Ancient Mesoamerica, 11 (2000), 307–321

Copyright © 2000 Cambridge University Press. Printed in the U.S.A.

PROVENIENCE INVESTIGATION OF CERAMICS

AND OBSIDIAN FROM OTUMBA

Hector Neff,a Michael D. Glascock,a Thomas H. Charlton,b Cynthia Otis Charlton,c and
Deborah L. Nichols d
a
Research Reactor Center, University of Missouri, Columbia, MO 65211, USA
b
Department of Anthropology, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA 52242-1322, USA
c
Independent Scholar, Wellman, IA 52356, USA
d
Department of Anthropology, Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH 03755, USA

Abstract
Obsidian and ceramic artifacts from the Otumba project were analyzed by instrumental neutron-activation analysis. Sources for the
obsidian were determined by comparison to a databank of Central Mexican source analyses. Ceramic sources were determined by
comparison to a series of reference groups from the Basin of Mexico and by comparison with raw material samples. Obsidian from
the lapidary workshop (Operation 11) comes predominantly from the Otumba and Pachuca sources. There is also an unknown
compositional profile present among the artifacts. This profile may derive from a not-yet-sampled flow within one of several
nearby obsidian-source areas, such as Otumba or Paredon. The majority of Otumba ceramics fall into a large group derived from
clays of the Teotihuacan-valley alluvium. Aztec II Black-on-Orange and red-ware samples come from other sources in the eastern
basin. Ceramics from sites along the trade route leading northeast toward Tulancingo include figurines derived from Otumba,
figurines probably made locally near Tepeapulco and Tulancingo, and long-handle censers probably made in the latter two
locations.

Provenience investigations of obsidian and ceramic artifacts from
Otumba and its dependencies were initiated in 1993. These inves-
tigations have employed instrumental neutron-activation analysis
(INAA) of artifacts and source raw materials in an effort to iden-
tify imports to Otumba and, if possible, to identify the zones of
origin of the imports. Ceramics were analyzed not only from
Otumba but also from sites located along a trade route leading north-
east from Otumba toward Tulancingo, Hidalgo (see Charlton et al.
2000:Figure 1). Ultimately, we intend the source determinations
to document external interactions of the Otumba population.
INAAis a highly precise chemical-characterization technique that
affords a means to determine the sources of artifacts made from geo-
logical raw materials. Analyses for the studies reported here were
undertaken at the Missouri University Research Reactor Center
(MURR). Most of the obsidian was analyzed with a single 5-second
irradiation and 12-minute gamma count. Three elements deter-
mined by abbreviated INAAprocedure, manganese, sodium, and bar-
ium, afford reliable means for differentiating most of the obsidian
sources in Mesoamerica (Glascock et al. 1994). Any remaining am-
biguities can be clarified by subjecting artifacts to a longer irradi-
ation and two additional gamma counts to determine 21 additional
elements. The standard procedure for pottery analysis at MURR de-
termines a total of 33 elements using a short and long irradiation and
a series of three gamma counts (Glascock 1992). In both the obsid-
ian and the pottery studies, elemental concentrations were deter-
mined by the comparison of count rates in the unknown samples to
count rates in standards of known composition.
PROVENIENCE DETERMINATION OF OBSIDIAN
AND POTTERY
Obsidian sources are localized and homogeneous, whereas ce-
ramic raw-material sources are widespread and heterogeneous, thus
sourcing efforts for the two must proceed along slightly different
paths. For obsidian, sampling and analyzing all sources is a real-
istic goal. For instance, the MURR Mesoamerican obsidian-
source databank includes multiple analyses of raw materials from
all of the main obsidian sources from Central Mexico to Hondu-
ras. Reference groups of analyses from the Mexican sources have
proved to be extremely homogeneous, which means source deter-
mination is virtually guaranteed for any obsidian artifact from sites
in most regions of Mesoamerica.1
For ceramics, it is usually unrealistic to attempt to sample the
relevant sources intensively enough. Raw materials suitable for
making ceramics are available almost anywhere, and the bound-
aries between “sources” are rarely distinct either on the ground or
in chemical-composition space. Thus, instead of forming refer-
ence groups out of known source samples, pattern-recognition tech-
niques are used to discover groups of relatively homogeneous
composition among the artifacts. The location of sources or source
1
West Mexico is an exception. There, artifact analyses have yielded
several chemical profiles not yet represented in the raw-material database.
None of these unknown west Mexican sources, however, are represented
in artifact collections from Central Mexico.

307
308 Neff et al.

Figure 1. Cerium–cesium bivariate plot showing obsidian sources represented in the Otumba collection together with the pottery
data.

zones then may be inferred by comparing known samples (i.e.,
raw materials obtained through an extensive sampling program)
to the reference groups discovered among the artifacts for which
source determinations are desired (Neff 1998). Alternatively the
“criterion of abundance,” which states that artifacts probably orig-
inate where they are most common (Bishop et al. 1982), or argu-
ments based on regional geology may be used to identify likely
source zones for pottery.2
The need for distinct approaches to obsidian and ceramic pro-
venience determination is illustrated succinctly by a bivariate
cesium-cerium plot of the Otumba obsidian and ceramic data to-
gether (Figure 1). Whereas the obsidian sources represented at
Otumba form seven highly discrete point clouds, the ceramic data
form a single amorphous cloud of points within which there are no
obvious subgroups.
one are from preworkshop contexts with Early Aztec ceramics,
and 74 are from contexts with evidence of lapidary production and
Late Aztec ceramics. Source assignments for the 95 artifacts are
shown in Table 1. The majority of the artifacts, 46 of 90 artifacts
(13 Early Aztec, 33 Late Aztec), come from the Otumba source
flow. Twenty-three green artifacts come, as expected, from Pa-
chuca (5 Early Aztec, 18 Late Aztec). Interestingly, however, two
of the green artifacts match the Tulancingo profile (both from Late
Aztec contexts). Eight other artifacts of varying gray, meca, and
brownish tones come from Tulancingo (1 Early Aztec, 7 Late Az-
Table 1. Operation 11: Frequencies of oibsidian by source and by period
of occupation

