CHAPTER TEN
STORAGE AT XOCHICALCO, MORELOS, MEXICO
Silvia Garza-Tarazona, Claudia Alvarado-Léon, Norberto González-Crespo, and Beatriz Palavicini-Beltrán
Introduction
The archaeological site of Xochicalco is located in the west-central portion of the state of Morelos, Mexico. This city is recognized as one of the most prominent early states of the Epiclassic period (AD 600/700–900/1000) (Jiménez-Moreno 1959). The cities of this period are distinguished, among other aspects, for their defensive settlement pattern on hilltops. The founders of Xochicalco chose a hill 120 meters above the surrounding terrain, making the most of the topography in order to establish hierarchical levels, which reflect the spatial order of the city (Alvarado and Garza 2010). Consequently, the highest part of the hill was restricted to political and administrative activities, rituals, and the residences of high officials (Figure 10.1).
The power under which the city was founded demonstrates a state-level society where nearby cities and villages were controlled through military subjugation to secure the goods and labor needed to maintain the central organism. This same power required the design and planning for the storage and safekeeping of sumptuary goods, raw materials and finished articles, both local and foreign, in order to control and administer the interests of the authoritarian state.
Storage
Storing is an economic activity based on the assumption of scarcity due to natural risks and/or surplus production (Hirth 2012: 14–15). Depending on the social hierarchy, storage has different goals: on the domestic level, it can secure the supply of staples in case of a natural disaster or other kind of disruption in order to ensure the sustenance of their members over a period of time (D’Altroy and Earle 1985: 190; Hayden 2009: 599; Alvarado et al. 2012: 82; Hirth 2012: 15; see Covey, Quale, and Covey, Chapter 7; and Chapter 1, this volume). In complex societies, it was intended to guarantee the economic stability of the political systems and the proper functioning for the survival of those who do not produce food and for the integration of political units in a market system (D’Altroy and Earle 1985: 191–93, 196; Alvarado et al. 2012; Hirth 2012: 15).
Figure 10.1 Main Plaza and Acropolis on the hilltop of Xochicalco. Credit: Adalberto Ríos.
The main objective of storage in Xochicalco was to establish centralized control of products and goods of a tributary system (Manzanilla 1983: 5; 1985: 103). Because of the oppression carried out by Xochicalco, the city received all the necessary labor for its establishment, maintenance, and expansion as a large part of the tribute received was in the form of labor. However, given the environmental conditions around the city where the optimal land for cultivation is located “within a 5 km radius” (Hirth 2000: 153) and the requirements of the institutions, the city depended on tribute food. Therefore, to satisfy the demand for both a permanent and temporary supply, it was necessary to concentrate the products in specific areas.
Similarly, the centralization of raw materials, imported goods, and other items of restricted use was necessary for their control, work, and distribution within the sphere of power and beyond the borders of Xochicalco’s domain, facing perhaps an institutional kind of storage (Hirth 2012: 20–22; Smith 2012: 211) in which the palace had a fundamental place in the political and economic relations within the city.
The Palace
During the Epiclassic period in Central Mexico, there was an emergence of urban settlements with different levels of fortification which exhibit certain architectural complexes that can be identified as “palaces,” where activities of administrative and political character are evident. In this case, we refer to the concept of palace used by Manzanilla (1985, 2001) as an architectural complex that involves the material representation of political power.
To address to the concept of a palace as an institution, we refer to it as a monumental building inserted in an urban context, yet isolated from the common people. The monumentality of these buildings is the first indicator of control over labor and construction materials. On the other hand, the strategic location of the palace, its isolation, its restricted circulation, and limited access within the urban plan also suggest a privileged position of the occupants within the chain of decision making in the city (Manzanilla 1985; Manzanilla, López, and Fash 2005; Alvarado et al. 2012: 82; Alvarado 2015: 184).
The architectural complexity of a palace permitted the development of the institution’s diverse activities. In the first place, it hosted people dedicated to the administration of goods (which vary greatly according to the case), but in relation to this core activity we find that palaces were places where political decisions were made, officials lived and religious and other types of ceremonies were conducted.
The most prominent part of the hill of Xochicalco was allocated to one of the most representative and important buildings of the city: the Acropolis (Alvarado 2015) (Figure 10.1 and Figure 10.2). Located west of the Plaza Principal, its monumental aspect is manifested in its layout, made up of ten buildings—one of them, the AC8, with two stories—interconnected by corridors and stairways, with patios and spacious rooms (Alvarado, in press) (Figure 10.3).
