Análisis de Vestuario en Los Códices Borgia

Society for American Archaeology

Costume Analysis and the Provenience of the Borgia Group CodicesAuthor(s): Patricia AnawaltSource: American Antiquity, Vol. 46, No. 4 (Oct., 1981), pp. 837-852Published by: Society for American ArchaeologyStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/280110 .

Accessed: 25/02/2015 10:22

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

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

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

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 201.148.81.39 on Wed, 25 Feb 2015 10:22:43 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=sam

http://www.jstor.org/stable/280110?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


pepoRts

COSTUME ANALYSIS AND THE PROVENIENCE OF THE BORGIA GROUP CODICES

Patricia Anawalt

There are indications that future archaeological investigations of the Late Postclassic horizon of the central and eastern Gulf Coast will reveal the existence of several regional artistic subtraditions of the prevailing Mixteca-Puebla horizon style. This would discourage the current pan-"Mixtec" approach to the interpretation of Postclassic Mesoamerican culture. A consequence of this presently confusing practice is the provenience debate concerning the religious Borgia Group codices. An abstract method of costume analysis indicates that these pictorial manuscripts did not originate in the Mixteca because they do not display Mixtec ritual clothing patterns. Data from the costume analysis, together with internal clues from the codices and archaeological and ethnohistorical evidence, demonstrate that the Borgia Group codices had diverse origins. The general Puebla-Tlaxcala region is suggested as the probable homeland for codices Borgia, Cospi, and Vaticanus B. The stylistic twins, Fej6rvary-Mayer and Laud, are assigned to the eastern Gulf Coast.

Recent collaboration between archaeological and ethnohistorical-costume analysis methodology has provided new insight into the artistic-cultural tradition of Late Postclassic central Mex- ican art. As a consequence, the pervasive myth of a monolithic pan-'"'Mixtec" artistic dominance for that time period now needs reassessment.

Vaillant (1938) coined the term "Mixteca-Puebla" to designate the two geographic areas within which the predominant horizon style of the Late Postclassic probably originated. Unfortunately, employment of the linguistic term "Mixtec" for this artistic tradition leads to a false generaliza- tion about the nature of "Mixtec" artistic dominance during this period. The result has been the facile misattribution of items and subjects to the "Mixtec School," a term which has been interpreted too literally.

This problem can be solved by combining information from four major data bases. First, archaeology provides material evidence of distinctive regional variants of the Mixteca-Puebla style. Second, ethnohistorical sources-both sixteenth-century conquistadors' eyewitness accounts and subsequent chronicles of the ethnographer-friars-testify to multiple areas of artistic production in Late Postclassic Mesoamerica. Third, modern ethnography records the survival of certain Pre- Hispanic cultural traditions, which substantiate the findings of archaeology and ethnohistory. Finally, a fourth source for further understanding of the Mixtec problem is costume analysis, an innovative method for analyzing depictions of Pre-Hispanic clothing.

Costume analysis methodology concentrates on the basic cut of a garment. Adequate clothing

Patricia Anawalt, Museum of Cultural History, University of California-Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA 90024

Copyright ? 1981 by the Society for American Archaeology 0002-7316/81/040837-16$2.10/1

837



AMERICAN ANTIQUITY

Figure 1. MIXTEC. Codex Zouche-Nuttal Figure 2. BORGIA GROUP. Codex Vaticanus B (page 50). (page 52).

data are not available in extant Pre-Hispanic sculptures, ceramics, or wall paintings but do exist in the indigenous pictorial books of Mesoamerica. By focusing on the attribute level, it is possible to hold in abeyance the social and religious implications of garments and successfully render data from diverse geographic, contextual, and chronological sources into comparable units for cross- cultural analysis. Multiple garment examples are necessary for such analysis, in order to adjust for possible idiosyncrasies of individual artists or aberrant costume depictions.

While the general geographic origin of most Pre-Hispanic codices is established the proveni- ences of five of these pictorials, known collectively as the Borgia Group codices, are unknown. This uncertainty has implicated the Borgia Group with the pan-Mixtec attribution problem. Analysis of the clothing depicted in these native documents has shed light on both the Borgia Group provenience debate and the Mixtec muddle. This study, then, provides an analysis of material culture distribution in order to demonstrate the existence of several distinct-although related-artistic cultural traditions, the separate nature of which has received insufficient atten- tion from scholars to date. The study should therefore be of interest to students of archaeology as well as of ethnohistory and art history.

Figure 3. MIXTEC. Codex Vindobonensis obverse (page 1).

Figure 4. BORGIA GROUP. Codex Fej6rv6ry- Mayer (page 32).

