l2421_batalla_scribes who painted.pdf

7/27/2019 L2421_Batalla_Scribes who painted.pdf

1/21

THE SCRIBES WHO PAINTED THE MATRICULA DE

TRIBUTOS AND THE CODEX MENDOZA

Juan Jose Batalla Rosado

Departamento de Historia de America II (Antropologia de America), Facultad de Geografia e Historia, Ciudad Universitaria s/n,Universidad Complutense, 28040 Madrid, Spain

Abstract

This article presents an analysis of the tlacuiloque (scribes) who participated in the production of the Matrcula de Tributos and the Codex

Mendoza. I show the relevance of palaeographic analysis for documents in which the writing system is logosyllabic or hieroglyphic and

most of the information is iconographic. The Matrcula de Tributos is a pre-Columbian document that recorded the tribute paid to the

Mexica empire by conquered towns. It was probably painted during the last decade of Moctezumas II rulership, although some of its

pages may have been produced earlier. Its production shows the work of at least six scribes. Its content was copied by a single artist around1542 as the second part of the Codex Mendoza, a document created to be sent to the Spanish emperor. I provide evidence of the work of

the six scribes in the pages preserved of the Matrcula. I also show that the scribe responsible for folios 6r11v of the Matrcula painted

the entire Codex Mendoza at least 20 years later. I demonstrate these interpretations through comparative analysis of some elements of the

iconography and logosyllabic writing in the Matrcula and the Codex Mendoza.

In this article, I argue that at least six scribes contributed to the

production of the Matrcula de Tributos and that one of them was

responsible for producing the Codex Mendoza several decades

later, continuing a line of analysis started in previous papers

(Batalla Rosado 2002a, 2007a). I summarize the overall argument

and offer several new interpretations on the dating and manner of

production of the two tribute documents. It is remarkable that a

scribe employed initially by the Mexica empire to produce an

imperial tribute document could be employed again by theSpanish empire in the early Colonial period. To support these

conclusions, I analyze graphic elements that appear in both

documents, examine patterns that identify the different scribes,

and make a comparative analysis of their style.

THE MATRICULA DE TRIBUTOS

Most scholars attribute the production of the Matrcula de Tributos

to the pre-Hispanic period (Barlow 1990; Berdan 1992:I:6465),

although some disagree (Reyes Garca 1997:17, 49). My analysis

supports the former interpretation. The format of the document

and the styles of the different scribes suggest a date prior to 1519.

Originally, the Matrcula may have been a long document, rolled

or folded, or it may have been composed of separate pagespainted on one side and later glued together to conform artificially

to the format of a European book. Significantly, the damage on

back-to-back pages does not match (Batalla Rosado 1992:I:

4849; Mohar 1997:7280; Rojas 1997:3435); this damage can

be observed On folios 2, 3, 6, 7, 9, and others (Matrcula de

Tributos 1980).

The Matrcula de Tributos was apparently produced as a series

of individual pages of amate paper (Berdan 1980a:9). Although

Luz Mara Mohar (1997:74) disagrees with Frances Berdans

hypothesis, my observations support Berdans view. The separate

sheets make sense, given the function of the Matrcula as a list of

tribute from individual imperial provinces (see Smith 2003:147

171). As the individual towns, their tribute requirements, or the

imperial status of the provinces changed over time, the document

could be modified accordingly. It was possible to add, delete, or

change the products paid by individual communities, correcting

or replacing sheets as needed. New sheets could also be added ifwarranted by imperial conquests.

According to Robert Barlow (1990:142), the Matrcula was

painted after 1511. This dating is supported by the inclusion in

the document of provinces conquered shortly before the arrival of

the Spanish (Rojas 1997:33). Nevertheless, we have to consider

that, if the Matrcula was a register of tribute on separate sheets, it

could have been produced over a period of many years. It is thus

possible, as Berdan (1992:I:6465) has remarked, that the

Matrcula was composed throughout the last decade of

Moctezumas II government, and not in a single year. We may be

able to trace the initial production of the document back to the

beginning of the empire if we assume that each sheet, or each

group of sheets, was painted separately during a different period,

expanding the document over the years. Another observation sup-porting this hypothesis is the large number of scribesat least

sixresponsible for the pages still preserved in the document,

including a Mixtec scribe (or a scribe following the Mixtecan artis-

tic tradition but working for the Mexica empire). For these reasons, I

cannot agree with Luis Reyes Garca (1997:17, 49), who dates the

work 1020 years after the fall of Tenochtitlan to Corte s. Reyes

Garca considers the Matrcula an incomplete copy of older

documents.

