Cotton in Aztec Mexico. Production, Distribution and Uses

Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México
University of California Institute for Mexico and the United States
Cotton in Aztec Mexico: Production, Distribution and Uses

Author(s): Frances F. Berdan
Source: Mexican Studies/Estudios Mexicanos, Vol. 3, No. 2 (Summer, 1987), pp. 235-262
Published by: University of California Press on behalf of the University of California
Institute for Mexico and the United States and the Universidad Nacional Autónoma de
México
Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/1051808
Accessed: 28-01-2019 02:36 UTC
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms
Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, University of California Institute for

Mexico and the United States, University of California Press are collaborating with
JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Mexican Studies/Estudios Mexicanos
This content downloaded from 132.248.9.8 on Mon, 28 Jan 2019 02:36:33 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Cotton in Aztec Mexico:
Production, Distribution and Uses
Frances F. Berdan
California State University, San Bernardino
Este trabajo presenta un analisis de la producci6n, distribuci6n, y uso

del algod6n y de los textiles de algod6n en el imperio azteca.
Early Spanish descriptions of the New World were replete with

vivid descriptions of this new and exotic land. The Spaniards mar-
veled over the carefully-planned cities, the orderly marketplaces, the
exquisite art work (especially in gold!). And they wondered at new
products of the land, such as maize, tomatoes, and cacao. Although
already familiar with cotton from earlier contacts with the east (In-
dia), they nonetheless expressed great interest in the crop, and es-
pecially in its New World uses. Peter Martyr, sailing to various
Caribbean islands with Columbus, repeatedly mentioned seeing cot-
ton as a growing crop and as a manufacture: it was spun and woven
with grasses to fashion fishing nets; it was spun, woven, and deco-
rated to produce textiles for decorative hangings or clothing (1970,
vol. I: First and Second Decades, passim). In one specific descrip-
tion of these voyages, a canoe encountered by Columbus
had in it much clothing of the kind which they weave of cotton in this land,
such as cloth woven with many designs and colors, shirts which reached
the knees, and some square pieces of cloth which they use for cloaks, call-
ing them zuyen (Blom 1932: 533).
This was the islands. On the mainland, the uses of cotton mul-
tiplied. The Maya found a use for almost every part of the cotton
plant in curing illnesses, from ulcers to skin diseases1 (Roys 1976:
1. Roys (1976: 282) describes many medicinal uses for the cotton (taman) plant
among the Yucatecan Maya: crushed young shoots were used for asthma, crushed
Mlex.ican Studies/Estudios Mexicanos 3 (2), Summer 1987. ( 1987 Regents of the UIniversity of California.
235
236 Mexican Studies/Estudios Mexicanos
282). Cottonseed may have provided oils (although the eviden

very scanty on this). But the most important uses of cotton w
spun and woven cloth. Cotton cloth was combined with light
woods and feathers to manufacture shields that " . . . are very light,
and strong, and good to look at" (Tozzer 1941: 121-22). It was
quilted to form the essential body armor of the Mesoamerican war-
rior. And textiles, of varying quality, elaboration, and form were
used in Mesoamerica for a multitude of purposes: from status-
signifying clothing to tortilla covers to mummy wraps.
It is clear that cotton played an extremely important role in the
economy and social life of Mesoamerican peoples. The domain en-
compassed by the Aztec empire in the early sixteenth century was
no exception. While cotton could only be grown in restricted eco-
logical settings, these limitations on production were offset by
widespread distribution networks which ensured availability of cot-
ton and cotton products to elites and others in highland centers.
This, then, is the subject of this paper: the complex relationships be-
tween production, distribution, and uses of cotton in sixteenth-
century Aztec Mexico.
The Ecology of Cotton Production
While most of the cotton grown in Mexico in pre-Spanish times

was of a single specie (Gossypium hirsutum), there were many var-
ieties.2 Diego de Landa provides us with a glimpse of this variation:
Cotton is gathered in wonderful quantity and grows in all parts of the land
and there are two kinds of it. One they sow every year and its little tree does
not last more than that year and is very small. The stalk of the other lasts
five or six years and bears its fruit every year which are pods like walnuts
seeds were taken for tenesmus, aching bones, and convulsions were treated in a bath
of boiled leaves, the blossom was used to cure earache, and "the toasted leaf is
squeezed into the eye to stop twitching." In addition, scalp diseases were treated with
hot crushed flowers; ulcers and other skin diseases were treated with crushed leaves;
and "a certain veneral disease" was treated with the flowers of the cotton plant. Her-
nandez (1959, vol. I: 426) speaks of the use of the pulverized stem to relieve ulcers,
and of the crushed (young plants?) curing "admirably" the bites of scorpions, snakes,
and other venomous creatures. Other medicinal uses are mentioned by Martinez
(1959: 30-31). Other (non-Mesoamerican) groups used parts of the cotton plant for
food. The Pima, for example, used the seeds as food, pounding them up with mesquite
beans in a mortar, or parching and eating them without grinding (Russell 1908:77).
While such a use is undocumented for ancient Mexico, Lewis (1963:85) mentions the
use of toasted cotton seeds for food in twentieth-century Tepoztlan.
2. The range of variation found in Tehuacan Valley archaeological contexts is
presented by Stephens (1967).
Berdan: Cotton in Aztec Mexico 237
with a green shell, which opens in four parts in due time and co
cotton (Tozzer 1941: 200).
There is some suggestion that the small annual variety might have
been an adaptation to valley conditions, where frosts might threaten
the survival of the perennial tree form (Saindon 1977: 10). However,
there are also indications that the large perennials can survive in the
inland valleys, as they have recently in the Sierra Norte de Puebla
(Kandt 1972: 62).
There are also variations in terms of fiber color produced by the
cotton plant, notably white (ichcatl) and brown (coyoichcatl). The
white form is ubiquitous in cotton-growing areas; the brown form
is found less frequently, but is known from both Pacific and Gulf
coast regions (Matricula de Tributos, f. 9v; Berdan, 1985 field notes
from Cuetzalan, Puebla; Foster 1942: 19; Kelley and Palerm 1952:
144-45).
Cotton is, essentially, a lowland crop. It requires a fairly con-
stant warm temperature (between 61 and 77 degrees Fahrenheit or
16-25 degrees Centigrade), and a heavy rainy season followed by
warm sunny periods (Saindon 1977: 10). These requirements are
met heartily in Pacific and Gulf coastal areas where rainfall is
seasonal, allowing an annual harvest early in the dry season, usually
September or October (Martinez 1959:28). Prime cotton growing
areas also extend inland from the coasts along river valleys, which
provide adequate moisture through rainfall or irrigation, suitably
warm temperatures, and protection from frosts. Interior lowland
valleys also qualify as cotton growing areas, as long as the moisture,
temperature and frost-protection criteria are met. This usually means
that cotton growing in inland regions is restricted to valleys below
1000 meters in elevation, and with water sources sufficient to sup-
port reliable irrigation agriculture (Map 1).3 Cotton from irrigated
lands was especially valued. Among the "graded" cotton types sold
by the cotton seller in the Tlatelolco market, Sahagfin's informants
say that
The cotton which he sells (is) round, fat, full-bodied, double-bodied. The
good cotton, the precious, the irrigated land variety, comes from irrigated
lands. That which comes from the hot countries follows. Also that which
3. It is unfortunate that the pre-Hispanic cotton production system is so poo

