Content area
Teljes szöveg
INTRODUCTION
The political, economic, and social changes that swept across Mesoamerica after the close of the Late Classic period (a.d. 600-800) has been a central issue since the advent of scholarly interest in pre-Hispanic history. Evidence for increasing political and ideological links between western and eastern Mesoamerica were first documented at the cities of Tula and Chichen Itza (Chi Cheen Itza1). Early theories to explain pan-Mesoamerican links in architecture and material culture combined indigenous historical accounts recorded during the contact period to interpret the historical links between the two cities. This research drew on indigenous accounts charting migrations and invasions of historical figures, lineages, and ethnic groups as a basic framework to understand sociopolitical dynamics originating at the close of the Classic period. In these narratives, archaeological evidence for increasing links between eastern and western Mesoamerica including distinctive forms of architecture, urban planning, and art styles were associated with the spread of "Mexican" groups with links to the Gulf Coast and central Mexico (Pollock et al. 1962; Roys 1962; Thompson 1970). Central themes in these reconstructions included (typically facile) correlations between material culture traits and historically documented groups, including the Itza, Olmeca Xicallanca, Toltec, Putun, and Nonoalca. Subsequent research has challenged or contradicted many of the central elements of these models, particularly chronological relationships between "Old" and "New" Chichen Itza and its relationship with Tula (see contributions in Kowalski and Kristan-Graham 2007).
A central figure in many indigenous accounts was the mythical personage or god Quetzalcoatl/Kukulcan (see Glossary and Appendix B). The nature and significance of this figure as a historical individual, mythical ruler, or deity--and his relation to Feathered Serpent iconography--has been a source of significant debate (Baldwin 1998; Florescano 1999; Gillespie 1989; López Austin 1973; López Austin and López Luján 1999, 2000; Nicholson 2001; Ringle et al. 1998). While uncritical acceptance of indigenous narratives as historically accurate accounts and projection of these sources into the pre-Hispanic era is problematic (Gillespie 2007; Gunsenheimer 2003; Smith 2007), indigenous histories provide an important window into the role of migration and foundation myths in political narratives late in the pre-Hispanic era.
Contemporary views of the relationship between increasing similarities in political/religious symbolism, iconography, architecture, and material culture traditions have shifted from invasion and migration...