GREATER MESOAMERICA The Archaeology of West and Northwest Mexico EDITED BY MICHAEL S. FOSTER AND SHIRLEY GORENSTEIN ‘The University of Utah Press Salt Lake CityCENTRALISMO IN MESOAMERICA HIS BOOK is the latest in a growing series of edited works devoted to the archaeology of ‘west or northwest Mexico or both (Bell, ed. 29743 Bochm de Lameiras and Weigand r992s Dahlgren ad Soto de Arechavaleta 1995; Foster and Weigand 985; Mathien and McGuire 1986; Reyman 19955 Riley ad Hedrick 1978 Woosley and Ravesloot 1993). The szroduction to this volume by Gorenstein and Foster shoes a long-standing complaint, voiced in many of earlier collections, that the findings of archaeolo- ‘working in these regions have not reccived the at~ tion they deserve, Mesoamericanists instead have re- ned focused on the better-known {at least so far) 224 often more spectacular remains of the central high- sods, the Gulf Coast, and the Maya region (Weigand 92a). In effect, many of the regions considered in the resent volume have been excluded from Mesoamerica + relegated to the status of peripheries that benefited -n but did not contribute to the development of ‘oamerican civilization. Nevertheless, it must be admitted that many of the tier archaeologists working in this vast area have tly colhaded in this centralismo by suggesting that regions became “mesoamericanized” only in the tages of their culture histories. Ochers have en- CHAPTER FIFTEEN FROM TZINTZUNTZAN TO PAQUIME Peers or Peripheries in Greater Mesoamerica? MICHAEL W. SPENCE dorsed the primary role of the “heartland” by propos- ing world-system and core-periphery models to explain the movement of goods and ideas between central Mexico and the West and Northwest. Although these ‘models have been challenged (e., Stark 1986), they have created a perspective that las become deeply embedded in he archaeological literature. Even this volume, although it includes several chapters contesting this view, implicitly adopts it through ts attempt to cover some thirteen states ‘of Mexico, from Michoacsin to Chihuahua Afterall, what coherence could such a vast area have, apare from its ap- parently marginal location when viewed from the rather ‘smug, perspective of central Mexico? As Gorenstein and Foster point out, however, Mesoamerica is by no means the clearly defined entity ‘we have assumed it to be. Despite numerous attempts to pin it down, the most recent being a concerted ex- amination of the topic at the 1989 XIX Mesa Redonda of the Sociedad Mexicana de Antropologia, Meso- america remains elusive in its defining criteria and its extent, both of which have changed over time (Braniff 19743 Contreras R. 1990). Much of this uncertainty is due to the work of investigators in the West and North- ‘west, whose findings have undermined our earlier, rather simplistic notions of Mesoamerica. The field has been ‘opened to alternative perspectives, always a healthy de- velopment (Nalda 1990). As Braniff (x995:2025 this 255MICHAEL W. SPENCE volume) has emphasized, we can now entertain the idea that cultura practices and elements moved into, not just out from, the “core” (see also Hers 1989), and that ‘eventthe frontier between settled mesoamericans and the ‘more nomadic Chichimecs to the north was a porous and fluctuating zone of peaceful contact and exchange rather than the rigid and confrontational border assumed by many earlier scholars. Despite the growth of these new perspectives, break- ing the old habits of thought will not be casy. They are locked in the archaeological language ofthe debate. Even among those who see no imbalance in the interactions between the societies of central Mexico and those of the “West and Northwest, terms such as “periphery” are still used to characterize the latter regions. We must explic= itly question whether the mesoamerican “core” is really a core, and so by extension whether its “periphery” is really a periphery. Stark (1986:272) is careful to use the term “periphery” in a purely geographic sense, avoid- ing any implication of structural oF economic inequal- ity. In fact, she questions the existence of any such im- balance. We mast follow that example and avoid a priori assumptions about the degree to which any one region dominates or even demographically outweighs another. As part of this approach, we should keep in mind that it is people, not regions, that interact. As Stack (1986:282) notes, the materials and messages transmitted between interacting elites may be quite different from those com- municated by entrepreneurially oriented meschants. THE ROLE OF TEOTIHUACAN ‘Teotihuacén has frequently been invoked to explain cul- tural developments in other parts of Mesoamerica. In some cases there is good reason for this. In Kaminaljuyu, for