known. There is little archaeological or ethnohistorical documentation on the
niques and technology of production, scheduling of activities, division of labo
so on. Some information on archaeological remains is presented in the reports
Tehuacan Valley excavations (see especially C. E. Smith 1967, Stephens 1967
Johnson 1967).
Map 1 Cotton Growing Areas in the Aztec Empire and
PROVINCES I INDEPENDENT
1. TLATELOLCO 13. TOLOCAN 26. COHUAXTLAHUACAN SENORIOS
2. PETLACALCO 14. OCULAN 27. COYOLAPAN A. METZTITLAN
3. ACOLHUACAN 15. MAUNALCO 28. TLACHQUIAUCO B. TLAXCALA
4. QUAUHNAHUAC 16. XOCOTITLAN 29. TOCHTEPEC C. TEOTITLAN DEL
5. HUAXTEPEC 17. TLACHCO 30. XOCONOCHCO CAMINO
6. QUAUHTITLAN 18. TEPECUACUILCO 31. QUAUHTOCHCO D. YOPfTZINCO
7. AXOCOPAN 19. CHUATLAN 32. CUETLAXTLAN E. TOTOTEPEC
ATnTtrnLI rR N TI0 i APAN X3 TI APACNYAN F. COATLICAMAC
5. r I u I W .--w
DE PEDRAZA 21. TLALCOCAUHT1TLAN 34. TLATLAUHQUITEPEC
9. HUEYPOCHTLAN 22. QUIAUHTEOPAN 35. TOCHPAN
10. ATOTONILCO 23. YOALTEPEC 36. ATLAN
EL GRANDE 24. CHALCO 37. TZICOAC
11. XILOTEPEC 25. TEPEACAC 38. OXTIPAN
12. QUAHUACAN
comes from the west follows. Finally comes that which comes from the
desert lands, from the north. That which is like the Totonac variety-tree
cotton-comes last of all. Separately the good man sells these. And he ad-
justs their prices. Separately he sells the yellow, separately the broken, the
stretched (1950-82, Book 10: 75).
The areas where cotton was grown is somewhat revealed by the

style of naming places used by the central Mexicans. Placenames
were frequently descriptive; thus names such as Ichcateopan (on the
cotton temple), Ichca Atoyac (in the river of cotton), or Ichcatepec
(on the hill of cotton) suggest cotton-growing areas, and are help-
ful in locating them (Rodriguez Vallejo 1982: 54-56).
Environmental requirements, somewhat offset by techn

efforts in irrigation, placed geographical restrictions on th
ing of cotton. But they did not inhibit the manufacture of cott
tiles in every niche of the Aztec realm. Complex combinat
entrepreneurial effort and political involvement eased mo
of cotton over space as it was transformed from raw mat
woven (and often decorated) cloth.
Systems of Cotton Textile Production
In terms of overall output and variety of uses, textile manufac-

ture was the most highly productive craft of sixteenth-century Mex-
ico.4 In the realm of production, three major problems surface: (1)
the quantities of cloth produced, (2) the significance of division of
labor patterns in cloth production, and (3) the relationship between
sources of raw materials and textile manufacture.
Cotton cloth was produced for a variety of purposes, includi
religious offerings; awnings or decorative hangings for templ
palaces and marketplaces; rich adornments for deities; marriage
ments; gifts for special ritual and social events, such as the ded
tion of a youth to the calpulli school, the potlatch-like exchan
by merchants at their flamboyant feasts, or politically-inspired
changes among powerful rulers; household utility items, such as
tilla covers; a warrior's battle armor; and finally, wrappings f
mummy bundles prepared, usually, for cremation. Certain wh
cotton mantas (quachtli) served money functions in the econom
circulating as a medium of exchange, and serving payment and s
dard of value functions as well. And, of course, the predominan
of textiles was as clothing, whether plain or exquisitely decor
cloaks, shifts, skirts and loincloths.
Such a vast demand required the production of considerable
quantities of cloth-of cotton or bast fibers, plain or decorated, large
or small. While there are no really good figures for cloth production
in central Mexico, even for the relatively well-documented late Az-
tec period, some quantities are suggested by tribute lists and a vari-
ety of conquest histories. As an example, the Matrfcula de Tributos
pictorially illustrates 60,400 cloaks (mantas), each to be rendered
in tribute four times yearly, yielding a total annual tribute of 241,600
4. The pivotal place of cloth in Aztec culture is not unusual in the world's an-
cient empires, where cloth, along with grains, served as the major material link in
trading and other inter-group relationships.
mantas.5 These textiles, being but rectangular swatches of

straight off the ubiquitous backstrap loom, could have serv
(if not all) of the "cloth purposes" already mentioned. 65,6
quachtli, which was a specialized type of cotton cloth.
Much of the remainder may have been used for clothing
surer notion of clothing tribute can be gained by looking sp
at loin cloths (maxtlatl) and women's tunics (huipilli) and s
(cueitl). The early sixteenth-century conquered provinces gave
14,400 loin cloths, 20,800 women's tunics, and 1,600 tunic and
skirt "sets." All this may provide some idea of the urban clothing
demands satisfied through tribute during one year.6 As an aside, I do
not agree with a recent calculation which places the Matric-
ula/Mendoza tribute totals at over three million pieces of cloth an-
nually (whether mantas, loin cloths, tunics or skirts), and further
concludes that this yielded "about 2.6 articles for each person in the
Valley of Mexico" (Drennan 1984: 109).7 The figure of three million
plus is predicated on the assumption that each unit of the Matric-
ula/Mendoza account represents not a single piece of cloth, but a
load of twenty (thus, typically, 400 mantas would result in 8,000
mantas, if by cargas or loads). True, the annotator of the Mendoza
(but not of the Matricula) added, quite as an afterthought, the word
carga, load of twenty, above each textile pictogram. From internal
evidence of the documents themselves (such as the nature of the an-
notations in the two pictorials, and the manner of counting mantas
when the number is less than 400),8 and from corroborating evi-
dence found in contemporary historical sources (e.g., the explana-
tion of the tribute account in the Document of 1554 that 400 mantas
5. This figure includes adjusted figures for five provinces included in the Codex
Mendoza tribute list but lacking in the Matricula. This also applies to the figures for
quachtli which follow. Of the total, 217,600 were cotton, the remainder of maguey
or yucca fibers.
6. This amount may have varied from year to year. I have concluded elsewhere
(Berdan n.d.) that the tally represented in the Matricula/Mendoza was most likely
for a single year only; other tallies were probably drawn up for other years, and may
well have contained different demands.
7. As to providing each Basin of Mexico inhabitant with 2.6 articles annua
I am sure that the distribution was not even across social categories, and special n
based on age and sex are not considered in this statistic. For example, children's cl
ing, which would have required some size adjustments, is not specifically incl
in the tribute tallies at all. Furthermore, some textiles, such as the quachtli, had
specialized functions and may not have been distributed for individual wear at all.
8. In the Matrfcula, province of Tochpan, 240 mantas are pictorially
represented by twelve banners (each standing for the number twenty) and the Nahuatl
gloss is matlacquimilli omome ("twelve loads of twenty each," -quimilli being a
suffix used for counting mantas by twenties, and matlac- omome being "twelve").
means twenty loads of twenty mantas each; descriptions of

