1

Micro-Architecture of the Zapotec:

Physical Manifestations of a Metaphysical Concept

By Jessica Kindrick

Abstract:

The so-called “precursor” of Monte Albán, San José Mogote is one of the oldest sites in the Oaxaca Valley

and was the location of many innovations in pre-Columbian Mesoamerica. On Mound 1 a series of three, two-room

temple structures (known as Structures 36, 35, and 13) dating to Monte Alban Period II were built superimposed

over one another. A complex ritual scene of arranged ceramic figures (known as Feature 96) was placed in an

offering box and buried beneath the floor of the oldest of these temple structures.

These temples provide scholars with invaluable information regarding the sanctification and ceremonial

rituals performed within them at San José Mogote and other Zapotec sites. In this paper I contend that this “micro-

tomb” can be interpreted as a literal, physical representation of a metaphysical concept: the recognized separation

that was responsible for the two-room temple plan that would become standardized later at Monte Albán and other

sites under its control.

Introduction

During the Formative Period, the Valley of Oaxaca underwent an extreme upswing in

population, as well as the stratification of that population within a relatively short time span of

around one thousand years (Figure 1). The Rosario Phase – Monte Albán I transition was,

according to Blanton et al, “one of the most important episodes in the evolution” of the cultures

that thrived in the Valley of Oaxaca (Figure 2).1 The so-called “precursor” of Monte Albán, San

1 Richard E Blanton, et al., Monte Albán’s Hinterland, Part I: The Prehispanic Settlement Patterns of the Central

and Southern Parts of the Valley of Oaxaca, Mexico (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan, Museum of

Anthropology, 1982): 37.

2

José Mogote is one of the oldest sites in the Oaxaca Valley and was the location of many

innovations in pre-Columbian Mesoamerica (Figure 3). On Mound 1, a series of three, two-room

temple structures (known as Structures 36, 35, and 13) were built superimposed over one another

(Figure 4). The temple sequence spans almost the entirety of Monte Albán period II with

possible overlap into early Monte Albán III. An offering of a complex ritual scene (known as

Feature 96) buried beneath the floor of the oldest of these temple structures, along with four

other offering boxes, warrants a deeper investigation and particular attention (Figure 5).

First uncovered in 1974, these well preserved, superimposed temples provide scholars

with invaluable information regarding the sanctification and ceremonial rituals performed within

them at San José Mogote and other Zapotec sites. All three temples were constructed of adobe

brick with white-stuccoed walls and floors and were oriented facing west. This ritual scene of

figures and objects is arranged in and around a miniature tomb structure and includes five

ceramic effigy urns, a ceramic figure who kneels in a ceramic bowl, the complete skeleton of a

Bobwhite quail, and a pair of trimmed deer antlers. I would contend that, to better understand

how the Zapotec related to both their deceased ancestors and the supernatural forces they

revered, this “micro-tomb” can be interpreted as a literal, physical representation of a

metaphysical concept: the recognized separation (both between this world and the upper world

and between those specialists who communicated with the ancestors and the community at large

who relied on their services) that was responsible for the two-room temple plan that would later

become standardized at Monte Albán and other sites under its control.2

This assertion isn’t necessarily a groundbreaking one; however, the current state of the

literature fails to tease out much more than a surface level interpretation of this scene where it is

2 Elsa M. Redmond and Charles S. Spencer, “Rituals of Sanctification and the Development of Standardized

Temples in Oaxaca, Mexico,” Cambridge Archaeological Journal 18, no. 02 (June 2008): 257-258.

3

mentioned or addressed. Marcus and Flannery discuss it in numerous sources, both

collaboratively and on their own, as well as Redmond and Spencer. Adam Sellen has also

discussed the ceramic vessels known as Cocijo urns. By interpreting and analyzing various lines

of evidence through a cosmological framework, we can come to better understand the ways in

which the Zapotec related to their ancestors and revered supernaturals, how different

communities related to one another, and how we can possibly better interpret Zapotec ritual and

its functions in larger society.

Zapotec “Micro-Architecture”

The tomb structure of the ritual scene of Feature 96 could be considered an example of

Zapotec “micro-architecture”. In a 1976 article, Bucher discusses “micro-architecture” within the

context of the Gothic style of the Medieval period, and claims that small scale architectural

structures, like reliquaries, were more relatable and more imperative to the general population

and their salvation than their grand, monumental-sized counterparts.3 Bucher makes sure to note

the often undervalued importance of the group experience to believers when linked to objects

imbued with mythical importance.4 There is also an analogy between his description of the

eventual role of the church as a “service structure” meant to house the smaller micro versions

and the Zapotec temple where the offering box containing Feature 96 was found.