The excavations in the Acropolis have revealed the presence of items related exclusively to the elite: stone sculptures, masks, pendants, beads and earrings made of greenstone or seashell, figurines of greenstone, censers, and Tlaloc vases. It is important to mention that many of these objects were found with marks of deliberate destruction, and some of them were part of other fragments found in Sector B (located on a lower-level terrace on the northern side of the Acropolis) (González et al. 1993–94: 61–72; Alvarado et al. 2012: 87; Alvarado 2015: 184).
The distribution of rooms, their different configurations, and the diversity of the archaeological materials found inside and outside the Acropolis, have allowed us to identify many of its features, like the storage areas for food and raw materials, workshops, areas for food preparation, residential quarters, and reception rooms, leading us to consider this archaeological building complex to be the palace of Xochicalco.
The Acropolis represented the wealth and power Xochicalco achieved during the Epiclassic period through the accumulation, control, production, and probable redistribution of luxury goods.
We now present the different kinds of staples and goods under the control of the palace institution at Xochicalco and other locations where they were stored.
Figure 10.2 Map of Xochicalco referring the Acropolis, Sector J, and Bastions.
Figure 10.3 Acropolis layout, pointing out the structures mentioned in the text.
Storage at Xochicalco
Food
Since the systematic explorations of the central part of Xochicalco began in 1992, there were four areas that, because of their size, location, and associated archaeological remains, were considered grain storerooms or graneros (González et al. 1993–94; Alvarado et al. 2012; Alvarado 2015: 190–191).
Inside the Acropolis, to the west, we find structure Ac5 (see Figure 10.3). In contrast to the rest of the structures in the group, Ac5 has a different floor plan with a rectangular layout and access from the west. In addition, the rooms of the structure are smaller and have low benches; they are more private when compared to other areas within the same architectural complex. Coupled with this data, the analysis of archaeological materials found in this structure reveals that its primary role was of a residential/domestic character, highlighting the presence of six tinajas or large amphorae taller than one meter (Garza and González 2006; Alvarado et al. 2012: 86), bowls, braziers, and incense burners.
Figure 10.4 The graneros (storerooms) inside Structure Ac5. Credit: Adalberto Ríos.
However, one of the architectural elements that attract more attention to Ac5 was the graneros (Figure 10.4). There are four rectangular areas of 2 meters by 5.50 meters, located at the northern end of the building, inside a large room where three tinajas, a cazuela (basin), and several bowls were found.
The graneros were built in a later architectural stage after the original building plan (Alvarado 2015: 190–191). The architects erected three transverse walls supported by the wall that originally enclosed the room to the north. To the south, they built another wall to ceiling height, leaving only an entrance at the eastern part of the granero. Access was 1.5 meters above the room’s floor, suggesting that they would have needed to use a ladder of a perishable material to reach it. On the other hand, being the only entrance to the four graneros, the cross walls that divide them have a cavity between them and the south wall, creating a kind of interior elevated passageway or crawlway to go from one granero to another (Figure 10.5). The volume of each of these areas is 41.80 cubic meters, a total of 167.20 cubic meters for all four.
These graneros are very similar to the ones described for the Grill Building from the site of Ziyadeh, Syria (Hole 1999: 269–270, fig. 5), and in some other sites in the Near East (Badra 2015: 112; Manzanilla 2012: 78). They also seem to be akin to the ones identified in Pachacamac, a site on the coast of Peru (Eeckhout 2012: 215, fig. 1). Until now, we had not found data about similar structures at any other site within Mesoamerica.
Figure 10.5 Reconstructed view of the graneros.
After the excavation of these four areas in Xochicalco the graneros were identified as places for grain storage because of their size and composition. Despite having collected samples for archaeobotanical analysis, the results were inconclusive because of the particularly poor conditions for the conservation of this kind of botanical remains in Xochicalco (Fernando Sánchez, personal communication, 2011). However, during the 2006 field season, Luis Barba and his team took floor samples from the graneros as well as from other areas within the Acropolis. In each granero, twelve samples were taken, totaling forty-eight. The results of these analyses are shown in Table 10.1, where the presence of carbonate (CO3) indicates the quality of the floors; the presence of pH implicates possible hydrogen, which would indicate remains of ashes; the presence of protein residues is associated, depending on the type of space analyzed, with places for preparation and consumption of food, or the bloodshed of animals occurred; the fatty acids indicate food preparation areas, resins, or wood storage; the phosphates (PO43−) suggest activities that left behind substances rich in phosphorus; and carbohydrates are related to starches and sugars (Barba, Ortiz, and Terreros 2006).