example, Teotihuacén influences and even the ac tual presence of Teotihuacanos is signaled by talud- tablero architecture and a variety of goods produced in ‘or distributed through Teotihuacan (Kidder etal. 1974; Sanders and Michels 19775 Spence 1996). Similar en- claves, or at least clear evidence of interaction with ‘Teotihuacén, appear at a variety of other sites in Guate- mala, Belize, and Veracruz (Spence 1996). In west and northwest Mexico, however, evidence of Teotihuacén contacts “spotty” (Aronson 1996:167). Although some ‘Teotibuacén goods appear in Michoacan, the Bajfo, and Jalisco, few sites are involved and the quantities of im ported goods are limited (Pollard, this volume; Braniff, this volumes Weigand 1992b). In demographic terms there is no doubt that Teotihuacén was indeed huge, with a population esti- mated at some 125,000 (Millon 1992). Whether this size created a large consumer demand for goods from the West and Northwest is quite another matter. The population of the Basin of Mexico in the Middle Classic period (ca. a.D. 200-650) may have been only about 230,000, the bulk of it packed into the city (Sanders et al, 1979). Beyond Teotihuacén, the population was dis- persed widely in hamlets, villages, and some smaller cen- ‘This population distribution suggests that any signifi- cant consumer demand would have been concentrated in the city itself. There, however, the demand for goods was considerable, Except perhaps for the last century of its existence, prestige and luxury goods circulated widely in the city, rather than being restricted to a small elite (Sempowski 1994:252, 263-264). Nevertheless, this de- mand was oriented largely toward the south and east, regions that show evidence of direct and at times in- tense interaction with Teotihuacén, Goods from the West and Northwest, in contrast, appear only sparsely in Teotihuacén sites. Some have adopted Kolb’s (1987:20, 8r) suggestion that the quan: tities of Pacific Spondylus calcifer found at Maquixco el Bajo, a site near the west edge of Teotihuacin, were imported from west Mexico. This species, however, is, widely distributed along the Pacifie coast, from Sonora to Ecuador (Kolb 1987:20). It may equally well have reached Teotibuacén through its links with Karminaljuya and Balberta (Kidder et al. 1974; Bové etal. 1993). Pil ‘Weigand has said that some sherds from the Maquixco el Bajo excavations may be from Jalisco, Nayarit, and Zacatecas (including the Chalchihuites culture), but no details have been provided (Kolb 1987:82-83). On the ‘other hand, some ceramic vessels and figurines from Michoacén have been found ata site near the west edge of Teotihuacén and may represent an enclave of Michoacanos in the city (Sergio Gomez. Chévee, personal communication 1993). ‘Most models that suggest that substantial interaction with the West or Northwest was developed before our chronologies were refined. Thus, it was suggested that Alta Vista was founded by migrating elites related to, if not from, Teotihuacén, and that the materials taken from, the extensive Chalchihuites mines went largely to sup- ply Teotihuacén with pigments, green stone, and other ‘goods (Aveni etal. 1982; Kelley 1983b; Weigand 1982). In effect, the post-Canatillo phase Suchil Chalchihuites cculeure developed as the result of a Teotihuacdin coloni- 256PEERS OR PERIPHERIES? zation effor, intended to secure a steady supply of de- sired materials for the city. Archaeologists are now moving away from this posi- sion, It is becoming clear that the Chalchihuites mines are primarily Epi-Classic in date and that their extent can be adequately explained by small-scale exploitation over the course of some centuries to suqoly regional consumers (Kelley and Kelley, ehis volume; Schiavitti 1995). Also, although Alta Vista may have been founded about 4.0. 450, it reached its peak in che winch century (Foster 199sb:85; Kelley r990b). The idea of an ongo- ing relationship between Teotihuacan and Alta Vista is further weakened by the absence of Teotihuacén items in Alta Vista and the virtual absence of Chalchihuites artifacts in Teotihuacain (see also Hers r989a:50, 188). ‘The one possible exception to the latter is a rim sherd from Maquixco el Bajo that Weigand says “appears to be from the Chalchihuites area during the Classic” (Kolb 1987:82-83). Nevertheless, there is one striking parallel chat must be explained: the Cerro el Chapin 1 pecked cross-circle (Aveni et al. 19825 Kelley and Kelley, this volume). Al- though widely distributed in Mesoamerica (one even appears 130 km to the north, in Durango; Aveni et al. +£982:319, 331), these features are clearly concentrated around Teotihuacén and associated sites (Aveni 1989). ‘There is no doubt that the Chapin 1 example closely ‘matches