Suggesting that these small, sacred objects can be analyzed in much the same way as

their macro brethren, Bucher emphasizes the blurring of lines that occurred between the creation

of the macro and micro; after all, the small scale model is often created with, at least, the same

artistry to be used in the larger final version. Beginning in the late thirteenth century, the same

3 François Bucher, “Micro-Architecture as the ‘Idea’ of Gothic Theory and Style.” Gesta 15, no. 1/2 (January 1,

1976): 71–89. 4 Bucher, 71.

4

design ideals were applied to the creation of both, until the design utilized in the smaller format

became so complex as to warrant its own genre entirely. And while the Zapotec example of a

“micro-tomb” was never intended to be seen by more than a few select individuals before burial,

the motivations for its creation and placement are comparable to the some of the motivations

discussed by Bucher. The way that the Zapotec would have related to the imagery represented

by, and in, this scene would have been comparable to the audience of Bucher’s objects. And in

the same way that Bucher observes that the “greatest mysteries of Christianity” were enclosed in

these Gothic micro-structures, the mysteries of the ancient Zapotec are embodied by this scene.

It is interesting to note that this example of a Zapotec micro-tomb is actually dissimilar to

at least one of its contemporary macro counterparts (Figure 6). It is, however, similar to an older

macro example found at San José Mogote (Figure 7).5 I would argue that this could indicate that

the micro-tomb is meant to represent the tomb of a long deceased ancestor who was the

progenitor of, or a very important member of, the ruling elite’s “dynasty”. This ancestor is the

one depicted atop the micro-tomb, who, according to Marcus and Flannery, is in mid-

transformation into one of the revered “cloud ancestors”.

During Monte Albán II, tombs of nobility became more elaborate in their construction, as

evidenced by Tomb 118 at Monte Albán (Figure 6). Before this they were generally one room, or

slightly divided one room, structures, Tomb 10 and 11 at an elite Rosario period residence at San

José Mogote being good examples (Figure 8). The plan of Tomb 11 is similar to the plan of

Feature 96’s micro-tomb and therefore supports my hypothesis; and almost as if ushering in the

standardization of the two-room temple plan, Tomb 11 has a two-chambered plan. Both tombs

were found to have been raided, only a small fragment of an obsidian implement remained on the

5 Joyce Marcus, and Kent V Flannery. Zapotec Civilization: How Urban Society Evolved in Mexico’s Oaxaca

Valley. (New York, N.Y.: Thames and Hudson, 1996): 180-181.

5

floor of Tomb 11 and a few bone, projectile point, and obsidian fragments were left behind in a

pile of red ochre powder in Tomb 10.

Even more similarities are observable between this example of Zapotec micro-

architecture and a full size Olmec example from the site of La Venta that was also associated

with ancestor worship by way of red pigment and contemporary to Tomb 10 and 11 at San José

Mogote (Figure 9). The plans are similar; the materials are understandably different given

regional availability of supply and construction styles. The Olmec example from La Venta is

full-sized, but it is miniature in the sense that it is a smaller tomb in which infants were interred.

There is also a corollary in the orientation of the site of LaVenta at eight degrees west of north

and the orientation of one of the earliest ceremonial buildings in San José Mogote, sometimes

referred to as a “Men’s House”. Another thing the two structures have in common is the link to

implements of autosacrificial activities: stingray spines of obsidian at San José Mogote and ones

made of jade at La Venta were found in the associated archaeological contexts. 6 Marcus and

Flannery have acknowledged the links between these tomb structures before, Marcus addressing

this comparison specifically.7

A Pervading Dichotomy

In this paper, I argue that this dichotomy of upper/lower and inner/outer is observable in

the ritual scene of Feature 96, which was buried under the floor of Structure 36, a two-room

temple dating to Monte Albán period at San José Mogote in the Etla arm of the Oaxaca Valley.

Recently radio carbon dated to 60 BCE – 90 CE, Structure 36 was the first two-room temple in a

6 Marcus and Flannery. Zapotec Civilization, 138.

7 Christina T Halperin, et al, Mesoamerican Figurines: Small-Scale Indices of Large-Scale Social Phenomena

(Gainesville: University Press of Florida, 2009): 28-29.

6

series of three that were superimposed upon one another.8 Before the next two-room temple

(Structure 35) was built over the razed remains of Structure 36, sometime between 10 BCE – 140

CE, a total of five offering boxes were deposited underneath the floor of Structure 36.9 In about

another hundred years, Structure 35 was covered and a final temple (Structure 13) was built over

it approximately 100-200 CE.

