The Griffin Fragment: A Mixtec Drinking Vessel Portraying the Place Sign for "Hill of

the Turkey"
Author(s): John M. D. Pohl
Source: Record of the Art Museum, Princeton University, Vol. 64 (2005), pp. 80-90
Published by: Princeton University Art Museum
Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/3774837
Accessed: 27-03-2020 19:40 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

Princeton University Art Museum is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and
extend access to Record of the Art Museum, Princeton University

This content downloaded from 132.248.9.8 on Fri, 27 Mar 2020 19:40:35 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
The Griffin Fragment: A Mixtec Drinking Vessel
Portraying the Place Sign for "Hill of the Turkey"
JOHN M. D. POHL
I had been aware that Princeton possessed masterpieces of
Pre-Columbian art, but it was not until I visited the
museum to interview for a position as curator and lecturer
that I learned the extraordinary breadth of the collection. I
was captivated as Faculty Curator Gillett Griffin walked me
around the gallery, relating one remarkable story after
another about how he had located so many of the pieces
and acquired them for the museum. Listening to Gillett's
experiences reminded me of a conference I attended
twenty-five years ago in Palenque, when I first witnessed
Gillett's effect on the field of Classic Maya studies. Scholars
and students had gathered at the palace ruins of Palenque to
devise a systematic approach to deciphering the site's hiero-
glyphic texts. Over the course of a week, people presented
research papers, worked in small groups with whatever photo-
graphs and drawings of the inscriptions existed, and made
daily trips to examine the carved monuments. I was some-
what mystified as to what role a gregarious art historian like
Gillett with an extensive career experience in graphic arts
could play in a world of self-absorbed code-breakers coming
largely from archaeological and linguistic backgrounds. But
as the days passed, I began to realize that Maya language and
material culture were only part of the key to decipherment;
many other clues were hidden in the full-figure narrative
scenes carved in relief on the stone monuments that the
hieroglyphs accompanied. Although it seems obvious today,
at that time scholars could barely tell men from women in
Maya art, much less comprehend the significance of the
arcane ceremonies portrayed.
It was Gillett who was providing so many of the clues to
allegory and metaphor by getting the group to focus on
representations of ritual objects in the reliefs. In many cases, known to archaeologists in the past, should more properly
he knew exactly what these objects were, having seen them
three-dimensionally as accoutrements on figurines-the
wooden statue of a dwarf holding a divining mirror is an
outstanding example-or as actual objects that he had
acquired for the museum. But it was the extraordinary Oaxacan
series kingdoms after A.D. 1300. Most vessels painted in
of painted Maya cylindrical vases in the Princeton collec-
Figure i.The Griffin fragment. Mixtec, Oaxaca, Mexico, A.D. 1300-1500.
Ceramic; 8.o x 6.8 cm. Princeton University Art Museum, gift of
Gillett G. Griffin (2004-268).
This content downloaded from 132.248.9.8 on Fri, 27 Mar 2020 19:40:35 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
tion that would have the greatest impact, for they portrayed
rituals comparable to the Palenque reliefs, including sig-
nificant details that allowed Gillett and his colleagues to
conclude that the events depicted had taken place in the
very palace rooms in which the monuments were displayed.
Contrasting and comparing the results of hieroglyphic
decipherment with analyses of art and ritual led to the real-
ization that what had been thought to be incomprehensible
graphics were nothing less than the paramount rituals
attending royal marriage, accession to high office, and other
affairs that have concerned ancient noble classes the world
over for thousands of years.
Gillett's eye for graphic detail, a subject that recurs
frequently in other papers presented in this publication, is
best exemplified for me by what I refer to here as the Griffin
fragment: an intriguing piece of a ceramic vessel, recently
given to the museum by Gillett himself. The fragment came
to my attention one evening when I was sitting in Gillett's
house looking at slides. Suddenly I spotted something I had
never seen before, a codex-style image of a turkey. Recog-
nizing the superb line-work and painting as akin to such
masterpieces as Codex Nuttall and Codex Vienna, I won-
dered where the fragment was. "It is here!" said Gillett,
heading off to a set of drawers in his dining room and
returning shortly with the actual piece (fig. i), which he
subsequently gave to the museum. The fragment, eight
centimeters high, clearly reflects expert craftsmanship. Its
finished edge indicates that it once was part of a finely made
vessel, but before I could confirm that it was Mixtec (as I
suspected), I needed to determine what kind of vessel it was.
Mixteca-Puebla polychrome ceramics, as they have been
be referred to as Nahua-Mixteca.' Intensive study of the
archaeological ruins of Cholula indicate that the style was
developed there first by Post-Classic Nahuas and then
adopted by confederacies of Mixtecs, Zapotecs, and other
this style were used to serve either chocolate or pulque, a fer-
mented cactus juice. Observing the conjunction between
the primary distribution of the Nahua-Mixteca style and
the constellation of primary marriage alliances of southern
Mexico, we should not be surprised to find allegorical
terms for marriage such as "the pulque is set before the lord
8I
 Ar..

