This article was accepted into the corpus but its outbound wikilinks were never NER-processed — typical at the deepest BFS hop or when the run's entity cap was reached. No expansion funnel to show.
| Tlatelolco codices | |
|---|---|
| Name | Tlatelolco codices |
| Date | 15th–16th centuries |
| Place | Tlatelolco |
| Language | Nahuatl |
| Material | Amatl |
| Format | codex |
Tlatelolco codices are a group of Mesoamerican pictorial and pictographic manuscripts produced in the pre-Columbian and early colonial periods in the urban locus of Tlatelolco within the Aztec Empire and later the Viceroyalty of New Spain. They function as archival records, liturgical guides, land and tribute registers, and historical chronicles connected to institutions such as the Calpulli Tepaneca, the Triple Alliance polities, and colonial-era colleges like the Colegio de Santa Cruz de Tlatelolco. Surviving examples circulate among collections in institutions like the Biblioteca Nacional de Antropología e Historia, the Archivo General de la Nación (México), the British Museum, and the Bibliothèque nationale de France.
The codices emerged during the late Postclassic period under rulers such as Moctezuma II and continued into the early colonial era under authorities like Hernán Cortés and Antonio de Mendoza. They reflect interactions among Nahua elites, Franciscan missionaries, Dominican scribes, indigenous tlatoani, and officials of the Real Audiencia of Mexico. Created amid events including the Spanish conquest of the Aztec Empire, the Great Tecallotl Cholula Massacre (as a comparable traumatic event), and the reorganization of indigenous tribute after the Spanish colonization of the Americas, the codices document how communities negotiated continuity and change in institutions such as the calpulli and municipal cabildos.
Codex production in Tlatelolco used materials like amate bark paper, deerskin, and European rag paper introduced via the Casa de Contratación. Pigments included mineral and organic sources known to artisans from places such as Cholula and Tlaxcala, and binders reflect techniques seen in codices like the Florentine Codex and the Codex Mendoza. Production involved specialist scribes and painters analogous to the pre-Conquest tlacuiloque attached to palaces of rulers like Ahuitzotl and workshops patronized by nobles such as Nezahualcóyotl. Tools included brushes similar to those depicted in the Codex Borbonicus and inks attested in colonial inventories kept by viceroys like Luis de Velasco.
Imagery in Tlatelolco manuscripts features glyphs for place-names, calendrical signs from the Xiuhpohualli and Tonalpohualli, pictographs for tribute lists comparable to entries in the Codex Mendoza, and scenes of rituals associated with deities such as Huitzilopochtli, Tlaloc, and syncretic Christian figures introduced during evangelization by orders including the Franciscans. Iconographic motifs exhibit continuity with works like the Codex Vaticanus B while adapting to contacts exemplified by manuscripts such as the Lienzo de Tlaxcala. Portraiture conventions preserve representations of rulers resembling depictions in the Codex Xolotl.
These codices served administrative functions for Altepetl authorities, recording tribute obligations tied to institutions like the Triple Alliance tributary system and adjudicating land disputes in analogues to the Huehuetlatolli oral genres recorded by colonial chroniclers such as Bernardino de Sahagún and Diego Durán. They also supported schooling and liturgy at the Colegio de Santa Cruz de Tlatelolco and were used in legal petitions presented before bodies like the Real Audiencia of Santo Domingo and the Royal Treasury. Ritual and mnemonic roles connected the codices to performance traditions preserved in accounts by figures such as Andrés de Olmos.
Provenance trajectories trace manuscripts from native repositories and judicial archives through colonial transfers to collections assembled by viceroys like Antonio de Mendoza and collectors such as Robert Constable (as examples of European acquisition). Several codices entered European and North American institutions through agents linked to the Antiquarian movement and imperial collections of courts like the Spanish monarchy. Conservation histories involve nineteenth- and twentieth-century interventions at institutions including the Museo Nacional de Antropología and the Archivo General de la Nación (México), where treatments paralleled those applied to the Codex Mendoza and the Florentine Codex.
Scholars debate dating, authorship, and function, with interpretations ranging across philologists and historians such as Charles Gibson, J. Benedict Warren, Elizabeth Hill Boone, Miguel León-Portilla, and Susan Schroeder. Debates engage methods from iconography compared to studies of the Tepanec polity, paleography echoing approaches used on the Codex Mendoza, and ethnohistory in the tradition of James Lockhart and Inga Clendinnen. Controversies surround colonial influence versus indigenous continuity, provenance claims contested by institutions like the British Museum and the Bibliothèque nationale de France, and questions of repatriation raised by Mexican scholars and agencies including the Instituto Nacional de Antropología e Historia.
Notable manuscripts associated by provenance and content with Tlatelolco production include items held alongside the Codex Boturini, the Codex Mendoza, the Codex Borgia corpus, and regional lienzos such as the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan. Major repositories housing relevant materials are the Biblioteca Nacional de Antropología e Historia, the Archivo General de la Nación (México), the British Museum, the Bibliothèque nationale de France, the Library of Congress, and the Museo Nacional de Antropología (Mexico City). Ongoing cataloguing projects connect these collections with international collaborations involving universities like Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, the University of Texas at Austin, and the School of Oriental and African Studies.
Category:Aztec codices Category:Mesoamerican manuscripts