¹ Bray, Warwick, ‘Land use, Settlement Pattern and Politics in Prehispanic Middle America: A Review’, in Ucko, P., Tringham, R. and Dimbleby, G. (eds.), Man, Settlement and Urbanism (London, Duckworth, 1972), pp. 909–26.Google Scholar

² René, Millon, ‘Teotihuacàn: Completion of Map of Giant City in the Valley of Mexico’, Science, 170 (1970), 1077–82.Google Scholar

³ Charles, Gibson, The Aztecs Under Spanish Rule (Stanford University Press, 1964), ch. 2.Google Scholar

⁴ Pedro, Carrasco, ‘The Peoples of Central Mexico and Their Historical Traditions’, in Wauchope, R. (gen. ed.), Handbook of Middle American Indians, II (University of Texas Press, 1971), 463–70.Google Scholar

⁵ Alfredo, López Austin, ‘Los Señoríos de Azcapotzalco y Tezcoco’, Historia Prehispúnica, 7 (Mexico, Museo Nacional de Antropología, 1967).Google Scholar

⁶ Gibson, , The Aztecs Under Spanish Rule, p. 23.Google Scholar

⁷ Claude, Nigel Byam Davies, The Mexica: First Steps to Power (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of London, 1970), pp. 11–12.Google Scholar

⁸ George, Kubler, ‘The Colonial Plan of Cholula’, Actas y Memorias del XXXVII Congreso Internacional de Americanistas, Argentina 1966 (Buenos Aires, 1968), 1, 209–23;Google ScholarBente, Bittmann Simons, ‘The City of Cholula and its Ancient Barrios’, Verhandlungen des XXXVIII Internationalen Amcrikanistenkongresses, Stuttgart-München 1968 (Klaus Renner, Munich, 1970), band II, pp. 139–50;Google ScholarCarrasco, , ‘The Peoples of Central Mexico …’, p. 470.Google Scholar

⁹ Charles, Gibson, Tlaxcala in the Sixteenth Century (Stanford University Press, 1967), pp. 1–3.Google Scholar

¹⁰ Davies, , The Mexica: First Steps to Power, p. 7.Google Scholar

¹¹ Ibid., p. 8.

¹² William, T. Sanders, ‘The Population of the Teotihuacán Valley, the Basin of Mexico and the Central Mexican Symbiotic Region in the Sixteenth Century’, in The Natural Environment, Contemporary Occupation and 16th Century Population of the Valley: Vol. 1 of the Final Report of the Teotihuacán Valley Project (The Pennsylvania State University, 1970, Occasional Paper in Anthropology no. 3), p. 443.Google Scholar

¹³ Carrasco, , ‘The Peoples of Central Mexico …’, p. 471;Google ScholarPedro, Carrasco, ‘Social Organization of Ancient Mexico’, in Wauchope, R. (gen. ed.), Handbook of Middle American Indians, 10 (University of Texas Press, 1971), 363, 372; Simons, ‘The City of Cholula and its Ancient Barrios’.Google Scholar

¹⁴ ‘The Colonial Plan of Cholula’, p. 215.

¹⁵ Carrasco, , ‘Social Organization of Ancient Mexico’, p. 372.Google Scholar

¹⁶ For examples, see Gibson, , The Aztecs Under Spanish Rule, pp. 34–7.Google Scholar

¹⁷ William, T. Sanders, The Cultural Ecology of the Teotihuacán Valley (The Pennsylvania State University, Dept. of Sociology and Anthropology, 1965), pp. 76–85. Compared with the Classic-period city, Aztec Teotihuacán was much reduced in size and status. Its exact size is hard to assess, for it is partly covered by the modern pueblo.Google Scholar

¹⁸ Jeffrey, R. Parsons, Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in the Chalco Region, Mexico, 1969 Season (Mimeographed report submitted to the Instituto Nacional de Antropología e Historia, August 1971, University of Michigan,Google Scholar Museum of Anthropology). The adjacent Ixtapalapa Peninsula also seems to have had a fairly nucleated population during the Aztec period. See Richard, E. Blanton, ‘Prehispanic Adaptation in the Ixtapalapa Region, Mexico’, Science, 175, no. 4028 (1972), 1317–26.Google Scholar

¹⁹ William, T. Sanders, ‘The Central Mexican Symbiotic Region’, in Gordon, Willey (ed.), Prehistoric Settlement Patterns in the New World (New York, Viking Fund Publications in Anthropology, 1956), pp. 115–27.Google Scholar