This content downloaded from 132.248.9.8 on Fri, 27 Mar 2020 19:40:35 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Figure 2.Three Mixtec vessels, after objects in the National Museum Figure 3.The Griffin fragment superimposed upon the shape of a
of Anthropology, Mexico City (painting:John Pohl). typical Mixtec tripod olla (drawing:John Pohl).

a b

-i _ Figure 4. (a) Representation of

a gobbler turkey appe
Codex Fejervary-May
ing:John Pohl); (b) M
of the species Meleagri

82

This content downloaded from 132.248.9.8 on Fri, 27 Mar 2020 19:40:35 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
and lady" or chocolate as "dowry."2 Careful examination of
iconographic preferences, and trace-element analyses of the
Wing ofTurkey Head ofTurkey
clay to discover its source have led to the determination of
three basic services of Nahua-Mixteca ceramics.The Nahuas
preferred large serving basins, goblets, and bowls that were
frequently ornamented with shields, skulls, bones, hands,
Place Sign
and human hearts-iconography related to war and
Flowers
sacrifice. Their feasts could be confrontational, resulting in
Wattde h
drunkenness and acts of factional violence.3 The Mixtecs
favored pitchers, tripod ollas, and tripod bowls (fig. 2), many
of which were ornamented with scenes taken directly from
-Base of Hill
the historical codices, thus indicating a close connection A- --0- -( Place Sign
between drinking parties and the recounting of creation
stories and heroic sagas. The decoration of Mixtec serving
ware with symbols for mushrooms, morning glories, and
other hallucinogens suggests that intoxication was a goal in
L5fii" Crenelated Merlons ofTemple Roof
consumption, perhaps to communicate with the ancestors
of the principal families.The Zapotecs were partial to many
of the same forms as the Mixtecs, especially tripod ollas and Figure 5.The Griffin fragment turkey image as a qualifi
pitchers, but favored three-dimensional representations of place-sign substantive yucu, or hill, in the Mixtec pictog
system (drawing:John Pohl).
animals and other spirit beings, such as the deer and hum-
mingbird that were connected to the saga of the god Bezelao
(Pece Lao), Lord Thirteen Flower.
Based on a comparison to the principal Nahua-Mixteca that, in this case, it is in fact the qualifier for a place sign.
vessel forms, the Griffin fragment is clearly Mixtec. From On careful inspection of the base and rear of the turkey's
the preservation of its curvature and its existing height, it head and wing, it is clear that what would ordinarily be the
is possible to determine that it belonged to the rim of a remainder of the body is instead part of a pictographic
tripod olla measuring approximately fifteen centimeters in place sign. Mixtec place signs are composed of four basic
diameter. A surviving portion of the globular body standardized substantives, Hill/ Yucu, River/ Yuta,
confirms the identification of the form, allowing me to Plain!Yodzo, and Town/Nuu.4 The curved base line, the
propose that, with the addition of legs, the whole vessel rounded summit, and the striations of a stratigraphic
stood approximately twenty to twenty-five centimeters matrix indicate that this is a place sign for a kingdom called
high (fig. 3). Close examination of the pictographic "Hill of the Turkey" (fig. 5).
imagery indicates that the image of the bird possesses a
wattle at the neck and a snood at the head that typify the
turkey male or gobbler of Meleagris gallopavo. It is also
HILL OF THE TURKEY IN THE MITLA
known in common Nahuatl-derived parlance as the gua-
LINTEL PAINTINGS
jolote, one of only three species of domesticated animals in
Mesoamerica (fig. 4). Given that Mixtec serving wares That the turkey serves as a qualifier for a hill substantive is
were intended for feasts, and that the Oaxacan dish of another indication that whatever had been painted on the
turkey smothered in chocolate mole sauce still enjoys inter- Griffin fragment involved an actual location somewhere in
national fame among gourmets today, we should not be Oaxaca. Confirmation of this hypothesis is found in a series
too surprised by the appearance of the gobbler-except of surviving frescoes at Mitla in the Tlacolula arm of the