those found in central Mexico. Stil, it remains possible that i was made by people who had learned the science from some region closer to hand than ‘Teotibuacdn (Cowgill 19972134). Folan et al. (1987) located another example at Cerrito de la Campana, a ‘Teotihuacdn-related site in the Temascalzingo area, in the state of Mexico near the Rio Lerma and the Michoacan border. Perhaps, as intervening areas are ‘more thoroughly explored, other examples will be found. ‘Weigand (r992b) proposed a different sort of effect that Teotihuacdn may have had in the West. He sug- gested that the distinctive Teuchitlén tradition of Jalisco may have evolved in part as a local response to pressure from Teotihvacan or allied groups in the Atemajac Val- ley, asa form of indigenous resistance. Again, the theory encounters chronological difficulties. The cultural ex- pression in the Atemajac Valley that Weigand refers to, the El Grillo phase, is actually Epi-Classic, ca. a.n. 600- ro00 (Beekman 1996a; Schondube B. and Galvin V. 1978). By the time this phase was developing, Teotihuacén had either already collapsed or was with: drawing from its former position of dominance in Mesoamerica. The presence of occasional Thin Orange sherds in some earlier Teuchitlan tradition sites indicates som link to Teotibuacéin, but there is no evidence that ‘Teotihuacan’s presence was immediate enough to pro- voke the sort of response Weigand has suggested. The realization that many of the cultures and sites in the West and Northwest were Epi-Classic, combined with the rarlier late lA.n 660) ow sigrentad oe the ca lapse of Teotihuacén (Cowgill 1996, 1997), has gener- ated a new set of theories about the nature of Tootihuace’s pace om chose cegions: lescems cae ake correspondence in time between the disintegration of ‘Teotihuacén and the development of vigorous new poli- ties to the west and northwest cannot be entirely coinci- dental (Nelson 1997]. One feature in particalas requives explanation: the appearance of talud-tablero architec ture in a number of apparently Epi-Classic sites in Michoacén and Jalisco. This architectural form has of ten been considered a hallmark of the Teotihuacén state, though some have cautioned that its association with Teotihuacén isnotas tight as has been assumed (Laporte 2987) There are several possible explanations for the wide distribution of the talud-tablero in Epi-Classic ‘Mesoamerica. For one, it may represent a special phe- nomenon, the invocation through architectural imagery of the power of a great civilization that had already passed into legend (Spence 1996:343). This would be a Particularly plausible explanation for those regions ‘where Teotihuacsn had played a major role in local af- fairs during che preceding Middle Classic period some Epi-Classic echo of its past importance would not be surprising. The post-A.D. 600 talud-tablero structures in the Maya region, like 5D-43 of Tikal, may be cases in point. Another possibility is that the Epi-Classic examples of talud-tablero no longer bear any seference at all to ‘Teotihuacén, Variants of this facade may simply have become a generalized architectural symbol for the state ‘or the public realm, or even just an attractive way to decorate a building, In this sense, it might be expected virtually anywhere in Mesoamerica, regardless of the area's prior relationship with Teotihuacén. This expla- nation would fit withthe network steategy that Blanton, and others (r996) believe dominated political systems im the Epi-Classic period; talud-tablero architecture would have become an “international style.” The third possibility is that ralud-rablero architecture was introduced by refugees from Teotihuacén (Pollard, this volume). Most of those leaving Teorihuacén during its decline could have been accommodated easily enough 257MICHAEL W. SPENCE elsewhere in the Basin of Mexico, which was not heavily populated then. Some may have moved into the Valley of Toluca, which shows a population expansion at about that time (Sugiura Y. 1996). Refugees would probably hhave moved to areas that were familiar to them or al- ready occupied by people with whom they had some prior relationship (Sugiura Y, 1996:248-249). This would certainly have been true of the Valley of Toluca, where populations with Teotihuacén-style pottery and talud-tablero architecture were established in the Middle Classic (Diaz O. 1993). And itis possible that some refu- sees would have traveled even farther afield. Teotihu- acén’s collapse involved internal conflict and violence against the ruling element of the city (Millon 1988), 30 fleeing elites may have wished to put a considerable dis- tance between themselves and their former subjects. It is difficult say which ofthese possibilities applies to