D. (2001). Los murales perdidos de Cholula, Puebla. Boletn Informativo: La Pintura
Mural Prehispanica en Mexico 7(14): 1317.
Rojas, J. M. (2001). La ltica de Cantona, Puebla: analisis tecnologico y morfologico. Unpublished
Licenciatura thesis, Escuela Nacional de Antropologa e Historia, Mexico City.
Salomon, T., Domnguez, E., and Urunuela, G. (2001). Vasos y braseros: ceramicas rituales del
Clasico en Cholula. Paper presented at the symposium Ceramicas rituales: ceremonias y ritos
de la Mesoamerica antigua, XXVI Mesa Redonda of the Sociedad Mexicana de Antropologa,
Zacatecas.
Salomon, T., Urunuela, G., and Plunket, P. (2002). The material evidence for the Bebedores feasting:
Ritual drinking at ancient Cholula. Paper presented at the symposium Cholula: A Look Back
and a Step Forward, 67th Annual Meeting of the Society for American Archaeology, Denver.
Sanders, W., Parsons, J., and Santley, R. (1979). The Basin of Mexico: Ecological Processes in the
Evolution of a Civilization, Academic Press, New York.
Schiffer, M. B. (1987). Formation Processes of the Archaeological Record, University of New Mexico
Press, Albuquerque.
Seele, E. (1973). Restos de milpas y poblaciones prehispanicas cerca de San Buenaventura Nealtican,
Puebla. Comunicaciones 7: 7786.
Serra, M. C. (1998). Xochitecatl, Gobierno del Estado de Tlaxcala, Tlaxcala.
Sheehy, J. J. (1994). Informe tecnico sobre la primera temporada del proyecto Acatzingo-Tepeaca.
Report submitted to the Consejo de Arqueologa, Instituto Nacional de Antropologa e Historia,
Mexico City.
Sheehy, J. J., Gonlin, N., Medina, M., and Hirth, K. (1995). Informe tecnico sobre la segunda temporada
del proyecto Acatzingo-Tepeaca. Report submitted to the Consejo de Arqueologa, Instituto
Nacional de Antropologa e Historia, Mexico City.
Sheehy, J. J., Medina, M., and Hirth, K. (1996). Informe tecnico sobre la tercera temporada del
proyecto Acatzingo-Tepeaca. Report submitted to the Consejo de Arqueologa, Instituto Nacional
de Antropologa e Historia, Mexico City.
Siebe, C. (2000). Age and archaeological implications of Xitle volcano, southwestern basin of Mexico
City. Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Reserach 104: 4564.
Siebe, C., Abrams, M., Macas, J. L., and Obenholzner, J. (1996). Repeated volcanic disasters in
Prehispanic time at Popocatepetl, Central Mexico: Past key to the future? Geology 24: 399
402.
Simkin, T., and Siebert, L. (2000). Appendix 2: Catalog of historically active volcanoes on Earth. In
Sigurdsson, H. (ed.), Encyclopedia of Volcanoes, Academic Press, San Diego, pp. 13651383.
Sisson, E. B., and Lilly, T. G. (1994a). A codex-style mural from Tehuacan Viejo, Puebla, Mexico.
Ancient Mesoamerica 5: 3344.
Sisson, E. B., and Lilly, T. G. (1994b). The mural of the Chimales and the Codex Borgia. In Nicholson,
H. B., and Quinones-Keber, E. (eds.), Mixteca-Puebla: Discoveries and Research in Mesoamerican Art and Archaeology, Labyrinthos, Culver City, CA, pp. 2544.
Smith, B. D. (1997). Reconsidering the Ocampo Caves and the era of incipient cultivation in Mesoamerica. Latin American Antiquity 8: 342383.
124
Smith, M. E. (2003). Information networks in Postclassic Mesoamerica. In Smith, M. E., and Berdan,
F. F. (eds.), The Postclassic Mesoamerican World, University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City,
pp. 181193.
Smith, M. E., and Berdan, F. F. (2000). The Postclassic Mesoamerican world system. Current Anthropology 41: 283286.
Smith, M. E., and Berdan, F. F. (2003a). Spatial structure of the Mesoamerican world system. In Smith,
Smith, M. E., and Berdan, F. F. (eds.) (2003b). The Postclassic Mesoamerican World, University of
Utah Press, Salt Lake City.
Smith, M. E., and Heath-Smith, C. M. (1980). Waves of influence in Postclassic Mesoamerica? A
critique of the Mixteca-Puebla concept. Anthropology 4: 1550.
Smith, M. E., and Parmenter, R. (1991). The Codex Tulane, Middle American Research Institute
Publication No. 61, Tulane University, New Orleans.
Suarez, S. (1990). Ultimos descubrimientos de entierros postclasicos en Cholula, Instituto Nacional
de Antropologa e Historia, Puebla.
Suarez, S. (1992). Excavaciones arqueologicas en Cholula, Puebla. In Segundo coloquio: balances y
prospectivas de las investigaciones sobre Puebla, Comision Puebla V Centenario-Gobierno del