83

This content downloaded from 132.248.9.8 on Fri, 27 Mar 2020 19:40:35 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

C ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ = A
Valley of Oaxaca (fig. 6).These Post-Classic ruins are unique
in that they preserve a series of lintel paintings that are re-
lated stylistically and thematically to the Mixtec codices-
pictographic screenfolds that recount creation myths, heroic
sagas, and the histories of more than twenty-five generations
of ancient Oaxacan ruling families through the Spanish
Conquest. Five fragments survive; four surround the main
residential courtyard of the palace of the North Group, and
a fifth is located in the palace of the Arroyo Group. Despite
their partial destruction from both natural and human
causes, enough critical information is preserved in the
upper portions of the paintings to identify narratives that
are well documented in the Mixtec Codices and other eth-
nohistorical sources.5
In earlier publications,6 I proposed that the Mitla lintel
paintings contained three primary themes: an Eastern Nahua
creation saga from Central Mexico, the Mixtec creation saga
of Apoala, and the Zapotec creation saga of the founding of
Zaachila. I demonstrated that the Mitla panels were signifi-
cant because they depicted the origin of three distinct elite
social groups who defined themselves on the basis of these
heroic sagas.The legends thereby bound aristocratic segments
of ancient Oaxacan society together in ways that superseded
84
This content downloaded from 132.248.9.8 on Fri, 27 Mar 2020 19:40:35 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Figure 6. The ruined palaces of
Mitla, Oaxaca, Mexico (photograph:
John Pohl).
the dialectic, cultural, and ethnic differences still maintained
today by Mixtecs, Zapotecs, and Nahuas, as well as half a
dozen other Indian language groups.
Painted on the north wall of the Church Group at Mitla
are symbols associated with a fourth cosmogony. The paint-
ing begins by showing the year sign "i Reed," which is
associated with the beginning of time in the Mixtec
codices.7 Following a series of events involving Nine Wind
Ehecatl-Quetzalcoatl and some kind of cosmic battle, a
scene appears in which place signs are carried on the backs
of gods. The first of these is Hill of the Turkey, and the pic-
tographic place sign is composed in much the same way as
the one on the Griffin fragment (fig. 7).
The deity seated at Hill of the Turkey in the Mitla paint-
ing can be identified as Lord Seven Flower in the Mixtec
Codices. On pages 3I through 33 of Codex Bodley, Lord
Four Wind visits three prominent oracular priests. The first
is Lord One Death, the oracle of Achiutla. The second is
Lady Nine Grass, the oracle of Chalcatongo, and the third is
Lord Seven Flower, orYya Sahuaco in the Mixtec language,
who is seated at Hill of the Turkey (fig. 8). The name Seven
Flower is in fact the name of the great creator god other-
wise called Tonacatecuhtli in the Eastern Nahua pantheon.8
 b a

Figure 7. Fragments of a fresco located in the lintel of the north building of the Church Group at Mitla: (a) priest bent over under the weight of the
place sign for Hill of the Turkey; (b) lord seated in front of the temple and the year sign on the Hill of the Turkey. The lord is identified as "Flower"
by a day sign in the lower left hand corner; although the numerical coefficient has been destroyed, a comparable representation in Codex Bodley
31V indicates that the lord is an oracle priest known as Seven Flower (drawing:John Pohl).

b a

Figure
Nochixtlan Valley. Codex Bodley 31 III; (b) Lord Four Wind meets Lord Seven Flower at Hill of the Turkey, and offers a bowl of chocolate in return
for the gift of a tunic and two jewels. Codex Bodley 3IV (painting:John Pohl).