In their 2004 article, Marcus and Flannery propose the idea that the ritual razing and

rebuilding of these two-room temples at San José Mogote coincides with a 52-year calendar

cycle. The later Aztec culture are also known for their use of a 52-year cycle, believing that the

world would end “unless all old fires were extinguished and new fires lit, both in the main

temple and on surrounding mountaintops” at the end of every cycle.10

While Marcus and

Flannery make sure to note that we have no knowledge of what rites were conducted upon

cycle’s end, they are also quick to emphasize the Zapotec tendency of building new temples over

the remains of leveled ones. They claim that this particular temple sequence provides an

opportunity to test this hypothesis, even though upon completing their analysis this can be

neither confirmed nor excluded as a possibility.11

Redmond and Spencer also discuss this

possibility in their 2008 article for Cambridge Archaeological Journal.12

The offering box containing Feature 96 was deposited underneath the floor of Structure

35 along with four other boxes before it was covered with a layer of soft adobe debris. This layer

of debris preserved the temple as well as a large number of obsidian implements found scattered

on southern end of the floor (Figure 10). These implements included daggers and prismatic

8 Joyce Marcus and Kent V. Flannery, “The Coevolution of Ritual and Society: New 14 C Dates from Ancient

Mexico,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 101, no. 52 (December

28, 2004): 18259. 9 Marcus and Flannery, “The Coevolution of Ritual and Society”, 18259.

10 Marcus and Flannery, “The Coevolution of Ritual and Society”, 18260.

11 Marcus and Flannery, “The Coevolution of Ritual and Society”, 18261.

12 Elsa M. Redmond, and Charles S. Spencer. “Rituals of Sanctification and the Development of Standardized

Temples in Oaxaca, Mexico.” Cambridge Archaeological Journal 18, no. 02 (June 2008): 239–266.

7

blades known to be used for bloodletting rituals and sacrificing small animals such as birds. In

fact, bird remains were also found during excavation in various places throughout the three

structures. Access to the inner room was generally restricted to the religious specialists who

would take the offerings left by petitioners in the outer room to complete the offering or

sacrifice, presumably, before a figure of a revered supernatural.

Two-Room Temple Plan

Flannery and Marcus argue that the standardization of a two-room temple plan indicates

the implementation of a “state religion” facilitated by “specialized priests” that would endure

throughout the Classic and Historic periods.13

The addition of a second room to the Zapotec

temple plan was observably in place by Monte Albán II, and one of the best known (but not

earliest) examples was uncovered by Caso on Building X, located northeast of Monte Albán’s

Main Plaza (Figure 11).14

Acosta uncovered another earlier temple underneath Caso’s discovery;

there was also an offering box deposited beneath the floor of this temple (presumably before the

later one was built over it as observed at San José Mogote).

Because Monte Albán underwent many construction phases, its oldest structures have

still not been uncovered; however, an early example of the two-room temple type was discovered

at Cerro Tilcajete in the Valle Grande arm of the Oaxaca Valley (Figure 12).15

By Monte Albán

II, the Ocotlán-Zimatlán polity that controlled the area of San Martin Tilcajete had finally been

conquered by the controlling elite at Monte Albán and Cerro Tilcajete was serving as a

13

K.V. Flannery & J. Marcus, “The origins of the state in Oaxaca: editors’ introduction”, in The Cloud People:

Divergent Evolution of the Zapotec and Mixtec Civilizations, eds. K.V. Flannery & J. Marcus (New York, NY:

Academic Press, 1983): 82; and J Marcus, & K.V. Flannery, Zapotec Civilization: How Urban Society Evolved in

Mexico’s Oaxaca Valley (London: Thames & Hudson, 1996): 182, 222. 14

Marcus and Flannery, Zapotec Civilization, 182. 15

Christina M. Elson,

Oaxaca. (Ann Arbor, Mich.: Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, 2007): 47-48.

8

secondary center to the state, much like San José Mogote at this point in time. Unlike San José

Mogote however, Cerro Tilcajete was a completely new site.16

The ruling elite at Monte Albán

had ties to the group of people sometimes referred to as the “Jaguar clan” from the Olmec

heartland. Blanton has suggested that Monte Albán was founded without regard to “practical

economic matters or subsistence”;17

therefore, secondary centers like San José Mogote and Cerro

Tilcajete, mentioned earlier, all more important to Monte Albán’s empire (Figure 13).

Physical Manifestations of the Metaphysical

Marcus and Flannery have interpreted the complex scene of Feature 96 as representing a

deceased Zapotec “Lord” transforming into a “Cloud Person” or “Flying Figure” who now can

communicate with Lightning.18

Additionally, they assert that the scene could represent a royal

ancestor of the kneeling figure (the noble acompañante) within the miniature tomb, or the partial

metamorphosis of that same individual, caught at a stage where its body is still that of a human

but the face is that of the lighting god Cociyo's. A cape flows behind the figure, who sits up on

its elbows holding a wooden stick and a bifurcated object that Marcus and Flannery identify as a

serpent tongue, they link these implements to the proliferation of agriculture. As already

mentioned, the agricultural capabilities of San José Mogote would have been very important to

the elite at Monte Albán who depended on the foodstuffs grown there.