Early Aztec Late Aztec

OBSIDIAN
All of the obsidian artifacts considered here came from the lapidary- Otumba 13 61.9% 33 44.60%
workshop excavation, Operation 11 (Otis Charlton 1993). Twenty- Pachuca 5 23.8% 18 24.30%
Tulancingo 1 4.8% 9 12.20%
Tepalzingo — — 1 1.35%
2 Orizaba — — 1 1.35%
There is an obvious exception to this “standard approach” to ceramic
sourcing. If kiln sites can be located and waster dumps sampled, then the Unknown 2 9.5% 12 16.20%
kiln samples can be treated as reference groups to which artifacts of un- Totals 21 100.0% 74 100.0%
known provenience can be compared in much the same way obsidian is
compared to reference groups from a series of source flows.
Ceramics and obsidian from Otumba
tec). Late Aztec deposits also contained one artifact from Pico de
Orizaba and one from Tepalzingo. The most surprising result of
the obsidian study is that 14 artifacts (2 Early Aztec, 12 Late Az-
tec) come from a previously unknown source.
The obsidian sample was not selected randomly, so it is debat-
able how well the data in Table 1 characterize obsidian source-
usage patterns in Otumba. Bearing in mind this qualification, there
are several contrasts between the Early Aztec and Late Aztec source-
usage data that can serve as hypotheses to guide further research.
First, residents of each period appear to have had equal access to
the green obsidian from Pachuca. The major distinction between
the two periods is in the lower use of Otumba obsidian in the Late
Aztec period, which was offset by increased use of Tulancingo
obsidian and obsidian from the unknown source. Tepalzingo and
Orizaba also appear for the first time in the Late Aztec period,
although it is quite possible this difference might be explained by
the smaller size of the Early Aztec sample. The obsidian data thus
suggest Late Aztec residents may have had access to a wider range
of obsidian sources than Early Aztec residents. This hypothesis
needs to be tested with a larger sample more suitable for estimat-
ing population parameters.
The group labeled “New Source” in Figure 1 requires further
comment. This group includes 14 of the analyzed artifacts from
the lapidary-workshop excavation. Elements determined from the
long irradiation indicate that these artifacts have a compositional
Figure 2. Manganese and sodium concentrations in obsidian artifacts from Otumba. Ellipses are 95% confidence ellipses for the
sources. Note that an unknown source in the Otumba data is similar to Paredon and Otumba on these two elements.
309
profile that, although similar to both Paredon and Otumba on ele-
ments determined from short-lived isotopes (Figure 2), represents
a distinct source (Figures 1 and 3). In fact, the fingerprint for the
14 artifacts from the unknown source is distinct from all other Cen-
tral Mexican sources. It is only the sizable representation of this
fingerprint in the lapidary-workshop sample that indicates to us
the source is not too distant from Otumba. One possibility is there
may be a compositionally distinct flow that was missed during ear-
lier sampling of Otumba, Paredon, or some other Central Mexican
source. Other sources, such as Pachuca, are known to have multi-
ple fingerprints (Cobean et al. 1991). Analysis of a more extensive
sample from Otumba and Paredon may shed additional light on
the provenience of this group.
CERAMICS
The ceramic sample includes 201 analyses, 137 from Otumba, 27
from outlying neighborhoods close to Otumba, and 35 from sites
along the trade route that leads northeast, past Tepeapulco, Te-
peapulco, and Tulancingo (see Charlton et al. 2000:Figure 1). The
sample as a whole is dominated by presumed locally made figu-
rines with associated wasters and molds (100) from various sur-
face collections along the trade routes and within the Otumba city-
state, and excavations in the capital, Otumba (TA 80). A presumed
locally made ceramic ware, Otumba Polished Tan, is represented
310
Figure 3. Europium–thorium bivariate plot showing artifacts from the unknown source plotted along with samples from other
sources that might not be differentiated based on abbreviated INAA.
by 33 sherds (some of which appear to be wasters) from TA-80
excavations and surface collections in four dependencies. Other
items analyzed include 30 fragments of long-handled incense burn-
ers from excavations in Otumba, surface collections in the depen-
dencies, and surface collections in the Tepeapulco and Tulancingo
city-states. Finally, the excavated lapidary workshop (Operation
11) provided fragments of Early Aztec Black-on-Orange vessels
(15), red-ware vessels (15), and wasters from ceramic production
(8).
In addition to the ceramics analyzed as part of the Otumba study,
the MURR ceramic databank includes a sizable sample of ceram-
ics and ceramic raw materials from other parts of the Basin of
Mexico that is relevant to the current study. Of particular impor-
tance are reference groups defined in a study of Aztec Black-on-
Orange pottery (Hodge et al. 1992, 1993). Black-on-Orange
reference groups are defined for the Tenochtitlan, Ixtapalapa,
Chalco, Texcoco, and Cuauhtitlan regions (Hodge and Neff 2001;
Hodge et al. 1992, 1993).3 The Basin of Mexico database also in-
cludes raw-material samples from throughout the basin, some col-
lected as part of the Aztec Black-on-Orange study and some
collected more recently in the Otumba study.
3
The Tenochtitlan/Ixtapalapa distinction, however, is difficult to sus-
tain. A larger raw-material sample from the southwestern basin is neces-
sary to clarify the nature of compositional variation in this region.
Neff et al.
Provenience determination for the Otumba ceramics can be ac-
complished by their comparison to the existing ceramic reference
groups and/or by comparison of raw materials to new groups rec-
ognized in the Otumba sample. For the most part, the prove-
niences of existing groups have been inferred via the criterion of
abundance, although raw-material analyses have helped confirm a
southeast basin provenience for Chalco polychrome, Early Aztec
Black-on-Orange, and other ceramics suspected to have origi-
nated in the Chalco region (Neff and Hodge 2001). The extensive
sample of raw materials from the Teotihuacan valley coupled with
the presence of presumed wasters among the sampled Otumba ce-
ramics affords an exceptionally strong basis for defining local com-
positional profiles for the region around Otumba.
Ceramic Groups in the Otumba Data
Using RQ-mode principal-components analysis (Baxter 1992; Neff
1994) as our primary pattern-recognition technique, we defined
three new compositional groups in the Otumba ceramic sample. In
addition, there are three categories of unassigned samples: un-
assigned Aztec II Black-on-Orange specimens, unassigned Aztec
Black-on-Red specimens, and other unassigned specimens. Table 2
lists the members of the three compositional groups together with
the unassigned specimens.
The majority of the analyzed samples from Otumba (108) fall
into a single large group, within which no further internal parti-
Ceramics and obsidian from Otumba 311

Table 2. Compositional affiliations and descriptive information for the Otumba project ceramic sample