loads, or forty loads of mantas . . . but never 400 loads, as
Ixtlilxochitl 1965, v. II: 197-8), I have concluded that the
figure of 278,400 pieces of cloth is what the pictorials int
This is, to be sure, still an impressive amount of cloth. And
only the amount tallied through official Tenochtitlan tribu
nels. Great quantities were woven in the urban capitals them
and certainly not all the cloth produced in the provinces t
through tribute to the urban capitals; much would have bee
for immediate household consumption, or exchanged thro
pervasive market system prominent throughout the empire
many designed textiles do not appear at all in the extant tribut
as Anawalt (n.d.a) has shown. This includes some items of p
ably great demand, such as the "flowered cape" bestowed o
riors as a reward for their first enemy capture. Also absent fro
tribute lists were the great quantities of quilted armor requ
warriors. Clearly estimates of cloth production cannot mer
with calculations of the tribute totals. Perhaps a good quan
answer is not in the offing; but the question leads to some othe
siderations.
One such consideration is the division of labor in textile prod

tion. Women were the spinners and weavers and also, apparentl
the "embellishers," adorning cloth with garnishes of embroider
feathers, or fur. Women throughout the imperial domain (and
yond) learned the craft. In most cases, women would have com
bined these activities with a multitude of others such as child care,
cooking, and general household maintenance. Only in the large
polygynous households of some nobles, or in special temples which
housed priestesses, might there be spinning and weaving by some
highly-skilled women on a more full-time occupational basis.9 But
I know of no firm evidence for the presence of textile workshops
in Aztec period Mexico.
By way of ethnographic analogy, the present-day Nahua
(Nahuat-speaking) women of the Sierra Norte de Puebla, Mexico,
continue to spin and weave much as they did in Aztec times. They
engage in this as an individualized, household activity:
In this region there is a low cotton plant, which gives a magenta colour,
called "coyote" colour. Some women have it sowed near their house. They
pick it and pluck it out a little. (Then the cotton is beaten on apetate (palm
9. Full-time specialization in weaving (along with flint-knapping and mold-made

pottery) has been posited from archaeological work in the Tehuacan Valley (MacNeish
et al 1972:470).
mat), which is placed over corn husks, to make the cotton even and
which will be easy to spin). They spin it by means of the spindle; if
careful, they can make it very fine; if not a thread comes out co
lumps. (They make a ball of the thread).... White cotton also gro
which the same technique is employed (Kandt 1972: 61-62; trans
informant narrative).
As recently as 1985, we observed a woman spinning with th

brown cotton. She removed the cotton seeds from the boll
(using no tools), proceeding to spin the fibers around a peti
long) spindle (malacat). She put the thread through two sp
a "rough" one and a "fine" one, producing a thin even thre
and other weavers of the Sierra Norte were reticent to estimate the
amount of time required to spin the thread and weave the cloth, em
phasizing that they combined these activities with those of child
care, housework, and even marketing ("drop spindles" can allow
one to spin while walking, for example). These ethnographic exam
ples are helpful in filling in some of the most notorious gaps in th
ethnohistorical record.
The division of labor in cloth production is further reflected
extant tribute information, but this time the conquest histori
These histories occasionally list the tirbute from a province imm
ately following its conquest by the Triple Alliance. Cotton cloth
in most cases, by far the most prominent item of tribute deman
(e.g., Alva Ixtlilxochitl 1965, v. II: 197, 196), perhaps reflecting
tered demographics in the conquered province. The highest cas
ties (from combat and sacrifice) would have been suffered by t
male population, and may well have resulted in a temporary im
balance in the sex ratio. Early tribute demands would have refle
this, placing the tribute burden on the portion of the population bes
able to produce in quantity: women, producing textiles. Later, tr
ute demands diversified as the population re-adjusted itself, an
other products worked their way onto the tribute lists.
A further dimension of productive effort involves the relatio
ship between sources of raw materials and locales of textile
manufacture. Basic textile raw materials were predominately cotton,
along with maguey and yucca fibers. As a general rule, in the realm
of the Aztec empire cotton could be successfully grown below 1000
meters, while maguey and yucca flourished especially above the
1000 meter altitude line. While there were many inland valleys
which qualified as cotton-growing areas (e.g., in present-day
Morelos state), cotton was most extensively grown along the coastal
strips, both Gulf and Pacific, and along the river valleys stretching
inland from those coasts. This natural patterning is reflected in the
Map 2 Provinces Paying Raw Cotton in Tribute
1. TLATELOLCO 13. TOLOCAN 26. COHUAXTLAHUACAN SENORIOS
2. PETLACALCO 14. OCUILAN 27. COYOLAPAN A. METZTITLAN
3. ACOLHUACAN 15. MALINALCO 28. TLACHQUIAUCO B. TLAXCALA
6. QUAUHTITLAN 18. TEPECUACUILCO 31. QUAUHTOCHCO D YOPTTZINCO
7. AXOCOPAN 19. CIHUATLAN 32. CUETLAXTLAN E TOTOTEPEC
Q ATNTrAM rrN TI APDAN 3. TI APACnYAM F. COATLICAMAC
DE PEDRAZA 21. TLALCOCAUHTITLAN 34. TLATLAUHQUITEPEC
10. ATOTONILCO
EL GRANDE
23. YOALTEPEC O36. ATLAN
24. CHALCO 37. TZICOAC
11. XILOTEPEC
25. TEPEACAC OXITIPAN
38.
12. QUAHUACAN
distribution of conquered provinces which were required to deliver

raw cotton as tribute (Map 2). And, there is a rough associatiQn
between these areas (along with other known cotton-growing areas)
and provinces which rendered oversize cotton mantas in tribute
(Map 3), some of these up to eight brazas in length.10 In some cases
these were fancy, in others not, but it does seem that those
10. The braza had various possible dimensions (usually about 66 inches), and
is represented pictorially by fingers projecting from the pictogram of the manta. In
the Matricula, only dimensions of 2, 4, or 8 brazas are represented (it being assumed
that mantas unmarked for length, with no fingers, were one braza in length). However,
Duran (1967, vol. 11:206) mentions mantas of 2, 4, 5, 10, and 20 brazas ("5," espe-
cially, does not sound very indigenous).
Map 3 Provinces Paying Oversize Cotton Mantas in Tribute
PROVINCES . INDEPENDENT
PROVINCES .~~~~~~l ~rr~
1. TLATELOLCO 13. TOLOCAN 26. COHUAXTLAHUACAN o,INUnlMI
2. 'PETLACALCO 14. OCUILAN 27. COYOLAPAN A. METZTITLAN
3. ACOLHUACAN 15. MALINALCO 28. TLACHQUIAUCO B. TLAXCALA

CAMINO
5. HUAXTEPEC 17. TLACHCO 30. XOCONOCHCO
31. QUAUHTOCHCO D. YOPITZINCO
6. QUAUHTITLAN p"18. TEPECUACUILCO
E. TOTOTEPEC
7. AXOCOPAN 9. CIHUATLAN 32. CUETLAXTLAN
33. TLAPACOYAN F. COATLICAMAC
8. ATOTONILCO TLAPAN
EL GRANDE
24. CHALCO Q37.TZICOAC
11. XILOTEPEC 25. TEPEACAC C38. OXITIPAN
12. QUAHUACAN
provinces endowed with cotton-growing capabilities were in

general required to deliver more cotton overall, in woven form,
than other provinces.
By way of contrast, maguey fiber mantas were obtained, in trib-
ute, only from the western and northern parts of the empire, yet the
raw materials were surely available in abundance throughout most
of highland Mexico, and processing of the fibers, followed by the
weaving of cloth, was widely practiced. While textiles of maguey
fiber have been generally relegated to commoner use, Patricia
Anawalt has clearly demonstrated that much of this cloth was highly
decorated, and would have been very appropriate noble wear. This
may have been especially true of one version of the magu

