Questionnaire Design
To insure a representative sample of all Teotihuacan Valley residents and Mexican national visitors to the site and potentially expand the results of the study beyond Teotihuacan to other world heritage sites, a statistical sampling procedure for a questionnaire survey was employed as part of the overall design method (see Appendix 1, Figure 1). Various social science research methods guides (De Vaus 2001, 2002, Fowler 2002, 1990, 1995, Kidder 1986), more specific questionnaire and interview development resources (Foddy 1993, Gillham 2000), statistical guides targeted for archaeology (Gillham 2000, Orton 2000, Shennan 1988) and prior survey questioning projects specific to archaeology (Merriman 1991,Watkins 2000) were followed to develop the questionnaire, sampling strategy and subsequent statistical operations. Qualitative data in the form of extended interviews, participant observation conducted at the site and in the valley and open-format questions on a pilot questionnaire was collected early on during the fieldwork in the fall of 2004 to identify general explanatory concepts accounting for the various associations with Teotihuacan (De Vaus 2002:10-15). These are included in the subsequent discussion for qualitative depth of the survey study. Explanatory concepts form the meeting between inductive and deductive reasoning procedures (De Vaus 2001: 24-7). Having worked at the site for the two previous summers and already been exposed to the cacophony of non-archaeological beliefs concerning the significance of Teotihuacan through the internet and fringe literature (see Chapter 5), I was well aware that much of the ‘currency’ of the zone fell outside of the archaeological narratives in the academic literature. So, for instance, I already had an idea that spiritual or ‘new age’ beliefs and economic relationships would figure into any investigation of the expanded ‘grey heritage’ of Teotihuacan. This latent nomenclature (e.g. spirituality, economics) was then confronted by the litany of common concerns expressed by valley residents and employees of the site during the initial fieldwork of the fall of 2004. Analogous to the theory-data scenarios of Wylie, Hodder and Shanks and Tilley (see Chapter 3) that tentative explanations abut empirical observation and are modified in the process, my initial concepts were greatly expanded and complexified after the initial fieldwork. So for example, two differing views regarding spiritual practices and the local economy were expressed by two local residents.
Figure 6.2: Self-identified Shaman (and apprentice) burning copal outside of the Ciudadela
A ‘Toltec shaman’ (and his apprentice), explained, when asked if the flood of tourists interfered with spiritual practices at the site, that “most tourists understand the spiritual roots of Teotihuacan. . .(and) that many understand that these practices are serious and they come to buy my obsidian and be cleansed with copal. . . It is some of the (INAH) guards who do like me being here.” This practitioner earned a modest income through selling his obsidian handicrafts and receiving ‘tips’ from cleansing tourists with copal smoke.
Figure 6.3: Local spiritual leader and head of the Civic Front for the Defense of the Teotihuacan Valley conducting a ritual for rain at her restaurant-cum-healing center
Another well-respected local spiritual practitioner and leader of the Civic Front for the Defense of the Teotihuacan Valley, an organization formed in opposition to the construction of the Walmart, retorted that “it is unfortunate that there are so many tourists . . .(who) do not understand what they are visiting . . but it is unavoidable as INAH operates the site to make money. I would prefer if the tourists and vendedores (traveling craftspeople selling their wares) were removed from Teotihuacan.” While her restaurant depends upon tourism (primarily Mexican nationals), this informant felt that the spiritual integrity of the site would be better served by removing tourists and others (vendedores) who depend upon the income made from selling crafts to tourists. Her sentiment, in line with her outspoken advocacy against Walmart, was that the site was too commercialized.
So while both individuals indicated the importance of Teotihuacan as a spiritual venue, their views on the inter-relationship between spirituality and the local economy were diametrically opposed (at least as stated). This lead me to develop more questions for the questionnaire focused upon economy and spirituality, breaking the two concepts down into more refined questions regarding local versus national economic benefit and conducting versus ‘consuming’ spiritual rituals. Noting the complex responses to questions regarding any one concept, I felt it necessary to approach each broad concept from several different angles in hopes of eliciting just such types of differences. But taking the responses of individuals on their own, the question becomes: can these specific concerns be grouped according to more general, shared patterns? So to continue the example, were the shaman’s association of economic gain and spirituality with Teotihuacan prevalent amongst a majority of residents, visitors and employees? Or was the local, traditional leader’s antipathy to commercialization of the site and her belief of the resultant denigration of the spiritual integrity of Teotihuacan more widely shared? And to make it more interesting, how might these type of beliefs relate to ideas of identity, heritage and archaeological knowledge?
Forward to Explanatory Concepts
Return to Statistical Survey