Estado de Puebla, Puebla, pp. 297303.
Suarez, S. (1994). El polcromo laca de Cholula, Puebla. In Nicholson, H. B., and Quinones-Keber,
E. (eds.), Mixteca-Puebla: Discoveries and Research in Mesoamerican Art and Archaeology,
Labyrinthos, Culver City, CA, pp. 4551.
Suarez, S. (1995). La ceramica lisa cholulteca. Arqueologa 1314: 109120.
Suarez, S., and Martnez, S. (1993). Monografa de Cholula, Puebla: una sntesis historica, H. Ayuntamiento Municipal de San Pedro Cholula, Cholula.
Talavera, J., Rojas, J. M., and Garca, E. (2001). Modificaciones culturales en los restos o seos de
Cantona, Puebla, Coleccion Cientfica 432, Instituto Nacional de Antropologa e Historia, Mexico
City.
Tschohl, P. (1977). Catalogo arqueologico y etnohistorico de Puebla-Tlaxcala, Mexico: CH-O, Fundacion Alemana para la Investigacion Cientfica, Koln.
Tschohl, P., and Nickel, H. (1972). Catalogo arqueologico y etnohistorico de Puebla-Tlaxcala, Mexico,
Tomo 1 (A-C), Fundacion Alemana para la Investigacion Cientfica, Koln-Frieberg.
Uriarte, M. T. (1999). Cholula. In de la Fuente, B. (ed.), Pre-Columbian Painting: Murals of Mesoamerica, Jaca Book, Milan, pp. 6770.
Urunuela, G. (1989a). Los entierros del proyecto Rescate Drenaje Cholula 85. Notas Mesoamericanas
11: 6480.
Urunuela, G. (1989b). Investigaciones arqueologicas en Colotzingo, Puebla. Notas Mesoamericanas
11: 110119.
Urunuela, G., Meza, A., and Hernandez, G. (1998). Patrones funerarios en Tetimpa. In Brambila,
R. (ed.), Antropologa e historia del occidente de Mexico: XXIV Mesa Redonda, Vol. III, Sociedad Mexicana de Antropologa and Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico, Mexico City,
pp. 18211839.
Urunuela, G., and Plunket, P. (1998). Areas de actividad en unidades domesticas del Formativo Terminal
en Tetimpa, Puebla. Arqueologa 20: 319.
Urunuela, G., and Plunket, P. (2001). De piedra ha de ser la cama . . .? Las tumbas en el Formativo de
Puebla-Tlaxcala y la Cuenca de Mexico, a partir de la evidencia de Tetimpa, Puebla. Arqueologa
25: 322.
Urunuela, G., and Plunket, P. (2002a). Lineages and ancestors: The Formative mortuary assemblages
of Tetimpa, Puebla. In Plunket, P. (ed.), Domestic Ritual in Ancient Mesoamerica, The Cotsen Institute of Archaeology, Monograph 46, University of California, Los Angeles, pp. 20
30.
Urunuela, G., and Plunket, P. (2002b). Informe tecnico: temporada 2001 del proyecto Tetimpa, Report
submitted to the Consejo Nacional de Arqueologa, Instituto Nacional de Antropologa e Historia,
Archivo Tecnico del INAH, Mexico City.
Urunuela, G., and Plunket, P. (2003). Testimonios de diversos tipos de abandono en Tetimpa, Puebla.
Trace 43: 8496.
125
Urunuela, G., and Plunket, P. (n.d.-a). Not so common: Pattern and variation in domestic ritual at rural
Formative Tetimpa. In Gonlin, N., and Lohse, J. (eds.), Commoner Ritual, Commoner Ideology:
A View from Households and Beyond Across Mesoamerica, MS 2002.
Urunuela, G., and Plunket, P. (n.d.-b). La transicion del Clasico al Posclasico: reflexiones sobre el Valle
de Puebla-Tlaxcala. In Manzanilla, L. (ed.), Reacomodos demograficos del Clasico al Posclasico
en el centro de Mexico, UNAM, Mexico City, MS 2002.
Urunuela, G., Plunket, P., Hernandez, G., and Albaitero, J. (1997). Biconical god figurines from
Cholula and the Codex Borgia. Latin American Antiquity 8: 6370.
Vaillant, G. C. (1940). Patterns in Middle American archaeology. In Hay, C. L., Linton, R. L., Lothrop,
S. K., Shapiro, H. L., and Vaillant, G. C. (eds.), The Maya and Their Neighbors: Essays on Middle
American Anthropology and Archaeology, Appleton-Century, New York, pp. 295305.
Vela, E., and Solanes, M. C. (1991). Propuesta para la proteccion del patrimonio arqueologico de
Cholula, Puebla. In Castillo Rojas, A. Y. (ed.), Primer coloquio balances y prospectivas de las
investigaciones sobre Puebla: Memorias, Gobierno del Estado de Puebla, Comision Puebla V
Centenario, Puebla, pp. 179186.
Wolfman, D. (1968). Preliminary report on excavations at UA-1, July 1968. Technical report submitted
to the Departamento de Monumentos Prehispanicos, Manuscript on file, Archaeology Laboratory,
Department of Anthropology, Universidad de las Americas, Puebla, Cholula.
BIBLIOGRAPHY OF RECENT LITERATURE