838 [Vol. 46, No. 4,19811



REPORTS

Figure 5. MIXTEC. Codex Becker I (page 16). Figure 6. BORGIA GROUP. Codex Laud (page 3D).

The distinctive collection of Pre-Hispanic religious documents known as the Borgia Group codices is comprised of five core pictorial manuscripts: Borgia, Vaticanus B, Cospi, Fejervary- Mayer, and Laud. Treated as a single entity because of similarities in style and content (Glass and Robertson 1975:99-100), they probably served as manuals for priests and diviners. Yet the Borgia Group pictorials offer few standard clues to their origin.

Over the years four possible homelands have been suggested for the Borgia Group codices: (1) the Puebla-Oaxaca border area (Seler 1963); (2) The Tlaxcala-Puebla region (Caso 1927; Nicholson 1966:153-154); (3) the Gulf Coast (Seler 1904:324; Nicholson 1966:152-153); (4) the Mixteca, heartland of the Mixtec Indians in Oaxaca (Toscano 1952; Robertson 1963; Furst 1978). Of the four only the Mixteca contains a corpus of pictorial data comparable to that of the Borgia Group codices, a fact stressed by supporters of a Mixtec origin. Those who hold this view claim that the Borgia Group pictorials are the religious counterparts to the Mixtec historical- genealogical codices.

In analyzing the costumes shown in the Borgia Group codices, I compared them with garments from five Mixtec historical-genealogical codices: Becker I, Bodley, Colombino, Selden (compiled in the mid-sixteenth century but nonetheless depicting only Pre-Hispanic clothing), Zouche-

Figure 7. MIXTEC. Codex Vindobonensis Figure 8. BORGIA GROUP. Codex Fejervdry- obverse (page 26). Mayer (page 3).

839

I .



o 0~

Table 1. Comparison of the Mixtec and Borgia Group Codices Costume Repertories.

Garment Mixtec Codices Borgia Groups Codices

Maxtiati CODEX VINDOBONENSIS obverse: 15% of the Examples of decorated maxtlatl: maxtlatl are decorated CODEX BORGIA: 55%

CODEX VATICANUS B: 68% CODEX COSPI: 11% CODEX FEJERVARY-MAYER: 68% CODEX LAUD: 18%

Hip-cloth CODEX VINDOBONENSIS obverse: all hip-cloths CODEX BORGIA and CODEX COSPI: all hip-cloths are decorated are decorated

CODEX VATICANUS B: 68% are decorated CODEX FEJERVARY-MAYER: 17% decorated CODEX LAUD: 18% decorated

Male Capes CODEX VINDOBONENSIS obverse: 2 male capes CODEX BORGIA: 2 CODEX VATICANUS B: 0 CODEX COSPI: 5 CODEX FEJERVARY-MAYER: 12 CODEX LAUD: 9 (2 are the only back capes in the Borgia

Group)

Kilt CODEX VINDOBONENSIS obverse: 8 CODEX BORGIA: none CODEX VINDOBONENSIS reverse: 2 CODEX VATICANUS B: approximately 19 CODEX ZOUCHE-NUTTALL: 1 CODEX COSPI: 1(?) CODEX COLOMBINO: 2 CODEX FEJERVARY-MAYER: 5

CODEX LAUD: 7

Female Chest Capes No female chest capes appear in the Mixtec Codies CODEX BORGIA: 0 (quemitl) CODEX VATICANUS B: 1

CODEX COSPI: 0 CODEX FEJERVARY-MAYER: 3 CODEX LAUD: 6

>

m

c)

z

z

-< 70 a

0

z p

oo

CD



Female skirt worn topless The Mixtec Codices contain only one topless female, The Borgia Group Codices all contain repeated depictions a child of topless females

Rounded and triangular The Mixtec Codices have no really short, rounded The Borgia Group Codices contain a number of very Quechquemitl quechquemitl short, rounded quechquemitli

The Mixtec Codices contain no quechquemitl + The Borgia Group Codices contain a number of maxtlatl = androgynous figures quechquemitl + maxtlatl = androgynous figures

Xicolli The red xicolli is the principal male garment of the The Borgia Group Codices contain only two xicolli Mixtec Codices. The white-with-black design xicolli depictions (CODEX FEJERVARY-MAYER and CODEX is the priestly garment LAUD). Both are priests but neither xicolli is white-

with- black designs

Armor The Mixtec Codices contain only a few depictions of The Borgia Group Codices contain no depictions of armor cotton and animal skin armor CODEX VINDOBONENSIS contains none