²⁰ Sherburne, F. Cook and Woodrow, Borah, ‘On the Credibility of Contemporary Testimony on the Population of Mexico in the Sixteenth Century’, in Homenaje a Roberto Weitlander (Mexico, Instituto Nacional de Antropología e Historia, 1966), pp. 229–39. Sanders, in ‘The Population of the Teotihuacn Valley…’, has already pointed out the methodological weaknesses in previous attempts by Borah, Cook and Simpson to arrive at population figures for 1519 on the basis of Spanish documents and Aztec tribute lists.Google Scholar

²¹ In their reports, Parsons and Sanders employ the following estimates of population density: 25–50 people per hectare for nucleated occupation (High Density Compact Village), 10–20 people per hectare for lighter occupation (Compact Low Density Village), and 2–10 peopleper hectare for areas with only a thin scatter of occupation debris (Scattered Villages and Ranchcrías); Jeffrey, R. Parsons, Prehistoric Settlement Patterns in the Texcoco Region, Mcxico (Ann Arbor, University of Michigan, Museum of Anthropology Memoir no. 3, 1971), p. 23.Google Scholar

²² Ibid., pp. 227–20.

²³ Sanders, , ‘The Population of the Teotihuacàn Valley.…, p. 44.Google Scholar

²⁴ Ibid., pp. 424–6.

²⁵ Personal communication from Edward E. Calnek, who stresses that the figure is highly tentative. It is, however, based on a fairly precise knowledge of the boundaries of the Aztec city and of the nature and distribution of houselots within it. See Calnek, , ‘Settlement Pattern and Chinampa Agriculture at Tenochtitlán’, American Antiquity, 37, 1 (1972), 104–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

²⁶ ‘The Population of the Teotihuacán Valley…’

²⁷ Cook and Borah, ‘On the Credibility of Contemporary Testimony …’, pp. 232–3 For other (smaller) estimates in sixteenth century sources, see Marshall, H. Saville, ‘The Earliest Notices Concerning the Conquest of Mexico by Cortés in 1519’, Indian Notes and Monographs, ix, 1 (New York, Museum of the American Indian, Heye Foundation, 1919–1920), 1–54.Google Scholar

²⁸ Ralph, L. Roys, The Political Geography of the Yucatec Maya (Washington, Carnegie Institution Publication no. 633, 1957);Google ScholarFrance, V. Scholes and Ralph, L. Roys, The Maya Chontal indians of Acalan-Tixchel (Norman, University of Oklahoma Press, 2nd ed., 1968).Google Scholar

²⁹ Calnek, ‘Settlement Pattern and Chinampa Agriculture…’

³⁰ William, T. Sanders, ‘Settlement Patterns in Central Mexico’, in Wauchope, R. (gen. ed.), Handbook of Middle American Indians, 10 (University of Texas Press, 1971), 26. The area shown in the maguey paper map, which Sanders uses as the basis of his calculations on the size and productivity of chinampa lots, does not come within the boundaries of Aztec Tenochtitlán, though it does refer to some part of the Basin of Mexico (Calnek, personal Communication).Google Scholar

³¹ Bray, , ‘Land use, Settlement Pattern and Politics…’ On the productivity of the chinampasGoogle Scholar in the Basin as a whole, see Pedro, Armillas, ‘Gardens on Swamps’, Science, 174, no. 4010 (1971), 660.Google Scholar

³² Fábrega, N. Molíns, ‘El Codice Mendocino y Ia Economía de Tcnochtitlán’, Revista Mexicana de Esnidios Antropológicos, 14 (1954–1955), 303–35.Google Scholar

³³ Parsons, , Prehistoric Settlement Patterns in the Texcoco Region, pp. 214–6.Google Scholar

³⁴ Robert, H. Barlow, ‘The Extent of the Empire of the Culhua Mexica’, Ibero-Americana, 28 (1949).Google Scholar

³⁵ Davies, ‘Los Señoríos Independientes del Imperio Azteca’.

³⁶ Dean, R. Snow, ‘Ceramic Sequence and Settlement Location in Pre-Hispanic Tlaxcala’, American Antiquity, 34 2(1969), 131–45.Google Scholar

³⁷ Davies, , ‘Los Señoíos Independientes…’, pp. 66, 97;Google ScholarGibson, , Tlaxcala in the Sixteenth Century, ch. i.Google Scholar

³⁸ Ibid., p. 10.

³⁹ Parsons, , Prehistoric Settlement Patterns in the Texcoco Region, p. 225.Google Scholar

⁴⁰ Gibson, , The Aztecs Under Spanish Rule, p. 340.Google Scholar

⁴¹ Parsons, , Prehistoric Settlement Patterns in the Texcoco Region, p. 218.Google Scholar

⁴² Sanders, , Cultural Ecology of the Teotihuacán Valley, p. 80.Google Scholar

⁴³ Gibson, , Tlaxcala in the Sixteenth Century, p. 5;Google ScholarDavies, , ‘Los Señoríos Independientes’, pp. 66–72.Google Scholar

⁴⁴ For the most recent discoveries consult the Boletmn of the Instituto Nacional de Antropologca de Historía, Mexico.

