LAB-SF-03 / Bookmaking and printing
Surface, color and limits of looking
Can visible color alone tell us what paint is made from, and what do support and application change?
Modern classroom adaptation. An original modern support-type investigation. It recreates neither bark paper, historic paint, Maya blue, nor conservation treatment. Support type combines weight, sizing, texture, absorption and color; it does not isolate paper color. Uncalibrated photography and hue cannot identify historic pigments.
History and chapter connections
The Códice Maya de México and Dresden Codex have separately documented preparation layers. Looking at classroom color samples cannot identify historical pigments or recipes.
Read the Códice Maya de México dossier ↗
- Chapter 4 · Color is work
Chapter references follow the twelve chapters of Books Were Already Here. The full manuscript is separate from these lab pages.
Read the historical background and its evidence limits
1.1 A fold is a structure, not a culture
A screenfold has a continuous support divided by alternating folds. It can be inspected as a compact stack, a short opening, or an extended sequence. The Getty's terminology describes historical examples assembled from hide or paper with a prepared painting surface. The category does not make all examples identical in support, paint, cultural affiliation, contents, or reading order. “Codex” is broader than “accordion book”: named Mesoamerican codices also include sheets, maps, rolls, and European-style volumes. [S01, S02]
A useful original diagram distinguishes three questions:
- Physical sequence: Which surface lies beside which when opened?
- Reading sequence: In what order does a particular reader follow signs, scenes, dates, or bands?
- Historical sequence: In what order did the represented events happen?
These need not coincide. Modern page numbers belong to another layer: cataloguing or publication. Do not mistake a scan viewer's left-to-right button for evidence of an original reading route.
1.2 Maya case: a book for working with time
Documented object: Códice Maya de México, approximately 1100, is a surviving pre-European Maya manuscript painted with mineral and organic colorants on prepared bark paper. The Getty–INAH exhibition identifies it as a sacred Venus book and one of four surviving pre-European Maya manuscripts. The surviving count concerns books, not every trace of Maya writing, and it must not be used to suggest Maya peoples disappeared. [S03]
Reading: The exhibition's reading guide reconstructs a twenty-page original sequence, of which ten pages survive. It describes proceeding left to right, row by row across the book. A date column, a deity, and a count connecting the next Venus phase work together. This is evidence about this manuscript. It is not a rule that all Maya inscriptions or codex passages are read the same way. [S04]
Writing: Maya writing includes signs for words and for syllables. A page is not simply a collection of pictures whose meanings can be guessed from resemblance. The British Museum's introductory account is useful for explaining this distinction; it does not supply a complete key for translating a chosen codex page. [S05]
Uses and users: The Dresden manuscript supplies a second case: almanacs and astronomical tables integrate calculation with ritual and divination. Its Venus section is located on manuscript pages 24 and 46–50; eclipse tables are on pages 51–58. These are not modern astronomy worksheets with religious decoration added afterward. The relationship among counting, divine agency, and decisions is part of the historical evidence. [S06]
People behind the surface: A seventh–eighth-century Maya vessel in the Metropolitan Museum uses a painting style compared with surviving codices. It is evidence of visual relationships between media, not a paper book and not proof that its painter also manufactured paper. A separate Met study discusses portrayals of scribes painting or consulting books. Images of work, a surviving book, and chemical identification answer different questions. [S07, S08]
Teach with care: Say “Maya” for the peoples and culture; name a particular Mayan language when discussing language evidence. Do not invent a single timeless “Maya language.” Do not ask pupils to translate their names by swapping English alphabet letters for attractive glyphs.
1.3 Ñuu Savi/Mixtec case: dynastic knowledge in a long painted surface
Documented object: The British Museum catalogues the Tonindeye (Nuttall) Codex as a deer-skin screenfold of 47 leaves, approximately 19 by 23.5 cm per page, made in the Mixteca region during 1200–1521. Its two sides present distinct narratives: histories of important centres and an account of the genealogy, marriages, politics, and military actions of Eight Deer Jaguar Claw. The physical object's production date must be distinguished from the dates of people and events represented. [S09]
Interpretation and route: John Pohl describes red guide lines assisting a meandering or boustrophedon route, difficult connections between narrative sections, and different emphases among related manuscripts. [S10] An analytical inference for students to test is that a genealogy selects relationships relevant to authority rather than recording everything that happened.