I will not discuss the content of the Matrcula de Tributos further

in this work, although I agree with Pedro Carrascos (1996:

31

E-mail correspondence to: [email protected]

Ancient Mesoamerica, 18 (2007), 3151Copyright# 2007 Cambridge University Press. Printed in the U.S.A.DOI: 10.1017/S0956536107000077


2/21

110111) view that the document reveals the relationship between

the provinces and Tenochtitlan. It is a key to the organization of the

Mexica empire (Figure 1).1

The Matrcula de Tributos (1974, 1980, 1991, 1997, 2003) is a

large document whose pages measure 42 cm 29 cm. It is

composed of 32 folios of amate paper. The tribute roll that forms

the second part of the Codex Mendoza is generally accepted as a

copy of the Matrcula. However, the later document lists tribute

from five provinces not included in the Matrcula. This suggests

that around 1542, when the Codex Mendoza was painted, the

Figure 1. Map of the provinces subject to the Mexica empire (from Berdan 1980b:28).

1 I based Figures 1 and 9 on the map published in Berdan (1980b:28).However, other studies of this issue, such as Berdan et al. (1996:112), aremore recent.

Batalla Rosado32


3/21

Matrcula must have had at least five additional folios: two between

folios 4v and 5r (the provinces of Axocapan and Atotonilco de

Pedraza); two between folios 12v and 13r (Tlachquiauhco and

Tochtepec); and one more at the end, where we would place the

province of Oxitipan. This pattern suggests that the Matrcula was

already in European form, with pages glued together, when the

Codex Mendoza was copied. The four missing interior folios were

each a recto verso pair, and the final missing folio must have had

only a single painted surface, because the Matrcula ended (or

began) with Oxtitipan, depending on the direction in which the

document is read (Rojas 1997:34).

Although not directly germane to the topic of this paper, my

opinion is that the Matrcula de Tributos was an official document

in Tenochtitlans imperial administration and that, as such, it should

be free of errors. Its purpose was to register and account for the

tribute due to the Mexica empire.

Finally, I must point out that after the Conquest, the Matrcula de

Tributos should have been annotated in both alphabetical Nahuatl

Figure 2. Stylistic details of the Mixtecan-style scribe on folios 4r5v, 12r13v in the Matrcula de Tributos (1980).

The scribes who painted the Matrcula de Tributos and the Codex Mendoza 33


4/21

and Castilian. Thus, we can differentiate the pre-Cortesian Libro

Indgena (Native Book) from the colonial Libro Escrito Europeo

(European Written Book) (see Batalla Rosado 2002b).

THE CODEX MENDOZA

The Codex Mendoza was painted in 1542 by a single scribe (see

Codex Mendoza 1992:I). With further analysis, it may be possible

to identify the presence of assistants or apprentices in copying the

Matrcula de Tributos to produce the tribute section of the Codex

Mendoza. The work of such assistants has been identified in other

Colonial and pre-Colonial codices (see Batalla Rosado 1993,

1994, 2002b, 2002c).

Nevertheless, I argue that the scribe in charge of painting the

Codex Mendoza must have been a master painter known for

high-quality work. His employer was the highest official in the

colonial system, the viceroy, and it is logical to assume that only

an artist of renown, the best one available, would receive such an

appointment. In agreement with the opinion of the encomendero

Jeronimo Lopez (around 1547), as recorded by Silvio Zavala

Figure 3. Stylistic details of the Mendocino-style scribe on folios 6r11v in the Matrcula de Tributos (1980).

Batalla Rosado34


5/21

(1938:70), I believe that the Codex Mendoza was produced by a

master of the painters named Francisco Gualpuyogualcal orCuauhpoyouacatl (Reyes Garca 1997:25):

It must have been about six years ago, more or less, that entering

one day into the home of an Indian who was called Francisco

Gualpuyogualcal, master of the painters, I saw in his possession

a book with covers of parchment and asking [sic] him what it

was. In secret he showed it to me and told me that he had made

it by the command of His Lordship, in which he had to record

all the land since the founding of the city of Mexico and

the lords that had governed and ruled until the coming of the

Spaniards and the battles and clashes that they had and the

taking of this great city and all the provinces that it ruled and

had made subject and the assignment of these towns and provinces

that was made by Motezuma to the principal lords of this city and

of the fee that each one ofthe knights gave him from the tributes of

the towns that he had and the plan that he employed in the afore-

said assignment and how he sketched [?] the towns and provinces

for it. (Zavala 1938:70, translated in Nicholson 1992:I:12)

I believe that the author of the Codex Mendoza did not feel it was

necessary to be precise in recording the tribute because he was

not creating an official economic document, like the Matrcula de

Tributos. Instead, the purpose of the Codex Mendoza was to show

a foreign ruler how the old system worked. In 1542, the former

Figure 4. Stylistic details of the scribe on folios 1r2r of the Matricula de Tributos (1980).



6/21

tribute and territorial divisions were no longer important. The Codex

Mendoza was not a document produced by the new colonial admin-

istration to control new territories; it was, instead, a kind of ency-

clopedia to explain to the new masters how these people had lived.

This helps explain why the Codex Mendoza is clearly divided

thematically into historic, economic, and ethnographic sections.