manta, woven from the coraz6n (rather than the "leaves")
maguey plant. Such a textile was observed by Roberto Weit
the Otomi area earlier in this century (Irmgard Weitlaner J
personal communication). Could this be the type of cloth wh
der scrutiny by the Spanish conquistadores, was described
just like silk? Is this Sahagun's "shiny maguey fiber [cape]
grade?" (1950-82, Book 10: 73). Perhaps many maguey fiber
mantas, recorded as worn by members of the exalted Aztec nobil-
ity, were of this soft, pliable and highly desirable maguey material.
The yucca fiber mantas were made from the Yucca aloifolia L.
(Cooper Clark 1938, vol. III: 71), also a fairly widely distributed
plant. Yet these cloaks were delivered in tribute by only two south-
western provinces; in both cases, the mantas were two brazas long.
As with the maguey fiber mantas, yucca fiber mantas were not
necessarily "commoner wear only." Sahagin (1950-82, Book 10:
75) indicates that some capes of this material were "the kind in
which to dress up for market." They could be woven very tightly
or extremely loosely, even "netlike." In that quite a variety of capes
were made from this fiber, and then presented in tribute as well as
proffered in the urban marketplaces (ibid.), it is likely that large
quantities were produced. Again, the tribute lists offer only the
barest glimpse.
Beyond the basic cloth, various adornments would have re-
quired extra time, special materials and extraordinary skills: the
spinning of rabbit fur, the application of embroidery, or the attach-
ing of feathers, both precious and ordinary. Some of these embel-
lishments were especially associated with particular ethnic groups
(e.g., the Totonac with embroidery); some of the other work (as
with spun rabbit fur and fine feathers) may have been more concen-
trated in the households of urban nobles (Sahagun 1950-82, Book
8: 49).11 The preparation and spinning of duck and turkey feathers
seems to have been one task of "bird owners." Sahagin (ibid., Book
10: 92) tells us that "she raises birds; she plucks them . . . she sells
soft spun [feathers]; long, even thread ...." These persons were
most probably Basin of Mexico dwellers, perhaps urbanites. Profes-
sional featherworkers (amanteca) do not seem to have been in-
volved with adorning clothing, although they are said to have
produced the "array of Huitzilopochtli, which they called the divine
11. It is quite clear, however, that very fancy, ornate work was done in com-
moner households, by commoner women (Sahagiin, 1950-82, Book 10:51-52).
cape"-feathered quemitl (bib-like capes), probably on a cloth b

ing, fit for a god (ibid., Book 9: 91).12
This brief view of textile production sets the stage for the
tribution and subsequent consumption of cloth, and also pinp
some significant constraints. Notably, only women spun and w
and did so mainly as a household enterprise. Production could
been considerable in an opulent polygynous palace, and in cer
temples where priestesses devoted much time to the task; but
were no fully specialized "workshops." Production of cloth is
obviously dependent on availability of raw materials-cotton,
maguey, yucca, furs, and feathers. Production zones were, of
course, to some extent fixed. Yet textile manufacture itself did not
observe these fixed boundaries-it further relied on the movement
of raw materials to the multitudinous spinning and weaving hou
holds. In addition, textile manufacture was conditioned partially
the need for cloth for immediate household use and for gifts or
change, and partially by the political demands of a conquest st
Distribution Channels for Cotton and Textiles
Textile-related movements occurred at a variety of lev

the "raw material stage;" to the spinner, weaver and per
bellisher; and finally to the consumer. These movements w
tated by a number of distribution channels, namely ma
exchange, foreign trade, and tribute.
Marketplace Exchange
Distribution through markets was intimately linked with

production in a "sequential movement and modification of goods"
process. This means that a product goes through several stages of
production, then exchange, then more production, then exchange
again, and so on until finally it reaches a consumer. At each stage,
the item grows closer to finished form, and also increases in value.
This process was a lively one in the realm of cotton cloth. Some
of the factors of production, spindle whorls for sure, were traded
(or at least moved) over some distance (Parsons 1972: 57). The
12. These were the teuquemitl, quetzalquemitl, uitzitzilquemitl, xiuhtotoque-

mitl (the divine cape, the quetzal feather, the hummingbird, the blue cotinga
capes .. .).
Huaxteca area of the Gulf Coast seems to have been a parti

popular source for these small cotton-spinning whorls;13 it
a well-endowed cotton-growing area (ibid.). Spindle whorls
that area have been found throughout central highland Me
some moving into areas of Aztec imperial control (including
one imperial capital, Texcoco), others into areas which sust
hostile relations with the Triple Alliance (notably Tlaxcala),
others into areas of highly unstable relations with both the Tri
liance and Tlaxcala (Cholula, for example). Apparently political
boundaries did little to inhibit the flow of these spindle whorls, and
the most likely channel was marketplace exchange, which usually
paid but little attention to political alliances and animosities (Berdan
1985).
The larger spindle whorls, presumably used for spinning the
coarser maguey or yucca fibers, have not been well documented for
the lowlands; their distribution seems to be more closely restricted
to actual zones of maguey and yucca production.
These differences in spindle whorl distribution reflect broader
variations in production-distribution processes. With cotton, the
raw material was moved about extensively by field owners, by pur-
chasers, and by professional long-distance merchants of the oz-
tomeca variety, who also dealt with similarly bulky cacao. Michael
Smith (n.d.) suggests that Morelos-grown cotton moved into the Val-
ley of Mexico by means of an interregional exchange (non-tribute)
system. Marketplaces probably provided the arena for this exchange.
With the raw material moving, women in highland communities
could spin and weave large quantities of cotton cloth. Some high-
land communities became noted for their spinning and weaving
achievements (Parsons 1972: 66) and in the sixteenth century
Alonso de Zorita talks of towns which "did not grow cotton but
worked it into a very good cloth. This excellent cloth was made by
the people of the tierra fria . . " (1963: 187). Cotton cloth
production was indeed a considerable and admirable undertaking in
highland, as well as lowland, areas. The raw cotton moved from
fields, through markets, such as the grand Tlatelolco market (see Sa-
hagin 1950-82, Book 10: 75), to household spinners and weavers.
Likewise the woven cloth often later entered the marketplace for
sale (or was destined for other uses, such as personal wear, gifts or
tribute payment). However, the spun thread, as yet unwoven, does
13. The Huaxtec spindle whorls were so popular, spinners in the Teotihuacan
Valley copied the Huaxtec style in producing their own spindle whorls.
not seem to have been a market or trade item.14 The spinnin