Reading and voice: John Monaghan's 1990 article argues from the premise that codices functioned as scripts for performance, relating arrangement to verbal artistry. The accessible abstract supports describing this as a scholarly argument, not claiming that we possess a recording of a specific ancient performance. A classroom oral presentation can explore the problem but cannot recreate a lost performance. [S11]
Living scholarship: Ñuu Savi scholars and cultural practitioners Omar Aguilar Sánchez and Izaira López Sánchez have connected codex research with community educational projects in Oaxaca, Guerrero, and Puebla promoting Tu’un Savi. Contemporary work belongs inside the chapter, not in a token final sentence after an account of European collections. Spellings and self-designations vary with language and community; retain a named source's form rather than forcing all forms into one spelling. [S12]
Teach with care: Introduce “Ñuu Savi/Mixtec” for orientation, then use the community or scholar's preferred term in the relevant context. Preserve the Indigenous makers' cultural attribution alongside conventional collector-derived titles. Avoid the assertion that these books were a universal picture language that anyone could understand without learning conventions.
1.4 Nahua cases: migration, skilled painting, and legal evidence
A migration screenfold: INAH's catalogue describes the Boturini Codex as an amate-paper screenfold, approximately 1540, from central Mexico. A separate INAH essay describes a one-sided strip and discusses uncertainty in its production history. The Getty's account of an early facsimile points out footprints linking the migration episodes. The manufacture of a surviving colonial object is not automatically contemporary with the earlier migration it depicts. [S13, S14, S02]
Named skills: Book 10, folio 18v, of the Florentine Codex describes the tlacuilo's skill with drawing, colour preparation, and painting. It also judges good and poor work. Use the digital edition's attributed Nahuatl-to-English translation as historical testimony about an occupational ideal, not as a neutral manual for every workshop. “Tlacuilo” is singular; “tlacuiloque” is plural in the cited modern scholarship. [S15, S17]
Colonial collaboration and unequal voices: The Florentine Codex was completed in 1577 through a large team of Indigenous authors and artists working with Bernardino de Sahagún. Its Nahuatl and Spanish columns and images are not interchangeable versions of one message. The Getty identifies differences among them and names several contributors. Students should ask who supplied knowledge, who selected and organized it, and which version a modern reader has been given. [S16]
A legal object with a material history: The Huexotzinco Codex's eight paintings were part of a 1531 legal case involving Cortés, his Huexotzincan allies, and colonial officials. The 2021 study reports that the eight paintings were made by three Indigenous scribes; that passage gives no individual names and should not be presented as a recovery of their identities. Analytical methods distinguish observed spectra from explanations of materials and use. For example, reflectance evidence alone could not identify its yellow dye conclusively; possible marigold is not an established identification. [S17]
The 1990 conservation investigation identifies four ficus-based amatl supports and four agave-based maguey supports. It also explains that the larger drawings were folded to fit the smaller Spanish manuscript and sewn into it. Earlier folds suggested a possible prior accordion arrangement. Therefore neither “all eight sheets are amate” nor “this was never a screenfold” is an acceptable summary. The later composite object preserves relationships among paintings and legal text while also showing damage associated with folding. [S18]
Writing caution: Research on early Nahua hieroglyphic writing addresses syllabic signs as well as other sign functions. It is inaccurate to teach that all Nahua writing consisted only of literal pictures, or that alphabetic writing alone introduced a capacity to record language. This dossier does not offer a complete account of a debated field or an invented decipherment. [S19]
1.5 Materials: a chain of skilled choices
Use the following as an original analytical framework, not a claim that every named occupation was separate in every community:
- Obtain and prepare a support
- Join and shape it where appropriate
- Prepare a painting surface where documented
- Select and process colorants
- Combine colorants with a medium
- Organize scenes, signs, dates, and other marks
- Paint, check, preserve, consult, and transmit the work
“Natural” does not mean simple, safe, or unprocessed. “Paper” does not mean one plant or one process. “Gesso,” “stucco,” and “ground” should not be treated as chemically identical across sources and objects. Name the material actually identified in the study being cited. A bright blue photograph is not enough to identify Maya blue.