85

This content downloaded from 132.248.9.8 on Fri, 27 Mar 2020 19:40:35 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
According to Codex Rios i, he was known as the father of
all the gods, and lord of the thirteenth, or highest, heaven.
Only those who had led the purest lives as great lords, or
children who had died before experiencing sin were pure
enough to reside with him in his garden paradise after
death.The description of this paradise matches the accounts
icated to lesser-ranking noblemen, such as the nephew of
the king of Zaachila, who was buried on a remote "lofty
height so that he might rule over the four directions, east,
west, north, and south, that from these palaces where he had
gone to sleep he could guard the vassals and lands of his
uncle.' 5

of Mitla in which the deceased were thought to enjoy a The Griffin fragment now causes me to consider an
bounteous life after death at a place which later Spanish alternative to the Mitla-Xaaga identification. The appear-
chroniclers compared to the Elysian Fields of Classical ance of "Hill of the Turkey" on a distinctly Mixtec-style
Greek and Roman mythology.9 It is not surprising that tripod olla, and the association in Codex Bodley of Lord
Seven Flower, as patron of the royal ancestors, also appears Seven Flower with the known Mixtec oracles consulted by
in the Mixtec codices as the leader of the mushroom rituals Lord Four Wind, might indicate a site somewhere in or
by which the living would eat hallucinogens and thereby around the Nochixtlan Valley, where the vase almost surely
communicate with the dead.'0 originated. A gloss for a place sign appearing in the colonial
In an earlier publication I proposed a correlation Mixtec Codex Muro offers a clue. It depicts the marriage of
between "Hill of the Turkey" and a promontory calleda woman
El to the lord of Suchixtlan, a kingdom at the north
endorof the valley. The codex, however, adds a place sign to
Guajolote, or "The Turkey," in Spanish and Guhdz Bedkol,
her personal name that might suggest the actual kingdom in
"Spring of the Turkey," in Zapotec. " The hill, located about
which she was born (fig. 9). It not only appears as Hill of the
three and a half kilometers east of Mitla, marks the border
between Mitla and the town of Xaaga, a former depend- Turkey pictographically, but a scribe has added a gloss iden-
ency. Early ethnographers working in the region described tifying it as Yucu Noc, or, more properly, Yucu Tinoo, which
the surrounding area as being the most sacred of natural translates as "Hill of the Turkey" in Mixtec. 6
features to the Mitla people, probably because it is a source Elsewhere, I demonstrated that Lord Four Wind, who
of the fresh springs that irrigate the Mitla Valley to the west. meets with the oracle Lord Seven Flower at Hill of the
Pictographs have been identified in nearby rock shelters,
and the land continues to be considered "bewitched" even
today.'2 Legends of oracular spirits in the area were docu-
(Ti)noo-Turkey
mented by Elsie Clews Parsons in the I930s. 13For example,
it was here that a spirit named Sus Giber fed the workmen
who quarried tufa blocks used for the construction of the
Mitla palaces. She was later transformed into a mass of rock
upon the first rising of the sun, during the creation of the
present epoch. Sus Giber is also venerated as the patroness
of a cave located a few hundred meters above Hill of the
Turkey, where people seek divine help in getting food, sup-
t Ws~~~~~~~uu-Hill
plies, and money, and where they pray for good fortune in
long-distance trading ventures. The place sign for "Hill of
the Turkey" illustrated in the lintel painting includes signs
for mirrors set into the mountain, and in stories told by the Figure 9. Part of the personal name of
people of Mitla caves are referred to as "little mirrors."'4 Codex Muro, including a place sign and
munity of origin; clearly glossed as Yucu
On an adjacent slope to the east, with a commanding
Turkey" in Mixtec language. The inclusi
view of the MitlaValley, are the ruins and cruciform tombs with the place sign may also relate direct
of Guirun (Guiaroo). Such outlying burial shrines were ded- two flowers on the Griffin fragment as