weaving occupations appear to have been encapsulated in a sin
operation. Whether further embellishing, such as the applicati
embroidery, spun rabbit fur or spun feathers, was also consi
a part of this singular household production process is not cl
Spun rabbit fur, as well as the spun feathers of "ordinary birds" s
as turkeys and ducks, were reportedly available in the Tlatelo
marketplace (Sahagin 1950-82: Book 10: 61, 77), and large
bers of unadorned (plain white) mantas were produced, some
perhaps destined for embellishment. While some cloth items may
have been adorned by the weaver herself, still others may have been
sold undecorated, for embellishment by a further purchaser, who
might then "personalize" the item (such as is done in the present-
day Sierra Norte de Puebla). The purchaser may also decorate the
cloth to increase its value, selling it later for gain, or presenting it
as stipulated tribute. Of the quilted cotton armor, very little is
known of its production and distribution. One community, Misantla
in eastern Mexico, reportedly produced cotton armor and carried
it to sell at the battlefields (Relaci6n de Misantla 1962: 17).
In contrast to cotton textiles, a slightly different production-
distribution sequence applied to the maguey fiber cloth (and
presumably the yucca fiber cloth as well). Here the whole process
appears to have been more self-contained. Maguey leaves do not ap-
pear on market lists as market items, yet the preparer ("dresser") of
maguey leaves is "an owner of maguey fiber" (Sahagin 1950-82,
Book 10: 73), and this same person is the seller of the maguey fiber
capes. Some of these persons may have owned maguey plants them-
selves, but surely there were many who did not, yet who still pre-
pared, spun and wove the material. Perhaps the raw material moved
to those persons through means more informal than the market-
place, or was present in the markets but not deemed worthy of men-
tion. In any event, it may be quite safely concluded that the raw
maguey material did not move as extensively or across regions, as
did cotton. Like cotton, however, bast fiber spinning and weaving
were operations carried on within individual households, and the
maguey fiber worker sold the capes in the marketplace (ibid.).
But again they diverge. Maguey fiber capes seem to have been
14. "Skeins" of thread, along with loom equipment, were bestowed in the wills
of two Culhuacan women in the mid-sixteenth century (Cline and Le6n-Portilla
1984:148-151, 182-183). In 1581, skeins were sold in Culhuacan to pay for a Mass;
this perhaps involved a marketplace transaction (ibid.: 190-191).
sold almost entirely by the producers themselves, perhaps

ing their generally "commoner" use. Yucca fiber capes were
by regional traveling merchants (tlanecuilo); this may refl
somewhat more restricted zone of production for cloaks o
material. Cotton textiles, while marketed by weavers and by
regional merchants, were also considered interesting commodities
for the fancy guild-organized professional merchants. The tilmapan
tlacatl, for example, the "man with the capes," specialized in the
large white cotton mantas called quachtli (might he have been a
money-changer of sorts?), while the important ueicapan tlacatl,
"principal merchant," specialized in trading fine decorated capes,
tunics, and skirts. These items must have been sufficiently valuable
to catch the interest of these specialized professional merchants,
whose enterpreneurial goals are well-documented. In short, dealing
in cotton (by professional oztomeca) or in cotton cloth (by high-
ranking professional merchants) was an economic enterprise of a
high order. The stage for this enterprise ranged from the grand
Tlatelolco marketplace, to sensitive borderland markets (such as
Cholula), to more clearly-definable "trading enclaves" (Map 4), to
smaller marketplaces within the empire and beyond.
Map 4 Trading Enclaves in Mesoamerica
Foreign Trade
Foreign trade, conducted between rulers of sovereign city
states, allowed for a relatively unencumbered movement of f
textiles and other luxury goods across otherwise sensitive bo
This trade was carried on at a high level, politically supporte
sanctioned by the rulers themselves. The agents were the gui
organized professional merchants, who were entrusted with
rulers' wealth. The merchants' risks were considerable, for th
were often assassinated in unfriendly districts. Their rewards
also great, however, for they received gifts from their king, pres
and rank in their guild, and frequently personal wealth from p
able economic transactions en route.
In this official traffic, only finished cotton goods moved
property of the Tenochtitlan ruler (that is, from the limited i
mation available). But the transactions were not simple, and t
seem to have involved social and political entailments at every
In the most fully documented example (Sahagfin 1950-82, Bo
7-8), professional merchants from Tenochtitlan were given 1
quachtli by the Mexica ruler, Ahuitzotl (ruled 1486-1502). They
ried these cloaks to their sister-city of Tlatelolco where the
chants of the two cities exchanged gifts and fine oratory; they
divided the cloaks equally between them. With these, they p
chased (presumably in the vast Tlatelolco market) the elabora
decorated articles of clothing which they were to trade with
of outlying districts:
. . And with the large cotton capes were then bought the rulers' ca
feathered in cup-shaped designs and those of eagle face designs, and s
on the border with feathers; and rulers' breech clouts with long end
embroidered skirts (and) shifts (ibid.).
The fact that the merchants carried as state goods the highly e
bellished elite clothing rather than the seemingly more "negot
quachtli punctuates the political overtones of this foreign exch
It may also reflect the pragmatics of transport; fewer fine cloaks
to be transported to equal in value the 1,600 quachtli.15
The commissioned merchants exchanged the Mexica ruler's
goods directly with the rulers of foreign districts for precious items
of supposedly equivalent value: jade, turquoise mosaic shields,
shells, tortoise shell cups, wild animal skins and a variety of feathers
15. Unfortunately, we do not have a good handle on the value equivalencies.

However, information in the tribute Document of 1554 (Scholes and Adams 1957:
30, 32) suggests that no transport advantage was gained in trading quachtli for fancy
including the prized quetzal (ibid.: 17, 18-19). Throughout, the

goods remained the property of the ruler Ahuitzotl, and the
chants served as his agents; an armed escort was even provide
merchants by their hosts as they traversed hostile foreign terri
It has all the trappings of a political arrangement enacted for m
benefit, with precious textiles and other luxuries providing th
necessary material link.
This mutual benefit was not without its economic rewards. The
very exchange of exclusively elite goods between Mexica emissaries
and foreign rulers served to move these luxury items across some-
times tense political boundaries. While low-value subsistence goods
may have moved fairly readily across such borders, the elite-
consumables would not easily penetrate those same borders in large
quantities (Berdan 1985: 355). Furthermore, on these expeditions,
the merchants also carried personal goods for purposes of sale-they
were private entrepreneurs as well as state agents. They offered
costly goods (such as golden necklaces and ear plugs) for the distant
elite, and less expensive items (such as rabbit fur and pointed obsid-
ian blades) for the commoners of those districts. They did not bring
cloth or raw cotton back into the empire on these journeys.
The professional merchants also frequented borderland markets,
quasi-"port of trade" locales situated on historically sensitive
borders (ibid.:354-55). And among their wares were always textiles.
So, at the Tepeacac market, they traded for (or with) cloaks and loin
cloths (Duran 1967, vol. II: 162); at Cohuaxtlahuaca before its con-
quest by the Triple Alliance, Valley of Mexico professional mer-
chants trafficked in clothing and rabbit fur thread (ibid.: 185). In
these "fringe" situations, entrepreneurial effort and political con-
trol combined to facilitate movements of textiles and other valued
goods.
Tribute
Tribute was a more politically-inspired operation. It involved a

payment in goods or services, or both, demanded of conquered dis-
tricts. Cotton as a raw material was given in tribute by four
"rich" women's clothing (the equivalency is 1:1); a little was gained with "rulers'
loin cloths" (with an equivalency of 2:1); and somewhat more was gained with
elaborate mantas, at a ratio of two or three such cloaks to one quachtli. While the
highest-valued cloak mentioned was fancy, with dyed cotton, perhaps spun rabbit
fur, and bordered with feathers, the document does not give equivalencies for pre-
cisely the capes described by Sahagin (although the "eagle face design" does appear
in the Matricula).
provinces: Cihuatlan on the Pacific coast, and Tzicoac, Atlan and