Table 10.1 Maximums, Minimums, and Averages Result from Floor Analysis
The overall results of these analyses show a generally high pH, suggesting that there was a fire on the floor of the graneros, as it was not an area for food preparation. The fire could be the one that destroyed the majority of the city’s structures at the end of its existence (González et al., in press), although there is a possibility that a fire could have been lit in order to get rid of the graneros insects, rodents, and their remains. On the other hand, high levels of protein residues, phosphates, and carbohydrates indicate the storage of some organic product, although they could not determine which.
The grains stored inside the graneros in the Acropolis could have been used for food preparation to serve the governmental, military, and religious institutions, as well as the labor groups in charge of the maintenance of the upper part of the city, and feastings.
The archaeological record found west of the Acropolis in Sector J, seven terraces below, could support this idea. The bones of slaughtered animals and human beings, pottery, cobs, and many other objects were found in a layer of earth and ashes, possibly the remains of a ritual ceremony.
There are three other possible graneros located within the structures of the Plaza Principal: G4–G11; G6, G7, and G8; or Pirámide de las Estelas (Table 10.2; Figure 10.6).
Structure G4 consisted of several rooms surrounding a patio. Access was from the east, appearing to be an area that tended to be separated from the activities carried out in the plaza. In fact, the structure was associated with a recessed stairway that seems to have been a domestic entrance from a lower terrace. The entire structure was built out of adobe, apparently serving as a food preparation area. Among the findings from this building and the adjacent G11 are four tinajas, jars (cántaros), pots, and bowls, among other objects (González et al. 1993–94).
Table 10.2 Dimensions of the Different Graneros Found in Xochicalco
| Length (m) | Width (m) | Volume (m3) | |
| Ac5 (4) | 5.5 | 2.5 | 41.80(167.2) |
| G4–G11 | 4.8 | 1.80 | 29.7 |
| G6–G7 | 9 | 1.5 | 51.3 |
| G8 | 2.6 | 2.1 | 20.8 |
Between structures G4 and G11 is a 1.80-by-4.8-meter granero with a capacity of 32.83 cubic meters. This is a completely enclosed room, with no access in any of its four walls. There is a stairway inside the room, which suggests that access was only from the top.
A third area of grain storage is found between structures G6 and G7. These buildings are located at the north of the Pirámide de las Estelas, flanking the Plaza Principal on its eastern side (see Figure 10.6).
G6 was a rectangular building with four patios and various rooms around them. G7 was a large structure that was burned and destroyed to build the Pirámide Gemela. The excavations revealed three rooms around a patio and two small stairways: one at the south outside between the two buildings and the other inside the patio (González et al. 1993–94). The data suggest that access to the structure could have been through the roof, entering through the patio.
Located between the G6 and G7 structures, there is a rectangular area with no access, and a capacity of 51.3 cubic meters. This possible granero, like those found in the Acropolis, was built sometime after the original floor plan of G7. A section of the longest room was separated off by a wall, to create a storage area with an entry from the top.
This also occurred in the G8 building’s storage area, where later architectural modifications led to the construction of the smallest granero yet found (20.8 cubic meters) (see Figure 10.6). The findings in this building, along with its architectural design, have led us to propose that it was probably the housing for senior members of the Xochicalco social hierarchy.
Goods and Raw Materials
Xochicalco controlled a series of local and foreign sumptuary goods that were exchanged and distributed exclusively by the elite. Such was the case of obsidian from Michoacán and Hidalgo, pottery objects and blue pigment from the Mayan area, jade from the Motagua region, Guatemala, turquoise from Zacatecas and the southwestern United States, and shells from the Pacific and the Gulf of Mexico, among others.
