cnn.com
Aztec Obsidian Trade Network Revealed
Analysis of 788 obsidian artifacts from Tenochtitlan reveals the Aztec Empire's vast trade network, sourcing materials from both allied and rival regions, showcasing a complex economic system that reflected political shifts and the symbolic importance of green obsidian from Sierra de Pachuca.
- What does the obsidian artifact analysis reveal about the Aztec Empire's economic and political reach?
- A study of 788 obsidian artifacts from Tenochtitlan reveals the Aztecs' extensive trade network, sourcing materials from both allied and rival regions. The analysis, using portable X-ray fluorescence, identified obsidian from at least eight sources, highlighting a complex economic system.
- What are the future implications for our understanding of the Aztec Empire based on this study's methodology and findings?
- The fluctuation in obsidian sources over time reflects the Aztec Empire's political and economic shifts. Periods of instability reduced obsidian diversity, while expansion led to increased access from a wider range of sources, emphasizing the link between political power and economic access.
- How did the Aztecs' use of obsidian vary between ritual objects and everyday tools, and what does this indicate about their society?
- The diverse obsidian sources, predominantly used for everyday tools, indicate a sophisticated market system extending beyond Aztec political control. This contrasts with the preference for a specific green obsidian from Sierra de Pachuca for ritual objects, showcasing both economic pragmatism and symbolic value.
Cognitive Concepts
Framing Bias
The article presents a generally balanced account of the study's findings. However, the emphasis on the 'most valuable' green obsidian and its symbolic connection to Tollan, might inadvertently give disproportionate weight to the ritual aspects of obsidian use, potentially overshadowing its significance in everyday life. The headline, while informative, could be framed to be more neutral. While the article is not biased, it could be structured to better reflect the relative importance of ritual versus everyday use of obsidian.
Language Bias
The language used is largely neutral and objective. The article uses descriptive terms like 'green and golden obsidian' without excessive emotional charge. However, terms like 'problematic tlatoani' (Aztec ruler) carry a subjective assessment, which might be better replaced with a neutral description of the ruler's actions and their historical context.
Bias by Omission
The article focuses primarily on the obsidian trade and its implications for Aztec society, but it could benefit from mentioning potential alternative explanations for the observed patterns in obsidian use. For example, were there shifts in geological availability of obsidian over time, or changes in technology that affected the ability to work with different types of obsidian? Additionally, while the article mentions the use of obsidian for tools and ritual objects, other potential uses of obsidian (e.g., in jewelry making, or in other forms of crafts) might be worth exploring further. The omission of these aspects limits the readers ability to fully understand the extent and complexity of the obsidian economy within the Aztec civilization.
Sustainable Development Goals
The research highlights the extensive trade networks of the Aztecs, encompassing both allied and rival groups. This suggests a relatively equitable distribution of essential resources (obsidian) across different communities, irrespective of political affiliations. The wide distribution of obsidian tools to both urban and rural populations also points to reduced economic disparity.