A Getty video features fourth-generation artisan Jose Daniel Santos de la Puerta and biologist Susana Xelhuantzi discussing amate work in San Pablito, Pahuatlán. Use their names and the video's location and date. Present modern work as living skilled practice with its own circumstances, not as a time machine giving direct access to an unchanged ancient recipe. The web introduction was read for this dossier; the video itself was not transcribed or analysed frame by frame. [S20]
1.6 Later lives: a book is also a record of its treatment
The Bodleian's materials project used non-destructive investigation of five manuscripts to study colour and reduce unnecessary handling. This supplies a strong model of questions before intervention. Its historical total of surviving ancient codices should not be carried into the textbook as an evergreen count. [S21]
The Library of Congress's handling advice for Asian-style accordion bindings explains why unsupported or twisted folds are vulnerable. It is a modern cross-regional preservation analogy, not evidence for ancient Mesoamerican readers' behaviour. For a classroom model, support the whole unfolded strip and keep adjacent sections level. [S22]
INAH's manuscript collection account describes controlled storage, restricted handling, and surrogate images for study. A digital copy makes many inquiries possible, but it does not make access conditions, rights, interpretation, or relationships with descendant communities irrelevant. [S23]
Extended historical background remains available on this lab’s web page.
Time and class planning
- Active estimate
- 70–95 minutes
- Sessions
- 2
- Adult preparation
- 30 minutes
Reserve an overnight interval; actual product, humidity, thickness and surface control drying. Postpone touching if tacky.
First session 35–45 minutes; second 35–50, including an expanded separate support-type comparison. Teacher preparation about 30 minutes plus a prior-day pilot of unspecified additional duration. Timings remain planning estimates.
Scale consumables from 30 students, round upward; recalculate shared-equipment throughput separately. Stock ink is an allowance, not required consumption. All timings are planning estimates; unknown quantities and times remain unspecified.
Materials
Baseline: 30 students in 10 groups of 3. Read teacher preparation and material conditions before arranging the activity.
Smooth white drawing-paper coupons
30 coupons · class
8 × 10 cm, about 120–160 g/m²; three per group.
Brown kraft coupons
30 coupons · class
8 × 10 cm, preferably comparable weight; three per group.
White textured watercolor-paper coupons
30 coupons · class
8 × 10 cm, about 200–300 g/m²; three per group.
Ready-mixed blue tempera paint
50 mL · class / 5 mL · group
Same school-approved labeled product and batch; covered wells.
Plus approximately 10 mL spare; 5 mL allocation includes losses, not compulsory consumption.
Spare ready-mixed blue tempera
10 mL · class
Flat brushes
10 brushes · class
Approximately 5 mm wide.
Needle-free measuring tools
10 tools · class
1 mL oral/arts syringe or marked transfer pipette capable of 0.10 mL; never reuse for food/medicine.
White shallow palettes
10 palettes · class
Rinse water
1000 mL · class / 100 mL · group
Stable rinse cups and cloth/towels
10 sets · class
Pencil, ruler, timer
10 sets · class
Cool LED desk lights
5 lamps · class
Shared between two groups; no UV.
Magnifiers
Not specified magnifiers · class
The source does not specify a class quantity. Select an adequate shared allocation during teacher preparation; no fixed amount is asserted.
Specimen trays
10 trays · class
At least 30 × 35 cm for nine samples.
Evidence card and observation sheet
10 sets · class
Paraphrase from SF-S17 and SF-S18; no uncleared journal figures.
Safety and stop conditions
Read these controls with the teacher before handling materials. Chemical etching is historical context only; the practical intaglio activity uses drypoint without mordants.
Controls
Use pre-cut board and paper; any craft knife or guillotine is teacher-only, according to school policy.
Use rounded scissors if students need a trimming step, and a capped pen or smooth plastic spoon rather than a sharp scoring tool.
Do not boil bark, harvest tree bark, process animal skin, grind minerals, heat indigo–clay mixtures, use solvents, or handle dry pigment powders.