Quauhtochco on the Gulf (see Map 2). If the Codex Mendoza
scheduling of tribute delivery is followed, the Pacific brown cotton
(coyoichcatl) was paid twice annually, while the other three
provinces paid their white cotton once a year.'6 According to Mo-
lins Fabrega (1983: 42), this amounted, in total, to 4,400 loads an-
nually, equalling 101,217.61 kg. (223,144.34 lbs.) in transport
weight.
While goods of many kinds were required in tribute, cotton tex-
tiles by far dominated. In the provincial organization of the empire,
as seen in the Matrfcula and Mendoza tribute tallies, all but two
provinces, of 38, provided textiles as tribute (Map 5). One of the
non-textile provinces, Xoconochco, was geographically disjointed
from the rest of the empire; its tribute emphasized luxuries such as
fine feathers, stones and animal skins. Perhaps at such a distance tex-
tiles were too costly to transport, compared with these high value,
low bulk items. The other province exempt from textile tribute was
Tepeacac, on the Cholula-Huexotzinco-Tlaxcala border. Distance
and transport ease are not reasonable explanations here, since
provinces located at much greater distances from the imperial cap-
itals provided large quantities of cloth in tribute. To look at Tepea-
cac's tribute generally, with carrying frames, smoking tubes, canes,
lime, staple foodstuffs and enemy prisoners, one might conclude
that this was a comparatively poor province, with little of luxury
value available to the inhabitants. Yet the market at Tepeacac was
a haven for professional merchants, with its assured offerings of fine
wares, including rich textiles. Additionally, Tepeacac was located
on a major commercial route from the highlands to the tropical
lowlands, and was an important trading center for cotton cloth and
salt (PNE V: 40-41). Perhaps, for tribute purposes, the imperial
powers were more interested in channeling the energies of the
Tepeacac residents to less ubiquitous offerings: no other province
in these tallies provides carrying frames, smoking tubes, canes or
enemy prisoners, and only one other province offers lime. Cloth
could be demanded of any province; perhaps it was less easy to ob-
tain these special items from "just anywhere" in the empire.
What additional factors may have conditioned the distribution
of textiles for tribute purposes? The availability of raw materials had
an uneven effect on the availability of finished cloth: cotton seems
16. There is no clear explanation for this difference. Xoconochco, on the Pa-
cific coast, also rendered its tribute semi-annually. The explanation may lie in crop
varieties, transport distance, historical events, or other factors.
Map 5 Provinces Paying No Textile Tribute
I, PROVINCES , INDEPENDENT
:itNUHMIUl
rrcs ~hlonls
1. TLATELOLCO 13. TOLOCAN 26. COHUAXTLAHUACAN
30. XOCONOCHCO CAMINO
5. HUAXTEPEC 17. TLACHCO
6. QUAUHTITLAN 18. TEPECUACUILCO 31. QUAUHTOCHCO D. YOPITZINCO
E. TOTOTEPEC
7. AXOCOPAN 19. CIHUATLAN 32. CUETLAXTLAN
8. ATOTONLCO 20. TLAPAN 33. TLAPACOYAN F. COATUCAMAC
DE PEDRAZA 21. TLALCOCAUHTTLAN 34. TLATLAUHQUITEPEC
EL GRANDE
11. XLOTEPEC
40 }25. TEPEACAC 38. OXTIPAN
12. QUAHUACAN
to have moved widely and easily from lowlands to highlands; the

maguey and yucca fibers appear more restricted in their movements,
clinging to highland zones. In coastal areas where cotton was
grown, there was a tendency for the imperial powers to demand
larger units of cloth, but the manufacture of cotton textiles was cer-
tainly not inhibited by the restricted production zone of this crop.
An investigation of cloth styles leads to a somewhat different
realm of explanation for the distribution of tribute textiles. Anawalt
(n.d.b.) has grappled with the problem of whether the styles of
mantas in the tribute codices represent local styles or overlaid im-
perial demands. She has concluded that the design motifs tended to
be regionally affiliated and more closely reflected ethnic association
Illustration 1 The Tlilpapatlauac Cloak Design
Illustration 2 The Ocuilteca Cloak Design
rather than state imposed policies and demands. I would like to

build a little here on her pioneering work in this area, by consider-
ing the distribution of three motifs. The first is the tlilpapatlauac,
"black striped mantas" (Illustration 1). This style was a predominant
offering of provinces to the northeast and east, but was also given
by two southern provinces, Cohuaxtlahuacan and Tepecuacuilco
(Map 6).17 By far its greatest concentration was to the northeast, and
it may even be said that it was a characteristic style of that region.
The second motif is the Ocuilteca, a red-striped cloak "of the
Ocuilteca," or people of the Ocuilan and Tollocan area, to the west
of the imperial capitals (Illustration 2). This style, in a somewhat sim-
plified or abbreviated form, is also found in the southern province
17. The tlilpapatlauac mantas from Cohuaxtlahuacan were four brazas long.
Map 6 Distribution of Three Distinctive Manta Designs
1. TLATELOLCO 13 TOLOCAN 26. COHUAXTLAHUACAN SENORIOS
2. PETLACALCO 14. OCULAN 27. COYOLAPAN A. METZTITLAN
3. ACOLHUACAN 15. MALINALCO 28. TLACHQIAUCO B. TLAXCALA
6. QUAUHTITLAN 18 TEPECUACUILCO 31. QUAUHTOCHCO D YOPITZINCO
7. AXOCOPAN 19. CHUATLAN 32. CUETLAXTLAN E TOTOTEPEC
A A^TT? T n snA A^^ TlA5AI q iT ADArYAN A F. COATUCAMAC
U. r\ I U I _LR W I L-rrPN
DE PEDRAZA 21. TLALCOCAUHTITL kN 34. TLATLAUHQUITEPEC

^ 9. HUEYPOCHTLAN 22. QUIAUHTEOPAN 35. TOCHPAN
)10. ATOTONILCO 23. YOALTEPEC 36. ATLAN
EL GRANDE
a'11. XILOTEPEC
25. TEPEACAC 38. OXITIPAN
12. QUAHUACAN
of Cohuaxtlahuacan (Map 6). The third style, cacamoliuhqui, or

"quilted manta" (Illustration 3), is most heavily concentrated in the
western part of the empire, with small amounts given in tribute from
the east and south. Cohuaxtlahuacan, again, gives mantas of this
motif (Map 6).
I repeatedly mention the province of Cohuaxtlahuacan because
it is an enigma in textile tribute: the mantas it gives are all of styles
that are much more traditional elsewhere in Mexico (Illustration 4);
it offers up no unique style of its own, but seems to have derived
motifs from other people . . . leading to the suggestion that this
province had strong connections, of some sort, with several differ-
ent peoples throughout the empire. What kind of connections? One
possibility is migration, either voluntary or forced. Did peoples from
Illustration 3 The Cacamoliuhqui Cloak Design
00
outside Cohuaxtlahuacan move into the region, bringing their tradi-

tional customs, including textile designs, with them? While there
were considerable movements of peoples throughout Mesoamerica
during the pre-Hispanic era, there is no definitive evidence linking
the population of Cohuaxtlahuacan, historically, to peoples of the
north who produced these distinctive manta designs. A remote sug-
gestion may be made with regard to the rather far-ranging
cacamoliuhqui8s motif: it was very typical in the west-central part
of the empire, and spilled also into some southern provinces. Three
of these southern provinces had Mexica garrisons, and it has been
posited that some towns in the central Valley of Mexico were
responsible for provisioning these garrisons, possibly with man-
power (see Berdan n.d.). Such a connection could account for the
presence of this manta style in the southern regions. And while Co-
huaxtlahuacan apparently did not have such garrisons within its
boundaries, it did have a substantial regional marketplace through
which these and other mantas could easily have passed. Available in
the marketplace, these introduced styles could have been adopted
for use by the local population. And under conquest, the Aztecs
were undoubtedly true to form in demanding tribute in locally-
available goods, including locally-available styles in clothing.
Cloaks of the tlilpapatlauac and Ocuilteca designs may also
have been introduced into Cohuaxtlahuacan province through the
marketplace. The former may have moved from the northeast and
east to the southern part of the empire, carried by some people sub-
ject to forced migration (ibid.). The Ocuilteca cloak, while glossed
as an Ocuilteca design, is simplified from those produced in the core
Ocuilteca area: it lacks the fancy curlicues between the red sections.
This simplication is often characteristic of a "copying" process, and
18. The cacamoliuhqui mantas from Cohuaxtlahuacan province were two