THE TIME SPAN BETWEEN THE MATRICULA DE

TRIBUTOS AND THE CODEX MENDOZA

The minimum interval between the production of the two codices

is 21 years, assuming that some parts of the Matrcula were

painted around the time of the Conquest. The interval could

easily have been greater than 21 years, however. In my interpret-

ation, folios 6r11v of the Matrcula and the Codex Mendoza as

a whole were painted by the same scribe. If folios 6r11v were

not the last pages of the Matrcula to be painted, then the

length of time between the two works would be longer than

the interval between the final pages of the document and the

painting of the Codex Mendoza in 1542. Unfortunately, we

have no information about the age of the scribe at the time that

the Codex Mendoza was done, making it impossible to generate

any hypothesis about the intervals between the works beyond

inferences based on the life expectancy of an average person.

Figure 5. Stylistic details of the scribe on folios 2v3v of the Matricula de Tributos (1980).

Batalla Rosado36


7/21

This factor suggests that the time span between folios 6r11v of

the Matrcula and the Codex Mendoza could not be more than

about 50 years.

THE SCRIBES OF THE MATRICULA DE TRIBUTOS

Establishing the number of painters who participated in the

production of the Matrcula de Tributos is not easy, because

iconographic and writing traits are subject to slight differences

even in the work of a single artist. Nevertheless, it is possible to

identify different hands that produced this document because

their manners of painting and writing allow the identification of

different styles. In fact, Berdan (1980a:9, Note 5) notes this possi-

bility, describing three styles in the Matrcula based on depictions

of tribute mantas and warriors costumes: the first style includes

laminas IIIX [folios 1v 5v]; the second, XI XXII [6r11v];

the third, XXIIIXXXII [12v 16v]. She does not pursue this

analysis, however. Similarly, Reyes Garca (1997:19) starts his

research on the document by defending the presence of a single

scribe, although later he recognizes two (Reyes Garca 1997:97,

133)one in folios 1r5v and 11v16v, and the second in the

central section, folios 6r11ron the basis of iconographic

Figure 6. Stylistic details of the scribe on folio 14r of the Matrcula de Tributos (1980).



8/21

changes in mantas, warriors costumes, and shields. I show later that

it is in fact possible to identify up to six scribes, whose work is

distributed in a different way from those suggested by Berdan and

Reyes Garca.

I begin by distinguishing the scribes in places that permit the

establishment of clear and unquestionable differences, regardless

of whether the original order of the Matrcula was the same as

when it was copied for the Codex Mendoza and regardless of the

number of folios that were lost after its initial production (at least

five). The first clear stylistic incongruities are found in the central

part of the document when it was converted into a European-style

book. As noted earlier, Berdan (1980a:9) and Reyes Garca

(1997:97, 133) established that the style of folios 6r 11v is different

from that of the rest of the document. But another factor separates

blocks of pages clearly between folios 5 and 6: the place where

two pages have been lost. Following the order of provinces in the

Figure 7. Stylistic details of the scribe on folios 14v to 16v of the Matrcula de Tributos (1980).

Batalla Rosado38


9/21

Codex Mendoza, the missing pages must have included the tribute

from four provinces (numbers 7, 8, 28, and 29 in Figure 1).

The Mixtecan-Style Scribe

I argue that folios 4r5v and 12r13v (identified with provinces 5,

6, 9, 10, 26, 27, 30, and 31 in Figure 1) were painted by a Mixtec or,

perhaps, Mixtecan-style scribe (Figure 2). A key element in

making this judgment is the sign for tepetl(hill) used in toponyms.

The sign is drawn using just two scrolls ( tetl, stone) on folios

4r5v and 12r15v, a feature that is characteristic of

pre-Columbian and Colonial documents of the Mixtecan culture

(see Batalla, 2007b). In central Mexican documents, by contrast,

the tepetl element is depicted using three scrollsor none at all.

The three-scroll design is used throughout the Matrcula de

Tributos, except on folios 4r5v and 12r13v.

The presence of the two-scroll tepetl sign on two different folio

blocks might suggest the work of two scribes educated in the

Figure 8. Stylistic details of the scribes of the Matrcula de Tributos (1980): (a) scribe of folios 1r2r; (b) scribe of folios 2v3v; (c)

scribe of folios 4r5v and 12r13v; (d) scribe of folios 6r11v; (e) scribe of folio 14r; (f) scribe of folios 14v16r.



10/21

tradition of Mixtec manuscript painting. However, enough shared

iconographic details are present to attribute all of the pages to a

single hand. For example, the bundles of mantas are represented

similarly, with straight lines, on folios 4r5v and 12r 13v,

although on folio 12r they form a square instead of a rectangle.

The glyph for the number 400 is also similar on all of the folios,

and the representation of beans and grains of maize, the maxtlatl

(loincloth) in the two-piece warriors costumes, the shape of the

shields, the way in which the little lines are disposed to represent

the petlatl(mat), and the heads of the god Xolotl and of the ocelotl

in the costumes are identical on the relevant pages. Although there

are clear differences in how the loads of maxtlatl are representated

on folios 4r and 12r, the discrepancies could be intentional, to

show differences in the quality of the loincloths. And although

there is a discrepancy in how the heads of the ocelotl are rep-

resented on folios 12r and 4r and 5r, the ears are identical. The

difference could be due to the fact that on folio 12r, the ocelotlrep-

resents the complete pelt of the animal, whereas on folios 4r and

5r, it is part of a warriors suit.