Do not use historic pigments, cinnabar, orpiment, lead colours, unknown earths, or genuine antiquities. No open flame, UV lamp, lasers, acids, or chemical “authenticity tests.”
No eating or drinking at the paint station. Wash hands; wipe spills promptly. Keep wet work away from screens and power supplies.
Use a stable cool LED desk lamp for raking light; do not shine it into eyes. Never fold, wet, rub, scrape, or take a sample from an original manuscript or valued modern artwork.
Record and follow individual allergy, sensory, motor, and vision accommodations. Do not ask pupils to disclose private health information to classmates.
Stop when
Unknown or unsuitable art materials, discomfort, unsafe cutting, damaged tools, or unsafe wet/electrical setup: pause and follow school procedures.
A source feature or matched historical scene is illegible or unverified: stop interpretive claims and use a labeled schematic or metadata exercise.
Measuring tool cannot reliably measure 0.10 mL: use teacher-measured portions or explicitly switch to qualitative observation.
Paint tacky on teacher test swatch: postpone physical examination; no heat gun.
Trained adult only
Craft knives, guillotines, stock cutting, product selection, source/right checks, and permission-controlled photography.
Excluded activities
Bark boiling or harvesting, skin processing, mineral grinding, heated indigo–clay mixtures, solvents, dry pigment powders, historic toxic pigments, genuine antiquities, flame, UV, lasers, acids, chemical authenticity tests.
Sacred reenactment, unverified translation, automated completion of damaged signs, compulsory personal genealogy/migration/religion disclosure.
Ordered student procedure
Label, five minutes. On the backs, mark white drawing paper W1–W3, kraft K1–K3, and textured watercolor paper T1–T3. Record product or brand, approximate weight, and visible features. Use “unknown” when information is missing.
Observe before painting, five minutes. Under one light, describe color, smoothness, opacity, and visible fibers. Draw a 2 × 2 cm square on the front of each specimen, at least 1 cm from an edge.
Agree on the application, three minutes. Stir the paint gently as its label directs. Measure 0.10 mL for each square. If your tool cannot measure that amount reliably, ask for teacher-measured portions or label the investigation qualitative. Do not report precision you could not achieve.
Apply, twelve minutes. Put the measured paint in a square and spread it with five comparable horizontal brush passes. Work in the order W1, K1, T1, then W2, K2, T2, then W3, K3, T3. This prevents one support from always being painted first or last. Use the same clean brush without adding water to the paint. Record spills, smears, retained brush water, or unusually heavy coverage.
Observe after five minutes. Record edge spread and apparent coverage, using the same light and distance. Note the interval for each sample if painting times differ. Do not touch the wet squares.
Dry and clean, five to fifteen minutes. Leave all specimens flat on the labeled tray. Follow the teacher's directions for paint waste and rinse water; do not pour unknown materials into drains. Wash hands and leave the samples for the full drying interval.
Check drying, three minutes. The teacher checks a separate swatch. If the material remains tacky, observe without contact and postpone any closer handling. Do not use a heat gun.
Compare repetitions, eight minutes. Arrange all nine specimens on the same neutral background under one light. First compare W1 with W2 and W3, then the kraft and textured sets. Record agreement or differences within each support before comparing the three types.
Compare support types. Describe apparent color, visible paper beneath the paint, edge definition, gloss, and texture. Keep “looks darker” separate from a claim about chemical composition. A matching color name does not establish matching ingredients.
Change light direction, five minutes. Use the cool LED lamp from the side to reveal surface texture. Keep the lamp stable and away from paper, eyes, and wet areas. Describe what becomes more visible; the changed lighting has not changed the material's composition.
Compare a photograph if available, five minutes. Photograph the entire array in one frame without filters, following classroom permissions. Compare the displayed image with the samples. Record the device and whether automatic image processing is known. Do not use screen color values to identify a historical pigment.
Read the historical evidence, seven minutes. The 1990 Huexotzinco investigation distinguished paper fibers microscopically. The 2021 investigation combined microscopy and spectroscopy, while retaining uncertainty about the yellow dye. Identify the methods and the limits in those two statements, then mark which of your classroom observations could support an identification of comparable strength. [4.1, 4.4]
Write and store, seven to twelve minutes. Explain one observed result, one limit, and one further question that would need another method. Store dry samples in a labeled folder with the record.