Robe Eleven robes occur in the Mixtec Codices. The Borgia Group Codices contain 48 robes: CODEX VINDOBONENSIS obverse: 3 CODEX BORGIA: 0 CODEX ZOUCHE-NUTTALL obverse: 8 CODEX VATICANUS B: 13

CODEX COSPI: 9 CODEX FEJERVARY-MAYER: 19 CODEX LAUD: 7

Huipil The Mixtec Codices contain very few huipil The Borgia Group contain very few huipil

Limb-encasing, ceremonial The Mixtec Codices contain at least 123 jaguar, puma, The Borgia Group Codices contain only two of these costumes and eagle costumes costumes, both jaguar (CODEX BORGIA and CODEX

LAUD)

m m -o 0

-i C,,



AMERICAN ANTIQUITY

Figure 9. MIXTEC. Codex Zouche-Nuttall Figure 10. BORGIA GROUP. Codex Laud (page 12). (page 15D).

Nuttal, and Codex Vindobonensis obverse. The latter pictorial is emphasized in the costume analysis because it is the only complete Mixtec religious pictorial extant, and hence it is the Mixtec document most analogous to the Borgia Group. It apparently tells the Mixtec creation myth and in- cludes a range of deities, or their impersonators, all clad in appropriate attire. Deity clothing also appears in the Borgia Group codices which depict rituals, divinatory calendars, patheons, and general religious ideologies.

The costume analysis (Anawalt 1975, 1981) initially involved selecting 102 typical examples of 12 different garment types. They were then organized into a series of comparative charts (Anawalt 1975:186, 205, 235, 248, 259, 266) according to five basic principles of garment con- struction.

COSTUME ANALYSIS

A summation of the costume analysis appears on Table 1, which compares the 12 types of clothing which occur in the Mixtec and Borgia Group codices. The initial category is the loincloth or maxtlatl. (This Nahuatl word regularly appears in the colonial sources throughout Mesoameri- ca, in keeping with the Spanish practice of applying Nahuatl terms in non-Nahuatl speaking areas.) The loincloth was a single piece of long narrow material that was wrapped around the waist several times, passed between the legs, and then tied at the back in such a manner that the ends of the cloth hung down in front and back (Figures 1, 2). Three of the five Borgia Group codices have more decorated loincloths (anything but unadorned pure white) than does Vin- dobonensis obverse.

The hip cloth is also found in both groups and is similar in both (Figures 3, 4). The indigenous term for this costume is unknown. Analogous modern garments (Anawalt 1975:71-76) suggest that it consisted of a square of material folded diagonally and then tied around the hips.

A third category of Table 1 is male capes, single webs of material that tied at the neck and were worn either over the chest or back (Figures 5, 6). Seler (1901-1902:122) referred to the chest cape as quemitl, an apronlike garment which was fastened around the neck of idols.

Male kilts, short skirtlike garments composed of closely spaced vertical panels, appear in both

842 [Vol. 46, No. 4,1981]

IV



REPORTS

Figure 11. MIXTEC. Codex Zouche-Nuttall Figure 12. BORGIA GROUP. Codex Fej6rv6ry- (page 30). Mayer (page 30).

groups, particularly on depictions of Tialoc representations and skeletal deities (Figures 7, 8). It is probable that the kilt was utilized mainly as a special-purpose ritual costume. There is no reference to it in the colonial sources, hence the mystery about its indigenous name.

The fifth and sixth categories, female capes and skirts, point up the first marked contrast between the two costume groups. The Mixtec codices display no females wearing quemitl, the chest cape, but such depictions do occur in the Borgia Group pictorials (Figures 9, 10).

Females undressed above the waist-wearing only a wraparound skirt-are a common occurrence in the Borgia Group (Figure 12) but almost nonexistent in the Mixtec pictorials. The sole ex- ample is a depiction of a child (Figure 11). This marked contrast indicates a significant variation in cultural practices.


Figure 14. BORGIA GROUP. Codex Fejerv6ry- Mayer (page 28).

843



AMERICAN ANTIQUITY

Figure 15. MIXTEC. Codex Selden (page 5). Figure 16. BORGIA GROUP. Codex Borgia (page 59).

The seventh category is that of rounded (Figures 13, 14) and triangular (Figures 15, 16) quech- quemiti, a female slip-on garment that covered only the upper torso. In regard to the Mixtec quechquemitl, Heyden (1977:8) suggested that the smaller "triangular" garment was a political status marker, whereas the larger "rounded" type probably was used for warmth. The occurrence of both styles in the religious Borgia Group codices, however, calls into question Heyden's hypothesis that the rounded style was strictly utilitarian. The Borgia Group has a number of very short "rounded" quechquemitl (see Figure 14), whereas the Mixtec pictorials have none. The im- plication is that "rounded" quechquemitl also carried a particular meaning.