As we will see later, these iconographic traits differentiate this

artist from the rest of the painters, as do the glyph for xiquipilli

(the number 8,000) and the form of depiction of cotton.

The Mendocino-Style Scribe

A second scribe who can be differentiated clearly in the Matrcula is

the one in charge of folios 6r11v (12 pages that correspond to

provinces 1125 in Figure 1). This scribe, whom I have called

the painter of the Mendocino (Batalla Rosado, 2007a), shows a

whole group of traits that are common to these folios and absent

in others (Figure 3). They include loads of mantas (clothes) exe-

cuted using a curvilinear design; the glyph for xiquipilli; the

shape of the beans and grains of corn; the feather decoration on

the shields, which is wide open and facing outward; the design of

the petlatl in the loads; the manner of depicting cotton; and the

rounded shape and decoration of the head of Xolotl and of he

ocelotl. These elements are found only on folios 6r11v of the

Matrcula de Tributos.

Figure 9. Geographic distribution of the provinces painted by two of the scribes of the Matrcula de Tributos: (a) scribe of folios 2v

3v; (b) Mixtecan-style scribe of folios 4r5v and 12r13v). The four missing provinces (numbers 6, 7, 28, and 29) are marked with

broken lines (maps from Berdan 1980b:28); (c) Mendoxino-style scribe of folios 6r11v; (d) scribe of folios 14v16v. The missing

province (number 38) is marked with a broken line (maps from Berdan 1980b:28).

Batalla Rosado40


11/21

The Scribe of Folios 1r2r

Despite the bad state of folios 1r2r, I argue that they were painted

by the same scribe (Figure 4). The depiction of the human eye is the

same on all three pages, and the glyph consisting of an eagle head is

the same on folios 1v and 2r. Also, there are similarities (and

differences) in how the xiuhuitzolli, or royal crown, is represented.

On all three folios, the red cloth attached to the crown does not

fall in a straight line but curves toward the exterior, even when it

has a knot to hold it to the crown. (The knot is present on folios

1r and 1v and absent on folio 2r). One must keep in mind,

however, that the differences may again be intentional: on folios

1r and 1v, the xiuhuitzolli acts as one element in a glyph, whereas

on folio 2r, its function is iconographic, fitting a persons head to

indicate a ruler.

Three additional elements set this artist apart from the others.

The three scrolls in tepetl and oztoc are in a different style from

that of the Mixtecan scribe (cf. Figures 2, 3, and 4). The maxtlatl

in the warriors outfits is painted differently (cf. Figures 2 and 4).

And the shape of the adornment on the shield, with the feathers

falling in a straight line, indicates that the artist of folios 1r2r is

not the painter of the Mendocino (cf. Figures 3 and 4).

The Scribe of Folios 2v3vA number of inconographic elements on folios 2v3v (provinces

2, 3, and 4 in Figure 1) indicate that the images were painted by a

single hand (Figure 5). For example, the designs for loads of

mantas are identical; the warriors costumes (such as the

papalotl) and shields are very similar; and Xolotls head, as

well as the beans and grains of corn, are the same. These

elements, together with the icon for xiquipilli (8,000), the max-

tlatl of the warriors costumes, and the heads of ocelotl, set this

artist apart from the three previously defined scribes (cf. Figures

2, 3, 4, and 5).

Figure 10. Iconographic depiction of loads of blankets by the scribe of folios 6r11v of the Matrcula de Tributos(1980) and the Codex

Mendoza (1992:Volume III).



12/21

The Scribe of Folio 14rOnly one folio painted by this artist has survived (Figure 6).

Although the design of the loads of mantas resembles those on

the preceding and following pages, folio 14r is distinguished

from them by a number of features: the loads of uipilli (indigenous

womans blouse); the glyph for the number 400; the execution of

the Patzactli outfit; the shields; the iconography of the petlatl

loads; the mummy bundle; and the head of Xolotl, which has a

distinctive ear, facial decoration, and shape. This artist uses a

different type of chimalli (shield) and maxtlatl from the artist of

folios 1r2r (cf. Figures 4 and 6) and draws the head for Xolotl

with a distinctive ear, which is different from the head drawn bythe artist of folios 2v3v (cf. Figures 5 and 6). These elements

also separate this artist clearly from the painters of the Mixtecan

and Mendocino styles (cf. Figures 2, 3, and 6).

The Scribe of Folios 14v16v

The following elements unite folios 14v16v and differentiate them

from the other folios in the document: the design of the loads of

mantas; the warriors suits (both the maxtlatl and the headdress in

the Patzactl costume); the numeric glyphs; the loads of petlatl;

and the heads of Xolotl and ocelotl (Figure 7). Although similar

Figure 11. Iconographic depiction of shields by the scribe of folios 6r 11v of the Matrcula de Tributos (1980) and the Codex Mendoza

(1992:Volume III).