Group Membership Probabilities

Composition
Group Analysis ID Site Provenience Description Chalco Texcoco Otumba

Otumba 11MD03 Otumba TA-80, Op 11 production debris 0.000 0.000 1.521

Otumba 37CR01 TA-37 TA-37, surface long-handle censer 0.000 0.000 94.763
Otumba 37CR02 TA-37 TA-37, surface long-handle censer 0.000 0.000 7.805
Otumba 37CR02 TA-37 TA-37, surface Otumba Polished Tan 0.000 0.000 95.902
Otumba 37FS03 TA-37 TA-37, surface figurine frag., III 0.000 0.000 79.838
Otumba 37FS04 TA-37 TA-37, surface figurine frag., col. 0.000 0.000 2.114
Otumba 37FS05 TA-37 TA-37, surface figurine frag., I 0.000 0.000 16.156
Otumba 37FS07 TA-37 TA-37, surface figurine frag., I 0.000 0.002 39.877
Otumba 39CR01 TA-39 TA-39, surface long-handle censer 0.000 0.000 40.675
Otumba 39CS02 TA-39 TA-39, surface Otumba Polished Tan 0.000 0.000 8.642
Otumba 39CS02 TA-39 TA-39, surface figurine frag., III 0.000 0.000 70.229
Otumba 57CR02 TA-57 TA-57, surface long-handle censer 0.000 0.000 43.886
Otumba 57CS01 TA-57 TA-57, surface Otumba Polished Tan 0.000 0.000 98.219
Otumba 57FS01 TA-57 TA-57, surface figurine frag., I 0.000 0.010 33.132
Otumba 57FS02 TA-57 TA-57, surface figurine frag., III 0.000 0.000 62.638
Otumba 57FS03 TA-57 TA-57, surface figurine frag., III 0.000 0.000 31.032
Otumba 71FS01 TA-71 TA-71, surface figurine frag., III 0.000 0.000 64.511
Otumba 71FS02 TA-71 TA-71, surface figurine frag., III 0.000 0.001 44.762
Otumba 80FS01 Otumba TA-80, surface figurine frag., III 0.000 0.000 12.653
Otumba 80FS02 Otumba TA-80, surface figurine frag., III 0.000 0.000 39.556
Otumba 80FS03 Otumba TA-80, surface figurine frag., III 0.000 0.000 84.632
Otumba 80FS04 Otumba TA-80, surface figurine frag., III 0.000 0.000 97.021
Otumba 80FS05 Otumba TA-80, surface figurine frag., III 0.000 0.000 88.347
Otumba 80FS07 Otumba TA-80, surface figurine frag., III 0.000 0.000 90.789
Otumba 80FS08 Otumba TA-80, surface figurine frag., III 0.000 0.000 82.401
Otumba 80FS09 Otumba TA-80, surface figurine frag., I 0.000 0.000 54.374
Otumba 80FS10 Otumba TA-80, surface figurine frag., I 0.000 0.000 15.311
Otumba 80FS11 Otumba TA-80, surface figurine frag., col. 0.000 0.001 88.081
Otumba 80FS12 Otumba TA-80, surface figurine frag., III 0.000 0.000 4.903
Otumba 80FS14 Otumba TA-80, surface figurine frag., III 0.000 0.000 18.713
Otumba 80FS16 Otumba TA-80, surface figurine frag., III 0.000 0.000 33.508
Otumba 80FS17 Otumba TA-80, surface figurine frag., III 0.000 0.000 25.728
Otumba 80FS18 Otumba TA-80, surface figurine frag., III 0.000 0.000 88.974
Otumba 80FS19 Otumba TA-80, surface figurine frag., III 0.000 0.000 2.794
Otumba 80FS20 Otumba TA-80, surface figurine frag., III 0.000 0.000 74.609
Otumba 80FS22 Otumba TA-80, surface figurine frag., III 0.000 0.000 18.481
Otumba 80FS24 Otumba TA-80, surface figurine frag., III 0.000 0.000 67.250
Otumba 80FS26 Otumba TA-80, surface figurine frag., III 0.000 0.000 45.647
Otumba 80X101 Otumba TA-80, Op. 10 Otumba Polished Tan 0.000 0.000 9.343
Otumba 80X103 Otumba TA-80, Op. 10 Otumba Polished Tan 0.000 0.000 31.699
Otumba 80X104 Otumba TA-80, Op. 10 Otumba Polished Tan 0.000 0.000 5.965
Otumba 80X105 Otumba TA-80, Op. 10 Otumba Polished Tan 0.000 0.000 98.842
Otumba 80X106 Otumba TA-80, Op. 10 Otumba Polished Tan 0.000 0.000 2.123
Otumba 80X108 Otumba TA-80, Op. 10 long-handle censer 0.000 0.000 23.787
Otumba 80X111 Otumba TA-80, Op. 11 long-handle censer 0.000 0.000 18.492
Otumba 80X114 Otumba TA-80, Op. 11 long-handle censer 0.000 0.000 38.559
Otumba 80X401 Otumba TA-80, Op. 4 (Fig. W.S.) figurine frag., III 0.000 0.000 97.644
Otumba 80X402 Otumba TA-80, Op. 4 (Fig. W.S.) figurine frag., III 0.000 0.000 87.699
Otumba 80X403 Otumba TA-80, Op. 4 (Fig. W.S.) figurine frag., I 0.000 0.000 62.838
Otumba 80X404 Otumba TA-80, Op. 4 (Fig. W.S.) figurine frag., III mold 0.000 0.000 75.126
Otumba 80X405 Otumba TA-80, Op. 4 (Fig. W.S.) figurine frag., col. 0.000 0.000 96.619
Otumba 80X406 Otumba TA-80, Op. 4 (Fig. W.S.) figurine frag., III mold 0.000 0.000 89.164
Otumba 80X407 Otumba TA-80, Op. 4 (Fig. W.S.) figurine frag., III 0.000 0.000 50.320
Otumba 80X409 Otumba TA-80, Op. 4 (Fig. W.S.) fired lump 0.021 0.072 26.484
Otumba 80X410 Otumba TA-80, Op. 4 (Fig. W.S.) fired lump 0.020 0.000 58.661
Otumba 80X411 Otumba TA-80, Op. 4 (Fig. W.S.) figurine frag., animal 0.000 0.000 22.943
Otumba 80X412 Otumba TA-80, Op. 4 (Fig. W.S.) fired lump 0.000 0.000 4.310
Otumba 80X413 Otumba TA-80, Op. 4 (Fig. W.S.) figurine frag., III 0.000 0.000 5.265
Otumba 80X414 Otumba TA-80, Op. 4 (Fig. W.S.) fired lump 0.000 0.002 12.465
Otumba 80X415 Otumba TA-80, Op. 4 (Fig. W.S.) figurine frag., III 0.000 0.000 91.848
(continued )
312 Neff et al.