An example of this control is reflected in the local greenstone objects that abound in Xochicalco. With this stone, artisans created figurines, beads, pendants, earrings, nose rings, and other types of adornments (Garza 1993–94). Within the city, we found a total of 1,017 anthropomorphic figurines and 1,968 greenstone beads; the great majority were found in the dumps of Sector B (Elements 1 and 77; Figure 10.7), where a total of 581 figurines and 287 beads were located. The other great concentration was found inside structure G6, with a total of 195 figurines and 901 beads.
At this point, we would like to highlight the relevance of Elements 1 and 77. They show not only the situation that prevailed within the city circa AD 1100 (Gonzalez et al., in press) but also the role played by the Acropolis as a centralizing institution. Both dumps have led us to note that the archaeological materials were removed and thrown from the Acropolis to Sector B (Figure 10.7), as a result of the rebellion that led to Xochicalco’s tragic end. Among these elements, projectile points, bifaces, knives, eccentrics, punches, masks, scrapers, bowls, vases, pots, flutes, pendants, masks, earrings, nose rings, incense burners, handled censers, molds, architectural elements, human and animal bones, and many more items were found.
Getting back to the greenstone, it is important to note that we have not found the necessary evidence to affirm that the items made from such material were completed within the city. Regardless of whether the products were made in Xochicalco, it seems to be a fact that the centralized power controlled their distribution inside and outside of the city. Even though the raw material can be found nearby in the Taxco shale deposits and at the Tembembe River, the importance of the finished object was considered to be high, given their scarce presence in other parts of Xochicalco.
It is important to mention the greenstone beads found at the southern entrance of the city during the 1984–86 fieldwork (see Figure 10.2). This access was flanked by two structures that have been called Bastiones (Garza 1993; Alvarado and Garza 2010). In the East Bastion, 461 greenstone beads and fifty-six figurines were found. These findings have allowed us to consider this space as a checkpoint; it is possible that to gain the right of entry it was necessary to leave something in exchange.
Figure 10.7 Elements 1 and 77 located in Sector B, north of the Acropolis.
Turning again to the Acropolis, with emphasis on its multiple functions, the size of the rooms, especially the area found in the Ac7 and Ac8 structures, is important (see Figure 10.3). These structures contained the largest and most spacious rooms in Xochicalco, with areas ranging from 72 square meters to 256 square meters. Given these dimensions, we have proposed that these areas were used for the storage of prestige goods and raw materials, as well as for workshops where full-time specialized craftsmen controlled by the state produced all of the objects.
The study of shells has provided interesting data that support this hypothesis. The results obtained in the analysis made by Melgar (2007, 2009) reveal that 95 percent of the collection was found in Elements 1 and 77 (see Figure 10.7), while the remaining 5 percent was found in the halls of the Acropolis. The collection includes raw material, objects made of shells in the process of being manufactured, and finished items.
During the fieldwork in the Pirámide de las Serpientes Emplumadas by César Sáenz (1963) in 1962–63, a burial offering consisting of several unprocessed shells covered with cinnabar was found. Decades later when examining the same building, Norberto González found at the foot of the stairs a later burial site with an offering containing about 191 shell objects (González et al., 1993–94).
With the analyses of the material recovered from the Acropolis, from Elements 1 and 77 and from the objects offered up at the foot of the Pirámide de las Serpientes Emplumadas, Melgar (2007, 2009) concluded that all the manufacturing process of shell objects took place in the highest part of the city, at the workshops located in the spacious rooms of the Acropolis.
Besides the control over greenstone and shell, we consider that some of the most exclusive ceramics could have been manufactured within the city. The discovery of recurrent molds and their positives in some areas suggests that there was some control of very special pottery that could only be produced with the consent of the elite. An example of this is the large number of ceramic molded and appliquéd plates that represent the Thunder God (González et al. 1993–94). These so-called Tlaloc vessels (Figure 10.8) were mostly concentrated in an architectural space near the Gran Pirámide,a temple associated with the worship of that same god. We assume that political and religious authorities would have controlled these molds and the distribution of their positives within Xochicalco.
Finally, we suggest the possibility that perishable materials could have been stored inside the Acropolis. We have considered that the great halls were used for the storage of raw materials, such as cotton, wood, feathers, and animal skins, among others. The presence of cotton crops in the state of Morelos before the Spanish intervention is known (Sanders and Price 1968: 192), so it would not be unusual for Xochicalco to have had control over this precious resource for Mesoamerican societies.