Batalla Rosado42


13/21

to the painter of folios 1r2r in the execution of the xiuhuitzolli (cf.

Figures 4 and 7), the work of this scribe differs in the decoration of

the chimalli and in the manner of depicting the maxtlatlof the war-

riors suits. Differences from the other artists (cf. Figures 27) can

also be found in the way xiquipilli is drawn, in the iconography of

cotton, and in the design of the heads of Xolotl and ocelotl. The

work of this artist differs from the scribe of folio 14r in the forms

of representation of the mortuary bundle and load of petlatl (cf.

Figures 6 and 7).

Finally, Reyes Garca (1997:51) has noted a possible European

reading order, from top to bottom, for the rows of loads of

mantas on folio 15van order that is not found on the other

pages of the Matrcula. The bottom line on folio 15v has only

three loads of mantas, whereas the other folios have five

Figure 12. Glyphs for the numeral 8,000 and iconographic depiction of the trojes(wooden bins) and baskets for copal by the scribe of

folios 6r11v of the Matrcula de Tributos (1980) and the Codex Mendoza (1992:Volume III).



14/21

(Figure 7). Reyes Garca believes that a downward reading order is

the only way to explain the space left in the third row; however, I

cannot agree with him. The loads in the bottom row all have

glyphs for 20 (the flag, pantli), in contrast to the loads in the

upper row, which all have the glyph for 400. The order of reading

thus follows the pre-Columbian pattern of increasing quantities of

objects from bottom to top. Therefore, even though an ascending

reading order is found throughout the Matrcula, the descending

reading order on folio 15v alone is insufficient to prove that the

document is pre-Columbian, because other Colonial-era tributary

codices, such as the Codice Tributos de Coyoacan (see Batalla

Rosado 2002d), preserve this characteristic.

Summary

I thus conclude, based on the representation of various iconographic

and writing elements, that it is possible to identify the work of at

least six scribes in the production of the Matrcula de Tributos. In

Figure 8, I assemble the icons that support the differentiation of

these six scribes. The scribes are indicated in the columns following

Figure 13. Depiction of an eagle by the scribe of folios 6r11v of the Matrcula de Tributos (1980) and the Codex Mendoza

(1992:Volume III).

Batalla Rosado44


15/21

the order in which their work appears in the document. The glyph

tepetl (hill), in the top row, separates the scribe of Mixtecan style

from the others. The loads ofmantas, in the second row, differentiate

five of the scribes, and the design of the beans and maize kernels

differentiate four. The maxtlatlin the warriors costumes differentiate

all six scribes, although some of them show similarities. The shields

distinguish all six artists; the heads of Xolotl distinguish five; and the

ocelotl and xiquippilli glyphs distinguish four. Numerous other

Figure 14. Iconographic depiction of warriors suits by the scribe of folios 6r11v of the Matrcula de Tributos (1980) and the Codex




16/21

details set each artists work apart from that of the others, but these

eight traits (Figure 8) should be sufficient to establish the presence

of six scribes in producing the Matrcula de Tributos.

It is also possible to analyze the geographic distribution of the

provinces whose tribute was painted by the six scribes.

Folios 1r2r. These pages describe the tribute of a province,

probably Tlatelolco, and the posts of the imperial administration.

Folios 2v3v. These pages include provinces in central Mexico

(Figure 9a).

Folios 4r 5v and 12r 13v. These are the pages painted by the

Mixtec or Mixtecan-style scribe. The provinces represented on

these pages (numbers 5, 6, 9, 10, 26, 27, 30, and 31 on Figure 1)

are grouped into two blocks, one of which covers the Mixtecan

area (Figure 9b). The pages for provinces 7, 8, 28, and 29

(Figure 1) have disappeared. According to the sequence given in

the Codex Mendoza, they should have fallen in the middle of the

work done by the Mixtecan-style scribe; however, their placement

also makes it possible that they were painted by the artist of the

Mendocino. Unfortunately, we cannot draw further conclusions

on this time.

Figure 15. Iconographic depiction of heads of ocelotlby the scribe of folios 6r11v of the Matrcula de Tributos (1980) and the Codex


Figure 16. Iconographic depiction of Xolotls head by the scribe of folios 6r11v of the Matrcula de Tributos (1980) and the Codex


Batalla Rosado46


17/21

Folios 6r11v. These pages are the work of the Mendocino

painter. The provinces that they depict (numbers 1125 on

Figure 1; see also Figure 9c) are located in the western part of the

empire, between the Pacific coast and central Mexico.

Folio 14r. It is rare for an artist to have been given charge of doc-

umenting a single province (number 32 on Figure 1). This could be

due to special historical circumstances. It is also possible, however,that the artist painted the folios for some of the lost provinces

(numbers 7, 8, 28, and 29). At present, we cannot determine

which ones, although province 29 borders province 32 and is not

far from province 28 (see Figure 1), making both provinces possibi-

lities. It is also possible that this scribe painted folios for provinces

that are still unidentified, which would require extending the cur-

rently known borders of the Mexica empire.

