Divinity Atlas

Sacred Correspondences
Sign In
Text size
100%
Theme
Source

Codex Borbonicus (Wikipedia)

source

Wikipedia's article on the Codex Borbonicus, an Aztec pictorial manuscript on a single 14.2 metre sheet of amatl bark paper, made around the time of the Spanish conquest and held by the Bibliotheque de l'Assemblee Nationale in Paris, a French national treasure barred from leaving the country since the 1960s. The article describes its divinatory calendar of trecena periods each ruled by a deity, and its 52 solar year cycle panel highlighting Quetzalcoatl and Tezcatlipoca. This description is adapted from Wikipedia contributors under CC BY-SA 4.0; changes were made. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

Facts
Assessment
Reliability Tier
3
Tier three: an encyclopedia article, used here for the manuscript's physical description, holding institution and general calendar structure, corroborated per deity by a specialist codex-commentary site and a peer reviewed journal article.
Citation
Publisher
Wikipedia
URL
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Codex_Borbonicus
Source Type
encyclopedia
Connections

Associated With

This source names Quetzalcoatl directly: "52 solar year cycle panel highlighting Quetzalcoatl and Tezcatlipoca."

Source Codex Borbonicus (Wikipedia)
Tezcatlipoca, Deities

This source names Tezcatlipoca directly: "panel highlighting Quetzalcoatl and Tezcatlipoca."

Source Codex Borbonicus (Wikipedia)
Claims Backed By This Source (24 claims)

This source backs 24 claims across the atlas. As facts: 16 well-attested. As cited relationships: 6 holds. Plus 2 entities citing it as a general reference with no single fact or relationship attached.

Disposition By Topic

  • Sacred Art & Iconography, 17 claims: 11 well-attested, 4 holds, 2 general references.
  • Sources, 7 claims: 5 well-attested, 2 holds.

Well-attested

16

Sacred Art & Iconography

Holds

6

Sacred Art & Iconography

General References

2

Sacred Art & Iconography

Comments (0)
No comments yet. Be the first to share a thought.
Reader Challenges (0)
No disputes yet. Spotted an error or a better source? Open the first one.