Sellen has studied these Cocijo urns as well, voicing support for the links drawn between

Cocijo as a revered supernatural and the ancient Mesoamerican rain-god Tlaloc by Caso and

16

Christina M Elson, Excavations at Cerro

Oaxaca. (Ann Arbor, Mich.: Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, 2007): xi. 17

Richard E. Blanton, “The Founding of Monte Albán,” in The Cloud People: Divergent Evolution of the Zapotec

and Mixtec Civilizations (Academic Press, 1983), 84. 18

Marcus and Flannery. Zapotec Civilization, 70-71.

9

Bernal despite Marcus’s objections, citing Marcus’ own ethnographic work as evidence.19

Marcus’ objections to this comparison seem strange given that Marcus and Flannery have

compared Monte Albán’s “synoikism” to that of Ancient Greece, yet she is opposed to referring

to these entities as deities, claiming that it is not appropriate to view a corpus of Mesoamerican

super naturals as a “pantheon”.20

Marcus and Flannery have interpreted the four Cocijo urns

found nearby the micro-tomb as the “four companions” of Cocijo: rain, wind, clouds, and hail.

The inclusion of these four accompanying super-natural forces has precedence in Oaxaca as

observable in a Zapotec effigy vessel of Cocijo with four containers attached behind the effigy

figure, and is largely what Marcus and Flannery based their interpretation on I’m sure (Figure

14).21

Every aspect of the ritual scene known as Feature 96 was predetermined and carefully

arranged. The motivation behind the deposition of the five offering boxes found under the floor

of Structure 36 may never be known with any amount of certainty, but the possible

interpretations put forth by Zapotec scholars help us better understand the nature of the society

that lived at San José Mogote and how they interacted with Monte Albán. This site would

eventually be overshadowed by the rise of Monte Albán as a regional center by 500 BCE,

although many of the forms and styles seen at San José Mogote are also observable at this later

site. The importance of secondary centers like San José Mogote and Cerro Tilcajete is

emphasized by Blanton who, as mentioned earlier, has posited that Monte Albán was founded

without regard to trade access or agricultural possibilities. If this is true, then these secondary

19

Adam T. Sellen, “Storm-God Impersonators from Ancient Oaxaca,” Ancient Mesoamerica 13, no. 01 (January

2002): 6. 20

Joyce Marcus, “Zapotec Religion”, in The Cloud People: Divergent Evolution of the Zapotec and Mixtec

Civilizations, edited by Kent Flannery and Joyce Marcus. (Academic Press: New York, 1983): 346-349. 21

Joyce Marcus, and Kent V. Flannery. “Ancient Zapotec Ritual and Religion: An Application of the Direct

Historical Approach.”, 59.

10

centers would have been responsible for supplying the elite at Monte Albán with necessary and

prestige-indicating goods and food.

If the temples included in the superimposed sequence were in fact ritually razed at the

end of cycle, then it could indicate a ritual rededication to stay in the favor of the super naturals

that they revered. These super-naturals, and the ancestors who would placate them on behalf of

their still living family members, were responsible for bringing fertility to crops and people; if

San José Mogote and Cerro Tilcajete were secondary centers to Monté Albán and supplied this

capital with food and other items then making sure that these sites were in good standing with

these super-naturals would have been of primary importance to the ruling elite.

This connection is emphasized by the similarities observable between the capital and

these secondary centers, but especially between Monte Albán and San José Mogote where the

two-room temple plan prevails and danzante figures appear. The symbolic red color is generally

associated with elite ancestor ritual and it can be seen at San José Mogote, Monte Albán, and

even the Olmec sites of San Lorenzo and La Venta and throughout Mesoamerica. Spatial

distinction of ritually accessible space is illustrated in the two-room temple plan as well as the

example of micro-architecture from San José Mogote known as Feature 96. The less sacred outer

temple is the equivalent of the interior of the micro-tomb where the ancestor figure, also

identified as an acompañante figure, who is covered in red pigment kneels in a bowl beside the

remains of a bobwhite quail offering. Inside this micro-tomb is literally where the ancestors’

representative was placed and buried to be housed forever.

Outside and atop the micro-tomb represents the upper realm of existence, where the

turtle-like ancestors reside among the clouds. The ascension of a human into this upper realm

may have required a human turtle ancestor transformation, which is depicted by the “flying”

11

ancestor figure shown either wearing a Cocijo mask or as having Cocijo’s face. And while

Klausmeyer’s drawing is better than having no representation of these artifacts at all, it leaves a

lot to be desired. In a 2011 photograph, Lorena Cassady captured an image of the rear of the

“flying” or “transforming” figure of Feature 96 and uploaded it to her Flickr account (Figure

15).22

Something that was noticeable in the drawing and emphasized in Cassady’s photo is the

tortoise-like feet of the figure; in the same vein, the figure’s posing mimics a turtle’s natural

stance as well. This turtle/tortoise link seems to be present in many native cultures of North

America, and it is usually a very primordial, highly revered creature in the realm of super-

naturals, and in the Zapotec case, they are associated with the ancestors. Another turtle/tortoise

link is present in the trimmed antler drumsticks, which could have been used to beat a turtle

drum.23

The Offering Boxes of Structure 35

The slab walls of the micro-tomb represent the physical and spiritual barrier between the

living and the realm of the supernatural as perceived by the Zapotec. Full time spiritual

specialists would have been present in the two-room temples to receive offerings that people

would bring and leave in the outer room, never crossing into the more sacred inner room where

only the specialist was allowed. The divide between the inner and outer rooms of the two-room

temple plan also represents the barrier represented by the slab walls of the micro-tomb. Under

the floor of the inner room is where the most impressive offerings (Features 94, 95, and 96) were

left. My thesis is also illustrated by the placement of these offering boxes left beneath the floor of

Structure 35.