the sites in west Mexico with talud-tablero architec ture. Some of them are in Michoacén, but their dates are not firmly established. Loma de Santa Maria may be a Middle Classic period site (Trejo de la Rosa 19793 Manzanilla Lépez 1988). Tres Cerritos is more dificult to place. The tomb with multiple burial chambers built into the talud-tablero structure there isnot a Teotihuacén feature (Macias Goytia and Vackimes Serret 1988). Tingambato, dated to the Epi-Classic (Pollard, this vol- lume), also has talud-tablero architecture associated with a tomb, this one containing at least 50 individuals (La- gunas R. 1987). At least some of the Michoacén sites with talud-tablero architecture, then, are probably Epi- Classic sites occupied by people with a decidedly non- ‘Teotihuacén mortuary program. They may represent the first scenario outlined above, an indigenous population that continued the use of talud-tablero because of its reference to a now mythical Teotihuacin, but the pres- ence of an earlier Middle Classic occupation closely linked to Teotihuaedn has still o be demonstrated, ‘The Epi-Classic talud-tablero expressions in the Atemajac Valley, on the other hand, may have been con- structed by elite refugees from Teotihuaefn. Although the pottery is generally quite different from that of ‘Teotihuacdn, the mortuary practices of the El Grillo phase are unlike those ofthe preceding Tabachines shaft tomb culture and show some features present also in ‘Teotihuacén: individual burial, emphasis on the seated and flexed positions, and the frequent inclusion of min- iature vessels (Aronson 1996:167; see also Cabrero G. 1995369). Nevertheless, one would have to explain why fleeing elites would move so far, to an area with no ear- lier Teotihuacén presence, and why local people would have suffered their intrusion. It should be noted that such an intrusion would have been a major event in lo- cal political history. The appearance of foreign patterns in public architecture indicates the foreign control of local labor, implying the subordination of local author- ity to the newcomers Sanders and Price 1968:166-167). Could a group of refugee Teotihuacanos have really ac- complished this? Although the El Grillo phase may rep- resent such a case, the evidence as it stands is not con- vincing. Ir seems that we have a lot more thinking, and dig- ging, to do on this topic. Ir would help if we had a better understanding of the archaeology of the intervening ar- «as (Aronson 1996:167) and a more precise chronology of developments in the Atemajac Valley. For that mat tes, more precision in the chronology of Teotihuacan it- self would be useful. There were apparently episodes of internal conflict and political revision before the final collapse, and some of them may have had some limited effect on the societies to the west (Cowgill 1997:155). Also, the scope of investigation should be expanded to include osteological data. Comparisons of skeletal se- ries from Teotihuacén with those of west Mexico may shed light on the question of population movements. There is also a structural perspective on central and ‘west Mexico relationships. Stark (1986:284) and Nelson (2993; see also Blanton et al. x996:r0) have suggested that the collapse of Teotihuacin may have freed “pe- ripheral” polities to develop their own potential. More recently, however, Nelson (1997:89) has rejected this idea, at lease with respect to Le Quemada, because it resumes a prior Middle Classic phase of Teotihuacain, domination in the area, a phase for which there is no evidence. Still, as Nelson notes, there is the troubling coincidence of “core” collapse and “periphery” growth (1997:107). Blanton and others (1996) have proposed another possible mechanism. They say that mesoamerican his- tory shows a continuing oscillation between what they call “corporate” and “network” strategies of gover- nance. With the collapse of Teotihuacén, a corporate state, network strategies became the dominant pattern inthe Epi-Classic. Blanton and others (r996:r0) say that these may always be present in the peripheries of corpo- rate states. Ir might be suggested, however, that the fac- tional conflicts of the Teotihuacén collapse (Millon 1988) ‘reated ¢ situation in which militarism and competition for power inevitably dominated post-Teotihuacén cen- tral Mexico politics. Leaders who adopted network strat- egies engaged in intense competition, relying on inter- 258PEERS OR PERI clite exchange systems, alliances, and politically advan- tageous marriages to enhance their authority. Prestige goods and knowledge, including religious concepts and iconographic expressions, moved over large arcas. Net- ‘work strategies are inherently expansive, as leaders de- velop exchange ties and