Table 2. Continued

Group Membership Probabilities

Composition
Group Analysis ID Site Provenience Description Chalco Texcoco Otumba

Otumba 80X416 Otumba TA-80, Op. 4 (Fig. W.S.) figurine frag., III 0.000 0.001 50.157
Otumba 80X418 Otumba TA-80, Op. 4 (Fig. W.S.) figurine frag., III 0.000 0.000 99.712
Otumba 80X419 Otumba TA-80, Op. 4 (Fig. W.S.) figurine frag., III 0.000 0.000 88.013
Otumba 80X420 Otumba TA-80, Op. 4 (Fig. W.S.) figurine frag., III mold 0.000 0.000 41.442
Otumba 80X421 Otumba TA-80, Op. 4 (Fig. W.S.) figurine frag., III 0.000 0.000 3.881
Otumba 80X422 Otumba TA-80, Op. 4 (Fig. W.S.) figurine frag., III 0.000 0.059 64.261
Otumba 80X423 Otumba TA-80, Op. 4 (Fig. W.S.) figurine frag., III 0.000 0.000 99.690
Otumba 80X424 Otumba TA-80, Op. 4 (Fig. W.S.) figurine frag., III mold 0.000 0.000 58.121
Otumba 80X425 Otumba TA-80, Op. 4 (Fig. W.S.) figurine frag., III mold 0.000 0.000 27.189
Otumba 80X426 Otumba TA-80, Op. 4 (Fig. W.S.) figurine frag., III 0.000 0.000 1.575
Otumba 80X427 Otumba TA-80, Op. 4 (Fig. W.S.) figurine frag., III 0.000 0.000 22.181
Otumba 80X428 Otumba TA-80, Op. 4 (Fig. W.S.) figurine frag., III 0.000 0.000 12.221
Otumba 80X430 Otumba TA-80, Op. 4 (Fig. W.S.) figurine frag., III 0.000 0.000 65.102
Otumba 80X431 Otumba TA-80, Op. 4 (Fig. W.S.) Otumba Polished Tan 0.000 0.000 93.752
Otumba 80X433 Otumba TA-80, Op. 4 (Fig. W.S.) Otumba Polished Tan 0.000 0.000 96.768
Otumba 80X434 Otumba TA-80, Op. 4 (Fig. W.S.) Otumba Polished Tan 0.000 0.000 92.744
Otumba 80X435 Otumba TA-80, Op. 4 (Fig. W.S.) Otumba Polished Tan 0.000 0.000 85.567
Otumba 80X436 Otumba TA-80, Op. 4 (Fig. W.S.) Otumba Polished Tan 0.000 0.000 45.215
Otumba 80X437 Otumba TA-80, Op. 4 (Fig. W.S.) Otumba Polished Tan 0.000 0.000 80.576
Otumba 80X438 Otumba TA-80, Op. 4 (Fig. W.S.) Otumba Polished Tan 0.000 0.000 85.144
Otumba 80X439 Otumba TA-80, Op. 4 (Fig. W.S.) Otumba Polished Tan 0.000 0.000 76.135
Otumba 80X440 Otumba TA-80, Op. 4 (Fig. W.S.) Otumba Polished Tan 0.000 0.000 23.135
Otumba 80X441 Otumba TA-80, Op. 4 (Fig. W.S.) Otumba Polished Tan 0.000 0.000 57.775
Otumba 80X442 Otumba TA-80, Op. 4 (Fig. W.S.) Otumba Polished Tan 0.000 0.000 89.088
Otumba 80X443 Otumba TA-80, Op. 4 (Fig. W.S.) Otumba Polished Tan 0.000 0.000 70.680
Otumba 80X444 Otumba TA-80, Op. 4 (Fig. W.S.) Otumba Polished Tan 0.000 0.000 77.630
Otumba 80X445 Otumba TA-80, Op. 4 (Fig. W.S.) long-handle censer 0.000 0.000 55.963
Otumba 80X447 Otumba TA-80, Op. 4 (Fig. W.S.) long-handle censer 0.000 0.000 75.015
Otumba 80X449 Otumba TA-80, Op. 4 (Fig. W.S.) long-handle censer 0.000 0.000 3.402
Otumba 80X450 Otumba TA-80, Op. 4 (Fig. W.S.) long-handle censer 0.000 0.000 33.514
Otumba 80X502 Otumba TA-80, Op. 5 figurine frag., animal 0.000 0.000 76.336
Otumba 80X503 Otumba TA-80, Op. 5 figurine frag., III 0.000 0.000 59.614
Otumba 80X504 Otumba TA-80, Op. 5 figurine frag., III 0.000 0.003 95.557
Otumba 80X901 Otumba TA-80, Op. 9 Otumba Polished Tan 0.001 0.000 17.527
Otumba 80X902 Otumba TA-80, Op. 9 Otumba Polished Tan 0.000 0.000 17.388
Otumba 80X903 Otumba TA-80, Op. 9 Otumba Polished Tan 0.000 0.000 86.837
Otumba 80X905 Otumba TA-80, Op. 9 Otumba Polished Tan 0.040 0.004 24.000
Otumba TRFS02 SU 688 figurine frag., col 0.000 0.000 84.064
Otumba TRFS03 SU 688 figurine frag., II 0.000 0.000 39.345
Otumba TRFS04 SU 388 figurine frag., I 0.000 0.000 19.904
Otumba TRFS05 SU 388 figurine frag., III 0.000 0.000 15.917
Otumba TRFS09 SU 460 figurine frag., III 0.000 0.000 23.807
Otumba TRFS10 SU 460 figurine frag., III 0.000 0.000 47.816
Otumba TRFS13 SU 294 figurine frag., III 0.000 0.000 12.197
Otumba TRFS15 SU 340 figurine frag., III 0.000 0.000 72.887
Otumba TRFS17 SU 363 figurine frag., I 0.000 0.019 42.680
Otumba TRFS19 SU 364 figurine frag., col. 0.000 0.000 2.074
Otumba TRFS24 SU 571 figurine frag., III 0.000 0.000 26.862
Otumba TRFS25 SU 571 figurine frag., III 0.000 0.000 17.586
T.R. Gp. 1 11B014 Otumba TA-80, Op. 11 Aztec II Black-on-Orange 0.000 0.000 0.000
T.R. Gp. 1 11B015 Otumba TA-80, Op. 11 Aztec II Black-on-Orange 0.000 0.000 0.000
T.R. Gp. 1 11BR01 Otumba TA-80, Op. 11 Aztec II red ware 0.000 0.000 0.007
T.R. Gp. 1 11BR02 Otumba TA-80, Op. 11 Aztec II red ware 0.000 0.000 0.000
T.R. Gp. 1 11BR05 Otumba TA-80, Op. 11 Aztec II red ware 0.000 0.000 0.000
T.R. Gp. 1 11BR06 Otumba TA-80, Op. 11 Aztec II red ware 0.000 0.000 0.001
T.R. Gp. 1 11BR08 Otumba TA-80, Op. 11 Aztec II red ware 0.000 0.000 0.000
T.R. Gp. 1 TRCR01 SU 571 long-handle censer 0.000 0.000 0.000
T.R. Gp. 1 TRCR02 SU 426 long-handle censer 0.000 0.000 0.000
T.R. Gp. 1 TRCR02 SU 444 long-handle censer 0.000 0.000 0.000
T.R. Gp. 1 TRCR05 SU 363 long-handle censer 0.000 0.000 0.000
(continued )
Ceramics and obsidian from Otumba 313