86

This content downloaded from 132.248.9.8 on Fri, 27 Mar 2020 19:40:35 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

'"--t - ,; .,'' , ' 3-t -. '.-.... . toward the Nochixtlan Valley, showing the
;R s s ,. ~~
R ~ Ii 5i y
Turkey in Codex Bodley, eventually became ruler of the
kingdom of Place of Flints. In i985, I mapped the ruins of
his palace on a promontory in the southern Nochixtlan
Valley.'7 The site is one of the largest in the region, and it is
surely no accident that the ruins are still used to define the
boundary between the communities of Tilantongo,Jaltepec,
and Mitlantongo. While examining maps and satellite pho-
tography of the Mitlantongo region south of Place of Flints,
I spotted a promontory called El Guajolote, one of the tall-
est mountains bordering the NochixtlanValley at an altitude
of approximately i,98i meters (fig. io). Furthermore, El
Guajolote appears as Yucu Tinoo in a sixteenth-century
geographical report for this region.'8 My suspicion is that if
the Hill of the Turkey were located in the Mixteca Alta
rather than the Mitla-Xaaga region, this would be a likely
location, especially given the correspondence between the
Mixtec name in the report and the gloss appearing in Codex
Muro, as well as its proximity to a site ruled by the hero Lord
Four Wind who consulted an oracle there. Satellite photog-
raphy of the area indicates the existence of a major archaeo-
logical zone at the summit of El Guajolote consistent with
This content downloaded from 132.248.9.8 on Fri, 27 Mar 2020 19:40:35 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
^~V ^ ~--Figure io. Oblique aerial view looking north
location of the ruins of Place of Fnts and
the promontory of El Guajolote, orYucu
1 Tinoo, approximately ten kilometers to the
south. The major archaeological zone con-
sists of two adjacent ceremonial centers with
E _ agricultural terraces and defensive works
extending for approximately half a mile
along the eastern side of the mountain
(lutainJohn P~ohl, based on iaefrom
Google Earth).
the remains of a major ceremonial site that probably dates to
the Classic period (A.D. 200-900) and was reused as an orac-
ular shrine during the Post-Classic period (A.D. 900-I521).
Further investigation of the area should reveal the existence
of any legends and religious stories still related by local
Mixtec farmers that can be helpful for identifications.'9
It is significant, however, that the Mitla painting depicts
Hill of the Turkey as a place sign being carried on the back
of a porter with a tumpline. Although the Mixtec codices
occasionally depict temples being carried this way, along
with sacred bundles and other ritual paraphernalia, in order
to illustrate how a religious cult was transferred from one
location to another, the moving of an entire mountain is
something entirely different.20 It is possible that the Mitla
painters were indicating that Hill of the Turkey, or the ritual
power invested in the place, was being transferred from the
Mixteca Alta to another location in Oaxaca, perhaps the
Mitla Valley itself. The Mitla painting may also suggest the
movement or migration of an entire population. Local tra-
dition does, in fact, relate that the Xaaga-Albarradas region
to the east of Mitla was settled by a population of Mixtecs.
87
When and how they established themselves there continues and diversity of forms from a lost legacy of craftsmanship.
to be debated, but comparisons to the historical circum- By comparison, my own investigation at the palace of Lord