⁴⁵ Parsons, , Prehistoric Settlement Patterns in the Texcoco Region, pp. 219–20.Google Scholar

⁴⁶ Sanders, , Cultural Ecology of the Teotihuacán Valley, pp. 76–85.Google Scholar

⁴⁷ Calnek, ‘Settlement Pattern and Chinampa Agriculture…’

⁴⁸ Pedro, Carrasco, ‘Family structure of sixteenth-century Tepoztlan’, in Robert, A. Manners (ed.), Process and Pattern in Culture: Essays in Honor of Julian H. Steward (Chicago, Aldine, 1964), pp. 185–210;Google ScholarCarrasco, , ‘Social Organization of Ancient Mexico…’, p. 368.Google Scholar

⁴⁹ Borah, W. and Cook, S. F., ‘The population of central Mexico in 1548: an analysis of the Suma de Visitas de Pueblos’, Ibero-Americana, 43 (1960), 97–8.Google Scholar

⁵⁰ Calnek, ‘Settlement Pattern and Chinampa Agriculture…’

⁵¹ Parsons, , Prehistoric Settlement Patterns in the Tescoco Region, pp. 230–2.Google Scholar

⁵² Sanders, , Cultural Ecology of the Teotihuacán Valley, p. 78.Google Scholar

⁵³ Ibid., pp. 87–8.

⁵⁴ For a fuller discussion of private landholding see Friedrich, Katz, Situación Social y Económica de los Aztecas durante los siglos XV y XVI (Universidad Autónoma de México, Serie de Cultura Náhuatl, Monograíca Num. 8, 1966)Google Scholar and Paul, Kirchhoff, ‘Land tenure in ancient Mexico’, Revista Mexicana de Estudios Antropológicos, 14 (1954–1955), 351–61.Google Scholar

⁵⁵ Parsons, , Prehistoric Settlement Patterns in the Texcoco Region, pp. 117, 120.Google Scholar

⁵⁶ Sanders, , Cultural Ecology of the Teotihuacán Valley, p. 121.Google Scholar

⁵⁷ Carrasco, , ‘Social Organization of Ancient Mexico’, pp. 363–4.Google Scholar

⁵⁸ The Codex Osuna gives a total of 60–70 calpullis, but the extra ones are estancias outside the city proper.

⁵⁹ Sanders, , ‘Settlement Patterns in Central Mexico’, p. 24.Google Scholar

⁶⁰ Personal communication from Edward, E. Calnck. I am also grateful for his comments on the tax data contained in Codex Osuna.Google Scholar

⁶¹ There is no general agreement among the scholars who have studied this problem. It is evident that marriage restrictions were not rigidly enforced, and that there may have been differences between the customs of one town and another. For recent discussions of calpulli endogamy (with references to the more important earlier studies) seeCarrasco, P., ‘El Barrio y Ia Regulación del Matrimonio en un Pueblo del Valle de México en ci Siglo XVI’, Revista Mexicana de Estudios Antropológicos, 17 (1961), 7–26,Google Scholar and Carrasco, , ‘Social Organization of Ancient Mexico’, pp. 363–75.Google Scholar See also John, M. Ingham, ‘Time and space in Ancient Mexico the symbolic dimensions of clanship’, Man, 6, 4(1971), 614–21 (though some of Ingham's conclusions on symbolicism and on supra-calpulli units are open to argument).Google Scholar

⁶² The evidence for the status of craftsmen is summarized, with references, in Katz, , Situación Social y Económica tie los Azzecas, pp. 47–55.Google Scholar

⁶³ Fernando, de Alva Ixtlilxóchitl, Obras Históricas (a vols., ed. Chavero, A.) (Mexico, 1891–1892), t. I, pp. 326–7.Google Scholar

⁶⁴ Katz, , Situacódn Social y Económica de los Aztecas, pp. 50–5.Google Scholar

⁶⁵ Carrasco, , ‘Social Organization of Ancient Mexico’, pp. 365–6.Google Scholar

⁶⁶ Sanders, , Cultural Ecology of the Teotihuacaán Valley, p. 83;Google ScholarThomas, H. Charlton, Informe sobre Trabajos del Laboratorio, Enero a Mayo 1971 (University of Iowa, Department of Anthropology, mimeo., 1971).Google Scholar

⁶⁷ Sanders, , Cultural Ecology of the Teotihuacán Valley, p. 79.Google Scholar

⁶⁸ Scholes, and Roys, , The Maya Chontal Indians of Acalan-Tixchel, p. 54.Google Scholar

⁶⁹ Gibson, , The Aztecs Under Spanish Rule, pp. 41–2.Google Scholar

⁷⁰ Scholes, and Roys, , The Maya Chontal Indians…, pp. 97–8.Google Scholar

⁷¹ ‘The Colonial Plan of Cholula’, pp. 220–3.