Table 2. Continued

Group Membership Probabilities

Composition
Group Analysis ID Site Provenience Description Chalco Texcoco Otumba

T.R. Gp. 1 TRCR06 SU 570 long-handle censer 0.000 0.000 0.003

T.R. Gp. 1 TRFS06 SU 388 figurine frag., animal 0.000 0.000 1.481
T.R. Gp. 1 TRFS12 SU 292 figurine frag., III 0.000 0.000 0.713
T.R. Gp. 1 TRFS14 SU 307 figurine frag., III 0.000 0.000 0.000
T.R. Gp. 1 TRFS18 SU 363 figurine frag., III 0.000 0.000 0.000
T.R. Gp. 1 TRFS20 SU 425 figurine frag., III 0.000 0.000 0.000
T.R. Gp. 1 TRFS21 SU 444 figurine frag., III 0.000 0.000 0.000
T.R. Gp. 1 TRFS22 SU 522 figurine frag., III 0.000 0.000 0.009
T.R. Gp. 1 VICS01 TA-V1 Otumba Polished Tan 0.000 0.000 1.376
T.R. Gp. 2 TRCR07 SU 667 long-handle censer 0.000 0.000 0.000
T.R. Gp. 2 TRCR08 SU 700 long-handle censer 0.000 0.000 0.000
T.R. Gp. 2 TRCR09 SU 670 long-handle censer 0.000 0.000 0.000
T.R. Gp. 2 TRCR10 SU 678 long-handle censer 0.000 0.000 0.000
T.R. Gp. 2 TRCR12 SU 678 long-handle censer 0.000 0.000 0.000
T.R. Gp. 2 TRFS08 SU 678 figurine frag., I 0.000 0.000 0.000
Unas. B/O 11B001 Otumba TA-80, Op. 11 Aztec II Black-on-Orange 9.889 0.006 0.042
Unas. B/O 11B002 Otumba TA-80, Op. 11 Aztec II Black-on-Orange 0.000 0.000 0.201
Unas. B/O 11B003 Otumba TA-80, Op. 11 Aztec II Black-on-Orange 14.139 1.536 1.711
Unas. B/O 11B004 Otumba TA-80, Op. 11 Aztec II Black-on-Orange 0.000 0.200 0.036
Unas. B/O 11B005 Otumba TA-80, Op. 11 Aztec II Black-on-Orange 0.000 9.713 4.294
Unas. B/O 11B006 Otumba TA-80, Op. 11 Aztec II Black-on-Orange 0.000 0.004 0.000
Unas. B/O 11B007 Otumba TA-80, Op. 11 Aztec II Black-on-Orange 11.557 0.011 0.554
Unas. B/O 11B008 Otumba TA-80, Op. 11 Aztec II Black-on-Orange 11.997 0.908 28.108
Unas. B/O 11B009 Otumba TA-80, Op. 11 Aztec II Black-on-Orange 30.726 17.406 10.414
Unas. B/O 11B011 Otumba TA-80, Op. 11 Aztec II Black-on-Orange 15.817 2.321 0.707
Unas. B/O 11B012 Otumba TA-80, Op. 11 Aztec II Black-on-Orange 0.000 0.102 0.069
Unas. B/O 11B013 Otumba TA-80, Op. 11 Aztec II Black-on-Orange 0.000 0.071 0.059
Unas. red 11BR03 Otumba TA-80, Op. 11 Aztec II red ware 0.000 0.000 0.000
Unas. red 11BR04 Otumba TA-80, Op. 11 Aztec II red ware 0.000 0.000 0.000
Unas. red 11BR07 Otumba TA-80, Op. 11 Aztec II red ware 0.000 0.000 0.000
Unas. red 11BR09 Otumba TA-80, Op. 11 Aztec II red ware 0.000 0.000 0.000
Unas. red 11BR11 Otumba TA-80, Op. 11 Aztec II red ware 0.000 0.000 0.000
Unas. red 11BR12 Otumba TA-80, Op. 11 Aztec II red ware 0.000 0.000 0.000
Unas. red 11BR13 Otumba TA-80, Op. 11 Aztec II red ware 0.000 0.000 0.000
Unas. red 11BR14 Otumba TA-80, Op. 11 Aztec II red ware 0.000 0.000 0.000
Unas. red 11BR15 Otumba TA-80, Op. 11 Aztec II red ware 0.000 0.000 0.000
Unas. 11B010 Otumba TA-80, Op. 11 Aztec II Black-on-Orange 0.000 0.000 0.000
Unas. 11BR10 Otumba TA-80, Op. 11 Aztec II red ware 0.000 0.000 0.000
Unas. 11MD01 Otumba TA-80, Op. 11 production debris 0.000 0.000 0.000
Unas. 11MD02 Otumba TA-80, Op. 11 production debris 0.000 0.000 0.001
Unas. 11MD04 Otumba TA-80, Op. 11 production debris 0.000 0.000 0.000
Unas. 11MD05 Otumba TA-80, Op. 11 production debris 0.000 0.000 0.002
Unas. 11MD06 Otumba TA-80, Op. 11 production debris 0.000 0.000 0.000
Unas. 11MD07 Otumba TA-80, Op. 11 production debris 0.000 0.000 0.000
Unas. 11MD08 Otumba TA-80, Op. 11 production debris 0.306 0.000 0.001
Unas. 37CS01 TA-37 TA-37, surface Otumba Polished Tan 0.000 0.000 0.369
Unas. 37FS01 TA-37 TA-37, surface figurine frag., III 0.000 0.000 0.000
Unas. 37FS02 TA-37 TA-37, surface figurine frag., I 0.000 0.000 0.080
Unas. 37FS06 TA-37 TA-37, surface figurine frag., I 0.000 0.001 5.305
Unas. 39CR02 TA-39 TA-39, surface long-handle censer 0.000 0.002 0.002
Unas. 39CS01 TA-39 TA-39, surface Otumba Polished Tan 0.000 0.000 0.000
Unas. 39FS01 TA-39 TA-39, surface figurine frag., III 0.000 0.000 0.054
Unas. 57CR01 TA-57 TA-57, surface long-handle censer 0.000 0.000 0.000
Unas. 57CS02 TA-57 TA-57, surface Otumba Polished Tan 0.000 0.000 0.000
Unas. 80FS06 Otumba TA-80, surface figurine frag., III 0.000 0.000 0.000
Unas. 80FS13 Otumba TA-80, surface figurine frag., III 0.000 0.000 0.264
Unas. 80FS15 Otumba TA-80, surface figurine frag., animal 0.000 0.000 0.000
Unas. 80FS21 Otumba TA-80, surface figurine frag., III 0.000 0.000 0.316
Unas. 80FS23 Otumba TA-80, surface figurine frag., III 0.000 0.000 0.230
Unas. 80FS25 Otumba TA-80, surface figurine frag., I 0.000 0.002 1.167
(continued )
314 Neff et al.

Table 2. Continued

Group Membership Probabilities

Composition
Group Analysis ID Site Provenience Description Chalco Texcoco Otumba

Unas. 80X102 Otumba TA-80, Op. 10 Otumba Polished Tan 0.000 0.000 0.000
Unas. 80X107 Otumba TA-80, Op. 10 long-handle censer 0.000 0.000 0.010
Unas. 80X109 Otumba TA-80, Op. 10 long-handle censer 0.000 0.000 0.942
Unas. 80X112 Otumba TA-80, Op. 11 long-handle censer 1.891 0.021 1.864
Unas. 80X113 Otumba TA-80, Op. 11 long-handle censer 0.000 0.000 0.000
Unas. 80X408 Otumba TA-80, Op. 4 (Fig. W.S.) fired lump 0.000 0.000 0.001
Unas. 80X417 Otumba TA-80, Op. 4 (Fig. W.S.) figurine frag., III 0.000 0.000 0.000
Unas. 80X429 Otumba TA-80, Op. 4 (Fig. W.S.) figurine frag., III 0.000 0.000 1.055
Unas. 80X432 Otumba TA-80, Op. 4 (Fig. W.S.) Otumba Polished Tan 0.000 0.000 0.002
Unas. 80X446 Otumba TA-80, Op. 4 (Fig. W.S.) long-handle censer 0.000 0.000 0.000
Unas. 80X448 Otumba TA-80, Op. 4 (Fig. W.S.) long-handle censer 0.000 0.000 0.000
Unas. 80X501 Otumba TA-80, Op. 5 figurine frag., III mold 0.000 0.000 0.811
Unas. 80X505 Otumba TA-80, Op. 5 figurine frag., III 0.000 0.000 0.222
Unas. 80X904 Otumba TA-80, Op. 9 Otumba Polished Tan 0.000 0.000 0.005
Unas. TRCR04 SU 363 long-handle censer 0.000 0.000 0.000
Unas. TRCR11 SU 678 long-handle censer 0.000 0.000 0.000
Unas. TRFS01 SU 584 figurine frag., I 0.000 0.002 0.089
Unas. TRFS07 SU 667 figurine frag., col 0.000 0.000 0.000
Unas. TRFS11 SU 285 figurine frag., col 0.230 0.000 3.290
Unas. TRFS16 SU 340 figurine frag., I 0.000 0.000 0.343
Unas. TRFS23 SU 522 figurine frag., I 0.000 0.000 0.001