Process diagrams
Text equivalent
A three-by-three array has W drawing-paper, K kraft-paper, and T textured-paper rows and repetition columns one through three. Each eight-by-ten-centimeter sheet has a two-by-two-centimeter paint square. The squares use one uniform schematic color and do not predict results. Below are a perpendicular viewing direction and a cool LED lamp lighting a sample from the side.
Accessible alternatives
Pre-folded/pre-marked models, large-print route diagrams, high-contrast labels, tactile fold markers, audio responses, and partner assistance.
Analyze a model without constructing it; provide fictional garden content instead of personal history.
Use text and patterns as well as color; do not rely on red/green or reading speed.
Offer equivalent no-contact roles and privately planned allergy, sensory, motor, and vision accommodations.
Use teacher-prepared dry specimens and qualitative observation if paint, measuring tools, or direct handling are unsuitable. Preserve the historical evidence discussion.
Photographs are optional; written, audio or tactile/verbal support descriptions can document observations.
Troubleshooting
- All specimens look alike
- Check: a valid result at this scale; report no obvious visible difference. It does not mean the supports are chemically identical.
Action: a valid result at this scale; report no obvious visible difference. It does not mean the supports are chemically identical. - Large differences within one category
- Check: investigate unequal volume, brush water, paper variation, or accidental smearing. Retain the data and repeat a clearly labelled specimen if time permits.
Action: investigate unequal volume, brush water, paper variation, or accidental smearing. Retain the data and repeat a clearly labelled specimen if time permits. - Paint pools
- Check: do not scrape it off. Note the deviation and use the pilot to adjust the next class's application volume.
Action: do not scrape it off. Note the deviation and use the pilot to adjust the next class's application volume. - Kraft paper curls
- Check: keep it flat on a tray while drying without taping across wet paint; note that the support responds differently. Do not infer the behaviour of ancient amate.
Action: keep it flat on a tray while drying without taping across wet paint; note that the support responds differently. Do not infer the behaviour of ancient amate. - The student's pigment identity is unknown
- Check: write “commercial product of unknown full formulation.” A colour name is not a chemical identification.
Action: write “commercial product of unknown full formulation.” A colour name is not a chemical identification. - No suitable paint or measuring tools
- Check: use pre-prepared teacher specimens and make the exercise qualitative. Keep the historical evidence discussion.
Action: use pre-prepared teacher specimens and make the exercise qualitative. Keep the historical evidence discussion.
Record and assess
Submit nine samples or the available documented set, the observation record, and a 150–200-word explanation. The 10-point assessment gives two points each for labels and fair comparison, precise observations, honest departures from the method, a source-supported historical connection, and explicit limits on chemical identification by appearance. An unexpected result receives full consideration when the record supports it.
Rubric · 10 points
- Labels, replicates and fair comparison · 2 points
- Precise observations · 2 points
- Recorded deviations · 2 points
- Source-supported historical connection · 2 points
- Limits and rejection of identification by hue · 2 points
Assess evidence, documentation, safety, historical specificity, and acknowledged limits; do not grade cultural imitation, beauty, speed, or physical strength as historical understanding.
Predictions to test
These are expected possibilities, never reported trial results. Record what actually happens, including failure.
Support categories may differ in edge spread, apparent coverage, color, gloss or texture, and replicates may vary.
No obvious visible difference is also a valid result; it does not establish identical chemistry.
Changing light direction may reveal texture differently without changing composition.
Neither this experiment nor a blue photograph identifies historic pigment or demonstrates Maya-blue manufacture.
Sources and access limits
Source access labels below are retained from the commissioned research. Partial, indexed, abstract and catalogue access do not imply a full-text reading. No new source reading or classroom trial is claimed by this website addition.
The printed reference list retains access labels and linked titles. Full source access notes remain on this lab’s web page.
Tana Elizabeth Villafana, Mary Elizabeth Haude, Amanda Satorius. “An analytical study of the Huexotzinco Codex using X-ray fluorescence, fiber optic reflectance spectroscopy, and portable Fourier-transform infrared spectroscopy.” Heritage Science 9, 54 (2021).