The second marked contrast between the two costume groups is the occurrence in the Borgia Group codices of androgynous figures who wear female clothing together with the loincloth, the

Figure 17. BORGIA GROUP. Codex Laud (page 20).

Figure 18. BORGIA GROUP. Codex Vaticanus B (page 89).

844 [Vol. 46, No. 4, 1981 ]



REPORTS

Figure 19. MIXTEC. Codex Bodley (page 14). Figure 20. MIXTEC. Codex Selden (page 14).

quintessential male garment (Figures 17, 18). Such bisexual figures do not occur in any of the Mix- tec codices, an omission suggestive of different cultural milieux.

The third marked contrast between the Mixtec and Borgia Group costume depictions occurs in the eighth category of Table 1, that of the xicolli, a short jacket with a diagnostic fringe or other- wise delineated hem area. This garment occurs repeatedly in the Mixtec codices: in red as the nobles' standard apparel (Figure 19) and in the priests' diagnostic white-with-black-designs style (Figure 20). The xicolli appears 30 times in the 52 pages of the Mixtec ritual pictorial Vindo- bonensis obverse. In contrast, in the entire Borgia Group only two xicolli are found (Figures 21,

Figure 21. BORGIA GROUP. Codex Laud (page 8).

Figure 22. BORGIA GROUP. Codex Fejerv6ry- Mayer (page 27).

845



AMERICAN ANTIQUITY

Figure 23. MIXTEC. Codex Zouche-Nuttall Figure 24. BORGIA GROUP. Codex Laud (page 40). (page 15D).

22). Both are on priests. However, neither bears the white-with-black designs of the typical Mix- tec priestly xicolli.

Armor comprises a ninth category. Whereas the Mixtec historical genealogical codices contain few examples, neither Vindobonensis obverse nor the Borgia Group contain any.

Both repertories depict the "robe," a long, body-hugging garment that appears to have been a special-purpose ritual costume (Figure 23, 24). The robe is more prevalent in the Borgia Group than in the Mixtec, but never in the white-with-black-designs style that appears on the Mixtec robe-clad priests (Figure 23).

Both the Mixtec and Borgia Group contain a few depictions of the female huipil, a simple blouse (Figures 25, 26).


Figure 26. BORGIA GROUP. Codex Cospi recto (page 1).

[Vol. 46, No. 4, 19811 846



REPORTS

Figure 27. MIXTEC. Codex Vindobonensis Figure 28. MIXTEC. Codex Zouche-Nuttall obverse (page 4). (page 45).

The final category of Table 1 is that of limb-encasing ceremonial costumes, which represent the fourth marked difference between the two costume traditions. The Mixtec codices display three styles of these garments: jaguar, puma, and eagle. Since the costumes encase the entire body, I assume that at least portions of the garments were woven, man-made facsimiles of the actual skins. These ceremonial costumes occur repeatedly throughout the Mixtec codices (Figures 27, 28). Codex Vindobonensis obverse contains 19 such costumes (11 eagle suits, 1 puma, 7 jaguar). In marked contrast, the entire Borgia Group contains only two such garments, both jaguar suits (Figures 29, 30).

To sum up, as Table 1 indicates, while there are many similarities between the two costume traditions there are four significant differences:

(1) Bare-chested females. In the entire Mixtec corpus there is only one depiction of a bare- chested female, a child. In contrast, such depictions appear repeatedly throughout the Borgia Group codices.

(2) Androgynous figures. The Mixtec corpus contains no figures who wear the male loincloth together with traditional female clothing. In contrast, such depictions appear a number of times in the Borgia Group codices.

(3) Xicolli distribution. In the Mixtec codices both the aristocratic red xicolli and the priestly black-and-white style appear repeatedly. In contrast, the five core members of the Borgia Group contain only two xicolli, both worn by priests but in neither case is the garment the Mixtec ritual black-with-white style.

(4) Limb-encasing ceremonial costume distribution. In the Mixtec corpus there are at least 123 jaguar, puma, and eagle costumes. In contrast, two jaguar suits are the only such costumes in the entire Borgia Group, indicating contrasting ceremonial accoutrements.

It is clear that the differences between the two costume traditions here described are significant enough to suggest that they are reflections of different cultural milieux. The costume evidence indicates that the Borgia Group codices cannot be of Mixtec origin because they do not depict what we know to have been Mixtec ceremonial clothing patterns. Therefore, in order to determine the homeland of these books, a combination of internal clues from the codices and ethnohistorical as well as archaeological evidence must be added to the picture. The data from these sources suggest that the five Borgia Group codices originated in diverse areas.