Benz, B. F., and Iltis, H. H. (1990). Studies in archaeological maize I. The wild maize from San
Marcos Cave restudied. American Antiquity 55: 500511.
Buckler, E. S., IV, Pearsall, D. M., and Holtsford, T. P. (1998). Climate, plant ecology, and central
Mexican Archaic subsistence. Current Anthropology 39: 152164.
Cabrera, M. R. (1990). Una region historica: la sierra norte de Puebla, e poca prehispanica. Boletn de
Antropologa Americana 22: 113122.
Cepeda, G. (1997a). Los nonoalca y sus relaciones con los mixtecos en los siglos XI y XII. In de la
Lama, E. (ed.), Simposium internacional Tehuacan y su entorno: balance y perspectivas, Instituto
Nacional de Antropologa e Historia, Mexico City, pp. 2544.
Cepeda, G. (1997b). Tula-Teohuacan, su posicion y relaciones en el siglo XVI. In de la Lama, E. (ed.),
Simposium internacional Tehuacan y su entorno: balance y perspectivas, Instituto Nacional de
Contreras, J. E. (1991). El proyecto Tetlatahuaca. Notas Mesoamericanas 13: 8392.
Cortes, F. (1995). Un sitio prehispanico en el subsuelo de la ciudad de Puebla. In Dahlgren, B.,
and Arechavaleta, M. D. (eds.), Arqueologa del norte y del occidente de Mexico, Universidad
Nacional Autonoma de Mexico, Mexico City, pp. 361367.
Cortes, F. (1997). La arqueologa del valle de Zapotitlan. In de la Lama, E. (ed.), Simposium internacional Tehuacan y su entorno: balance y perspectivas, Instituto Nacional de Antropologa e
Historia, Mexico City, pp. 1116.
Drennan, R. D. (1997). Tehuacan y los estados del Clasico. In de la Lama, E. (ed.), Simposium
internacional Tehuacan y su entorno: balance y perspectivas, Instituto Nacional de Antropologa
Druc, I. C. (2000). Ceramic production in San Marcos Acteopan, Puebla, Mexico. Ancient Mesoamerica
11: 7789.
Dyckerhoff, U. (1990). Control hidraulico en el Huejotzingo prehispanico. Papeles de la Casa Chata
5(7): 1928.
Dyckerhoff, U. (1997). Los caminos reales en la provincia de Huejotzingo, siglos XV al XVIII. In de
la Lama, E., and Landa, M. E. (eds.), Simposium internacional de investigacion de Huexotzinco,
Instituto Nacional de Antropologa e Historia, Mexico City, pp. 121151.
Fowler, R. (1997). Manejo hidraulico en el Preclasico en Puebla, Mexico. In de la Lama, E., and Landa,
M. E. (eds.), Simposium internacional Tehuacan y su entorno: balance y perspectivas, Instituto
Nacional de Antropologa e Historia, Mexico City, pp. 6368.
126
Galvez, M. (1998). Cerro Colorado, una fortaleza a traves del tiempo. In Brambila, R. (ed.),
Antropologa e historia del occidente de Mexico: XXIV Mesa Redonda, Vol. III, Sociedad Mexicana de Antropologa and Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico, Mexico City, pp. 1975
1989.
Gamez, A. (1999). Los popoloca de Tecamachalco-Quecholac. Historia, sociedad y cultura de un
senoro prehispanico, Unpublished Masters thesis, Division de Posgrado, Escuela Nacional de
Antropologa e Historia, Mexico City.
Garca Cook, A. (1993). Investigaciones en Cantona, Puebla. Arqueologa Mexicana 1(3): 80.
Garca Cook, A. (1994). Cantona. Arqueologa Mexicana 2(10): 6065.
Garca Cook, A. (1995). Cruce de caminos: desarrollo historico de la region poblano-tlaxcalteca.
Arqueologa Mexicana 3(13): 1217.
Garca Cook, A., and Merino, B. L. (1997). Notas sobre asentamientos prehispanicos fortificados o
en posicion estrategica del suroeste de Puebla. In Garca Cook, A., Mastache, A. G., Merino, L.,