brazas long.
Illustration 4 Tribute From the Province of Cohuaxtlahuacan, with

Three Enigmatic Cloak Styles at the Upper Left
.9-3
\"I
a-
np.
QZ
0
'QJ(1~~3 11W ---
le
0 . 0 I @ .
.. :
L??::~?
the people of thi

obtained some th
their own.
Cohuaxtlahuacan province is an enigma, for the only cloak

given in tribute were ones whose designs were traditional else-
where. This highlights the point that, while tribute is an imperial po-
litical phenomenon, its form relies heavily on other factors including
local traditions, movements of peoples through migration, and

movements of ideas and goods through trade.
Complexities in Cotton Textile Exchange

I have analytically separated three spheres of distribution: mar-
ketplace exchange, foreign trade, and state-imposed tribute. This
does not mean, however, that these exchange spheres were fully in-
dependent of one another-they were, indeed, functionally and
historically intertwined. These relationships can be readily seen with
the movements of textiles and their raw materials.
One example of such movements comes from Teotitlan del
Camino, external to the Aztec domain. There, the women manufac-
tured women's tunics (huipilli) and sold them to merchants who
carried them south to Guatemala, Suchitepeques (Xochitepec) and
Xoconochco. There they exchanged the huipiles for cacao, which
the people of Teotitlan lacked. Nor did the people of Teotitlan grow
their own cotton for this extensive clothing manufacture; this they
obtained from distant coastal areas (PNE IV: 107). While the type of
merchant involved in this intricate web is not specified, they were
probably regionally based merchants (rather than oztomeca or
pochteca associated with the state), given the relative ease with
which they would have necessarily crossed and recrossed Aztec im-
perial boundaries.
In another case, the people of Papaloticpan in the Oaxaca area
traveled to the Rio de Alvarado on the Gulf coast to purchase raw
cotton. The women then wove the cotton into skirts and cloaks
which they either used themselves, sold locally, or carried b
the Rio de Alvarado (where they had obtained the cotton in th
place) and sold the finished goods there. In this exchange they
gained sufficiently to be able to pay their tribute (PNE IV: 93). The
people of Tequisistlan near Texcoco also engaged in the highland-
lowland symbiosis, obtaining their cotton in the Quauhnahuac
(Cuernavaca) region, weaving mantas and huipiles, and subsequently
selling them (PNE VI: 230).
Map 7 illustrates some further complexities. For example, it can
be seen that some cotton growing areas supplied other cotton grow-
ing areas with raw cotton; this happened inside the empire, outside
it, and across imperial boundaries. Some cotton growing areas sup-
plied highland towns with sufficient raw material that those com-
munities became well-known as cotton and textile trading centers;
and, again, the imperial borders were permeable. Furthermore,
some communities specifically known as textile tribute-paying
Map 7 Relationships Among Cotton Growing Areas, Textile Tribute

Towns, and Textile Trading Centers
PROVINCES
1. TLATELOLCO 13. TOLOCAN 26. COHUAXTLAHUACAN
30. XOCONOCHCO CAMINO
5. HUAXTEPEC 17. TLACHCO
18. TEPECUACUILCO 31. QUAUHTOCHCO D. YOPTTZINCO
6. QUAUHTITLAN
32. CUETLAXTLAN E. TOTOTEPEC
7. AXOCOPAN 19. CHUATLAN
20. TLAPAN 33. TLAPACOYAN F. COATUCAMAC
8. ATOTONLCO
EL GRANDE 37. TZICOAC
24. CHALCO
11. XILOTEPEC 38. OXIPAN
25. TEPEACAC
12. QUAHUACAN
towns (as opposed to whole provinces) also obtained their raw

materials from afar, most likely by trade conducted by regional mer-
chants, or through marketplace exchange.
Thus, tribute relied on regional trade and marketplace exchange,
and at the same time stimulated such trade by intensifying demand.
Of all materials moved about in this manner, textiles were by far the
most significant, and required the most involved arrangements. And,
more important yet, everyone in the realm participated in, and was
affected by, these arrangements-as raw material producer, textile
manufacturer, embellisher, trader, or consumer; as royal accountant
or tribute-paying villager; as noble or commoner.
References Cited
Alva Ixtlilxochitl, Fernando de

1965 Obras Hist6ricas. 2 vols. Mexico: Editora Nacional.
Anawalt, Patricia
n.d.a. A Comparative Analysis of the Costumes and Accoutre-
ments of the Codex Mendoza. In The Codex Mendoza,
eds. Frances F. Berdan and Patricia Anawalt. In
preparation.
n.d.b. "The Enigmas of Aztec Textile Production, D
and Utilization." Paper presented at the 77th
ing of the American Anthropological Associ
geles, 1978.
Berdan,Frances F.
1985 Markets in the Economy of Aztec Mexico. In Markets an

Marketing, ed. Stuart Plattner. Monographs in Econom
Anthropology, vol. 4. New York: University Press o
America.
n.d. The Imperial Tribute Roll of the Codex Mendoza. In The
Codex Mendoza, eds. Frances F. Berdan and Patricia
Anawalt. In preparation.
Blom, F.
1932 Commerce, Trade and Monetary Units of the Maya. Tu-
lane University, Middle American Research Institute, Pub-
lication 4, No. 14.
Cline, S. L. and Miguel Le6n-Portilla, eds.
1984 The Testaments of Culhuacan. UCLA Latin American
Center Publications, Special Studies vol. 2, Nahuatl Series
number 1.
Cooper Clark, James, ed.

1938 Codex Mendoza, 3 vols. London: Waterlow and Sons.
Drennan, Robert
1984 Long-distance Transport Costs in Pre-Hispanic Meso-
America. American Anthropologist 86, # 1:105-112.
Duran, Diego
1967 Historia de las Indias de Nueva Espana e Islas de la Tierra
Firme. 2 vols. Mexico: Editorial Porrua.
Foster, George
1942 A Primitive Mexican Economy. Monographs of the Ameri-
can Ethnological Society, no. 5. New York: J. J. Augustin.
Hernandez, Francisco
1959 Historia Natural de Nueva Espana. Vol. 1. Mexico:
Universidad Nacional de Mexico.
Johnson, Irmgard W.
1967 Textiles. In The Prehistory of the Tehuacan Valley Vol. 2:
The Non-Ceramic Artifacts (Douglas S. Byers, ed.): 189-
226. Austin: University of Texas Press.
Kandt, Vera B.
1972 "Arts and Crafts of Zacatipan: A Nahuat Village in the Sierra
de Puebla." Unpublished Master's thesis. State University,
Leiden, The Netherlands.
Kelly, Isabel and Angel Palerm
1952 The Tajin Totonac. Part 1: History, Subsistence, Shelter
and Technology. Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institu-
tion Institute of Social Anthropology Publication No. 13.
Lewis, Oscar
1951 Life in a Mexican Village: Tepoztlan Restudied. Urbana:
University of Illinois Press.
MacNeish, Richard S., Melvin L. Fowler, Angel Garcia Cook, Frederick A
Peterson, Antoinette Nelken-Terner, and James A. Neely
1972 Excavations and Reconnaissance. The Prehistory of the
Tehuacan Valley. Vol. 5. Austin: The University of Texas
Press.
Martyr D'Anghera, Peter