847



AMERICAN ANTIQUITY

Figure 29. BORGIA GROUP. Codex Laud Figure 30. BORGIA GROUP. Codex Borgia (page 13D). (page 60).

THE PROPOSED PROVENIENCE OF THE BORGIA GROUP CODICES

The evidence associating Codex Borgia with the important Pre-Hispanic center of Cholula is im- pressive. There are stylistic similarities between Cholula polychrome pottery and the pictorials, as well as repeated representations in the codex of the god particularly important to the Nahuatl speakers, Tezcatlipoca. Archaeological evidence further corroborates this association. In 1927 a buried temple was excavated at Tizatlan in Tlaxcala city. Within were two plaster-covered altars with polychrome paintings. A close stylistic resemblance was noted between the paintings and Codex Borgia, particularly in a representation of Tezcatlipoca (Caso 1927). This resemblance sug- gests that Borgia comes from a region where this capricious, omniscient god was a paramount deity. The Puebla-Tlaxcala area was just such an area, one of three of the largest centers for the Tez-

catlipoca cult (Nicholson 1963:35). Torquemada (1943-1944: 11:254) states that pilgrims came from as far as beyond Guatemala to the god's shrine near Atlixco, which emphasizes Tez- catlipoca's importance in the Puebla-Tlaxcala region.

Archaeologists Chadwick and MacNeish (1967) propose a nearby homeland for Borgia. They stress the similarities of the "eared" thatch roofs of the Tehuacan Valley house types and those depicted in Borgia (a similarity first noted by Nicholson [1966:150]) plus the marked resemblance between the Venta Salada phase ceramic vessels of Tehuacan and containers which appear in the Codex. Chadwick and MacNeish suggest that the codex was executed in the Tehuacan Valley. I, however, while inclined to accept their basic argument, agree with Nicholson

(1966:153-154) in favoring the area farther to the north in the general Cholula region. The evidence for this attribution consists of (1) resemblance between the "tipo codice" designs of Cholula polychrome and stylistic-iconographic devices seen in Codex Borgia, (2) the iconographic similarities between the pictorial representations of the codex and the Tizatlan altarpiece, and (3) the repeated occurrence of Tezcatlipoca in the codex.

Codex Cospi is stylistically similar to Borgia and evinces an even closer resemblance to the Tizatlan altar paintings. It thus seems logical to attribute this to the Puebla-Tlaxcala region as well. This may also be the best presently attainable attribution for Codex Vaticanus B. While it resembles Borgia, it is much sketchier in both content and style and aesthetically much inferior.

848 [Vol. 46, No. 4,1981]



REPORTS

It is only with the two remaining Borgia Group pictorials, the stylistic twins Fejervary-Mayer and Laud, that primary emphasis shifts to the central-eastern Gulf Coast. For the Late Postclassic, this area is archaeologically poorly known. While it is understandable that emphasis has hitherto been on Preclassic Olmec sites and subsequent Classic period Maya connections, enough work has now been done to demonstrate that the region was a center for an elaborate polychrome ceramic tradition of the Postclassic-a tradition which produced vessels that occasionally display "tipo codice" representations. Such pieces resemble the distinctive polychrome ware of the great central Mexican religious and manufacturing center of Cholula. This is supported by both Drucker's (1943) work at Cerro de las Mesas-which revealed a late ceramic phase almost identical to Cholula polychrome-and Medellin Zenil's (1952, 1955, 1960) archaeological surveys of that region. The influence of the polychrome ceramic tradition of Cholula on the local assem- blage of Cempoallan, Veracruz, was so great that Garcia Payon (1949:471) dubbed this center "un vastago de Cholula" (cf. Noguera 1954:295). Cempoallan also sent pilgrims to Cholula for rituals. Obviously, the stylistic-iconographic tradition of central Mexico influenced this section of the Gulf Coast.

Prior to the Spanish conquest the central-eastern Veracruz area was thriving. The natives of the region were famous for their skill in painting cotton mantles (Alvarado Tezozomoc 1944:308-309) and also had the reputation of being particularly knowledgeable in ritual and divinatory lore. They were descendants of the Tlamatinime, the wise men of legendary Tamoan- chan, who were supposed to have migrated to this eastern coastal region, taking with them the sacred ritual books (Anderson and Dibble 1950-1969, Bk. 10:187-188, 190-192). Among other names the area was known as Tlillan Tlapallan, place of writings.

