Thank you, Thelmadatter, I understand what you mean, but my point would be that the 1649 text is the earliest ethnographic source (the author interviewed locals about the place) on hand with respect to this issue. Also, this is not a European book, per se, rather a book written by a New Spanish peninsular who had spent a lifetime in the territories writing its history (also an important source for studies of the Virgin of Guadalupe, and a significant author of mexican mestizaje). I understand that there are other versions that are not written (bernuzzi, 1981, for example, has some of these - though they are more modern textualized acquisitions), nonetheless at the time of Florencia's text he is indicating that there is something of a lack of memory. Further to this, the assertion that the cave deity was indeed Ostoc Teotl (or some version thereof) is a result of subsequent authors' use of the Florencia text (ie. Joaquin Sardo, 1810), and as far as can be ascertained, a rather modern innovation as well. (  )