tions can be recognized. This group includes most of the Otumba
Polished Tan specimens from Otumba and figurines and incense
burners (Table 2). Cross-validated Mahalanobis distances from the
group centroid were calculated, and specimens distant enough from
the centroid to have less than 1% probability of membership in the
group were excluded from it (see Bishop and Neff 1989). A few
specimens with probabilities marginally greater than 1% (see
Table 2) were excluded from the group because key dimensions of
variation indicated they were inconsistent with the Otumba Ref-
erence Group profile and/or because including them attenuated the
discrimination between Otumba and other groups, especially Tex-
coco. Also, several unassigned Black-on-Orange specimens show
moderately high probabilities of belonging both to Otumba and to
one of the other eastern basin groups (Table 2). A canonical dis-
criminant analysis of the five Basin of Mexico reference groups
(Figure 4) effectively separates Otumba from the other groups on
the first two discriminant axes.
Along with the Otumba Reference Group, two smaller groups
were recognized in the ceramic sample from the Otumba project.
The larger of the two, which is designated Trade Route Group 1,
includes a variety of pottery and figurines from Otumba, Tepeap-
ulco, and Tulancingo (Table 2). A smaller group, designated Trade
Route Group 2, consists exclusively of ceramics (five censers and
one figurine) from the Tulancingo city-state located at the north-
eastern extreme of the trade-route survey. As shown in Figure 5,
both smaller groups fall at the low extreme of transition metal con-
centrations compared to other reference groups from the eastern
Basin of Mexico.
There are several grounds for inferring provenience of the three
groups identified in the Otumba sample. First, there is a general
trend in transition metal concentrations within the Basin of Mex-
ico from high values in the south to low values in the north. This
trend may be attributed to the increasing contribution of quater-
nary basalts to the sediments as one moves from north to south
within the basin. In a study of Aztec red ware, Minc (1994) also
noted this geographic trend in transition metal concentrations (spe-
cifically, chromium) and suggested that red ware with high chro-
mium concentrations probably comes from the Chalco–Tenango–
Amecameca area and that red ware with low chromium comes from
the Texcoco region. In the MURR databank, the Chalco Reference
Group (which, as noted above, is tied to the southern basin by raw
materials) falls at the enriched extreme of the continuum (Fig-
ure 5). Continuing north along the eastern side of the basin, Tex-
coco shows lower transition metal values than does Chalco, and
the three groups recognized in the Otumba sample show even lower
values still. There is a parallel trend along the western side of the
basin, with Tenochtitlan/Ixtapalapa lying at an intermediate posi-
tion and Cuautitlan lying at the low extreme. The canonical dis-
criminant analysis (Figure 4) captures the trend from south to
northwest along Discriminant Function 1 and the trend from south
to northeast on Discriminant Function 2.
Other evidence strengthens the case for a Teotihuacan valley
provenience for the Otumba Reference Group. The group con-
tains high frequencies of presumed local products, including fig-
urines and Otumba Polished Tan, and this would indicate a local
provenience for the group based on the criterion of abundance
(Bishop et al. 1982). Further, one specimen included in the group,
11MD03, is a waster found in the lapidary-workshop excavation.
Finally, the most conclusive evidence favoring a local source for
specimens in the Otumba Reference Group comes from compar-
ison of raw materials to the group using Mahalanobis distances:
as shown in Figure 6, probabilities of group membership for the
raw clays peak on the Teotihuacan-valley alluvium slightly west
of Otumba.
Ceramics and obsidian from Otumba 315

Figure 4. Discriminant Axes 1 and 2 derived from a five-group canonical discriminant analysis of reference groups representing five
Basin of Mexico production zones.

Figure 5. Chromium and scandium concentrations in three ceramic reference groups from the eastern Basin of Mexico along with
two smaller groups recognized in the Otumba project sample.
316
Figure 6. Surface indicating variation in the probability sampled raw clays belong to the Otumba Reference Group. Probabilities are
based on 31 of 33 elemental concentrations (terbium and nickel excluded). Minimum probability is 1%, and contour interval is 2%.
Axis scales are UTM coordinates.
Due to their smaller size and the fact they are compositionally
more diverse than the basin reference groups, the two trade-route
groups are more difficult to link to production locations. Northern
basin proveniences for both groups, nonetheless, are suggested by
the low transition metal concentrations, as discussed above. In fact,
on both the iron–scandium plot (Figure 5) and the discriminant-
analysis plot (Figure 7), both groups fall at an even more extreme
position than Otumba, which might indicate a provenience north
and/or east of the Teotihuacan valley.
Trade Route Group 1 is dominated by Aztec II Black-on-
Orange and red ware from Otumba together with figurines and
long-handle censers from the vicinity of Tepeapulco. The proba-
bility surface for this group shows its highest peak in the south-
western Teotihuacan valley, at the edge of the Patlachique foothills
(Figure 8). There are other high spots, however, including two oth-
ers at the edge of the Teotihuacan-valley alluvium, one on the north-
ern flank of Cerro Gordo and one in the vicinity of Tepeapulco.
Since there is no evidence of Aztec II occupation near Tepeapulco,
it seems unlikely the Aztec Black-on-Orange and red ware origi-
nated in that area. One possibility is that the group, as currently
constituted, includes ceramics derived from broadly similar raw
materials available in several locations. As the northern basin ce-
ramic sample increases in size, we anticipate the nature of com-
positional variation within this group (i.e., whether it is one group
or several) will become clearer and the reliability of our assess-
Neff et al.
ment of provenience(s) of the group(s) will improve. At present, it
seems safest to conclude that this group may derive from one or
more locations in or adjacent to the Teotihuacan valley or, possi-
bly, in the Tepeapulco area.
The six specimens in Trade Route Group 2 would appear to de-
rive from the Tulancingo region on several grounds. First, the only
proveniences represented in the group are at the extreme northern
(Tulancingo) end of the trade-route survey. Second, extrapolating
the geographic trends inferred for both the chromium–scandium
plot (Figure 5) and the discriminant-analysis plot (Figure 7), the
data for this group represent an extreme northern profile. Finally,
although the group is very small and the probability surface (Fig-
ure 9) was therefore calculated from only four principal compo-
nents, it is evident that the clays most similar to the group lie to
the northeast of the Teotihuacan valley. Again, as the ceramic sam-
ple increases in size, we anticipate that the provenience of this
group will become clearer.
Provenience of the Unassigned Ceramics
As mentioned previously, there are three groups of unassigned spec-
imens, Aztec II Black-on-Orange, Aztec II red ware, and miscel-
laneous. Compositional affiliations of these specimens can be
evaluated with reference to the well-defined Basin of Mexico ref-
erence groups.
Ceramics and obsidian from Otumba 317

Figure 7. Same canonical discriminant-function plot shown in Figure 4, but with Trade Route Groups 1 and 2 and unassigned
specimens plotted along with ellipses representing the 90% probability level for membership in the five basin reference groups.