22

This and more beautiful photos can be seen at http://www.flickr.com/photos/yaxchibonam/ 23

Joyce Marcus, “Rethinking Figurines” in Mesoamerican Figurines: Small-Scale Indices of Large-Scale Social

Phenomena. eds. Christina T Halperin, (Gainesville: University Press of Florida, 2009): 34.

12

Features 94 and 95 were deposited in stone offering boxes under the north end of the

floor of the inner room; 95 contained no remaining artifacts while 94 consisted of two human

effigies of jade and other small fragments lying in red pigmented powder.24

The two figures have

been interpreted by Marcus and Flannery as a possibly being “stand-ins” for sacrificed nobles.25

Feature 96 was deposited in an adobe offering box as opposed to stone and contained the

complex ritual scene arranged around the adobe walled, volcanic tuff topped, micro-tomb that

this paper has been considering. It is worth noting, once again, that the figure inside the micro-

tomb is covered in red powder.

This recurring red pigment indicates an intricate link between these offerings and the

revered cloud ancestors. The appearance of the symbolic red color in the offering boxes beneath

the floor of the more sacred inner room is not a coincidence as I would argue, but merely another

example of this metaphysical concept being manifested physically through architectural

structures. This hypothesis is further reinforced by the fact that Feature 93, left in an offering box

under the floor of the outer room, contained the remains of two quail bones because, as

mentioned elsewhere in this paper, the outer room of the two room temple is where petitioners

would leave offerings (including quail) for the religious specialist to take into the more sacred

inner room to offer to the super-naturals.26

Types of Mesoamerican Figurines

It is important to note the differences in form, function, and purpose of the types of

figurines found in the ritual scene of Feature 96. As Marcus observes, these deliberately arranged

24

Marcus and Flannery. “Ancient Zapotec Ritual and Religion”, 68. 25

Marcus and Flannery. “Ancient Zapotec Ritual and Religion”, 69. 26

Marcus and Flannery. “Ancient Zapotec Ritual and Religion”, 68.

13

scenes constitute primary contexts and can impart unadulterated knowledge to scholars.27

The

study of this scene, and other ritually arranged scenes like it, is relevant to at least four popular

research topics: ritual performance, social relations, gender, and ancestors. In addition to Feature

96 at San José Mogote, scenes similar to this one can be found at Monte Albán and

Xoxocotlan.28

The figurines of our ritual scene from Feature 96 are of two distinct types found in

Oaxaca. The five effigy vessels placed outside of the micro-tomb are known as Cocijo urns,

while the figure inside of the micro-tomb is a type known as acompañante figures, as designated

by Caso.29

My thesis is once again bolstered by the separation of the figure types inside and

outside the micro-tomb: the deified ancestor super-naturals being located outside and above the

tomb (representing the upper realm) and the soon-to-be deified kneeling ancestor (or

acompañante) figure on the inside of the micro-tomb representing life on the earthly realm.

Conclusion

The grandest physical incarnation of the metaphysical concept this paper has been

exploring could be said to be the founding of the elite capital of Monte Albán itself.30

With no

regard to trade access or agriculturally sound land, the ruling elite founded the new capital on a

series of low hills elevated 1,300 feet above the valley floor. This paper explored the physical

manifestations of a metaphysical concept recognized by the Zapotec that revolved around the

identified separation between the revered super-naturals and the living. Due to this separation,

communication with the super-naturals and/or deified ancestors who lived among them, had to

27

Marcus, “Rethinking Figurines”, 26. 28

Marcus, “Rethinking Figurines”, 31. 29

Caso 1938 and Caso and Bernal 1952, cited in Marcus, “Rethinking Figurines”, 33. 30

Kent V. Flannery, and Joyce Marcus. “Evolution of the Public Building in Formative Oaxaca.” In Cultural

Change and Continuity: Essays in Honor of James Bennett Griffin. (New York: Academic Press, 1976): 220.

14

be facilitated by full-time religious specialists. The incorporation of these full-time specialists

prompted the addition of the second room to the Zapotec temple that would become standardized

later at Monte Albán and other sites under its control.