Tana Elizabeth Villafana, Mary Elizabeth Haude, Amanda Satorius. “An analytical study of the Huexotzinco Codex using X-ray fluorescence, fiber optic reflectance spectroscopy, and portable Fourier-transform infrared spectroscopy.” Heritage Science 9, 54 (2021). https://www.nature.com/articles/s40494-021-00524-1 . Relevant methods/results/discussion read. Preserve analytical and historical uncertainty.
Sylvia Rodgers Albro and Thomas C. Albro II. “The Examination and Conservation Treatment of the Library of Congress Harkness 1531 Huejotzingo Codex.” JAIC 29(2), 1990: 97–115, section 4.1.
Sylvia Rodgers Albro and Thomas C. Albro II. “The Examination and Conservation Treatment of the Library of Congress Harkness 1531 Huejotzingo Codex.” JAIC 29(2), 1990: 97–115, section 4.1. https://cool.culturalheritage.org/jaic/articles/jaic29-02-001_4.html . Linked section read. Do not repeat its erroneous classification of agave as a cactus.
Bodleian Libraries. “Non-destructive analysis of early Mesoamerican manuscripts conservation project.” Completed 2016.
Bodleian Libraries. “Non-destructive analysis of early Mesoamerican manuscripts conservation project.” Completed 2016. https://www.bodleian.ox.ac.uk/about/libraries/our-work/mesoamerican-manuscripts-conservation . Full project summary read. A modern methodological example, not a student protocol for analysing originals.
U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission. “Art Materials.”
U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission. “Art Materials.” https://www.cpsc.gov/FAQ/art-materials . Relevant safety/label discussion read. Clarifies what labelling establishes; follow local school rules and product instructions too.
American Academy of Pediatrics, HealthyChildren.org. “Choosing Safe Art & Craft Supplies for Children.”
American Academy of Pediatrics, HealthyChildren.org. “Choosing Safe Art & Craft Supplies for Children.” https://www.healthychildren.org/English/safety-prevention/at-home/Pages/Choosing-Safe-Arts-and-Craft-Supplies.aspx . Relevant selection and hygiene guidance read. General material-selection support, not certification of this dossier's untested procedures.
National Museum of the American Indian. “Essential Understandings,” Native Knowledge 360°.
National Museum of the American Indian. “Essential Understandings,” Native Knowledge 360°. https://americanindian.si.edu/nk360/about/essential-understandings . Framework read. Broad educational grounding; it does not authorize reuse of a particular community's sacred knowledge.
- SF-S26 · Source link ↗
Link check, 18 October 2026: HTTP 403. Original citation retained; source access was not re-established.
- SF-S26 · Source link ↗
Getty Art & Architecture Thesaurus. “Screenfolds (manuscript books).”
Getty Art & Architecture Thesaurus. “Screenfolds (manuscript books).” https://www.getty.edu/vow/AATFullDisplay?find=&logic=¬e=&page=1&subjectid=300417533 . Full short terminology entry read. Useful for structural vocabulary. Its aggregate materials description is not a recipe for every object.
Getty Research Institute. “In Tlilli In Tlapalli: Reproducing Ancient Mexican Books.”
Getty Research Institute. “In Tlilli In Tlapalli: Reproducing Ancient Mexican Books.” https://www.getty.edu/research/exhibitions_events/exhibitions/obsidian_mirror/ancient_mexican_books.html . Exhibition text read. Useful for formats and the Boturini facsimile example; retain the distinction between a historical manuscript and the displayed copy.
J. Paul Getty Museum, with INAH and BNAH. “Códice Maya de México.” 2022 exhibition.
J. Paul Getty Museum, with INAH and BNAH. “Códice Maya de México.” 2022 exhibition. https://www.getty.edu/art/exhibitions/maya_codex/ . Main text and object captions read. Strong concise object introduction. Image captions reserve rights.
J. Paul Getty Museum. “Códice Maya de México: Gallery Text.” 2022.
J. Paul Getty Museum. “Códice Maya de México: Gallery Text.” 2022. https://www.getty.edu/art/exhibitions/maya_codex/downloads/maya_codex_gallery_text.pdf . Relevant English/Spanish text read, especially PDF page 7 on reading. This dossier relies on the exhibition's reconstruction, not independent decipherment.