Folios 14v16r. These pages record the tribute of provinces in

northern Mexico and the Gulf Coast (Figure 9d). Province 38

(Oxitipan), which is missing from the Matrcula, also could have

been painted by this artist.

THE PAINTER OF FOLIOS 6R 11V OF THE MATRICULA

DE TRIBUTOS AND THE WHOLE CODEX MENDOZA

Elsewhere, I compared folios 6r11v of the Matrcula de Tributos

and folios 31r 42r of the Codex Mendoza by focusing on the tribute

paid by individual provinces as recorded in the two documents

(Batalla Rosado 2007a). In this article, I expand the analysis to

include the entire Codex Mendoza. It is my opinion that it is

sufficient to compare particular iconographic elements to establish

clearly that folios 6r11v of the Matrcula and the entire Codex

Mendoza were painted by the same person.

The icon that represents the loads of mantas in the two docu-

ments (see Batalla Rosado, 2007a:Figure 1) establishes that both

works were executed by a single painter (Figure 10). Curving

lines predominate; moreoever, there is no variation in the forms of

representation, and there is great similarity in the specific content

of each work. A consideration of the iconography of the shields

(see Batalla Rosado, 2007a:Figure 2) leads to the same conclusion

(Figure 11): the variations are minimal, and each individualrepresentation shows the same design of feathers, which expand

out in a curving fashion. Three additional elements support my

hypothesis (see Figure 12; see also Batalla Rosado 2007a:

Figure 3). First, the xiquipilli is depicted in the same manner in

the common tributary folios (6r 11v of the Matrcula and

31r42r of the Codex Mendoza), as well as in the other pages of

the Codex Mendoza, except folio 10v. On that folio, however, the

xiquipilli is a place name, and its interior design is adorned).

Second, in the grain containers, the icon for beans is identical

across all of the folios, and one finds only small differences in the

grains of corn. Third, the boxes, incense, and number 400 are

depicted identically in the baskets of copal, labeled canastillas

de copale blanco, including the direction and orientation of the

small lines that define the baskets.

Other icons, such as the images of eagles painted on the different

folios in this analysis (see Batalla Rosado 2007a:Figure 4), suggest

the work of a single artist (Figure 13). The eagles are identical not

only when they are depicted as tribute, but also when they are part of

a glyph. The representation of the warriors suits (Figure 14) leads

one to the same conclusion (see Batalla Rosado 2007a:Figure 5).

Also, the heads of ocelotl (Figure 15) and Xolotl (Figure 16) are

represented the same way in both documents, even when they are

part of the place names that occur throughout the Codex

Mendoza. Finally, the similarity in Mictlantecuhtlis head as part

Figure 17. Iconographic depiction of Mictlantecuhtlis head by the scribe of folios 6r 11v of the Matrcula de Tributos (1980) and the

Codex Mendoza (1992:Volume III).



18/21

of the Tzitzimitl suit (Figure 17) in folios 6r11v of the Matrcula

and in the Codex Mendoza leaves little doubt that these were all

done by the same painter.

Finally, when one compares the place names (see Batalla Rosado

2007a:Figure 6) that occur in both documents (Figures 18 and 19),

one sees again that they were painted by the same person. There

are no differences between them, apart from very minor details.

Also notable for their similarities are depictions of dogs, the two

sinuous lines on the upper part of the human skulls mounted on

skull racks, the joints between the blades and handles of axes, and

the teeth in the sign foroztoc. This point is reinforced by a compari-

son of other iconographic elements, such as human faces (Figure 19,

lower half), although there are small discrepancies within the same

document (in the old mens heads). In the depictions of royal

crowns (Figure 19, middle row), the red cloth that hangs in the

back is divided by two lines, one horizontal and the other vertical,

on folios 6r11v of the Matrcula and in various pages of the

Codex Mendoza.

Figure 18. Writing elements by the scribe of folios 6r11v of the Matrcula de Tributos (1980) and the Codex Mendoza (1992:

Volume III).

Batalla Rosado48


19/21

All of these iconographic elements lead to a single conclusion: the

scribe who produced folios 6r11v of the Matrcula and the scribe

who produced the Codex Mendoza were in fact the same person.

CONCLUSIONS

The evidence presented here supports the conclusion that the surviv-

ing pages of the Matrcula de Tributos were painted by at least six

different, and distinct, scribes, grouped as follows: folios 1r2r;

folios 2v3v; folios 4r5v and 12r13v (Mixtecan style); folios

6r11v (Mendocino style); folio 14r; and folios 14v 16v. We

know that at least five pages were lost over time, and it is impossible

to assign them definitively to any of the painters. Nevertheless, the

evidence suggests that four of the missing pages may have been

done by the Mixtecan-style scribe and the other by the scribe who

painted folios 14v16v. It is strange that one of the scribes

may have painted only a single folio (14r). The location of the

province painted by this scribe (numer 32 in Figure 1) is clearly

delimited geographically. The presence of so many scribes

supports the interpretation that the Matrcula de Tributos is a

Figure 19. Iconographic and writing elements depicted by the scribe of folios 6r11v of the Matrcula de Tributos(1980) and the Codex




20/21

pre-Columbian document and that in its original form, it consisted

of separate sheets.