A few different lines of evidence were discussed to support my thesis. This evidence

included the association of red pigment with ancestor veneration as seen throughout formative

Mesoamerica, the physical arrangement of the ritual scene of Feature 96, the cosmological basis

for the two-room temple plan, Zapotec tomb architecture, as well as the location of the offering

boxes deposited under the floor of Structure 35 at San José Mogote. I hope that my analysis,

while not revelatory in any significant sense, can shed light on the cosmological principles the

Zapotec lived by, but that are so often quickly generalized and unspecific for the purposes of

quick and simplified interpretation.

15

Figure 1. Site in the Valley of Oaxaca discussed in this paper.

16

Figure 2. Timeline for Mesoamerica and the Valley of Oaxaca.

17

Figure 3 (Above).

Artist Reconstruction of San

José Mogote.

Figure 4 (Right).

Three superimposed two-room

temples at San José Mogote.

18

Figure 5. Artist's reconstruction of the ritual scene from Feature 96, an offering box below the

floor of the Structure 35 temple.

19

Figure 6. Plan and cross-section of Tomb 118 at Monte Alban.

Figure 7. Tomb 11 at San José

Mogote, dates to the Rosario

Period.

20

Figure 8. Plan of a Rosario period, elite residence showing Tomb 10 and 11.

21

Figure 9. Tomb

A, otherwise

known as

Monument 7, at

La Venta.

Figure 10. Plan of

Structure 35 temple, with

the locations of obsidian

artefacts on the floor

shown by symbols.

22

Figure 11. Plan of two-room

temple on Mound X at Monte

Albán.

Figure 12. Plan of Structure 2,

Mound B, a two-room temple at

Cerro Tilcajete.

23

Figure 13. An artist reconstruction of Monte Alban.

Figure 14. Zapotec effigy

vessel showing an

anthropomorphic Cociyo, or

Lightning, with 4 containers on

his back.

24

Figure 15. The “Flying Figure” from Feature 96.

25

REFERENCES CITED

Beckmann, Jennifer, Charles S. Spencer, and Elsa M. Redmond. 2013. “Early State Development at

San Martín Tilcajete.” Accessed December 2.

http://research.amnh.org/anthropology/research/mca/projects/tilcajete.

Begun, Erica. 2008. “The Many Faces of Figurines.” Ancient Mesoamerica 19 (02) (September):

311–318.

Blanton, Richard E. 1996. Ancient Mesoamerica: A Comparison of Change in Three Regions.

Cambridge [England]: Cambridge University Press.

———. 1999. Ancient Oaxaca: The Monte Albán State. Cambridge, UK; New York, NY: Cambridge

University Press.

Blanton, Richard E, University of Michigan, and Museum of Anthropology. 1982. Monte Alban’s

Hinterland, Part I: The Prehispanic Settlement Patterns of the Central and Southern Parts of the

Valley of Oaxaca, Mexico. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan, Museum of Anthropology.

Blanton, Richard E. 1983. “The Founding of Monte Alban.” In The Cloud People: Divergent

Evolution of the Zapotec and Mixtec Civilizations, 83–87. Academic Press.

Blanton, Richard E., Jill Appel, Laura Finsten, Steve Kowalewski, Gary Feinman, and Eva Fisch.

1979. “Regional Evolution in the Valley of Oaxaca, Mexico.” Journal of Field Archaeology 6

(4): 369–390.

Blomster, Jeffrey P. 2002. “What and Where Is Olmec Style? Regional Perspectives on Hollow

Figurines in Early Formative Mesoamerica.” Ancient Mesoamerica 13 (02) (July): 171–195.

———. 2010. “Complexity, Interaction, and Epistemology: Mixtecs, Zapotecs, and Olmecs in Early

Formative Mesoamerica.” Ancient Mesoamerica 21 (01) (March): 135–149.

26

Boos, Frank. 1966. The Ceramic Sculptures of Ancient Oaxaca. South Brunswick [N.J.: A.S. Barnes.

Bucher, François. 1976. “Micro-Architecture as the ‘Idea’ of Gothic Theory and Style.” Gesta 15

(1/2) (January 1): 71–89. doi:10.2307/766753.

Cahn, Robert, and Marcus Winter. 1993. “The San José Mogote Danzante.” Indiana 13: 39–64.

“Center for the Future of Museums: Futures Studies 101: Implications Wheel.” 2011. Center for the

Future of Museums. http://futureofmuseums.blogspot.com/2011/11/futures-studies-101-

implications-wheel.html.

“Center for the Future of Museums: Futurist Friday: Internet Fail.” 2012. Center for the Future of

Museums. http://futureofmuseums.blogspot.com/2012/07/futurist-friday-internet-fail.html.

“Center for the Future of Museums: Museum Eras*—Creativaceous, CarbonNeutraliferous,

Developonian?” 2010. Center for the Future of Museums.

http://futureofmuseums.blogspot.com/2010/10/museum-erascreativaceous.html.

