Regional communications in ancient Mesoamerica: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added
cleanup, first pass
fix
Line 60:
An elemental piece of this discussion was provided by Bernal Diaz del Castillo,<ref name=Diaz >{{cite journal |last= Diaz del Castillo |first= Bernal |year=1976 |title= Historia de la conquista de Nueva España |trans-title=History of the conquest of new Spain |publisher= Editorial Porrúa |location=México |edition=11th Edition |language=es |page=396}}</ref> who mentioned that once they took over Tenochtitlan (1521 CE), lords from Tehuantepec came before Cortes to ask for help in fighting one of their neighbors, Tututepec, whom were battling them constantly. Cortes sent Pedro de Alvarado who in time conquered Tututepec. It is interesting understanding the Tututepec political expansion and their western wars against the Mexicas, near Ometepec, Guerrero and to the east with Tehuantepec, they had blocked that route during the Mesoamerican postclassical period.<ref name=Icon />
 
There are many debates related to the definition of specific sculptures styles,<ref name=Christa >{{cite book |last= Schieber de Lavarreda |first= Christa |year= 1999|title= Taller arqueología de la región de la Costa Sur de Guatemala |trans-title=Archaeological workshop of southern Guatemala region |publisher= Ministerio de Cultura y Deportes |location= Guatemala |language=es |pages=1–10 }}</ref> in general terms the Parsons proposal<ref name=Parsons >{{cite journal book|last= Parsons |first= Lee A |chapter= Post-Olmec Stone Sculpture: The Olmec-Izapan Transition on the Southern Pacific Coast and Highlands |title=The Olmec and Their Neighbors |editor=E. Benson|publisher=Dumbarton Oaks |location= Washington, D.C. |pages=257–288}}</ref> is accepted, in the sense that there is a mesoamerican sculpture tradition from the preclassical to the postclassical periods, with divergent lines, some of which disappear and others with evolving styles from regional development, and that at the same time, with cross information from a region to another, that there are spectacular fashion styles that may vanish at a point in time, only to return adapted to new conditions.<ref name=Icon />
 
This process has an effect in the chronology, makes an exact dating of pieces troublesome, the problem is compounded because the majority of the pieces lost their original context, some from prehispanic times.<ref name=Icon />
Line 67:
Based on the presence of a ceramic style pottery shaped as pots (Tecomates), found in the Tlapa and Huamuxtitlán, it is known that the region had an early cultural development predating the Olmecs.<ref name=Icon />
 
A female ceramic figurine from the Huamuxtitlán valley indicates an archaeological occupation of eastern Guerrero State, contemporary to the Chiapas Ocós Phase (1500–1350 BCE);<ref name=C&M >{{cite documentbook|last= Mary E. Pye |first= Clark, John E. |year=2002 |chapter= Re-Visiting the Mixe-Zoque, Slighted Neighbors and Predecessors of the Early Lowland Maya |title=Southern Maya in the Late Preclassic |editor1=M. Love |editor2=R. Rosensweig |publisher=University of Colorado, Boulder |location=Colorado }}</ref> while the appearance of Olmec type figures in [[Marquelia]] at the [[Costa Chica of Guerrero|Costa Chica]], could prove an Olmec transition process, as proposed for [[Mazatán, Chiapas]] during the Cherla and Cuadros Phases (1350–1150 BCE).<ref name=Clark >{{cite journal |last= Clark |first= John E. |year=1990 |title= Olmecas, olmequismo y olmequización en Mesoamérica |trans-title=Olmecs, olmequism and olmequization in Mesoamerica |journal= Arqueología |location= México |language=es |volume=3 |pages=49–56}}</ref> See [http://www.asociaciontikal.com/pdf/54_-_Mary_Pye.pdf Figure 4 of Huamuxtitlán and Figure 5 Marquelia Page 927]
 
===Mid-Preclassical Period (900-500 BCE)===