relationships far afield in order 10 obtain the exotic goods and knowledge necessary to ‘maintain their positions at home. This could explain the wide circulation of goods and ideas, such as pseudocloisonné and talud-tablero archi- tecture in the Epi-Classie period. These became elements of an “international style” that developed with the bur- ‘geoning communication and exchange networks char- acteristic of the Epi-Classic polities. Though Teotihuacén. ‘may have been the original source of inspiration for some of these elements, in the Epi-Classic they would have taken on new meanings, ones responsive to the political imperatives of the time. If interpretations of some skeletal concentrations at ‘Alta Vista, Cerro del Huistle, and La Quemada as the display of conquered enemies are correct, military con- flice must have played a significant role in the competi- tion among Epi-Classic elites (Abbott Kelley 19785 Hers ‘19892; Pickering 1985). Some caution is required here, however (Faulhaber 1960:r40-142). Thorough osteo- logical analyses of the skeletal material, coupled with careful attention to context, are necessary. The Cerro del Hustle discovery indicates some sort of tzompant, which in Late Postelassic central Mexico would have been used for the display of enemies’ heads (Hers 119892:89-91). This function also scems plausible for the Cerro del Huistle case, where the heads, mostly of adule ‘males, were apparently pierced and suspended while till fleshed. Nevertheless, some further confirmation, such as evidence of biologically diverse origins or a high inci- dence of perimortem trauma, would be welcome. Some displays of skeletal elements or body parts or both seem to have involved ancestors and kin rather than enemies (Nelson et al. 1992). The public curation of ancestral bones would not be unexpected in politcal systems based con a nctwork strategy, since the “patrimonial rhetoric” deployed to support political status in such systems of ten includes reference to descent (Blanton etal. 1996:5). THE AZTATLAN COMPLEX ‘The Aztatlin complex, the expression of the Mixteca- Puebla sphere in the West and Northwest, may have developed as early as a.0. 800-900 (Kelley, this volume; 259 IPHERIES? Mountjoy 1990}. Kelley (this volume) places its peak in Late Aztatlin, which he equates with Aztec Iin the Ba- sin of Mexico and, based partially on the chronology of Sanders ef al. (1979), dates to AD. 1150-13 50/1400. Recent work in the Basin of Mexico and at Cholula, however, suggests that Aztec I and the Mixteca-Puebla style were certainly present in those areas by A.D. 1000, and perhaps earlier (Cowgill 1996; Lind 19943 McCafferty 1994; Parsons et al. 1996). Thus, the early dates suggested for Aztatkin by Kelley (this volume) and Mountjoy (1990, this volume) may not be far off the mark. If so, the Aztathin complex would represent an Early Postelassic (8.0. 900-1250) phenomenon that de- veloped hard on the heels of the Epi-Classic expressions discussed above. ‘The varieties and quantities of materials circulating, in the Early Postclassic period may have been greater than in the Epi-Classic. Copper items, turquoise, pris- atic blades of fine west Mexico obsidians, elaborate polychrome ceramics, and even some Plumbate pottery ‘were among the goods involved (Ganot R. and Peschard F 19955 Kelley this volume; Weigand and Spence 1982). Blanton and others (1996:r0) cite this system as an ex- ample of the network strategy and identify the Mixteca- Puebla ceramics as an “international style” (se also Pohl and Byland 1994). As before, elites were collecting pres- tige goods and knowledge from near and far to support their claims in the competition for regional power. The inclusion of knowledge, both mundane and exotic, and the necessity of appeal to supernatural authority in these competitions led to a set of mutually understood ideo- logical concepts and a common symbolic grammar (Braniff 1995; Kelley, this volume; Pohl and Byland 1994). Although this seems to be a plausible model of the developments in Postclassic west and northwest Mexico, it must still be thoroughly tested. One important ques- tion concerns the mechanism forthe circulation of these concepts and goods. Kelley (this volume) suggests the trocador, the mobile merchant, as a principal agent of transmission. These merchants could not have been purely entreprencurial. As Stark (r986:282) has pointed out, commercially driven traders would not have been ly to communicate, let alone instill the concepts and information necessary for effective participation in broader ideological and iconographic systems. To ac- complish that, the mobile merchants must have been. agents or members of the interacting elites. This does not deny an entrepreneurial