Final Considerations
The need for staples for the maintenance of the non-producing groups that administered the state apparatus and its formal function by controlling the manufacture and circulation of sumptuary goods required specific areas for storage. In early states, it is possible to identify these particular areas inside or very close to buildings related to civic and private ceremonies.
The Acropolis in Xochicalco included areas for food storage and workshops. Its location, its architectural arrangements, the archaeological evidence found within the spacious rooms as well as its restricted access, reveal the role the building played as a palace by definition. The presence of this kind of structure is an indicator of a socially stratified society, where the group in charge of controlling staples and goods get their tribute from the subjugated provinces, accumulating, storing, and redistributing products under their control (Manzanilla 1985: 92; 2001: 103; Alvarado 2015).
Although a distribution network to determine how much land was controlled by Xochicalco has not been detected, the evidence from the upper part of the city allows us to suggest that the food stored in the graneros was used for the subsistence of priests, rulers, and full-time specialists working within the Acropolis workshops. The tinajas found in the rooms related to the graneros in both the Acropolis and structures G4 and G11 in the Plaza Principal were used for the preparation of large quantities of food.
The discovery of the dumps on the western slope of the Acropolis, and the terraces below, where bowls, braziers, censers, handled censers, animal bones, obsidian knives and blades, masks, and many other materials were found in a layer of earth and ashes, suggested to us that this was possibly a dump of ritual celebration, with the use of some of the products stored within the palace.
Despite our conclusions that the ruling class in Xochicalco survived by tribute and labor from the subject villages, we assume that there could be another kind of economic interaction to complement the survival and empowerment of Xochicalco that is still to be identified.
References
Alvarado, Claudia. 2015. El espacio construido y los procesos de cambio en la Acrópolis de Xochicalco. Cuicuilco 63: 173–207.
Alvarado, Claudia. In press. Los sistemas de circulación en Xochicalco, Morelos. In Memorias del V Congreso Interno Centro INAH-Morelos, Patrimonio Cultural: Investigación y Conservación, ed. Giselle Canto, Laura Ledesma, and Raúl González. Cuernavaca: Instituto Nacional de Antropología e Historia.
Alvarado, Claudia, and Silvia Garza. 2010. El carácter defensivo de Xochicalco (6501100 d.C.). Arqueología 43: 136–154.
Alvarado, Claudia, Silvia Garza, Norberto González, and Beatriz Palavicini. 2012. Alma- cenamiento en dos sitios del Epiclásico: Xochicalco (Morelos) y Cacaxtla (Tlaxcala). In Almacenamiento Prehispánico del Norte de Méxicoal Altiplano Central, ed. S. Bortot, D. Michelet, and V Darras, 81–90. Mexico City and San Luis Potosí: Centro de Estudios Mexicanos y Centroamericanos, Universidad Autónoma de San Luis Potosi.
Badra, Nancy. 2015. Settlement Patterns and Land Use during Ninevite 5 Period “3002500 BC” in the Khabour Basin. Mediterranean Archaeology and Archaeometry 15 (1): 109–115.
Barba, Luis, Agustín Ortiz, and Martín Terreros. 2006. Estudio químico de pisos de estructuras arqueológicas de Xochicalco. In Informe Proyecto Xochicalco, Acrópolis 2006. Mexico City: Archives of the Instituto Nacional de Antropología e Historia.
D’Altroy, Terence N., and Timothy K. Earle. 1985. Staple Finance, Wealth Finance, and Storage in the Inka Political Economy. Current Anthropology 26 (2): 187–206.
Eeckhout, Peter. 2012. Inca Storage and Accounting Facilities at Pachacamac. Andean Past 10: 213–239.
Garza, Silvia. 1993. Una de las entradas a la ciudad de Xochicalco, Morelos. Cuadernos de Arquitectura Mesoamericana 24: 9–17.
Garza, Silvia. 1993–94. Informe del Análisis de Lítica Pulida. Informe Materiales Arqueológicos del Proyecto Especial Xochicalco 1993–1994. Mexico City: Archives of the Instituto Nacional de Antropología e Historia.
Garza, Silvia, and Norberto González. 2006. Cerámica de Xochicalco. In La producción alfarera en el México Antiguo III, ed. L. Merino and A. García, 125–159. Mexico City: Instituto Nacional de Antropología e Historia.