British Museum. “Untangling Maya Glyphs.” Google Arts & Culture.
British Museum. “Untangling Maya Glyphs.” Google Arts & Culture. https://artsandculture.google.com/story/untangling-maya-glyphs-the-british-museum/9AVhlqaqtBwwIw?hl=en . Institutional exposition read. Useful for word/syllable distinction; not a current comprehensive sign list.
SLUB Dresden. “The Dresden Maya Codex: Content.”
SLUB Dresden. “The Dresden Maya Codex: Content.” https://www.slub-dresden.de/en/explore/manuscripts/the-dresden-maya-codex/content . Substantive content section read. Useful for section/page identification and relation between almanacs and astronomy. Avoid extending particular deity interpretations or calendrical conversions beyond the cited account.
Metropolitan Museum of Art. “Cylindrical Vessel,” 1983.543.3.
Metropolitan Museum of Art. “Cylindrical Vessel,” 1983.543.3. https://www.metmuseum.org/art/collection/search/314311 . Object record read. Useful for comparing media without treating ceramic style as a surviving paper manuscript.
- SF-S07 · Source link ↗
Link check, 18 October 2026: HTTP 429. Original citation retained; source access was not re-established.
- SF-S07 · Source link ↗
James Doyle. “Creation Narratives on Ancient Maya Codex-Style Ceramics.” Metropolitan Museum Journal 51 (2016).
James Doyle. “Creation Narratives on Ancient Maya Codex-Style Ceramics.” Metropolitan Museum Journal 51 (2016). https://resources.metmuseum.org/resources/metpublications/pdf/Doyle_Metropolitan_Museum_Journal_v_51_2016.pdf . Relevant opening discussion of Maya books and scribal depictions read. Some dating and authenticity discussion predates the later institutional consensus about Códice Maya de México; do not repeat its old dispute status as current.
British Museum. “The Tonindeye (Nuttall) Codex,” Am1902,0308.1.
British Museum. “The Tonindeye (Nuttall) Codex,” Am1902,0308.1. https://www.britishmuseum.org/collection/object/E_Am1902-0308-1 . Object record read. Keep leaf counts distinct from an edition's numbered painted pages.
- SF-S09 · Source link ↗
Link check, 18 October 2026: HTTP 403. Original citation retained; source access was not re-established.
- SF-S09 · Source link ↗
John M. D. Pohl. “Ancient Books: Mixtec Group Codices.” FAMSI.
John M. D. Pohl. “Ancient Books: Mixtec Group Codices.” FAMSI. https://www.famsi.org/research/pohl/jpcodices/pohlmixtec1.html . Complete essay read; retain attribution. Avoid its dated demographic generalizations.
John Monaghan. “Performance and the Structure of the Mixtec Codices.” Ancient Mesoamerica 1(1), 1990: 133–140.
John Monaghan. “Performance and the Structure of the Mixtec Codices.” Ancient Mesoamerica 1(1), 1990: 133–140. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0956536100000146 . Publisher abstract and bibliographic record read, not full article. Its explicit premise and argument are reported as such.
SDCELAR. “Mixtec Codices and the Living Heritage of the Ñuu Savi.” 27 September 2023.
SDCELAR. “Mixtec Codices and the Living Heritage of the Ñuu Savi.” 27 September 2023. https://www.sdcelarbritishmuseum.org/news/watch-the-talk-mixtec-codices-and-the-living-heritage-of-the-nuu-savi/ . Full short institutional report read; linked talk not watched. Names community scholars and educational projects; not a substitute for their full work.
INAH. “Códices,” catalogue entry for Códice Boturini.
INAH. “Códices,” catalogue entry for Códice Boturini. https://codices.inah.gob.mx/pc/ . Relevant catalogue entry verified. Useful for approximate date, support, and format; not grounds for treating every production question as closed.
INAH, Códice Boturini project. “Descripción del Códice.”