This region of the Gulf Coast, reknowned for craftsmen skilled in painting and priests steeped in esoteric religious lore, well may be the homeland of the beautifully drawn and intellectually abstract Fejervary-Mayer and Laud codices. As we have seen, these codices contain recurring Gulf Coast features: emphasis on the area's mother goddess Tlazolteotl-Ixcuinan; arm bands and axes; resemblances in a universe diagram between Fejervary-Mayer and Lowland Maya Codex Madrid; and the frequency of bare-chested females.

Bare-chested females were typical of the central-eastern Veracruz tropical zone. While admit- tedly there is no necessary correlation between seminudity and warm climate (recall the nudity practiced in the harsh environment of Tierra del Fuego), the repeated occurrence of bare-chested females in the Borgia Group codices may well be a provenience indicator. With only one excep- tion-a child-bareness occurs neither in the Mixtec codices nor in the Aztec pictorials (depictions of bare-chested Aztec females are almost always stone sculptures, mother goddesses, whose exposed breasts emphasize their maternal aspect). In the central-eastern Gulf Coast, however, bare-chested women were typical of the area well into the twentieth century (Covarrubias 1947:43-47).

A further argument in support of a Gulf Coast provenience for Fejervary-Mayer and Laud in- volves the propensity of the Spanish for collecting native books in that region. It is understandable that the Europeans should be fascinated with these exotic pictorials at that particular time and place. Central Veracruz was the first area where the conquistadors landed and remained recon- noitering for 5 months; Cempoallan was the first large Mesoamerican city they visited. We have proof that the Spaniards acquired indigenous documents during this period. In the July 6,1519, in- ventory of gifts sent back by Cortes are listed two native books (Pagden 1971:40-46) for which honor there are presently a number of pictorial contenders (Nicholson 1966:148-149), Fejervary- Mayer and Laud among them. However, the sixteenth-century chronicler Peter Martyr tells us that a number of books arrived back in Spain. He also describes these pictorials as being made of paper rather than animal skin, the material used for all the Borgia Group codices (MacNutt 1912:11:40-41). It is just possible that Martyr could have had such a strong impression of the exotic native paper that he failed to note the true composition of the two deerskin codices. It is more probable, however, that Fejervary-Mayer and Laud originated to the east of Cempoallan and were collected later.

849



AMERICAN ANTIQUITY

These stylistic twins among the Borgia Group contain internal clues-the combining of a "streamlined Mixtec style" (Nicholson 1966:155) with Gulf Coast iconography-which point to origins in an area touched by both traditions. Ethnohistorical evidence substantiates this. In eastern Veracruz, lying in the drainage of the Papaloapan-Coatzacoalcos rivers, is the Chinantla region. In Pre-Hispanic times this area was a key geographic and cultural transition zone between the Mixteca and Gulf Coast. It was also a profitable gold-producing region, and hence provided a raison d'etre for the first Spaniard's visit to the area. In the winter of 1519-1520 Diego de Ordaz was sent by Cort6s to evaluate the Chinantla region (Wagner 1969:242-244, 386). In addition to his usual Spanish obsession with gold, Ordaz was also an enthusiastic souvenir collector. There is a record of a "giant's bone" he took from a native temple (MacNutt 1912:11:189) and he is claimed to have been fascinated by seeing paintings of "devils." Ordaz returned to Spain as a procurador for Cortes in late 1521 or early 1522. This trip is also associated with a usually neglected second small shipment of Cortesian gifts to the Crown (Wagner 1969:326).

It is quite possible, of course, that there was never any documentation of the Borgia Group twin's exodus from Mexico, and hence the above speculations are spurious. The first records of Fejervary-Meyer and Laud in Europe are late and of no help with the provenience problem. Never- theless, the content, style, and iconography of these two unique pictorials definitely point toward the eastern Gulf Coast origin. It is therefore not illogical to suggest that the inveterate souvenir hunter Ordaz also may have carried back to Spain, along with his famous "giant's bone," these two magnificently executed codices.

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

The five core members of the Borgia Group codices have come to be regarded as a single corpus because, when compared with other Mesoamerican ritual manuscripts, they are more like each other than any other pictorials. Because the Borgia codices lack standard provenience clues, their homeland has been a matter of debate. Some scholars, drawing on stylistic similarities, have assigned these pictorials to the Mixtec. This attribution has been shown to be faulty through an innovative method of costume analysis. Data garnered from the costume analysis, internal clues from the pictorials, and ethnohistorical and archaeological evidence demonstrate that the Borgia Group codices actually have diverse origins separated in space but nevertheless reflecting a Mixteca-Puebla art tradition. The Mixtec codices also reflect this pervasive Late Postclassic horizon style, and it is at this level of shared influence that they resemble the five core pictorials of the Borgia Group.