and Rivero, S. (eds.), Homenaje al profesor Cesar A. Saenz, Instituto Nacional de Antropologa
Garca, A. (1997). La industria de la sal y de la ceramica en la region de Coxcatlan, Tehuacan, vista por
las fuentes etnohistoricas y arqueologicas; siglos XII al XVI. In de la Lama, E. (ed.), Simposium
Hernandez, M. R. (1995). Materiales constructivos empleados en el sitio de Cutha, Zapotitlan Salinas,
Puebla. Revista Mexicana de Estudios Antropologicos XLI: 177190.
Jimenez, O. H., Sanchez, R., and Robles, J. (2000). El tecali, un tipo de travertino: petrografa y uso
arqueologico. Arqueologa 24: 129143.
McAuliffe, J. R., Sundt, P. C., Valiente-Banuet, A., Casas, A., and Viveros, J. L. (2001). Pre-Columbian
soil erosion, persistent ecological changes, and collapse of a subsistence agricultural economy
in the semi-arid Tehucan Valley, Mexicos cradle of maize. Journal of Arid Environments 47:
4775.
MacNeish, R. S. (1995). Investigaciones arqueologicas en el Valle de Tehuacan. Arqueologa Mexicana
3(13): 1823.
MacNeish, R. S., and Eubanks, M. W. (2000). Comparative analysis of the Ro Balsas and Tehuacan
models for the origins of maize. Latin American Antiquity 11: 320.
Merlo, E. (1991). Los teocallis-maqueta de Calipan, Puebla. Notas Mesoamericanas 13: 2534.
Montano, H. (1997). Tlalancaleca: un sitio preclasico en Puebla. In de la Lama, E., and Landa,
M. E. (eds.), Simposio internacional de investigacion de Huexotzinco, Instituto Nacional de
Montano, H. (1998). Tlalancaleca, Puebla: un antecedente del apogeo cultural del altiplano central.
Unpublished Masters thesis, Escuela Nacional de Antropologa e Historia, Mexico City.
Morales, L. (1991). Altixco prehispanico. Unpublished Licenciaturas thesis, Department of Anthropology, Universidad de las Americas-Puebla, Cholula.
Neely, J. A. (2001). A contextual study of the fossilized prehispanic canal systems of the Tehuacan
Valley, Puebla, Mexico. Antiquity 75(289): 505506.
Nelken-Terner, A. (1997). Retrospectiva y perspectivas: reflexiones mnimas. In de la Lama, E. (ed.),
Nicholson, H. B. (199192). A Cholulteca ceramic caricature of a Totonac. Notas Mesoamericanas
13: 6382.
Noyola, A. (1991). La excavacion de una unidad habitacional del Clasico en San Juan Tejupa, Atzizihuacan, Puebla. Unpublished Licenciatura thesis, Department of Anthropology, Universidad de
las Americas-Puebla, Cholula.
Noyola, A. (1991). La excavacion de una unidad habitacional del Clasico en Tejupa, Puebla. Notas
Noyola, A. (1992). Unidades habitacionales prehispanicas excavadas en el estado de Puebla. Notas
Paddock, J. (1992). Cholula de vidas varias. Notas Mesoamericanas 14: 318.
Paddock, J. (1997). Algunos problemas pendientes en el valle de Tehuacan. In de la Lama, E. (ed.),
127
Paddock, J. (1997). Ciudad del Sol. In de la Lama, E. (ed.), Simposium internacional Tehuacan y
su entorno: balance y perspectivas, Instituto Nacional de Antropologa e Historia, Mexico City,
pp. 111113.
Plunket, P. (1998). La arqueologa del valle de Atlixco. In Jaen, M. T., Lopez, S., Marquez, L.,
and Hernandez, P. (eds.), Tiempo, poblacion y sociedad: homenaje al maestro Arturo Romano
Pacheco, Coleccion Cientfica 365, INAH, Mexico City, pp. 471481.
Plunket, P. (2001). Huejotzingo. In Carrasco, D. (ed.), The Oxford Encyclopedia of Mesoamerican
Cultures, Oxford University Press, New York, pp. 1719.