stances by which Mixtec populations settled in other parts Eight Deer at Tilantongo revealed the existence of consider-
of the Oaxaca Valley suggest that such migrations resulted able amounts of polychrome fragments spread downslope
from either factional conflicts or royal intermarriages just to the rear of the buildings of the western complex.
between Mixtec and Zapotec nobles in Pre-Columbian While it is possible that such deposits resulted from simple
household accidents and subsequent clean up, the lack of
times."' In 1994, on a trip to examine pictographs on the
rock faces adjacent to El Guajolote, I was accompanied by a other expected types of debris suggests some form of more
man from Miahuatlan. He told me a legend of a population formalized ceremonial activity. In fact, the ritual smashing of
of Mixtecs who lost a war in their homeland in the Mixteca pottery is still an essential part of Oaxacan tradition today.
Alta, fought their way across the Valley of Oaxaca, and During Christmas and NewYear's festivities, between De-
moved into the MitlaValley to establish a new kingdom in cember I6 and 31, celebrants enjoy el Romperse de las Placas,
the hills surrounding Xaaga. The Griffin fragment preserves or the Smashing of the Plates, during which celebrants stroll
the only known proper Mixtec place sign in a polychrome about the community eating sweet fried bread, drinking hot
ceramic medium. While more complete vessels illustrate chocolate, and then smashing the ceramic serving vessels
palaces, temples, caves, and other features, they usually lack against the back walls of the churches to signify the end of
references to specific toponyms for entire kingdoms and the old year and the onset of the new. Given the fascination
focus instead on locations for ritual acts. It is interesting in with the calendar rituals that is so obvious in the Mixtec
this regard that the crenellated merlons of a temple roof codices, it is at least possible that today's practice has its roots
appear at the curve of the base of the fragment, indicating in the ancient past. Until recently, the archaeological and art
that a ritual scene had appeared around the spherical body historical study of the Mixtec, Zapotec, and Nahua confed-
of the vase (fig. 5). One does wonder where the rest of the eracies have received significantly less attention than that of
vessel might be, but finding it is highly unlikely. While their more famous rival, the Aztec Empire. Consequently,
whole vessels have sometimes been discovered in tombs, works of art have been acquired, for the most part, only as
excavations and surveys at Mixtec palaces indicate that frag- individual specimens to "fill out" general collections of
ments are the result of intentional destruction during feasts. Mesoamerican antiquities. The Griffin fragment is unique
The most famous deposit came from Caso's excavations at and remarkably well preserved. Despite its fragmentary con-
Las Pilitas, where approximately ten thousand fragments were dition it possesses a quality of line-work and characteriza-
found (fig. ii). Michael Lind later demonstrated that this tion unsurpassed in any other examples. With the addition
was the ceramic dump for the royal palace of Chachoapan of this important piece to Princeton's growing collection of
at the northern end of the Nochixtlan Valley.22 The quality Post-Classic polychrome ceramnics, I hope that we can begin
of many of the vessels was nothing less than stunning, and to break new ground in the study of one of the most
yet they provide only a glimpse of the extraordinary quality magnificent artistic legacies of Pre-Columbian art.