motivation, but it qualifies itMICHAEL W. SPENCE In her discussion of the iconography, Braniff (19952182) has cautioned that the meanings associated ‘with a symbol can change with time and context. This raises the question of the degree to which this “interna- tional style” actually represents a single, widespread system of belief and ritual, as opposed to a set of loosely structured and regionally reinterpreted symbols. If ves- sels bearing complex Mixteca-Puebla iconographic mo- tifs were widely circulated, their presence far from their source of manufacture could not be taken necessarily to mean local understanding and acceptance of the mes- sage encoded in the images. They could simply have been. reinterpreted in local terms. On the other hang, if these elaborate motifs had been faithfully reproduced on lo- cal pottery, it would imply something more. Reinterpre- tation in terms of local concepts and beliefs would be expected to result in some selection and alteration of the images, their recasting in a locally intelligible for- mat. In the absence of evidence for such reinterprota- tion, one could suggest that the formal body of beliefs expressed in the images had been transmitted intact and wwas largely accepted by the recipients. ‘Thus, we must determine just how international this “international style” really is. Technical analyses of the pottery, employing petrographic and trace element meth ‘ods, will play a crucial role in this effort. They have proved to be very informative about Mixteca-Puebla ‘ceramics in central Mexico (Neffet al. 1994) but to date have been applied to only a few western and northwest- ern cases (Strazicich 1996; Woosley and Olinger 1993). If manufacturing centers and distribution spheres can be identified and associated with iconographic systems, ‘we will understand a great deal more about the Aztatlan network and its sociopolitical foundations. In sum, the idea of a large and economically integrated ‘central Mexico population exerting a major impact on the development of western and northwestern societies isa figment of archaeological imagination. In the Middle Classic period, Teotihuacin’s acquisitive gaze was turned more to the east and south. Some adjacent peoples to. the west and north were certainly interacting with ‘Teotihuacanos, but the nature of this interaction is not clear and most of the region was unaffected. With the collapse of Teotihuacén, central Mexico splintered into a mumber of vigorously competing smaller polities that ‘would have been even less able to dominate those of the ‘West and Northwest in any respect (political, economic, or religious), although paradoxically the circulation of goods and ideas among all these societies may have in- creased substantially at this time. This situation persisted through the Epi-Classic and Early Postclassic periods. Interaction among the regions was clearly occurring, but it was probably on a rela- tively equal footing and often screened through inter- vening polities and agents. Iris only with the ascendancy of the Triple Alliance (4.0. 1428-1520) in the Late Postclassic period that central Mexico may have become integrated and populous enough to effect some limited restructuring of economic practices and institutions in the West and Northwest. FUTURE DIRECTIONS Archaeologists have become increasingly aware that centralismo, though it may explain the imbalance in wealth and power between center and periphery in Mexico today, is not a tenable characterization of past interactions. This growing realization is reflected in the trend away from world-system and core-periphery mod- els, and the focus on explanatory concepts that assume a more equitable balance among interacting polities. Kelley's (r986a, this volume) srocador model, the peer- polity model discussed by Jiménez Betts and Darling (this, volume; see also Renfrew 1986), and the network strat- egy concept of Blanton and others (1996) are cases in point. Regrettably, though, the terminology and even some of the assumptions from our brief flirtation with core-periphery theory linger on. These must be explic- itty recognized and tested if we are to make any further progress Nevertheless, it may still be helpful to look to the ar- chaeology of the mesoamerican “heartland” for some suggestions for the future directions of research in the ‘west and northwest. For example, syntheses in the West and Northwest (including this volume) have typically covered a great deal of territory, spatially, chronologi- cally, and topically. This is necessary in the earlier stages of investigation, when regions have to be defined and an initial chronology developed, but the absence of tighter focus can eventually stall progress, Syntheses of such broad geographic scope are usually