Plunket, P., and Urunuela, G. (199192). La escultura postclasica del Valle de Atlixco. Notas
Plunket, P., and Urunuela, G. (2001). The Puebla-Tlaxcala region. In Evans, S., and Webster, D. (eds.),
The Archaeology of Ancient Mexico and Central America, Garland Press, New York, pp. 611617.
Ramrez, F. (1996). The social, political and economic structure of Zapotitlan Salinas, Puebla, Mexico
during the late prehispanic and early colonial periods. Unpublished Masters thesis, Department
of Anthropology, University of Texas, Austin.
Rattray, E. C., and Galguera, G. (1993). Enfoques interdisciplinarios en el estudio de la ceramica
anaranjado delgado. In Cabrero, M. T. (ed.), II Coloquio Pedro Bosch-Gimpera, Instituto de
Investigaciones Antropologicas, Mexico City, pp. 239252.
Reynoso, L. (1997). La ceramica de Los Reyes Metzontla, una clave hacia el pasado. In de la Lama, E.
(ed.), Simposium internacional Tehuacan y su entorno: balance y perspectivas, Instituto Nacional
Rojas, J. L. de (1994). After the conquest: Quauhtinchan and the Mexica province of Tepeacac. In
Hodge, M., and Smith, M. E. (eds.), Economies and Polities in the Aztec Realm, Studies on
Culture and Society 6, Institute for Mesoamerican Studies, State University of New York at
Albany, Albany, pp. 405431.
Ruiz, J. O. (1991). Yohualichan en el contexto cultural prehispanico de la totonaca Puebla-Veracruz. In
Castillo, A. Y. (ed.), Primer coloquio balances y prospectivas de las investigaciones sobre Puebla:
Memorias, Gobierno del Estado de Puebla, Comision Puebla V Centenario, Puebla, pp. 225
232.
Sanchez de la Barquera, E. C. (1996). Figurillas prehispanicas del valle de Atlixco, Puebla, Coleccion
Cientfica 355, Instituto Nacional de Antropologa e Historia, Mexico City.
Serra, M. C. (1995). Presencia olmeca en el altiplano. In Clark, J. (ed.), Los olmecas en Mesoamerica,
Citibank, Mexico City, pp. 175187.
Sisson, E. B. (1991). The gods of Coxcatlan. Notas Mesoamericanas 13: 523.
Sisson, E. B. (1997). La muerte en el cacicazgo de Coxcatlan. In de la Lama, E. (ed.), Simposium
Solanes, M. C. (1995). Cholula. Arqueologa Mexicana 3(13): 2430.
Sols, F. (1994). La ceramica polcroma de Cholula, Puebla. Arqueologa Mexicana 2(7): 53
56.
Spranz, B. (1992). Puebla und Tlaxcala in vorspanischer Zeit: Archaologische und ethnohistorische
Arbeiten des Mexico-Projektes der Deutschen Forschungsgemeinschaft. Baessler Archiv 40(2):
241287.
Spranz, B. (1996). Totimehuacan und Xochitecal: zwei Platze in Puebla und Tlaxcala, Mexiko, in
praklassischer Zeit. Tribus 45: 138150.
Suarez, S., Plunket, P., and Urunuela, G. (1992). Rescate arqueologico en la Universidad de las
Americas, Cholula, Puebla. Boletn del Consejo de Arqueologa 1991: 260261.
Urdapilleta, J. A., and Urquiza, L. (1997). Manifestaciones rupestres en el altiplano central de Mexico:
el culto a Tlaloc. In Garca, A., Becerril, V., Lechuga, M. C., and Rivas, F. (eds.), Homenaje a
la doctora Beatriz Barba de Pina Chan, Instituto Nacional de Antropologa e Historia, Mexico
City, pp. 389414.
Urunuela G. (1998). Excavaciones en Colotzingo, un sitio del Preclasico Medio y Tardo. In Jaen,
M. T., Lopez, S., Marquez, L., and Hernandez, P. (eds.), Tiempo, poblacion y sociedad: homenaje
al maestro Arturo Romano Pacheco, Coleccion Cientfica 365, INAH, Mexico City, pp. 483491.
Villaverde, C. (1993). Yohualichan. Institute of Maya Studies Newsletter 22(4): 7.