The evidence also suggests strongly that the scribe who was

responsible for painting folios 6r 11v of the Matrcula de

Tributos painted the Codex Mendoza at least 21 years later. In my

opinion, the iconographic analysis confirms this interpretation,

which leads logically to the conclusion that scribes from the late

pre-Columbian era continued to work during the Colonial period.

In the case described here, the scribe in question was already amaster artist in pre-Columbian times, and that was probably the

reason that both the Mexica administration and the viceroy selected

him to paint the documents. Agents of these two empires must have

commissioned codices from expert scribes for official documents of

this sort, which needed to be free of errors.

A final question remains: how is it possible that an individual

scribes painting style was maintained for 20 years or more, even

to the point of executing most iconographic elements identically?

It is difficult to offer an adequate response when we know so little

about how scribes learned and how they carried their work. This

case is not unique, for it has been documented in several

Colonial-period maps. Barbara Mundy (1996:188 195) has

demonstrated the presence of a single painter in the maps of the

Relaciones Geograficas from Xalapa (1580), Actopan (1578), and

Atezca (1587). The case of the painter of the Matrcula de

Tributos and the Codex Mendoza, however, is the first documentedexample of a single person carrying out a work of such magnitude

and so many years apart. Nevertheless, this should not be viewed as

an extraordinary occurrence. It is only logical that Colonial docu-

ments such as the Codex Mendoza would have been assigned to

painters of recognized prestige, and that some of the painters of

other major Colonial codices would have been scribes who had

been working since the pre-Hispanic epoch.

RESUMEN

En este artculo presentamos un analisis sobre los escribas que participaron

en la realizacion de la Matrcula de Tributos y del Codice Mendoza. As,

mostramos la importancia que el estudio paleografico tiene tambien en

este tipo de documentacion donde el sistema de escritura es logosilabico y

mucha de su informacion es iconografica. La Matrcula de Tributos es un

documento de origen prehispanico pintado posiblemente durante la ultima

decada del gobierno de Moctezuma II, aunque alguna de sus paginas

puede ser anterior, en el que participaron al menos seis pintores, plasman-

dose en el mismo los tributos que los lugares conquistados pagaban al

imperio mexica. Su contenido fue copiado, hacia 1542, en lo que conocemos

como segunda parte o seccion tributaria del Codice Mendoza, obra realizada

por un unico artista para enviar al emperador espanol. En este trabajo preten-

demos ofrecer las pruebas de la presencia de seis escribas en la realizacion de

las paginas que conservamos de laMatrcula de Tributos y que uno de ellos,

aquel que llevo a cabo los folios 6r11v de la misma fue el que anos

despues, como mnimo 20, pinto en su totalidad el Codice Mendoza. Para

probar esta afirmacion presentamos un analisis comparativo a nivel iconogra-

fico y de escritura logosilabica de la Matrcula de Tributos y del Codice

Mendoza.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The translation of this article was done by Carlos Garca Lahuerta, a Ph.D.candidate in the Department of American History II, Universidad

Complutense de Madrid, and was checked in its final version byDr. Michael E. Smith of Arizona State University.

REFERENCES

Barlow, Robert H.1990 El tributo en maz en el imperio de Moctezuma. In Obras de

Robert H. Barlow: Los mexicas y la triple alianza, vol. 3, edited byJesus Monjaras-Ruiz, Elena Limon, and Maria de la Cruz Pailles,pp. 139 150. Instituto Nacional de Antropologa e Historia andUniversidad de Las Americas, Mexico City.

Batalla Rosado, Juan Jose1992 El arte de escribir en Mesoamerica: El Codice Borbonico.

Memoria de licenciatura, 2 Vols. Universidad Complutense, Madrid.1993 Los tlacuiloque del Codice Borbonico. Analisis iconografico de

los signos calendaricos. Estudios de Historia Social y Economica deAmerica 10:924.

1994 Los tlacuiloque del Codice Borbonico: Una aproximacion a sunumero y estilo. Journal de la Societe des Americanistes 80:4772.

2002a Analisis sobre el numero de tlacuiloqueescribas que partici-paron en la Matrcula de Tributos. In Actas del XXIV Congreso

Internacional de Americanstica. Quaderni di Thule, Revista italianadi studi americanistici, pp. 363 368. Centro Studi AmericanisticiCircolo Amerindiano, Perugia, Italy.

2002b El Codice Tudela y el Grupo Magliabechiano: La tradicion med-ieval europea de copia de codices en America. Volumen de estudio dela edicion facsmil del Codice Tudela. Ministerio de Educacion, Culturay Deportes, Agencia Espanola de Cooperacion Internacional yTestimonio Compana Editorial, Madrid.