constrained topically to some degree, dealing only with certain time periods (e.g., Diehl and Berlo r989) or subjects (e.g. Chase and Chase 19923 Nicholson and Quifiones Keber 1994). Some similar efforts are now appeacing in the archaeological literature of west and northwest Mexico (Cabrero G. 1995; Hosler 1994). ‘As always, more fieldwork is also needed. In some areas, broad survey coupled with test excavation is still 260PEERS OR PERIPHERIES? necessary, Foster (this volume) has shown that this is the case for Durango, where our understanding of the archaeological resources is still in its infancy. Jane Kelley and Joe Stewart (1991, 1992) have only recently com- pleted an extensive survey of west-central Chihuahua. In other regions, a different approach is needed. The Teuchidlin tradition, for example, is known largely through surface reconnaissance. The very limited sub- surface data come almost entirely from monitoring the activities and finds of looters (Beekman 1996b:136; ‘Weigand 1985252, 70). Some of our information on the Azzatlin complex also comes from looted graves (Ganot R. and Peschard F. 1995). It is now time for intensive excavation, especially in view of the accumulating dam- age caused by looters and development (Mountjoy 19954). This will nor only provide far more detailed and reliable evidence but will also relieve us of some of the troubling ethical problems that come of dealing with looted data. As any thoughtful perusal of Alison Wylie's (2996) excellent discussion of the subject shows, there ‘are major moral and practical difficulties involved in even casual and distanced use of looted evidence. In the long run, we are probably just creating a greater threat to archaeological resources for an incommensurate re- turn of data. The course of furure investigations, then, should in- lade concentrated examinations of key sites and areas. ‘The long-term investigation of the Suchil branch of the ‘Chalehihuites culture by the Kelleys is fine example of what is needed (Abbott Kelley 1978; Kelley 1983b, 19gob}. The work of Nelson and his students (Nelson etal. 19925 Strazicich 1996) and of Jiménez Bets (this volume) at La Quemada, coupled with Teombold's (2985, 1991) study of the site's broader Malpaso Valley context, is another case in point. In addition, technical analyses designed to identify the sources and circulation spheres of particular archaeo- logical materials will be crucial. Samples of adequate size from archaeologically defined proveniences are es- sential for such studies. Looted materials should not even be considered, given the inherent uncertainties about their contexts, Excellent recent analyses along these lines, have dealt with obsidian (Trombold et al. x93), tur- guoise (Weigand and Harbortle 1993), metals (Hosler 1994), and ceramics (Strazicich 1996; Woosley and Olinger 1993). Ulrimately, I am suggesting that we follow the course J. Charles Kelley laid out for us with his own work: broad survey to gain some idea of the distribution of archaeological resources in a region, followed by inten- sive excavations at key sites with analysis and publica- tion of the data and the application of the results to questions of broader anthropological interest. Along the way, time should be set aside for the sort of very de- tailed analysis of a particular dataset that is best exem- plified by the Kelleys” (this volume) remarkable recon- struction ofthe use ofthe Cerro del Chapin cross-ircle As Kelley knew, the grand sweep and the minutiae are equally important in understanding the past. To date, archaeology in west and northwest Mexico has pechaps concentrated a bit too much on the grand sweep. Fortunately, there is a large pool of dedicated and competent scholars, many of them represented in this volume, working in the archaeology of west and north- west Mexico. They are well aware of the potential of this vast region to enrich, even revolutionize, our under- standing of Mesoamerica. Ii difficult to imagine a sat- isfactory account of mesoamerican history that does not include some of their stories: the great Tarascan state, which brought the Aztec war machine to a grinding halt in the west (Pollard 1993); the long Teuchitlin tradi- tion, with its unique circular architecture, and the sociopolitical implications of that architecture (Weigand 19908, 1996); and the Chalchihuites culture, with its ‘extensive mines, complex architecture, and enigmatic ‘mortuary displays (Abbott Kelley 1978; Kelley 1983b, 1ggob). There is not much rime to waste, however. As the pace of development and looting quickens (Mountjoy 995d), we may once again find that the archacology of centeal Mexico is showing us the way of the future. In this case, it is not a happy prospect (Parsons 1989). 261