INAH, Códice Boturini project. “Descripción del Códice.” https://www.codiceboturini.inah.gob.mx/approaches_text.php?textID=0 . Description and relevant interpretation sections read. Use with the catalogue; distinguish observations from hypotheses. Avoid importing old catalogue “maguey” labels as analytical identification.
Digital Florentine Codex. Book 10, folio 18v. Getty Research Institute, 2023.
Digital Florentine Codex. Book 10, folio 18v. Getty Research Institute, 2023. https://florentinecodex.getty.edu/en/book/10/folio/18v . Nahuatl transcription and attributed Anderson–Dibble English translation read. A primary historical description accessed through an edited translation, not an unmediated voice.
- SF-S15 · Source link ↗
Link check, 18 October 2026: connection unavailable. Original citation retained; source access was not re-established.
- SF-S15 · Source link ↗
Kim N. Richter, Alicia Maria Houtrouw, Joshua Fitzgerald. “Competing Narratives on the Conquest of Mexico and the Fall of the Aztec Empire.” Getty, 2020, updated 2023.
Kim N. Richter, Alicia Maria Houtrouw, Joshua Fitzgerald. “Competing Narratives on the Conquest of Mexico and the Fall of the Aztec Empire.” Getty, 2020, updated 2023. https://www.getty.edu/news/competing-narratives-about-the-conquest-of-mexico-and-the-fall-of-the-aztec-empire/ . Article read. Good for named collaborators, parallel columns, and differentiated audiences.
Erik Velásquez García. “Silabogramas nahuas en tiempos de la Conquista.” Estudios de Cultura Náhuatl.
Erik Velásquez García. “Silabogramas nahuas en tiempos de la Conquista.” Estudios de Cultura Náhuatl. https://nahuatl.historicas.unam.mx/index.php/ecn/article/view/77886 . Abstract and publisher record read. Supports acknowledging active research on early syllabic signs, not an unqualified claim about all signs or workshops.
- SF-S19 · Source link ↗
Link check, 18 October 2026: connection unavailable. Original citation retained; source access was not re-established.
- SF-S19 · Source link ↗
Mustafa Eck. “Watch: 2000 Years of Paper Making Continues.” Getty, 1 November 2022.
Mustafa Eck. “Watch: 2000 Years of Paper Making Continues.” Getty, 1 November 2022. https://www.getty.edu/news/amate-codex-paper-video-aztec-maya-mexico/ . Introductory article read; video identified, not independently transcribed. Use for named present-day makers and a qualified continuity question.
Library of Congress. “Care, Handling and Storage of Asian Style Bindings.”
Library of Congress. “Care, Handling and Storage of Asian Style Bindings.” https://loc.gov/preservation/care/asianbind.html . Accordion section read. Cross-regional modern preservation advice; use only for handling logic, clearly labelled.
Biblioteca Nacional de Antropología e Historia. “Testimonios Pictográficos.”
Biblioteca Nacional de Antropología e Historia. “Testimonios Pictográficos.” https://bnah.inah.gob.mx/pictografico.php . Collection-care and access description read. Useful for explaining surrogates and restricted original handling; confirm current access rules before planning a visit.
Getty Education. “Picturing a Story: Photo Essay about a Community, Event or Issue.”
Getty Education. “Picturing a Story: Photo Essay about a Community, Event or Issue.” https://www.getty.edu/education/for_teachers/curricula/dorothea_lange/lange_lesson08.html . Accordion directions and assessment read. Published modern bookmaking precedent; this dossier provides a substantially different measured research-model activity.
Zelia Nuttall, ed. Codex Nuttall: Facsimile of an Ancient Mexican Codex. Cambridge, Mass.: Peabody Museum, Harvard University, 1902. Getty Research Institute copy, Internet Archive.
Zelia Nuttall, ed. Codex Nuttall: Facsimile of an Ancient Mexican Codex. Cambridge, Mass.: Peabody Museum, Harvard University, 1902. Getty Research Institute copy, Internet Archive. https://archive.org/details/gri_33125011146541 . Metadata, contributor, physical facsimile description, and access record verified; the whole scanned edition was not read or compared page by page. The record marks possible copyright status “NOT_IN_COPYRIGHT”; verify actual intended image reuse and all applicable rights before publication. Treat the edition as a historical reproduction, not a photograph of the original.