⁷² Thomas, H. Charlton, ‘Ethnohistory and Archaeology: Post-Conquest Aztec Sites’, American Antiquity, 34, 3 (1969), 286–302.Google Scholar

⁷³ For documentation on the Valley of Mexico, see Gibson, , The Aztecs Under Spanish Rule, pp. 44–50. A similar range of variation is found in all other areas for which records exist.Google Scholar

⁷⁴ Ibid., pp. 40, 478 n. 59.

⁷⁵ Ibid., p. 45.

⁷⁶ Ibid., fig. 3.

⁷⁷ Compare Ibid., fig. 2.

⁷⁸ Gibson, , Tlaxcala in the Sixteenth Century, p. 136.Google Scholar

⁷⁹ Snow, ‘Ceramic Sequence and Settlement Location in Pre-Hispanic Tiaxcala’.

⁸⁰ Ronald, Spores, The Mixtec Kings and Their People (Norman, University of Oklahoma Press, 1967).Google Scholar

⁸¹ Sanders, , Cultural Ecology of the Teotihuacán Valley and ‘The Population of the Teotihuacán Valley…’ passim.Google Scholar

⁸² Parsons, , Prehistoric Settlement Patterns in the Texcoco Region and ‘Patrones de asentamiento prehispánico en Ia región texcocana’, Boletin del Inst it uto de Antropología Historia, 35, 31–7;Google ScholarParsons, , Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in the Chalco Region;Google ScholarRichard, E. Blanton, Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in the Ixtapalapa Region, Mexico (University of Michigan, Dept of Anthropology, Ph.D. dissertation, 1970), and ‘Prehispanic Adaptation in the Ixtapalapa Region’.Google Scholar

⁸³ Richard, S. MacNeish, ‘The Evolution of Community Patterns in the Tehuacán Valley of Mexico, and Speculations about the Cultural Processes’, in Ucko, P., Tringham, R. and Dimbleby, G. (edo.), Man, Settlement and Urbanism, pp. 67–93.Google Scholar

⁸⁴ Jeffrey, R. Parsons, ‘Teotihuacán, Mexico, and its impact on Regional Demography’, Science, 162 (1968), 872–7. The same phenomenon has been noted in the Ixtapalapa Peninsula. See Blanton, ‘Prehispanic Adaptation in the Ixtapalapa Region’.Google Scholar

⁸⁵ Blanton, , op. cit.Google ScholarJeffrey, R. Parsons, ‘An Archaeological Evaluation of the Codice Xolotl’ American Antiquity, 35, 4 (1970), 435–40.Google Scholar

⁸⁶ Parsons, , Prehistoric Settlement Patterns in the Texcoco Region, pp. 220, 226.Google Scholar

⁸⁷ Gibson, , The Aztecs Under Spanish Rule, p. 47.Google Scholar

⁸⁸ Abstracted from MacNeish, , ‘The Evolution of Community Patterns in the Tehuacán Valley’, p. 87.Google Scholar

⁸⁹ For discussion of the political status of this señorío, see Davies, , ‘ Los Señors Independientes del Imperio Azteca’, pp. 14–16.Google Scholar

⁹⁰ Sanders, , Cultural Ecology of the Teotihuacán Valley, pp. 85–8.Google Scholar

⁹¹ Parsons, , Prehistoric Settlement Patterns in the Texcoco Region, pp. 230–1.Google Scholar

⁹² Pomar, J., ‘Relación de Tetzcoco’, in Icazbalceta, J. Garcia (ed.), Nueva Colección de Documentos para la Historia de Mexico (Mexico, Editorial Chavez Hayhoe, 1941), pp. 54–5.Google Scholar

⁹³ Spores, , The Mixtec Kings and Their People, p. 6.Google Scholar

⁹⁴ Kent, V. Flannery (ed.), Preliminary Archaeological Investigations in the Valley of Oaxaca, 1966–1969 (Mimeographed report presented to the National Science Foundation and the Instituto Nacional de Antropología e Historia, Mexico; University of Michigan, Museum of Anthropology, n.d.).Google Scholar

⁹⁵ Sanders, , Cultural Ecology of the Teotihuacán Valley.Google Scholar

⁹⁶ The Aztecs Under Spanish Rule, fig. 2.

⁹⁷ ‘Ethnohistory and Archaeology: Post-Conquest Aztec Sites’ and El Valle de Teotihuacan:cerámica y patrones de asentamiento, 1520–1969’, Boletín dcl Instituto Nacional de Antropología e Historia, 41 (September 1970), 15–23.