The general Puebla-Tlaxcala region is suggested as the probable homeland for codices Borgia, Cospi, and Vaticanus B. The stylistic twins Fejervary-Mayer and Laud are consigned to the Gulf Coast. The determination of diverse origins for the Borgia Group codices indicates that several distinctive-although related-regional artistic subtraditions of the Mixteca-Puebla style were in existence in the Late Postclassic.

The results of the ethnohistorical-costume analysis study point to central-eastern Veracruz as a particularly auspicious region for future archaeological research into this question. My work indicates that the most promising areas are those suggested by Nicholson (1963:55-64): the regions somewhat north of Cempoallan to at least the Tabasco border in the south, with special emphasis on the Tuxtepec and lower Papaloapan, Playa Vicente, Los Tuxtlas, and Coatzacoalcos zones. Certainly, the explicitly detailed pictorials Fejervary-Mayer and Laud contain representations of a variety of ritual objects and structures of originally imperishable materials which are potential- ly available for archaeological discovery. Another find on the order of the Tizatlan altar might prove a major turning point in our understanding of the artistic-cultural tradition of Late Post- classic Mesoamerica.

Acknowledgments. I wish to thank H. B. Nicholson for his help with this article. A number of other people have also contributed to early drafts of the paper: Frances Berdan, Christopher Donnan, Doris Heyden, P. A.

850 [Vol. 46, No. 4,1981]



REPORTS

Parsons, and anonymous reviewers. Jean Sells did the fine-line tracings of the figures from photographs taken by Susan Einstein.

REFERENCES CITED

Alvarado Tezozomoc, Hernando 1944 Cronica mexicana escrita hacia el aflo de 1598. Notas del Manuel Orozco y Berra. Editorial Leyenda,

Mexico, D. F. Anawalt, Patricia

1975 Pan-Mesoamerican costume repertory at the time of Spanish contact. Ph.D. dissertation, University of California-Los Angeles. University Microfilms, Ann Arbor. No. 76-8973.

1981 Indian clothing before Cortes: Mesoamerican costumes from the codices. University of Oklahoma Press, Norman, in press.

Anderson, Arthur J. O., and Charles E. Dibble 1950-1969 Florentine Codex: general history of the things of New Spain. Fray Bernardino Sahagin.

Edited by Arthur J. 0. Anderson and Charles E. Dibble. 11 vols. Monographs of the School of American Research, Number 14, Parts 2-13. University of Utah and School of American Research, Santa Fe.

Caso, Alfonso 1927 Las ruinas de Tizatlan. Revista Mexicana de Estudios Historias I:139-172.

Chadwick, Robert, and R. S. MacNeish 1967 The Codex Borgia and the Venta Salada phase. In Prehistory of the Tehuacan Valley, environment

and subsistence (vol 1), edited by D. S. Byers, pp. 114-131. University of Texas Press, Austin. Codex Becker I

1961 Codex Becker I/II. Museum fur V61kerkunde, Wein. Inv. Nr. 60306 and 60307. Akademische Druck- und Verlagsanstalt, Graz.

Codex Bodley 1960 Codex Bodley. Facsimile edition of a Mexican painting preserved in the collection of Sir Thomas Bod-

ley, Bodleian Library, Oxford, interpreted by A. Caso, translated by R. Morales, revised by J. Paddock. Sociedad Mexicana de Antropologia, M6xico. D. F.

Codex Borgia 1963 Codex Borgia. In Comentarios al Codice Borgia. Eduard Seler. 2 vols. and facsimile reproduction of

the Codex. Fondo de Cultura Econ6mica, Mexico, D. F. Codex Colombino

1966 Codex Colombino. Interpretation of the codex by A. Caso. Glosses by Mary Elizabeth Smith, with a facsimile of the codex. Sociedad Mexicana de Antropologia, Mexico, D. F.

Codex Cospi 1968 Codex Cospi (Calendario Messicano 4093), Biblioteca Universitaria, Bologna. Einleitung und Sum-

mary: K. A. Nowotny. Akademische Druck-und Verlagsanstalt, Graz. Codex Fej6rvary-Mayer

1971 Codex Fejerv6ry-Mayer (12014 M) City of Liverpool Museums. Introduction: C. A. Burland. Aka- demische Druck-und Verlagsanstalt, Graz.

Codex Laud 1966 Codex Laud (MS Laud Misc. 678, Bodleian Library). True-color facsimile of the old Mexican manu-

script. Introduction by Cottie Burland. Akademische Druck-und Verlagsanstalt, Graz. Codex Selden

1964 Codex Selden 3135 (A.2). Interpretation of the codex by A. Caso, translated by J. Quirarte, revised by J. Paddock, with a facsimile of the codex. Sociedad Mexicana de Antropologia, M6xico, D. F.