Figure 8. Surface indicating variation in the probability that sampled raw clays belong to Trade Route Group 1. Probabilities are based
on Principal Components 1 through 9 of the raw clay data. Minimum probability is 20%, and the contour interval is 5%. Axis scales
are UTM coordinates.
318
Figure 9. Surface indicating variation in the probability sampled raw clays belong to Trade Route Group 2. Probabilities are based on
Principal Components 1 through 4 of the raw clay data. Minimum probability is 14%, and contour interval is 2%. Axis scales are
UTM coordinates.
Most of the Aztec II Black-on-Orange specimens appear to
have originated in one or another of the eastern basin produc-
tion centers based on Mahalanobis distance-based probabilities
of group membership (Table 2; although not shown, none ex-
ceeds 1% probability for membership in the Tenochtitlan-
Ixtapalapa or Cuauhtitlan groups). Although the probabilities
indicate many Black-on-Orange specimens come from Chalco,
their positions in the discriminant space (Figure 7) and on the
chromium–scandium plot (Figure 10) are more consistent with a
Texcoco provenience. The two Black-on-Orange specimens in
Trade Route Group 1 probably come from somewhere around the
Teotihuacan valley, as discussed above. There seems little doubt
that most Aztec II Black-on-Orange was imported to Otumba from
production centers to the south and west, in the vicinities of Tex-
coco and/or Chalco.
None of the Aztec II red-ware specimens exceeds 1% probability
of membership in any of the basin reference groups (see Table 2 for
three of the groups), but a general eastern basin attribution seems
likely for most of them based on the discriminant analysis (Fig-
ure 7). Both the discriminant analysis and the chromium–scandium
plot (Figure 10) also show that the red-ware samples are composi-
tionally diverse. Chromium and scandium concentrations range from
sufficiently enriched to be consistent with a Chalco provenience to
sufficiently diluted to be consistent with an Otumba provenience; the
Neff et al.
five Aztec II red-ware specimens in Trade Route Group 1 are, of
course, even more “northern” (diluted) in their transition metal pro-
files. As mentioned above, Minc (1994) argued that high-chromium
Aztec red ware originated in the Chalco–Tenango–Amecameca re-
gion, while low-chromium Aztec red ware originated farther north,
perhaps around Texcoco. Based on this inference and our own ob-
servations about transition metal trends in the eastern basin, there
seems little doubt that the Aztec II red-ware sample from Otumba
originated in several production centers stretching south from
Otumba, perhaps as far as the Chalco basin.
The miscellaneous unassigned specimens are outliers relative
to all of the well-defined basin reference groups (Table 2). None-
theless, the results of projecting these specimens into the discrim-
inant space of the reference groups (Figure 7) and onto the
chromium–scandium plot (Figure 10) indicate that most of them
have compositions consistent with a provenience in the Otumba
or Texcoco regions. Slight variations in resource procurement
and/or paste preparation may be inferred to have caused them to
diverge from the reference-group profiles. Extreme outliers, which
are labeled in Figures 7 and 10, include the following: 80FS15, a
possible import from the south, perhaps beyond the Chalco ba-
sin; TRFS07, which appears to be an anomalous composition from
somewhere in the northern basin; and 80X446, which may rep-
resent an extreme composition from the Otumba–Texcoco region.
Ceramics and obsidian from Otumba
Figure 10. Chromium–scandium plot (same as Figure 5) with unassigned Otumba project samples plotted along with ellipses for
eastern basin reference groups and the two trade-route groups.
DISCUSSION
The combined data from obsidian and ceramic sourcing document
some of the material interactions that linked the Aztec town of
Otumba with surrounding regions of Central Mexico.
Obsidian
The obsidian data document exploitation of the local Otumba
source, presumably for local blade and lapidary production. Ob-
sidian also came from more distant sources such as Pachuca and
Tulancingo. The obsidian associated with the lapidary workshop
indicates an increased use of more distant obsidian source areas
by this workshop over those used by the household represented by
the Aztec II materials. Additional analyses of gray obsidian from
other Late Aztec deposits should help evaluate this tendency.
One fingerprint identified in the Otumba obsidian sample re-
mains of unknown derivation. Since this fingerprint is the second
most frequent of the gray-obsidian fingerprints, it may come from
a source not far from Otumba. It may be from a previously un-
sampled flow within the Otumba source area or, perhaps, the Teco-
comulco (Paredon) source area. Additional survey and analysis of
samples from both of these source areas are being undertaken in
an effort to identify the source of the unknown fingerprint.
319
Ceramics
The only apparent ceramic imports to Otumba date to the Early Az-
tec period. They include Aztec II Black-on-Orange specimens that
may come from Chalco and/or Texcoco along with Aztec II red-
ware specimens that also seem to have originated somewhere to the
south and west of Otumba. Although a source somewhere in or near
the Teotihuacan valley seems most likely for the Aztec II Black-on-
Orange and red ware in Trade Route Group 1, it is possible that they
originated to the north and east of Otumba, perhaps near Tepeap-
ulco. Contradicting this interpretation, very little evidence was en-
countered on the survey of Aztec II occupation around Tepeapulco.
These ambiguities will probably disappear when we have a larger
sample and a better understanding of Trade Route Group 1.
The sample from Otumba reported here does not include Aztec
III Black-on-Orange, so we cannot yet say whether these deco-
rated serving dishes might have been made locally or imported
from production centers in Texcoco, Tenochtitlan, or elsewhere.
Analysis of a large sample of Aztec III Black-on-Orange from
Otumba and other northeast basin sites is currently underway.
The Aztec III sample from Otumba and its dependencies con-
sists mainly of figurines, Otumba Polished Tan, and long-handle
censers. Most of these specimens fall into a single compositional
group, which can be inferred confidently to represent local pro-
duction in the immediate vicinity of the Aztec town. This is grat-
320
ifying, since a large number of the sampled figurines come from
an archaeological context interpreted as a figurine workshop. The
unassigned examples of these types and the seven unassigned sam-
ples of production debris from the Otumba lapidary workshop (Op-
eration 11) probably reflect peculiarities of local ceramic resource
use and/or divergent paste preparation. With the possible excep-
tions of censer 80X446 and figurine 80FS15, none of the un-
assigned specimens from Otumba seems likely to have originated
from a nonlocal source.
The diversity of figurines produced at Otumba is somewhat sur-
prising. Although, as Table 2 indicates, five figurine types (I, II,
III, animal, and early Colonial) are included in the Otumba Ref-
erence Group, there is minimal archaeological evidence for pro-
duction of Type I and Type II figurines at Otumba. The evidence
includes a single Type I mold; it is possible that other molds for
these types may not yet have been recognized. Otumba figurine
workshops distributed Type III and other figurines within Otumba
and its dependencies within the city-state and exported them to
the Tepeapulco city-state (Table 2).
Figurines also appear to have been made outside Otumba. Based
on the results discussed above, it appears that animal figurines and
Type III figurines in Trade Route Group 1 found near Tepeapulco
may have originated near Tepeapulco based on the results dis-
cussed above. The single Type I figurine in Trade Route Group 2
found in the Tulancingo area appears to have been made locally,
although archaeological work in the Tulancingo valley has never
found evidence of any ceramic workshops. Unfortunately, small
group sizes cloud the issue of source determination for specimens
in both of these groups. As mentioned previously, a larger sample
of figurines and ceramics from sites along the trade route will fur-
ther refine our interpretation of these reference groups.
In contrast to the figurines, there is no evidence that long-handle
censers were circulated by exchange or any other means. All of the
censers in the Otumba Reference Group were found within the city-
state. Of six censers sampled from near Tepeapulco, five are prob-