88

This content downloaded from 132.248.9.8 on Fri, 27 Mar 2020 19:40:35 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 q

10 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~*

'I

Figure ii. Artist's rendering of fragments of polychrome serving ware from among some io,ooo pieces found adjacen
ruins of the royal palace of Chachoapan in the northern end of the Nochixtian Valley. From Alfonso Caso and Ignaci
"La Ceramica de Monte Alban," Memorias 13 (Mexico, 1967), pl. i 8.

89

This content downloaded from 132.248.9.8 on Fri, 27 Mar 2020 19:40:35 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
NOTES
i. John M. D. Pohl, "Ritual and Iconographic Variability in Mixteca Puebla
Polychrome Pottery," in The Postclassic Mesoamerican World System, ed. Michael
Smith and Frances Berdan (Salt Lake City, 2003), 201-7;John M. D. Pohl,
"Nahua Drinking Bowl with an Image of Xochiquetzal," Record of the
Princeton University Art Museum 63 (2004): 40-45.
2. M. E. Smith, Picture Writingfrom Ancient Southern Mexico: Mixtec Place Signs
and Maps (Norman, Okla., 2003), 30-31; Pohl, "Ritual and Iconographic
Variability" (see n. I), 201-7; John M. D. Pohl, "Screenfold Manuscripts of
Highland Mexico and Their Possible Influence on Codex Madrid," in The
Madrid Codex: New Approaches to Understanding an Ancient Maya Manuscript,
ed. Gabriel Vail and Anthony Aveni (Boulder, Col., 2004), 378.
3. John M. D. Pohl, "Themes of Drunkenness,Violence, and Factionalism in
Tlaxcalan Altar Paintings," Res 33 (i998): i84-207; Pohl, "Ritual and
IconographicVariability" (see n. I), 171-75.
4. Smith, Picture Writing from Ancient Southern Mexico (see n. 2), 39.
5. John M. D. Pohl, "The Lintel Paintings of Mitla and the Function of whelming
the archaeological and ethnohistorical evidence to the contrary,
some
Mitla Palaces," in Mesoamerican Architecture as a Cultural Symbol, ed. Jeff K. scholars continue to attribute creation legends in Mixtec codices to
Kowalski (New York, I999), 176-97; John M. D. Pohl, "Los Dinteles
Pintados de Mitla," Arqueologia Mexicana i0, no. 55 (2002): 64-67.
6. Pohl, "Lintel Paintings of Mitla"; Pohl, "Los Dinteles Pintados."
7. Jill L. Furst, "Year I Reed, Day I Alligator: A Mixtec Metaphor'"Journal of
Latin American Lore 4, no. I (1978): 93-128.
8. John M. D. Pohl, "Weaving and Gift Exchange in the Mixtec Codices," in
Cloth and Curing, Continuity and Exchange in Oaxaca, ed. Grace Johnson and
Douglas Sharon, San Diego Museum Papers 32 (San Diego, 1994), 9-10;
Matthew Robb, Seven Flower: A Biography of a Mixtec Deity, unpublished
manuscript.
9. Pohl,"Lintel Paintings of Mitla" (see n. 5), I76-97.
i0. Jill L. Furst, Codex Vindobonensis Mexicanus 1 :A Commentary, State University
of NewYork at Albany, Institute for Mesoamerican Studies, Publication 14
(Albany, 1978), 204; Pohl,"Lintel Paintings of Mitla" (see n. 5), 187.
ii. Pohl, "Lintel Paintings of Mitla," i88-89.
12. Ibid.
i3. Elsie Clews Parsons, Mitla, Town of Souls (Chicago, 1936), 210, 220-21,
295-96, 340-42.
14. Ibid., 420.
ii. Pohl, "Lintel Paintings of Mitla' (see n. S), i88.
i6. M. E. Smith, "The Relationship between Mixtec Manuscript Painting and
the Mixtec Language: A Study of Some Personal Names in Codices Muro
and Sanchez Solis," in Dumbarton Oaks Conference on Mesoamerican Writing
Systems, ed. Elizabeth Benson (Washington, D.C., 1973), 87.
17. Bruce E. Byland andJohn M. D. Pohl, In the Realm of 8 Deer:7TeArchaeology
of the Mixtec Codices (Norman, Okla., 1994), 90-93.
i8. Ren& Acufia, Relaciones Geogrdficas del Siglo XVI:Antequera, vol. 2, ed. Ren&
Acui'a (Mexico City, i984), 240. Other possible locations that include a
name for Hill of the Turkey are Miahuatlan andTeposcolula, but the Mixtec
name, Yucu Tinoo, does not appear to be associated with either of them; see
Jose Maria Bradomin, Toponimia de Oaxaca, 3d ed. (Oaxaca, 1992), 152, 250.
The Zapotec name Gui-bed, or San Pedro Totolapan, located about 25
kilometers south of Mitla, contains the word bed meaning "turkey," but this
refers specifically to a female bird that lacks the distinguishing characteris-