Codex Vaticanus B 1972 Codex Vaticanus B. (Codex Vaticanus 3773), Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana. Einleitung summary und

resumen: Ferdinand Anders. Akademische Druck-und Verlagsanstalt, Graz. Codex Vindobonensis Mexicanus I

1974 Codex Vindobonensis Mexicanus I. Vollstiindige Faksimile-Ausgabe im originalformat. History and description of the manuscript: Otto Adelhoder. Akademische Druck-und Verlagstanstalt, Graz.

Codex Zouche-Nuttall 1902 Codex Zouche-Nuttall: facsimile of an ancient Mexican codex belonging to Lord Zouche of Haryn(g)

worth England. Peabody Museum of American Archaeology and Ethnology, Cambridge. Covarrubias, Miguel

1947 Mexico south: the Isthmus of Tehuantepec. Cassell, London. Drucker, Philip

1943 Ceramic stratigraphy at Cerro de las Mesas, Veracruz, Mexico. Smithsonian Institution, Bureau of American Ethnology, Bulletin, 141.

851



AMERICAN ANTIQUITY

Furst, Jill Leslie 1978 Codex Vindobonensis Mexicanus I: A Commentary. Institute for Mesoamerican Studies, State Uni-

versity of New York at Albany, Publication No. 4. Albany. Garcia, Pay6n, J.

1949 Zempoala: compendio de su estudio arqueolo6gico. Uni-ver 1:449-476. Glass, John B., in collaboration with Donald Robertson

1975 A census of native Middle American pictorial manuscripts. In Handbook of Middle American In- dians (vol 14), general editor Robert Wauchope, pp. 81-252. University of Texas Press, Austin.

Heyden, Doris 1977 The quechquemitl as a symbol of power in the Mixtec codices. Vicus cuadernos, Arqueologia, Antro-

pologia Cultural, Etnologia I:5-24. MacNutt, F. A.

1912 Anghiera, Pietro Martire d', 1455-1526. De orbe novo, the eight Decades of Peter Martyr d'Anghera, translated from the Latin, with notes and introduction by Francis Angustus MacNutt. 2 vols. G. P. Putnam's Sons: New York and London.

Medellin Zenil, A. 1952 Exploraciones en Quauhtochco. Gobierno del estado de Veracruz, Departamento de Antropologia,

Jalapa. 1955 Exploraci6n en la Isla de Sacrificios. Gobierno del estado de Veracruz, Jalapa. 1960 Cerdmicas del Totonacapan: exploraciones arqueol6gicas en el centro de Veracruz, Jalapa.

Nicholson, H. B. 1963 The problem of the provenience of the members of the "Codex Borgia Group." Ms. in possession of

author. 1966 The problem of the provenience of the members of the "Codex Borgia Group": a summary. In Suma

antropologica en homenaje a Roberto J. Weitlaner, pp. 145-158. Instituto Nacional de Antropologia e Historia, Mexico, D. F.

Noguera, Eduardo 1954 La cer6mica arqueologica de Cholula. Editorial Guarania, Mexico, D. F.

Pagden, A. R. 1971 Hernan Cortes, translated and edited by A. R. Pagden. Grossman, New York.

Robertson, Donald 1963 The style of the Borgia Group of Mexican pre-conquest manuscripts. In Studies in western art (vol. 3),

edited by M. Meiss and others, pp. 148-164. 20th International Congress on the History of Art. Seler, Eduard

1901-1902 Codex Fejerv6ry-Mayer. Published at the expense of His Excellency, the Duke of Loubat, Ber- lin and London.

1904 Wall paintings at Mitla. Smithsonian Institution, Bureau of American Ethnology, Bulletin 28:243-324. 1963 Codex Borgia. Comentarios al Codice Borgia. 2 vols. and facsimile reproduction of the codex. Fondo

de Cultura Economica, Mexico, D. F. Torquemada, Juan de

1943-1944 Monarquia Indiana, edited by Salvador Chaves Hayhoe. 3 Vols. M6xico, D. F. Toscano, Salvador

1952 Arte precolombino de Mexico y la America Central. M6xico, D. F. Vaillant, George

1938 A correlation of archaeological and historical sequences in the Valley of Mexico. American Anthro- pologist 40:535-573.

Wagner, Henry R. 1969 The rise of Fernando Cortes. Originally published in 1944 by The Cortes Society. Kraus Reprint, New

York.

852 [Vol. 46, No. 4,1981]



Documents

Análisis de Vestuario en Los Códices Borgia