González, Norberto, Silvia Garza, Claudia Alvarado, Emiliano Melgar, Beatriz Palavicini, Mauro de Angeles, Fernando Sánchez, and J. Bernardo Albaitero. 1993–94. Informe trabajodecampo del Proyecto Especial Xochicalco 1993–1994. Mexico City: Archives of the Instituto Nacional de Antropología e Historia.
González, Norberto, Silvia Garza, Claudia Alvarado, and Beatriz Palavicini. In press. Xochicalco en la Secuencia Mesoamericana. In II Coloquio de Arqueología: Geografía Politica y Cronología en el México Antiguo. Mexico City: Coordinación Nacional de Arqueología-DEA, Instituto Nacional de Antropología e Historia.
Hayden, Brian. 2009. The Proof Is in the Pudding: Feasting and the Origins of Domestication. Current Anthropology 50 (5): 597–601.
Hirth, Kenneth G. 2000. Ancient Urbanism at Xochicalco. Vol. 1. Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press.
Hirth, Kenneth G. 2012. La modelización del almacenaje prehistórico: Subsistencia, desigualdad y complejidad política. In Almacenamiento Prehispánicodel Norte de Méxicoal Altiplano Central, ed. S. Bortot, D. Michelet, and V. Darras, 13–25. Mexico City and San Luis Potosí: Centro de Estudios Mexicanos y Centroamericanos, Universidad Autónoma de San Luis Potosí.
Hole, Frank. 1999. Implications of Possible Storage Structures at Tell Ziyadeh, NE Syria. Journal of Field Archaeology 26 (3): 267–283.
Jiménez-Moreno, Wigberto. 1959. Síntesis de la Historia Pretolteca de Mesoamérica. In Esplendor del México Antiguo, ed. C. Cook, 2: 1019–1108. Mexico City: Centro de Investigaciones Antropológicas de México.
Manzanilla, Linda. 1983. La redistribución como proceso de centralización de la producción y circulación de bienes. Boletín de Antropología Americana 7: 5–18.
Manzanilla, Linda. 1985. Templo y palacio: Proposiciones sobre el surgimiento de la sociedad urbana y el Estado. Anales de Antropologia 22: 91–114.
Manzanilla, Linda. 2001. Gobierno corporativo en Teotihuacan: Una revisión del concepto “Palacio” aplicado a la gran urbe prehispánica. Anales de Antropología 35: 157–190.
Manzanilla, Linda. 2012. El almacenamiento en Teotihuacan: Enfoques metodológicos. In Almacenamiento Prehispánicodel Norte de Méxicoal Altiplano Central, ed. S. Bortot, D. Michelet, and V Darras, 73–80. Mexico City and San Luis Potosí: Centro de Estudios Mexicanos y Centroamericanos, Universidad Autónoma de San Luis Potosí.
Manzanilla, Linda, Leonardo López, and William Fash. 2005. Cómo definir un palacio en Teotihuacan. In Arquitectura y urbanismo: Pasado y presente de los espacios en Teotihuacan. Memoria de la Tercera Mesa Redonda deTeotihuacan, ed. Ma. E. Ruiz and J. Torres, 185–209. Mexico City: Instituto Nacional de Antropología e Historia.
Melgar, Emiliano R. 2007. Las ofrendas de concha de moluscos de la Pirámide de las Serpientes Emplumadas, Xochicalco, Morelos. Revista Mexicana de Biodiversidad 78: 83S-92S.
Melgar, Emiliano. 2009. La producción especializada de objetos de concha en Xochicalco. MA thesis. Mexico City: Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Instituto de Investigaciones Antropológicas.
Sáenz, César A. 1963. Exploraciones en la Pirámide de las Serpientes Emplumadas, Xochicalco. Revista Mexicana de Estudios Antropológicos 19: 7–25.
Sanders, William, and Barbara Price. 1968. Mesoamerica, the Evolution of a Civilization. New York: Random House.
Smith, Michael. 2012. El almacenamiento en la economía azteca: Una perspectiva com- parativa. In Almacenamiento Prehispánico del Norte deMéxicoal Altiplano Central, ed. S. Bortot, D. Michelet, and V. Darras, 201–220. Mexico City and San Luis Potosí: Centro de Estudios Mexicanos y Centroamericanos, Universidad Autónoma de San Luis Potosí.