Abstract
In this article, I compare backstrap-loom weaving in three cultural contexts: the ancient Maya, the ancient Aztecs, and 20th century Mesoamerica. Although continuities are present, important differences exist in the ways that weaving was situated historically. Among the Classic Maya, weaving defined class; in Aztec Mexico, weaving defined gender; and in 20th-century Mesoamerica, weaving defined ethnicity. A comparison of these cases suggests that historical study is a useful tool for both archaeologists and ethnographers. It promotes recognition of the diversity of practice and belief in ancient societies. It helps to define the scope of contemporary ethnographic study. It combats cultural essentialism and injects agency into our accounts. It enables us to acknowledge both the rich heritage of indigenous peoples and the fact of culture change. Comparative historical study provides a strong rationale for the continued association of archaeology and cultural anthropology as parts of a wider anthropological whole.
Highlights
In this article, I compare backstrap-loom weaving in three cultural contexts: the ancient Maya, the ancient Aztecs, and 20th century Mesoamerica
It promotes recognition of the diversity of practice and belief in ancient societies. It helps to define the scope of contemporary ethnographic study
Comparative historical study provides a strong rationale for the continued association of archaeology and cultural anthropology as parts of a wider anthropological whole
Summary
En este artículo comparo el proceso de tejido en telares de cintura de tres contextos culturales: los Maya, los antiguos aztecas y la Mesoamérica del siglo XX. En el Maya Clásico el tejido marcó la clase social, el género entre los Azteca de México y el origen étnico en la Mesoamérica del siglo XX. El análisis comparativo de estos casos históricos sugiere que la comparación es una herramienta útil tanto para arqueólogos como para los etnógrafos: promueve el reconocimiento de la diversidad de las prácticas y las creencias de las sociedades antiguas; contribuye a definir el alcance del estudio etnográfico contemporáneo; combate el esencialismo cultural y carga a nuestras narrativas de capacidad transformadora; nos permite reconocer el rico patrimonio de los pueblos indígenas y el hecho cultural del cambio. El análisis histórico comparativo proporciona un fundamento sólido para mantener la asociación de la arqueología y la antropología cultural como partes de un todo antropológico mayor
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