tics of the male discussed in this article. Guaxolotitlan, located in the Etla
Valley, includes a Nahuatl name for "turkey," but that meaning is not shared
with the Zapotec name, Huitzo; and the Mixtec name for the community,
9o
This content downloaded from 132.248.9.8 on Fri, 27 Mar 2020 19:40:35 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Nuundodzo, means "Place of the Quetzal."A Hill of the Turkey is featured as
a pictograph in stone reliefs at Xochicalco and paintings at Cacaxtla. Silvia
Garza Tarazona has even gone so far as to propose that this place sign actu-
ally signified Xochicalco; see "El Nombre de Xochicalco antes de Siglo
XVI:Totolhuacalco?" Arqueologia Mexicana io, no. SS (2002): 56-57. Hill of
the Turkey appears as a place sign on a monument at Monte Alban dating to
about A.D. 6oo-8oo.This may be a reference to the place sign for Hill of the
Turkey appearing at Xochicalco and Cacaxtla discussed by Garza Tarazona,
or it may be another, more localized Oaxacan site, perhaps the antecedent
to the place portrayed in the fragment; see Urcid Serrano, Javier Marcus
Winter, and Raul Matadamas, "Nuevos Monumentos Grabados en Monte
Albin, Oaxaca," in Escritura Zapoteca Prehispanica: Nuevas Aportaciones, ed.
Marcus Winter (Oaxaca, I994), 36-39.
The Xochicalco-Cacaxtla place sign does not designate, however, the
same location as that appearing on the Griffin fragment. Despite over-
times, exotic places, and foreign peoples unrelated to the Mixtecs them-
selves. For critical discussions, see John M. D. Pohl, "The Shadow of Monte
Alban: Politics and Historiography in Postclassic Oaxaca by Maarten Jansen,
Peter Krofges, and Michel R. Oudijk," Latin American Antiquity io, no. 3
(I999): 317-i8 (book review) and "The Archaeology of History in
Postclassic Oaxaca," in Mesoamerican Archaeology: Theory and Practice,
A. Hendon and Rosemary A. Joyce (Oxford, 2004), 224, 234-35. Their
theories are conjectural, counterintuitive, and sensationalist. Colonial manu-
scripts, maps, and lienzos, the "Rosetta stones" of historical and dynastic
research in codex studies, are explicit in emphasizing the local territorial
concerns of Mixtec dynastic history (Smith, Picture Writing from Ancient
Southern Mexico" [see n. 2], 30-31).Although neighboring kingdoms such as
Zaachila might appear occasionally in reference to Mixtec alliances with
the Zapotecs, the actual scope of events is decidedly focused on the
Mixteca itself.
I9. Byland and Pohl, In the Realm of 8 Deer (see n. i6), 90-93.
20. John M. D. Pohl, The Politics of Symbolism in the Mixtec Codices, Vanderbilt
University Publications in Anthropology, no. 46 (Nashville, 1994), 23-4I.
21. John M. D. Pohl, "Royal Marriage and Confederacy Building among the
Eastern Nahuas, Mixtecs, and Zapotecs," in The Postclassic Mesoamerican
World System" (see n. I), 245. A story repeated for decades in the anthropo-
logical literature suggests that the Zapotecs did not know how to weave
palmetto and so colonial Dominicans had to move a Mixtec population
into the region to practice the craft. The account was pure speculation on
the part of a geographer named Oscar Schmeider, who worked in the
region during the 1920S; see Oscar Schmeider, The Settlements of the Tzapotec
and Mixe Indians, University of California Publications in Geography, vol. 4.
(Berkeley, 1930); Scott Cook,"Mestizo PalmWeavers among the Zapotec:A
Critical Re-examination of the 'Albarradas Enigma'," Notas Mesoamericanas
9 (1983): 39-46. Several Zapotec palmetto-weaving communities live in the
region today, and there are indications that the Mixtec population moved
into the region sometime during the Post-Classic period.
22. Alfonso Caso and Ignacio Bernal, La Ceramica de Monte Alban, Memorias 13
(Mexico City, I967); Michael Lind, Postclassic and Early Colonial Mixtec
Houses in the Nochixtldn Valley, Oaxaca, Vanderbilt University Publications in
Anthropology, no. 23 (Nashville, 1979); Michael Lind, Sociocultural Dimen-
sions of Mixtec Ceramics, Vanderbilt University Publications in Anthropology,
no. 33 (Nashville, 1987), I4.