Puebla Prehistory

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Puebla Prehistory

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

C 2005)

Journal of Archaeological Research, Vol. 13, No. 2, June 2005 (

Recent Research in Puebla Prehistory

Patricia Plunket1,2 and Gabriela Urunuela

de Antropologa, Universidad de las Americas-Puebla, Sta. Catarina Martir, Puebla,

Plunket and Urunuela

Recent Research in Puebla Prehistory

Plunket and Urunuela

sewage installation, electrification, tourism initiatives, and mining; very little of

Recent Research in Puebla Prehistory

Mesoamerica during the Coxcatlan phase (50003400 B.C. [uncalibrated]

Plunket and Urunuela

Recent Research in Puebla Prehistory

HOUSEHOLD ARCHAEOLOGY AT THE FORMATIVE

Plunket and Urunuela

Recent Research in Puebla Prehistory

Plunket and Urunuela

Recent Research in Puebla Prehistory

Plunket and Urunuela

Recent Research in Puebla Prehistory

Plunket and Urunuela

Recent Research in Puebla Prehistory

THE NAHUA-OTOMANGUE FRONTIER

Recent Research in Puebla Prehistory

settlements outside contacts and alliances remain unresolved; further analysis of

Recent Research in Puebla Prehistory

as being occupied by either Popoloca (Castillo, 1998c) or Nahua refugees (Sisson

THE MIXTECA-PUEBLA PHENOMENON

Recent Research in Puebla Prehistory

Plunket and Urunuela

Recent Research in Puebla Prehistory

Fig. 5. Catalina polychrome pulque goblet (courtesy of the

milieu. Hernandez (1995a,b) comparison of the motifs of Cholula, Huejotzingo,

Recent Research in Puebla Prehistory

Plunket and Urunuela

central area; its exclusion from general considerations of Mesoamerican prehistory

Recent Research in Puebla Prehistory

Plunket and Urunuela

Aufdermaeur, J. (1970). Excavaciones en dos sitios preclasicos de Moyotzingo. Comunicaciones 1:

Recent Research in Puebla Prehistory

Mexicana de Antropologa and Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico, Mexico City,

Plunket and Urunuela

Recent Research in Puebla Prehistory

Plunket and Urunuela

Recent Research in Puebla Prehistory

Nicholson, H. B. (2001). Mixteca-Puebla style. In Carrasco, D. (ed.), The Oxford Encyclopedia

Plunket and Urunuela

Recent Research in Puebla Prehistory

Plunket and Urunuela

Recent Research in Puebla Prehistory

BIBLIOGRAPHY OF RECENT LITERATURE

Plunket and Urunuela

Recent Research in Puebla Prehistory

You might also like