1970 De Orbe Novo: the Eight Decades of Peter Martyr D'An-
ghera. 2 vols. Translated from the Latin with notes and in-
troduction by F. A. MacNutt. New York: Burt Franklin.
Martinez, Maximino
1959 Plantas utiles de la flora mexicana. Mexico: Ediciones
Botas.
Matricula de Tributos
Manuscript in the Museo Nacional de Antropologia, Mex-

ico City.
Molins Fabrega, N.
1983 El C6dice Mendocino y la Economia de Tenochtitlan. Mex-
ico: Jorge Porrua, S.A.
Parsons, Mary H.
1972 Spindle Whorls from the Teotihuacan Valley, Mexico. In
Miscellaneous Studies in Mexican Prehistory. Ann Arbor:
Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan An-
thropological Papers No. 45.
Paso y Troncoso, Francisco del, ed.
1905-1906 Papeles de Nueva Espana. Vols. IV-VI. Madrid: Sucesores
de Rivandeneyra.
Perez de Arteaga, Diego
1962 Relacion de Misantla, 1579. (Notas de David Ramirez
Lavoignet.) Cuadernos de la Facultad de Filosofia y Letras,
no. 8. Xalapa, Veracruz, Mexico: Universidad Veracruzana.
Rodriguez Vallejo, Jose
1976 Ixcatl, El Algod6n Mexicano. Mexico: Fondo de Cultura
Econ6mica.
Roys, Ralph
1976 The Ethno-Botany of the Maya. Philadelphia: ISHI Reprints
on Latin America and the Caribbean.
Russell, Frank
1908 The Pima Indians. 26th Annual Report of the Bureau of
American Ethnology for 1904-1905, 3-389. Washington,
D.C.
Sahagin, Bernardino de
1950-82 Florentine Codex: General History of the Things of New
Spain. ArthurJ. O. Anderson and Charles E. Dibble, transl.
Salt Lake City and Santa Fe: University of Utah Press and
School of American Research.
Saindon, Jacqueline
1977 "Cotton Production and Exchange in Mexico 1427-1580."
Unpublished Master's thesis in Anthropology, Hunter Col-
lege, The City University of New York.
Scholes, F. V. and E. B. Adams
1957 Informaci6n sobre los tributos que los indios pagaban a
Moctezuma, afio de 1554. Documentospara la Historia
del Mexico Colonial, vol. 4.
Smith, C. Earle, Jr.
1967 Plant Remains. In The Prehistory of the Tehuacan Valley.
Vol. 1: Environment and Subsistence, ed. Douglas S. Byers,
220-255. Austin: University of Texas Press.
Smith, Michael E.
n.d. "Social and Economic Organization in the Provinces of the
Aztec Empire: Cuauhnahuac and Huaxtepec." Unpublished
ms.
Stephens, Stanley G.
1967 A Cotton Boll Segment from Coxcatlan Cave. In The Pre-
history of the Tehuacan Valley, Vol. 1: Environment and
Subsistence, ed. Douglas S. Byers, 256-260. Austin: Univer-
sity of Texas Press.
Tozzer, Alfred M.
1941 Landa's Relacion de las Cosas de Yucatan. Cambridge:
Papers of the Peabody Museum of American Archaeolog
and Ethnology, Harvard University. Vol. XVIII.
Zorita, Alonso de
1963 Life and Labor in Ancient Mexico. Translated by Benjamin
Keen. New Brunswick, N.J.: Rutgers University Press.

Cotton in Aztec Mexico. Production, Distribution and Uses

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Cotton in Aztec Mexico. Production, Distribution and Uses

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México

University of California Institute for Mexico and the United States

Cotton in Aztec Mexico: Production, Distribution and Uses

Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, University of California Institute for

Production, Distribution and Uses

Este trabajo presenta un analisis de la producci6n, distribuci6n, y uso

Early Spanish descriptions of the New World were replete with

282). Cottonseed may have provided oils (although the eviden

The Ecology of Cotton Production

While most of the cotton grown in Mexico in pre-Spanish times

3. It is unfortunate that the pre-Hispanic cotton production system is so poo

Map 1 Cotton Growing Areas in the Aztec Empire and

The areas where cotton was grown is somewhat revealed by the

Environmental requirements, somewhat offset by techn

Systems of Cotton Textile Production

In terms of overall output and variety of uses, textile manufac-

mantas.5 These textiles, being but rectangular swatches of

means twenty loads of twenty mantas each; descriptions of

One such consideration is the division of labor in textile prod

9. Full-time specialization in weaving (along with flint-knapping and mold-made

As recently as 1985, we observed a woman spinning with th

Map 2 Provinces Paying Raw Cotton in Tribute

distribution of conquered provinces which were required to deliver

Map 3 Provinces Paying Oversize Cotton Mantas in Tribute

4. QUAUHNAHUAC 16. XOCOTITLAN 29. TOCHTEPEC C. TEOTITLAN DEL

provinces endowed with cotton-growing capabilities were in

may have been especially true of one version of the magu

cape"-feathered quemitl (bib-like capes), probably on a cloth b

Distribution Channels for Cotton and Textiles

Textile-related movements occurred at a variety of lev

Distribution through markets was intimately linked with

12. These were the teuquemitl, quetzalquemitl, uitzitzilquemitl, xiuhtotoque-

Huaxteca area of the Gulf Coast seems to have been a parti

not seem to have been a market or trade item.14 The spinnin

sold almost entirely by the producers themselves, perhaps

Map 4 Trading Enclaves in Mesoamerica

15. Unfortunately, we do not have a good handle on the value equivalencies.

including the prized quetzal (ibid.: 17, 18-19). Throughout, the

Tribute was a more politically-inspired operation. It involved a

provinces: Cihuatlan on the Pacific coast, and Tzicoac, Atlan and

Map 5 Provinces Paying No Textile Tribute

to have moved widely and easily from lowlands to highlands; the

Illustration 1 The Tlilpapatlauac Cloak Design

Illustration 2 The Ocuilteca Cloak Design

rather than state imposed policies and demands. I would like to

Map 6 Distribution of Three Distinctive Manta Designs

DE PEDRAZA 21. TLALCOCAUHTITL kN 34. TLATLAUHQUITEPEC

of Cohuaxtlahuacan (Map 6). The third style, cacamoliuhqui, or

Illustration 3 The Cacamoliuhqui Cloak Design

outside Cohuaxtlahuacan move into the region, bringing their tradi-

18. The cacamoliuhqui mantas from Cohuaxtlahuacan province were two

Illustration 4 Tribute From the Province of Cohuaxtlahuacan, with

the people of thi

Cohuaxtlahuacan province is an enigma, for the only cloak

local traditions, movements of peoples through migration, and

Complexities in Cotton Textile Exchange

Map 7 Relationships Among Cotton Growing Areas, Textile Tribute

towns (as opposed to whole provinces) also obtained their raw

Alva Ixtlilxochitl, Fernando de

1985 Markets in the Economy of Aztec Mexico. In Markets an

Cooper Clark, James, ed.

Martyr D'Anghera, Peter

Manuscript in the Museo Nacional de Antropologia, Mex-

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen