>A significant new book is now available.  It is
>
>*Theaters of Conversion. Religious Architecture
>and Indian Artisans in Colonial Mexico*
>by Sam Edgerton,
>with beautiful photographs by Jorge Perez de Lara, and
>dedicated to the memory and inspiration of Linda Schele.
>
>This book is simply wonderful.
>Something to immerse oneself in,
>to read more than once, and to keep going back to.
>
>Edgerton gives much credit to editors at the Univ. of New Mexico Press,
>Dana Asbury and Dawn Hall, and art editor Melissa Tandysh,
>for going all out, sparing no expense, in order that this be
>such a gorgeous publication, in paper quality, color, and typography.
>
>This book explores what was happening in Mexico
>during the period 1520-1570, and in the
>Pueblo Southwest of the present USA slightly later.
>This was a time when the Franciscan, Dominican, and Augustinian
>monastic orders carried the major role as cultural mediators,
>responsible for conversion to Christianity,
>and when Mesoamerican cultures were still very strong.
>Therefore fascinating processes of blending and translation can be
>seen, even if we have to pay attention to every available clue
>to regain the ability to see them.
>
>After 1570 (not just coincidentally,
>the date of Sahagun's great work),
>the native population had been greatly decimated by diseases,
>European attitudes became much more rigid,
>and colonists demanded more free Indian labor.
>Spain pushed a transfer of spiritual responsibilities from the Conventos
>to the lay priesthood, with additional enormous losses for the Indians.
>
>Sam Edgerton's book is about what may be regarded as rather
>a golden age of contact, by comparison to what came later.
>
>A recurring theme throughout the book is that the friars chose
>expediently from among the options available to them those
>alternatives which found the greatest resonance among their
>new converts.
>As a result, this time period 1520-1570 is a crucial source of
>information about the nature of Mesoamerican societies
>before the arrival of Europeans.  This concept in itself is not new,
>but Edgerton manages to extract from the various clues available
>information about this time period which has not usually been
>easily accessible to non-specialists.  Reading the book is
>sometimes like a pleasant detective story, as he leads us through
>a series of clues to his conclusions.
>
>There are also considerable new materials, partly from Edgerton's choices
>of what to explore, partly from fortunate coincidences, one of the
>greatest of these being the recent uncovering of numerous murals
>which had for years been covered with whitewash.
>These reveal several unknown chapters of the early contact period.
>
>The title of the book refers to Edgerton's hypothesis, I think well
>supported, that the design of the Conventos, their cloister courtyards
>(patios, atria), their open chapels, the murals on their walls,
>and other features, were intended to support grand theatrical spectacles,
>of a kind which the Mesoamerican peoples greatly favored.
>(The purposes behind their design were not merely to minister to
>large numbers of Indians in the open air.)  This theme also permeates
>the book, coming up again and again in novel ways.
>
>A third recurring theme is that from a close examination of what the
>friars did in Mesoamerica of this period, we learn very much
>also about European culture of the time (and not merely Spanish culture).
>During the reactions to Martin Luther and the Protestant Reformation,
>the Catholic Counter-Reformation emphasized greater theatricality and
>appeal to the populace.  Large theatrical spectacles were in fashion
>also in Europe at this time, although they fell out of favor later.
>
>A fourth recurring theme is that the Indian artists of the time were highly
>competent, that they made extensive use of both native and European
>techniques in painting and architecture.  For example, some skilled
>native artists enthusiastically adopted the "chiaroscuro" technique of
>using light and shading to convey three-dimensional effects.
>Edgerton states that it has been too easily assumed that works which showed
>many European features must have been produced by Europeans, rather than
>by Indians, thus both greatly underrating the skills of the native artists,
>who learned from a school established early in Mexico City by Fray
>Pedro de Gante, and also overestimating the skills of the first group of
>European artists who immigrated to the new Spanish Americas.
>
>*
>
>Yet Edgerton is not pursuing any politically correct line here.
>While he believes that there were horrors perpetrated upon the inhabitants
>of the Americas, he is throughout extremely sensitive to and focused on
>how individuals of all cultures made the best of the circumstances
>in which they found themselves.
>One of the greatest values of this book is the way it leads readers to
>rethink assumptions they may hold, whether or not they end up agreeing
>with the author in general or in details.  I think Edgerton would not have
>wanted it any other way.  For example his Chapter 1 begins:
>
>"Was ever a statement like the one on the facing page
>[by Toribio Motolini'a] more quaintly out of tune with the ecumenical
>sentiments of North Americans in this dawning century of universal
>human rights?  Could one ever believe that the pious missionary who
>wrote this was just as sensitive to the dignity and privileges of the
>indigenous Indians as any liberal humanitarian today?  I answer
>emphatically yes, adding further that the first mendicant friars
>who came to the Americas after Columbus's "discovery" were the
>sixteenth-century equivalent of the twentieth-century Peace Corps."
>
>*
>
>The rest of this review will summarize some of the interesting
>findings which Edgerton chooses to emphasize.
>First a couple of simpler parallels, then I will discuss in somewhat
>more detail the theatrical heart of the book.
>
>*
>
>The Cross and the Tree
>
>The cross very nicely represented the world tree of traditional
>Mesoamerican Beliefs.  This idea is nicely presented,
>but there is a special additional feature.  In the patio cross
>at the convento of San Agustin, Acolman, Mexico, and elsewhere
>Christ is repesented as being the cross itself, or being in the cross,
>not as being a separate being hung on the cross.  This reflects
>native beliefs.
>
>*
>
>Counterclockwise procession to the four quarters:
>
>The "posadas" in the four corners of convent courtyards are quite likely
>a development out of native traditions.  While the concept of four world
>directions existed also in Europe and elsewhere, the counterclockwise 
>direction
>of processions was specific to the Americas.  The detailed placement of
>altars within posadas, facing the arriving processions, show that the
>counterclockwise direction was retained after contact.
>Edgerton notes that such a counterclockwise direction of procession
>was not uniform in Europe until AFTER contact with the Americas,
>and though he does not I think say so explicitly, certainly seems to at least
>leave open the possibility that it was an import from the Americas to
>Europe.
>
>Such counterclockwise processions were also used for foundings and
>refoundings, so that they carried an especial importance when the
>traditional communities made such a procession around the courtyard
>of a new church.  It sanctified the new church in native eyes,
>and made it the functional replacement of the temple whose location
>it so often adopted.  Edgerton makes the standard comparison to the
>counterclockwise sequence of years of the Founding of Tenochtitlan,
>as shown in the Codex Mendoza.
>
>Edgerton is noting ways in which the newly built conventos
>were suitably designed to represent also the traditional cosmological
>ideas of the peoples of Mesoamerica.
>
>*
>
>The Arch and the Cave
>
>Edgerton makes a good argument that the arch, which the Indians
>quickly came to appreciate, was one of those choices used quite
>deliberately by the friars, and that the open chapels of the Conventos
>were regarded as analogs to the caves, which in Mexico as so widely
>in the world are regarded as particularly sacred places.
>He also suggests that a number of open chapels in the Yucatan
>originally had palapas ramadas in front of them,
>thus perpetuating traditional architecture.
>
>*
>
>Architecture and painting designed for grand spectacles
>
>Various architectural features can be understood in new ways from this
>perspective.  The large flat walls open to the public in the Convento
>of Saints Pedro y Pablo, Teposcolula, Oaxaca, quite probably carried
>large "lienzos" or visual paintings used in preaching, perhaps much in the
>manner the native populations were already accustomed to.
>Special effects, deus ex machina and all the rest,
>were supported through  "mezzanines" behind the nearby walls,
>so those manipulating the special effects would be hidden.
>Paintings even in the inner cloisters of the Conventos were intended
>as backdrops to elaborate costumed processions and re-enactments.
>Indian converts were invited even into these areas, and were even
>responsible for painting many of them (as the Paradise Garden
>murals at Malinalco), with permission of the friars, and often here
>as elsewhere making reference to aspects of their own continuing
>beliefs where these fit especially closely with Christian beliefs.
>
>There are also numerous records that the Indians put on grand
>spectacles much admired by the friars, admired for the cleverness of
>their theatrical effects and also for the elegance of their decorations,
>complete with imitation rabbits, flowers, birds, and much else.
>Some decorations which especially reflect this native sense of
>ornate elaboration with native themes may be seen in the arches of the
>open chapel at the convento of San Luis Obispo, Tlalmanalco, Mexico,
>near Amecameca.
>
>In several places, Edgerton notes that the friars did not report
>to Spain or to Rome on all aspects of these performances,
>that they passed over some in silence.  Probably they were fully
>aware that there were traditional beliefs being perpetuated within
>the walls of the Conventos, and chose to accept or even promote these.
>After all, they were few in number, and dependent on their new
>converts for their livelihood as well as for most construction and art.
>
>Many paintings around this time, both in Mexico and in Europe,
>were apparently not so much paintings of an imagined scene,
>rather they were paintings of a theatrical representation of such a scene,
>complete with movable scenery and many other features.
>Edgerton compares Giotto's "Scenes from the Life of the Virgin Mary
>[Expulsion of Joachim from the Temple; Presentation of the Virgin]"
>around 1305, Arena Chapel, Padua, Italy.
>And for perspective 3D effects, he compares scenes from the
>Basilica of St. Francis, Assisi (for whom the Franciscan order is named).
>The European infatuation with perspective at this time was also
>enthusiastically adopted by some skilled native artists.
>
>*
>
>Malinalco as crowning masterpiece.
>
>Edgerton's chapter focusing on Malinalco is about a unique and
>special achievement.  In his words (p.235):
>
>     "The Malinalco cycle, arguably the most original extant masterpiece
>of Indian mural art in the postconquest period, had, unfortunately,
>no painted successors ....
>     "In this final moment of the mendicant friars' autonomy,
>the Malinalco murals sing the swan song of constructive cooperation
>between native artists and the European Renaissance -- the light of
>convento art burning brightest just before it went out."
>
>These sentences are almost a distillation of the major theme of
>the book.
>
>(This same chapter focuses also on several ways in which the native
>calendar of festivals and beliefs was adapted to the Christian year.
>I consider questions involving this topic near the end of this review.)
>
>*
>
>Murals like Cacaxtla: Battles of the Otomi vs. the Chichimecs
>
>Just as the Otomi served the Aztecs by defending the northern
>borders of their Empire against the "barbarian Chichimecs",
>so they served the new masters of Tenochtitlan.
>This was important to the Spanish especially after 1549,
>after the discovery of silver in the northern region.
>In some truly astounding murals recently brought to light,
>in the Convento church of San Miguel, Ixmiquilpan, Hidalgo,
>are paintings of battles analogous in colors and style to those of
>Cacaxtla (a resemblance so striking I wondered about it even before
>Edgerton labeled it).  Edgerton credits Donna Pierce (in her yet
>unpublished dissertation) as suggesting that in gratitude for their
>services, the Otomi were permitted to represent their victories in the
>manner they themselves preferred,  even in murals in a church.
>
>*
>
>The Pueblo Southwest of the present USA
>
>Even in the churches of these "most remote provinces"
>where proselytization by the monastic orders continued later than
>it did in central Mexico, there were clerestories designed to produce
>dramatic highlights of the altar.  Drama was important even here,
>and Edgerton draws some nice parallels with what was being done
>in Europe of the time.
>
>There is nice discussion of the integration of Kivas
>into the architectural design of a number of churches,
>of the reverence with which they were at first treated, for example
>being carefully interred in clean sand, or being the centers of
>cloisters, presumably even still used for some traditional ceremonies,
>now within the church.  Edgerton points out that these treatments
>are not destruction intended to show domination.
>
>(In his chapters on the Pueblo areas, Edgerton did not mention
>that the facades of many churches had a stairstep front,
>one which could be easily analogized to the "cloud-terrace" symbol
>traditionally so much used in that area.  Somewhat similar facades do
>occur elsewhere in the world, even for example in Yucatan (for example
>Edgerton's figures 2.24-25 for Yotholin and Tixcuytun, Yucatan).
>So it might be difficult to demonstrate an influence of native traditions
>on this particular architectural choice made by the friars,
>but it might be possible.  I would like to see Edgerton try.)
>
>*
>
>Memory aids - use of spatial locations to fix elements in memory.
>
>This is the subject of Chapter 9, in which parts of the architectural space
>were assigned to ideas to be memorized, in a fashion already known
>from Europe, but carried out in ways specific to Mexico.
>
>*
>
>The persistence of native calendar and festivals
>
>There is extensive discussion, esp. in the chapter on the Cloister as
>Theater, and the details shown in the Malinalco and other paintings,
>of ways in which native festivals of fall and resurrection,
>even the calendrics of ceremonial returns of Quetzlcoatl,
>were integrated with Christian teachings.  The recurrence of festivals
>every 8 years, even festivals not linked to Venus, might be especially
>interesting to those studying Mesoamerican astronomy.  (Eight years of
>365 days each are exactly 5 Venus synodic cycles of 584 days each.)
>
>It is very tempting to try to discover in this material information
>about persisting calendrical and astronomical practices.
>If we knew exactly what had been the reality of tradition, we
>surely would be able to see its reflections in events after 1520.
>But attempts to reason backwards may not work.  Because the
>festivals could be rescheduled under the influence of the friars,
>they may mislead us.  The following longer discussion
>gives some idea of the difficulties.
>
>The years 1570-72 were ones of enormous productivity just before the
>contraction of the convento worlds.  Edgerton suspects it is not merely
>coincidence that 1571 was the transition from year 13 Rabbit to year 1 Reed,
>years which had always been significant for the native calendars
>(Mixtec specialists will certainly recognize their symbolic recurrences),
>and also just incidentally, the 52-year anniversary of Cortez's arrival in 
>1519,
>which occurred thus at the same significant point in the Mesoamerican
>52-year calendar cycle.  We come back to these two years below.
>
>Edgerton is using Caso's standard correlation between the Aztec and
>Christian calendars.  In that correlation, which others have noted
>was observed in the Tlatelolco calendar, the 260-day cycle was
>exactly aligned with the Mayan usage, using the 584,283 correlation.
>So our standard calculators work for the Tlatelolco usage.
>In other calendars, even that of Tenochtitlan, the sister city,
>the day names of the 260-day cycle did not coincide with these.
>(The year names are counted by a system unlike that used by the Mayans,
>but we need not go into that here.)
>
>Edgerton notes that the disappearance and reappearance of Venus
>was most probably celebrated in the form of the Christian allegory of
>Eve's temptation and fall, a fiesta of "Eve who Sinned" (and was reborn).
>The Codex Telleriano-Remensis commentator relates the tradition that in the
>year One Rabbit on a day One Flower, "a rose bloomed and then withered"
>(Folio 10v-11r and translation on p.260 in the Quiñones-Keber edition).
>One Flower is equivalent in the 260-day calendar to the Mayan One Ajaw,
>the canonical day of Venus's heliacal rising as morning star.
>One Rabbit years included 1506 and 1558.  In these two One Rabbit years
>there had been disatrous harvests, and in 1558 also a plague.
>The Codex Telleriano-Remensis states on Folio 48v that a fiesta
>solemnizing "Eve who sinned" was performed every eight years
>and only during a Rabbit year, that "they fasted eight days before this
>one rose arrived" [day One Flower?], and then "adorned themselves".
>(There is also a reference to day names with the coefficient "5" as
>referring to the fall of man.  The day just preceding the beginning of
>eight days of fasting before any One Flower would be a day Five Monkey.)
>
>If this analogy discussed by Edgerton bears fruit, then the 8 days of fasting
>before the One Flower should at some time have matched the 8 days of
>inferior conjunction of Venus before its rise as morning star.
>The problem is, at what actual date was such a connection established?
>
>That astronomical co-occurrence with the day name One Flower happens
>only about once in 65 Venus synodic cycles, in 104 years of 365 days,
>with an error of 5.2 days; or after four days less than 61 such Venus cycles,
>or after eight days less than 57 such Venus cycles, if the Mayan corrections 
>are
>used as in the Dresden Codex, so extensively analysed by Floyd Lousbury.
>If the Aztecs celebrated it every 8 years, the day of celebration would most
>often not be a day on which Venus was actually first rising as morning star.
>So it appears at first sight that the celebrations were using the calendar 
>symbolically,
>and were not in general timed to coincide with specific astronomical events.
>At least as we have them recorded by the friars, at that time.
>
>The Codex Telleriano-Remensis also states (Folio11r)
>"this year of 1562 on the 27th of July was the feast of she who sinned",
>but the sentence was inscribed and then crossed out.
>In another place (Folio 49r) the Codex notes that this festival was in "this 
>year of
>Five Rabbit on the day One Flower" and dated to July 23rd.
>While the year 1562 was indeed the year Five Rabbit in the Caso correlation,
>neither the 27th of July nor the 23rd July was a day One Flower in that year.
>Day One Flower in the Tlatelolco calendar (as in Mayan)
>would have been 22 September, 1562.
>But that is probably not the direction to look for a solution.
>
>The Codex Telleriano-Remensis was quite possibly from the region
>of Cholula, since for both the Codex and for Cholula, Quetzalcoatl
>was of supreme importance.  It may be the only document we have which is
>primarily from that region using the calendar of Cholula.
>If we use the method of  Howard F. Cline.  1973.  "The Chronology of the
>Conquest: Synchronologies in Codex Telleriano-Remensis and Sahagu'n"
>Journal de la Socie'te' des Ame'ricanistes vol.62 pp.9-33
>then we observe the following:
>
>Date given:
>1562 July 23,  "One Flower", but in the Tlatelolco system it is Five Rain.
>     The distance from Five Rain to One Flower is 61 days.
>1563 April 22  "One Reed", but in the Tlatelolco system it is 5 Grass.
>     The distance from 5 Grass to One Reed is 61 days.
>These two shifts are both by the same amount.  So it appears the
>Cholula ritual calendar may have had a 260-day count which was
>uniformly shifted 61 days earlier than that used in Tlatelolco.
>By comparison, the Tenochtitlan calendar was offset
>from Tlatelolco 20 days the other direction, so where the day of the
>fall of Tenochtitlan was 1 Serpent in the Tlatelolco count,
>it was 7 Serpent in what analysts have called the Tenochtitlan count,
>20 days earlier than 1 Serpent, which implies the Tenochtitlan 260-day
>cycle was shifted 20 days later than the Tlatelolco one.
>
>If we now examine the astronomy for these dates given in the
>Telleriano-Remensis, dates which were presumably correct in the
>Spanish Julian calendar, and presumably given by Ri'os,
>we find that on the day 23 July, 1562,
>Mercury and Venus and Mars were all evening stars,
>Mercury hightest, Venus at around 18-19 degrees.  Ten days earlier
>(about 8 days?) they were all three in conjunction.  Is this special
>enough to be something the Cholulans were celebrating?  I don't know.
>If their calendar put a One Flower dayname at this date, would they manage
>to connect that to what was happening in the heavens?  Probably yes?
>
>The other date, 22 April 1563, on a day 1 Reed (Cholulan)
>= 5 Rain (Tlatelolcan), was a time of arrival of Venus at maximum
>elongation as morning star (though that is hard to pin down to a
>particular day, since Venus slows greatly before it stops rising).
>Cline refers to the annotator of the Telleriano-Remensis as saying
>that he witnessed a special feast in Cholula on Quetzalcoatl's birthday,
>on this 1 Reed day.   Perhaps not a first rising, but a significant day?
>
>If we try to interpret the given dates as Tlatelolcan, assuming that
>the dates given in the Spanish calendar are wrong, we have less success.
>
>Equal difficulties accompany any attempt to link the first recorded 
>celebration
>of "Eve who Sinned" with astronomical events.  This was reported by Fray
>Motolini'a as the Wednesday following Easter, April 24, 1538.
>But this is nowhere near an 8-day disappearance of Venus before its
>first heliacal rising as morning star.  The closest ones were
>approximately 26 July to 3 August 1537 and 6 March to 13 March 1539.
>However, in 1938, somewhere between 21 April and 26 April would have
>been the disappearance of Venus as morning star, quite a different point in
>its cycle, with no relevance to the 8 days, but possibly used in this
>post-conquest period.  (There was also a note that the Indians had wanted
>to celebrate this earlier, during Lent, but were not permitted to.  Since
>this would have been less significant in terms of the actual astronomy of
>Venus, perhaps it is to be understood as the Indians wanting to analogize
>their period of fasting and penance to that of Christian Lent.)
>
>The date of completion of the Malinalco murals was probably in
>February of 1571 or shortly after (Edgerton p.233), or by the
>end of year 13 Rabbit, at the beginning of 1571 (Edgerton p.234).
>Edgerton considers the possibility of a performance of "Eve who Sinned"
>in 1570 (a Thirteen Rabbit year) or in 1571.  There was a first rise of Venus
>as morning star approximately 3 March, 1571 (4 days after a 13 Flower day),
>and the preceding one would have been around 27 July 1569 (a 5 Flower day).
>But none in the 13 Rabbit year 1570.
>
>The dates discussed just above were treated in terms of the Tlatelolco 
>calendar.
>If we turn the procedure upside down, and search for a Tlatelolcan day
>Five Rain which would equate to a Cholulan One Flower, we find on
>22 May 1570 such a day, with Venus about to emerge some 10+ days later
>as evening star, not morning star.  Not conclusive.  It seems impossible to 
>pin
>these down as actual astronomical events at the dates of these celebrations.
>Quite likely, they are merely ceremonial.  But that would fit well with
>Edgerton's presentation of a general appeal to traditional calendrics,
>not a preservation of the exact traditions themselves.
>
>The Venus event in 1571 might have been considered part of the parallels
>to 1519, when Cortez arrived.  Cortez's arrival, 21 April 1519, was also
>on a day One Flower (Tlatelolcan now again), and a day or two after
>a first rise of Venus as evening star (not as morning star, so not the 
>occasion
>for an 8-day disappearance, but perhaps still relevant).  A better match
>might be the one pointed to by Edgerton, that in 1571 a day One Flower
>(again Tlatelolcan, not Cholulan) would have fallen on April 8,
>Palm Sunday, the beginning of five days of penance and self-mortification
>before Easter (it would have been better if it were after those days
>of penance, at Easter).  (I add the coincidence that the next One Flower was
>Christmas Eve, 1571, and was a first appearance of Venus as evening star,
>while April 8 was near a maximum elongation of Mercury as morning star,
>Venus coming close to that position by Easter, just afterwards.)
>
>Going back to One Rabbit, in a different part of the calendar cycle,
>the year which follows One Rabbit is Two Reed, and this year of the cycle
>was associated with the east, the direction from which the first newborn
>sun of the succeeding age arises.  In year Two Reed, every 52 years,
>the Aztecs celebrated their New Fire ceremony.
>There was a sacrifice and the emperor would beg the gods to permit
>the sun to rise and that the world should continue for another 52 years.
>
>Others have struggled with these problems of calendrics and the spotty
>record from early contact years.  Edgerton's new perspectives may
>just possibly suggest new solutions to those most interested.
>
>It is perhaps interesting that also in Peru, the Indian peoples tried to
>establish parallels between their traditional beliefs and those of the new
>Christian rulers, to legitimize their own in this way.  In Peru this effort
>was stamped out, Blas Valera being jailed and exiled to Cadiz, for example.
>
>*
>
>I do have two small complaints about the formatting of the book.
>
>The index is not as comprehensive as one might like.
>
>The illustrations are too frequently out of synch with the text discussing
>them, and I think unnecessarily so.  Since this is such a common problem
>in publishing, and the cumulative impact on readers I estimate to be large
>and negative, I go to the trouble of specifying detail here.  All you authors
>out there, please take care to insist with your publishers on getting figure
>locations the best possible, overall.
>Do not accept any arbitrary rules to interfere with this overall goal,
>such as "figure may not EVER precede text reference".  If violating
>such a purely arbitrary rule makes everything else better, do it.  If you
have
>trouble getting a publisher to agree, consider revising the order of items in
>your text, or some other solution.  Maybe then they will see it as important.
>
>For example, consider Chapter 2 (the only one where I have gone back to
>study this in detail).  The dramatic results show why this stuck in my mind.
>If illustrations 2.3 through 2.11 were each one page earlier,
>then the text for those pages would be one-half to one page later.  As a 
>result,
>the text referring to 2.3-2.4 and to 2.6 would be one page later than
>those figures (instead of text referring to 2.3 one page late and
>to 2.6 one page early) but the text referring to 2.7 and 2.8 would be
>facing their illustrations instead of two and three pages early,
>and text referring to 2.9 to 2.11 would be facing their illustrations
>instead of two and three pages early.
>If then figures 2.12 and 2.13, both from the same convento, were moved
>onto facing pages two and three pages earlier than they are, their text
>would face both their illustrations instead of being 4 and 6 pages early.
>If figures 2.14 and 2.15 were moved three pages earlier than they are,
>their text would perhaps have faced them or been one page away,
>instead of being 7 pages and 6 pages away.
>Similar advancement of illustrations 2.16 through 2.20 could
>bring their referring texts much closer than the current distance from
>illustrations which is six, seven, seven, eight, nine, and ten pages.
>Figures 2.21 and 2.22 are eight and nine pages away from their illustrations.
>In these and all of the following, the illustrations come too late.
>Figure 2.23 is seven pages away.
>With figure 2.24 suddently we are on a facing page,
>Figures 2.25 and 2.26 (first reference) are two pages away.
>Figures 2.27 (second more important reference to view the figure) and
>figures 2.28, and 2.29 and 2.30 are one, two, three, and two pages away.
>(Figure 2.31 is like 2.30 full-page, so both of those could possibly not
>have been brought to face their texts.)  With Figure 2.32, we are again
>on the same page.
>
>*
>
>There is a small error in the calendric sequence of year names given
>from the top of p.229 to p.230.  The last three entries should be
>One Reed, Two Flint-Knife, Three House (not Three Flint-Knife
>and Four House).
>
>*
>
>I hope the above capsule review gives some small idea of the enormous
>wealth of ideas which are woven throughout Sam Edgerton's new book.
>
>I expect the book will be controversial in several quarters,
>and think that will be a good indicator of its value.
>I also expect it will contribute to a permanent shift in perspective on many
>of the topics with which it deals.  A major contribution.
>
>Lloyd Anderson
>Ecological Linguistics
>
>*
>
>Details of the book:
>
>*Theaters of Conversion. Religious Architecture
>and Indian Artisans in Colonial Mexico*
>By Samuel Edgerton, with photographs by Jorge Perez de Lara
>University of New Mexico Press 2001
>ISBN 0-8263-2256-5
>$60 cloth.  Shipping and handling $4 for the first book,
>$1 for each book thereafter.  Ship via UPS wherever possible.
>Orders outside the USA:  $5 for the first book,
>$2.00 for each book thereafter.  Payment must be in US$$
>or by check or money order drawn upon a US bank.
>Order from 1-800-249-7737,
>or by post from
>University of New Mexico Press,
>Albuquerque NM 87131-1591
>

*******************************************************************
Anita Cohen-Williams
CohWill Consulting
Search Engine Guru/SEO
List Owner of HISTARCH, SUB-ARCH, and SPANBORD
[log in to unmask]
http://www.10minuteresume.com/resumes/basicres/index.html

"Hit Any User to Continue."- Anon.