“Center for the Future of Museums: Navigating Conservation Futures.” 2011. Center for the Future of

Museums. http://futureofmuseums.blogspot.com/2011/12/navigating-conservation-futures.html.

“Center for the Future of Museums: Scanning for Change: Or How Important Work Can Sometimes

Look Like Wasting Time.” 2010. Center for the Future of Museums.

http://futureofmuseums.blogspot.com/2010/09/scanning-for-change-or-how-important.html.

“Center for the Future of Museums: Straight Up or with a Twist: Two Examples of How to Envision

the Future.” 2011. Center for the Future of Museums.

http://futureofmuseums.blogspot.com/2011/01/straight-up-or-with-twist-two-examples.html.

“Center for the Future of Museums: The Sneaky Nature of Change.” 2010. Center for the Future of

Museums. http://futureofmuseums.blogspot.com/2010/09/sneaky-nature-of-change.html.

27

Coe, Michael D, Richard A Diehl, and Jay I. Kislak Reference Collection (Library of Congress).

1980. In the Land of the Olmec. Austin: University of Texas Press.

Diehl, Richard A. 2004. The Olmecs: America’s First Civilization. New York, N.Y.: Thames &

Hudson.

Elson, Christina M, University of Michigan, and Museum of Anthropology. 2007.

. Ann Arbor,

Mich.: Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan.

Flannery, Kent V. 1976. The Early Mesoamerican Village. New York: Academic Press.

Flannery, Kent V, and Joyce Marcus. 1983. The Cloud People: Divergent Evolution of the Zapotec

and Mixtec Civilizations. New York: Academic Press.

Flannery, Kent V, Joyce Marcus, University of Michigan, and Museum of Anthropology. 2005.

Excavations at San José Mogote 1: the household archaeology. Ann Arbor: Museum of

Anthropology, University of Michigan.

Flannery, Kent V., and Joyce Marcus. 1976a. “Evolution of Thr Public Building in Formative

Oaxaca.” In Cultural Change and Continuity: Essays in Honor of James Bennett Griffin. New

York: Academic Press.

———. 1976b. “Formative Oaxaca and the Zapotec Cosmos: The Interactions of Ritual and Human

Ecology Are Traced in This Interpretation of a Prehistoric Settlement in Highland Mexico.”

American Scientist 64 (4) (August): 374–383.

Flannery, Kent V., and James Schoenwetter. 1970. “Climate and Man in Formative Oaxaca.”

Archaeology 23 (2) (April): 144–152.

“Gregg Easterbrook: ‘The King Of Sports’ | The Diane Rehm Show from WAMU and NPR.” 2013.

December 6. http://thedianerehmshow.org/shows/2013-12-09/gregg-easterbrook-king-sports.

28

Griffin, James B, and Charles E Cleland. 1976. Cultural Change and Continuity: Essays in Honor of

James Bennett Griffin. New York: Academic Press.

Guernsey, Julia. 2012. Sculpture and Social Dynamics in Preclassic Mesoamerica.

Halperin, Christina T, Society for American Archaeology, and Braunstein Symposium Annual

Meeting, ed. 2009. Mesoamerican Figurines: Small-Scale Indices of Large-Scale Social

Phenomena. Gainesville: University Press of Florida.

Henderson, John S. “Origin of the 260-Day Cycle in Mesoamerica.”

http://www.dartmouth.edu/~izapa/M-2.pdf.

Joyce, Arthur A. 2010. Mixtecs, Zapotecs, and Chatinos: Ancient Peoples of Southern Mexico.

Malden, Mass.: Wiley-Blackwell.

Knight, Vernon J. 2013. Iconographic Method in New World Prehistory. Cambridge; New York:

Cambridge University Press.

Kowalewski, Stephen A. 1976. “Prehispanic Settlement Patterns of the Central Part of the Valley of

Oaxaca, Mexico.”

Lelyveld, MaryJo. 2011. “Beyond Swabs and Solvent Gels: Using Scenarios to Generate, Evaluate

and Navigate Conservation Futures.” In . https://aam-us.org/docs/default-source/center-for-the-

future-of-museums/lelyveld---beyond-swabs-and-solvent-gels.pdf?sfvrsn=2.

Marcus, Joyce. 1998. Women’s ritual in formative Oaxaca: figurine-making, divination, death, and

the ancestors. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Museum of Anthropology.

Marcus, Joyce, and Kent V Flannery. 1996. Zapotec Civilization: How Urban Society Evolved in

Mexico’s Oaxaca Valley. New York, N.Y.: Thames and Hudson.

Marcus, Joyce, and Kent V. Flannery. 1994. “Ancient Zapotec Ritual and Religion: An Application of

the Direct Historical Approach.” In The Ancient Mind: Elements of Cognitive Archaeology,

29

edited by Ezra B. W. Zubrow and Colin Renfrew, 55–74. Cambridge University Press.

http://www.columbia.edu/itc/anthropology/v3922/pdfs/marcus_flannery.pdf.