2002c El numero de tlacuiloque pintores del Libro Indgena delCodice Tudela. Revista Espanola de Antropologa Americana32:127177.

2002d Codice Tributos de Coyoacan, facsimile ed. Brokarte, Madrid.

2007a Matrcula de Tributos y Codice Mendoza: La autora deun mismo maestro de pintores para los folios 6r a 11v del primeroy la totalidad del segundo. Anales del Museo de America 15:120,in press.

2007b Un glifo de la tradicion escrituraria mixteca: El signo cerro condoble voluta. In Actes colloquim Mixtec Writing: Historical

Development and Social Context, edited by Maarten Jansen. RealAcademy Neerlandesa of Sciencies and Arts, Amsterdam, in press.

Berdan, Frances F.1980a The Matrcula de TributosIntroduction. In The Matrcula

de Tributos, edited by Frances F. Berdan and Jacqueline deDurand-Forest. pp. 9 11. Akademische Druck- und Verlagsanstalt,Graz.

1980b The Matrcula de TributosProvincial Tribute. In TheMatrcula de Tributos, edited by Frances F. Berdan and Jacquelinede Durand-Forest, pp. 2745. Akademische Druck- undVerlagsanstalt, Graz.

1992 The Imperial Tribute Roll of the Codex Mendoza. In The CodexMendoza, vol. 1, edited by Frances F. Berdan and Patricia R.Anawalt, pp. 5579. University of California Press, Berkeley.

Berdan, Frances F., Richard E. Blanton, Elizabeth Hill Boone, Mary G.Hodge, Michael E. Smith, and Emily Umberger

1996 Aztec Imperial Strategies. Dumbarton Oaks Research Library andCollection, Washington, DC.

Carrasco, Pedro1996 Estructura poltico-territorial del imperio tenochca. La Triple

Alianza de Tenochtitlan, Tetzcoco y Tlacopan. El Colegio de Mexico,Fondo de Cultura Economica, Mexico City.

Batalla Rosado50


21/21

Codex Mendoza

1992 The Codex Mendoza, 4 vols., edited by Frances F. Berdan andPatricia Anawalt. University of California Press, Berkeley.

Matrcula de Tributos

1974 Matrcula de Tributos. In Estudio de V.M. Castillo en Historia deMexico, vol. 3, edited by Miguel Leon-Portilla, pp. 523528. SalvatMexicana de Ediciones, Mexico City.

1980 Matrcula de Tributos (Codice de Moctezuma), reprint ed., editedby Frances Berdan and Jacqueline de Durand-Forest. AkademischeDruck- und Verlagsanstalt, Graz.

1991 Matrcula de Tributos. Nuevos Estudios. Edited by MiguelLeon-Portilla, Mara Teresa Sepulveda, and M. Victor Castillo.Secretara de Hacienda y Credito Publico, Mexico City.

1997 Matrcula de Tributos o Codice de Moctezuma, reprint ed. Editedby Luis Reyes Garca. Akademische Druck- und Verlagsanstalt, Fondode Cultura Economica, Mexico City.

2003 La Matrcula de Tributos. In Arqueolog a Mexicana (specialedition 14), edited by Miguel Leon-Portilla, Mara Teresa Sepulveda,and M. Victor Castillo. Editorial Races, Mexico City.

Mohar, Luz Mara1997 De amate, colores y lneas en la Matrcula de Tributos. In Codices

y documentos sobre Mexico. Segundo Simposio, vol. 2, Salvador RuedaSmithers, Constanza Vega Sosa, and Rodrigo Martnez Baracs,

pp. 63 82. Instituto Nacional de Antropologa e Historia, ConsejoNacional para la Cultura y las Artes, Mexico City.

Mundy, Barbara E.1996 The Mapping of New Spain. Indigenous Cartography and the

Maps of the Relaciones Geograficas. University of Chicago Press,Chicago.

Nicholson, Henry B.1992 The History of the Codex Mendoza. In The Codex Mendoza, vol.

1, edited by Frances F. Berdan and Patricia R. Anawalt, pp. 111.University of California Press, Berkeley.

Reyes Garca, Luis1997 Matrcula de Tributos o Codice de Moctezuma. Volumen de

estudio d e la ed icion facsmil. Akademische Druck- undVerlagsanstalt, Fondo de Cultura Economica, Mexico City.

Rojas, Jose Luis de1997 Informacion de 1554. Sobre los tributos que los indios pagaban a

Moctezuma. Centro de Investigaciones y Estudios Superiores enAntropologa Social, Mexico City.

Smith, Michel E.2003 The Aztecs, 2nd ed. Blackwell, Oxford.

Zavala, Silvio1938 Las encomiendas de Nueva Espana y el gobierno de don Antonio

de Mendoza. Revista de Historia de America I:5975.


l2421_batalla_scribes who painted.pdf

Documents