ably local (since they are in Trade Route Group 1). Similarly, of six
censers from the Tulancingo region, five fall into Trade Route Group
RESUMEN
Artefactos de obsidiana y cerámica procedentes de Otumba y sitios a lo
largo de la ruta de intercambio hacia Tulancingo, Hidalgo, fueron analiza-
dos por activación de neutrones en el laboratorio de arqueometría del Re-
actor Nuclear de la Universidad de Missouri (MURR). Se determinaron
las fuentes de obsidiana por medio de una comparación con la base de
datos de obsidiana de México central de MURR. Los artefactos de cerámica
fueron asignados a uno de los grupos de referencia que ya están definidos
para la Cuenca de México. Se identificaron zonas de producción para es-
tos grupos cerámicos por una comparación con barros crudos recolectados
en varios sectores de la Cuenca. Obsidiana encontrada en el lapidario (Op-
eración 11) en Otumba viene predominantemente de la fuente cerca de
Otumba y de Pachuca, la fuente de obsidiana verde que está al norte del
sitio de Otumba. Se identificó también un perfil químico desconocido en-
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
We gratefully acknowledge support from the National Science Foundation
for the Archaeometry Laboratory at the Missouri University Research Re-
actor (DBS-9102016 and SBR-9503035). Thanks also to Cynthia Hays and
Sergio Herrera for helping with all phases of the analysis and to M. Nieves
Neff et al.
2 and thus were probably made in the Tulancingo region. (The re-
maining two censers from the trade-route survey are unassigned.)
Local production and consumption of censers seem to have been the
rule. Again, better sampling of trade-route ceramics and raw mate-
rials is required to confirm this hypothesis.
CONCLUSION
We anticipate a number of issues raised in the present article will
be clarified by additional raw material and artifact analyses cur-
rently in progress. Additional sampling of obsidian sources may
identify the source of the unknown fingerprint. Additional sam-
pling of obsidian artifacts will test the hypothesis that access to
more distant sources increased between Early and Late Aztec times.
Sampling of Aztec III Black-on-Orange will indicate whether
Otumba made its own serving dishes and how much may have
been imported from Texcoco, Tenochtitlan, or other basin sources.
Additional ceramic sampling may also help refine our interpreta-
tion of Trade Route Groups 1 and 2.
The major contribution of this ceramic study is the definition of
a ceramic compositional reference group for the immediate vicin-
ity of Otumba. There are now three reference groups representing
subregions of the eastern basin (Chalco, Texcoco, and Otumba).
Both the Chalco Reference Group (Neff and Hodge 2001) and the
Otumba Reference Group (this study) are tied securely to loca-
tions on the ground because the samples from geological contexts
fall within the ranges of chemical variation of the ceramic groups.
The Otumba group, as reported here, is derived from clays pro-
cured from the Teotihuacan-valley alluvium adjacent to Otumba.
Our success in finding raw materials similar in composition to
our ceramic reference groups validates the approach to ceramic
source determination outlined at the outset (see Neff 1998). To
reiterate, the approach couples definition of reference groups within
the sample of unknown ceramics with extensive raw-material sam-
pling. We anticipate that continued application of this approach
will help us refine our source attributions for the other Basin of
Mexico reference groups.
tre la obsidiana analizada. Se sugiere que este perfil pertenece a un
yacimiento localizado dentro de una de las fuentes cercanas, como Otumba
o Paredón. La mayoría de los artefactos de cerámica son miembros de un
grupo químico que claramente proviene de los barros aluviales del valle de
Teotihuacán. Algunas muestras del tipo Negro-sobre-anaranjado de la fase
Azteca II y algunas muestras de la vajilla Azteca roja representan otros
centros de fabricación del lado este de la Cuenca de México. Se encon-
traron algunos perfiles químicos diferentes entre las muestras analizadas
de sitios a lo largo de la ruta de intercambio. Aunque hay muestras de
figurillas que probablemente se originaron en los talleres de Otumba, otras
figurillas y algunos incensarios de mango largo son químicamente difer-
entes, y probablemente se originaron en las regiones de Tepeapulco o
Tulancingo.
Zedeño for correcting the Spanish summary. The fieldwork at Otumba and
subsequent analyses of the materials obtained were supported by National
Science Foundation Grant BNS-8719665 to Thomas H. Charlton and BNS-
8718149 to Deborah L. Nichols. The National Endowment for the Human-
Ceramics and obsidian from Otumba
ities also supported the research through two research grants to Thomas H.
Charlton, RO-21705-88 and RO-22268-91. Deborah Nichols also received
support from the Claire Garber Goodman Fund, the Dartmouth Class of
1962, and the Dartmouth Faculty Research Committee. Thomas Charlton
also received support from the University of Iowa. The raw-materials sur-
REFERENCES
Baxter, Michael J.
1992 Archaeological Uses of the Biplot-A Neglected Technique? In
Computer Applications and Quantitative Methods in Archaeology,
1991, edited by G. Lock and J. Moffett, pp. 141–148. BAR Inter-
national Series S577. Tempus Reparatum, Archaeological and Histor-
ical Associates, Oxford.
Bishop, Ronald L., and Hector Neff
1989 Compositional Data Analysis in Archaeology. In Archaeological
Chemistry IV, edited by R.O. Allen, pp. 576–586. Advances in Chem-
istry Series 220. American Chemical Society, Washington, DC.
Bishop, Ronald L., Robert L. Rands, and George R. Holley
1982 Ceramic Compositional Analysis in Archaeological Perspective.
In Advances in Archaeological Method and Theory, vol. 5, edited by
Michael B. Schiffer, pp. 275–330. Academic Press, New York.
Charlton, Thomas H., Deborah L. Nichols, and Cynthia Otis Charlton
2000 Otumba and Its Neighbors: Ex Oriente Lux. Ancient Mesoamer-
ica 11:247–265.
Cobean, Robert H., James R. Vogt, Michael D. Glascock, and Terence L.
Stocker
1991 High-Precision Trace-Element Characterization of Major Meso-
american Obsidian Sources and Further Analyses of Artifacts from
San Lorenzo Tenochtitlan, Mexico. Latin American Antiquity 2:69–91.
Glascock, Michael D.
1992 Characterization of Archaeological Ceramics at MURR by Neu-
tron Activation Analysis and Multivariate Statistics. In Chemical Char-
acterization of Ceramic Pastes in Archaeology, edited by H. Neff,
pp. 11–26. Prehistory Press, Madison, WI.
Glascock, Michael D., Hector Neff, Katherine Stryker, and Taryn N. Johnson
1994 Sourcing Archaeological Obsidian by an Abbreviated NAA
Procedure. Journal of Radioanalytical and Nuclear Chemistry
180(1):29–35.
321
vey was funded by National Science Foundation grants to Charlton (SBR-
9714583) and Nichols (SBR-9707462) and by the Reiss Fund for Senior
Faculty Research, Nelson A. Rockefeller Center for the Social Sciences at
Dartmouth College (Deborah L. Nichols, principal investigator).
Hodge, Mary G., and Hector Neff
2001 Xaltocan in the Economy of the Basin of Mexico: A View from
Ceramic Tradewares. In Postclassic Xaltocan: Ecological and Social
Determinants of Production in the Northern Basin of Mexico, edited
by E. Brumfiel, in press.
Hodge, Mary G., Hector Neff, M. James Blackman, and Leah D. Minc
1992 A Compositional Perspective on Ceramic Production in the Az-
tec. In Chemical Characterization of Ceramic Pastes in Archaeology,
edited by H. Neff, pp. 203–220. Prehistory Press, Madison, WI.
1993 The Regional Structure of Black-on-Orange Ceramic Produc-
tion in the Aztec Empire’s Heartland. Latin American Antiquity
4:130–157.
Minc, Leah D.
1994 Political Economy and Market Economy under Aztec Rule: A
Regional Perspective Based on Decorated Ceramic Production and
Distribution Systems in the Valley of Mexico. Ph.D. dissertation, Uni-
versity of Michigan.
Neff, Hector
1994 RQ-Mode Principal Components Analysis of Ceramic Compo-
sitional Data. Archaeometry 36:115–130.
1998 Units in Chemistry-Based Provenance Investigations of Ceram-
ics. In Measuring Time, Space, and Material: Unit Issues in Archae-
ology, edited by A.F. Ramenofsky and A. Steffen, pp. 115–127.
University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.
Neff, Hector, and Mary G. Hodge
2001 Ceramic Production at Chalco, a.d. 500–1500: INAA of Deco-
rated Serving Dishes and Raw Clays. In Place of Jade: Society and
Economy in Ancient Chalco, edited by M.G. Hodge. Memoirs in Latin
American Archaeology. University of Pittsburgh, in press.
Otis Charlton, Cynthia
1993 Lapidary Production at Aztec Otumba. Ancient Mesoamerica
4:231–243.