———. 2004. “The Coevolution of Ritual and Society: New 14 C Dates from Ancient Mexico.”

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 101 (52)

(December 28): 18257–18261.

Merritt, Elizabeth. “Center for the Future of Museums.” Center for the Future of Museums.

http://futureofmuseums.blogspot.com/.

Moser, Christopher L, Kent V Flannery, and Marcus Winter. 1970. Preliminary Archeological

Investigations in the Valley of Oaxaca, Mexico, 1966-1969: A Report to the National Science

Foundatio . [S.l.]: Moser.

Neff, Hector. 2011. “Evolution of the Mesoamerican Mother Culture.” Ancient Mesoamerica 22 (01)

(March): 107–122.

“NMC Horizon Project Preview: 2013 Museum Edition.” 2013. The New Media Consortium.

http://www.nmc.org/pdf/2013-horizon-museum-preview.pdf.

Orr, Heather S, and Rex Koontz. 2009. Blood and Beauty: Organized Violence in the Art and

Archaeology of Mesoamerica and Central America. [Los Angeles, CA]: Cotsen Institute of

Archaeology Press.

Paddock, John, Ignacio Bernal, and Jay I. Kislak Reference Collection (Library of Congress). 1966.

Ancient Oaxaca; Discoveries in Mexican Archeology and History. Stanford, Calif.: Stanford

University Press.

Pannapacker, William. 2013. “No More Digitally Challenged Liberal-Arts Majors.” The Chronicle of

Higher Education, November 18. http://chronicle.com/article/No-More-Digitally-

Challenged/143079/.

30

Price, T. Douglas, Feinman, Gary M. 1993. Images of the Past. Mountain View, Calif.: Mayfield Pub.

Co.

Rappaport, Roy A. 1971. “The Sacred in Human Evolution.” Annual Review of Ecology and

Systematics 2: 23–44.

RAPPAPORT, ROY A. 1971. “Ritual, Sanctity, and Cybernetics1.” AMAN American Anthropologist

73 (1): 59–76.

Redmond, Elsa M., and Charles S. Spencer. 2008. “Rituals of Sanctification and the Development of

Standardized Temples in Oaxaca, Mexico.” Cambridge Archaeological Journal 18 (02) (June):

239–266.

Rickards, Constantine George. 1938. “Monograph on Ornaments on Zapotec Funerary Urns.” Journal

de La Société Des Américanistes: 147–166.

Schiro, Mike. 2013. “3D Scanning of Bruce Nauman’s ‘From Hand to Mouth.’” Hirshhorn Museum

and Sculpture Garden. Accessed December 9.

http://www.hirshhorn.si.edu/collection/conserving-modern-materials/.

Sellen, Adam T. 2002. “Storm-God Impersonators from Ancient Oaxaca.” Ancient Mesoamerica 13

(01) (January): 3–19.

———. 2011. “Sowing the Blood with the Maize: Zapotec Effigy Vessels and Agricultural Ritual.”

Ancient Mesoamerica 22 (01) (March): 71–89.

Sharer, Robert J, David C Grove, and Jay I. Kislak Reference Collection (Library of Congress). 1989.

Regional Perspectives on the Olmec. Cambridge [England]; New York: Cambridge University

Press.

31

Sherman, R. Jason, Leah Minc, Christina M. Elson, Charles S. Spencer, and Elsa M. Redmond. 2013.

“Trace-Element Analysis on Pottery from Oaxaca.” Accessed December 2.

http://research.amnh.org/anthropology/research/mca/projects/oaxaca.

Skidmore, Joel. 2013. “Evidence of Earliest Maya Writing.” MesoWeb.com. Accessed November 6.

http://www.mesoweb.com/reports/SanBartoloWriting.html.

Spencer, Charles S., and Elsa M. Redmond. 2004. “A Late Monte Alban I Phase (300-100 B.C.)

Palace in the Valley of Oaxaca.” Latin American Antiquity 15 (4) (December): 441.

doi:10.2307/4141587.

Tate, Carolyn. 1999. “Patrons of Shamanic Power.” Ancient Mesoamerica 10 (02) (July): 169–188.

Taube, Karl. 1996. “The Olmec Maize God: The Face of Corn in Formative Mesoamerica.” RES:

Anthropology and Aesthetics 29/30: 39–81.

Urcid, Javier. 2005. Zapotec Writing: Knowledge, Power, and Memory in Ancient Oaxaca. Brandeis

University.

Whalen, Michael E. 1981. Excavations at Santo Domingo Tomaltepec: Evolution of a Formative

Community in the Valley of Oaxaca, Mexico. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan, Museum of

Anthropology.

Whitecotton, Joseph W. 1977. The Zapotecs: Princes, Priests, and Peasants. Norman: University of

Oklahoma Press.

Winter, Marcus Cole. 1979. “Tierras Largas a Formative Community in the Valley of Oaxaca,

Mexico.”