DISCUSSING EPICLASSIC AT TEOTIHUACAN: THE URBAN QUESTION. San Francisco

Transcription

1 DISCUSSING EPICLASSIC AT TEOTIHUACAN: THE URBAN QUESTION. Unpublished paper presented in the 80 th SAA Meeting San Francisco Natalia Moragas Segura 1

2 DISCUSSING EPICLASSIC AT TEOTIHUACAN: THE URBAN QUESTION. Natalia Moragas Segura Ph.D. Universitat de Barcelona 04/16/2015 I was thinking how I could contribute to this symposium. After thinking for a while I decided to incorporate some of the topics that I developed some years ago in my PhD thesis Dinámica del cambio cultural en Teotihuacan durante el Epiclásico ( d.c) defended in 2003 in Barcelona under the direction of Linda Manzanilla. In 1998, my first idea was to collect all the information published about this topic but quickly I had to assume that I would have to open the scenario of my research to other collateral topics and offer a plausible explanation about the transition of Classic to Epiclassic period in Teotihuacan which meant to get into the controversial issue of the collapse of the city. Teotihuacan gives us the chance to study a densely-populated, long lasting city with inhabitants of various origins. We still have many questions regarding the way which the city was organized and its expansion across Mesoamerica. We cannot say that Teotihuacan is where the Mesoamerican city was born but we can say that is where it achieved a high degree of social complexity. The study of how complex societies collapse has been a recurrent topic for social researches. Understanding how a society which is apparently stable in all cultural, political, economic and social aspects can suddenly go into a decline and fall, even today, represents a challenge. At this point I need to summarize some aspects of how researchers have interpreted the collapse of Teotihuacan just to frame the discussion. There are three main archaeological indicators with which the collapse of Teotihuacan has been interpreted: the burning of the city, the looting of the city and the radical change of the material culture. The burning and looting of the city is associated to most of the ceremonial and high class and intermediate elite class buildings of the city. Fire could be violent but also associated to a desacralization process as Millon suggested in The 2

3 looting of structures cannot be separated from fire at this time but it is also a more widespread cultural phenomenon of closure and change. The change of material culture is absolutely surprising. Traditionally, the presence of a new material culture complex is associated with the arrival of a new people and their role as invading groups who conquered Teotihuacan. I have no time to discuss the coyotlatelco problem as I wanted but, the various researchers who dealt with this culture can initially be grouped following two general lines: one advocating continuity 1 and other suggesting discontinuity 2. Almost all the archaeologists agreed on these three points. William Sanders too, but he was more reluctant about another concept associated with these three indicators: The change of material culture. His defense of the Oxtotipac ceramic complex was very evident in the Coyotlatelco symposia coordinated by Laura Solar in In 2003, Linda Manzanilla incorporated another factor: the reoccupation of areas by the same groups as a social consequence of the post immediate collapse society. A second framework is related to Who? and How? Rejecting the idea of a mysterious collapse of Teotihuacan, it would be necessary to reconsider other elements and put them into the discussion like the Metepec pottery complex, the abandonment of ethnic neighborhoods, the deterioration of long distance trade, changes in burial record or the fact that there are not big architectonical plans in the city in the last century before the collapse. Some authors believe that we should see very big problems in the Teotihuacan State during the 5 th century. In my opinion, one of the challenges is to see and redefine the impact of the last years of Teotihuacan in their immediate area: Toluca,Puebla-Tlaxcala, Hidalgo For example if the Toluca area received Teotihuacan groups during the Late Xolalpan phase, this would not be in the context of an expanding society, but the result of internal changes or even political instability within the city. Bearing in mind the models used to explain the collapse of Teotihuacan (invasion of Coyotlatelco people, social crisis, ecological crisis.)., it may be 1 (Acosta1972, Dumond & Muller1972; Good &Obermeyer,1986; Hicks &Nicholson 1964;Sanders,1965 ) 2 ( Braniff,1972; Cobean 1978,1990; Mastache& Cobean 1989,Piña Chan,1967,Rattrya,1966,1991). 3

4 interesting to consider an additional idea: the archaeological data suggest two different social processes: one decaying Teotihuacan society and one rising coyotlatelco society in the same time at the same place. The presence of Coyotlatelco society a little before the fall of the city in the Valley of Mexico shows us an interesting scenario to consider. Some ideas about Teotihuacan in Epiclassic times. Some interesting facts to think about are: No ceremonial constructions are done in Epiclassic time in Teotihuacan. The abandonment of structures shows some differences about continuity or discontinuity in the stratigraphic record. For example, Atetelco shows a large phase of abandonment of classical structures but not in Tepantitla with a continuity of the occupation. Early studies made by the Teotihuacan Mapping Project suggest that Coyotlatelco pottery appears in areas where materials from earlier phases Xolalpan and Metepec- are to be found. However in Luis Manuel Gamboa, found Coyotlatelco pottery associated to Xolalpan floors with no Metepec cultural material in the periphery of the city The looting made by the population remaining in ceremonial area and buildings associated with the elites are presented, but not with the same intensity. For example, Xalla versus Ventilla (intermediate elites). The reoccupation of caves and the area of the pyramid of the Sun (in my opinion maybe it is more related to coyotlatelco-mazapa transition). The area of the Pyramid of the Sun seems to maintain its importance in a different sociopolitical context. Changes in the internal mobility in the apartment compounds.in my opinion it is related to the breakdown of the city in its global conception. The use of obsidiana from Otumba and the abandonment of the Sierra de las Navajas. All those inputs lead us to a problematic but, very interesting question, which concerns how were really the relationships between teotihuacanos and coyotlatelcos. 4

5 Another interesting situation to consider is social stratification and its effect on the collapse and the Epiclassic period. If we consider the collapse of Teotihuacan as a crisis of the political and ideological power of the Teotihuacan elites; the crisis must have affected those social sector more involved with the power. Raúl García identifies a Coyotlatelco settlement in the south of the Valley of Mexico (Chalco area) when these new settlers met with no obvious resistance from the Teotihuacan population already living there. We can only propose the effect that the loss of power had on other social groups within the collapse of Teotihuacan. One obvious condition could be that, when the political institutions of government of the city started not to operate properly, the Teotihuacan political ideological system fell. It could be seen as a reduction in the complexity of the Teotihuacan state to a level where there would have been less socio-political integration ( leader or cacique level). The elites and the other social groups linked with them with political and economic bounds had to decide to leave the city or change in a new sociopolitical scenario. Different areas probably reacted in different ways depending on how involved they were with the Teotihuacan political apparatus The more specialized you are, the more difficult it is to survive. The specialist craftsmen had two options: emigrate in search of new markets to serve to the new ruling class or become non full time specialist in the city in a new local market (for example the obsidian market of Otumba). For the peasants could it be easier to assume the new political situation serving to the new coyotaltelco rulers. The ruralization suggested for the Basin of Mexico itself, corresponds to regeneration in terms of redistribution of power and resources and the development and settlement of new groups arriving. The relations within elites during the Epiclassic period should be understood, at least in the Basin of Mexico, from the perspective of various political entities developing along local markets. Characterizing the post-collapse society in the Basin of Mexico is the main challenge for Epiclassic time. We cannot know how the new Coyotlalteco elites would interact with the decaying Teotihuacan elites but it is possible that whatever relationship existed, it would be changed substantially and they could have taken advantage of the internal conflicts. The new rulers are heads of family or lineage with close relationships to other groups. The last 5

6 teotihuacanos and the new coyotlatelcos had to establish ties of lineage maybe with marriage between them. The lack of data means that we cannot be sure what type of socio-economic organization existed but it appears that it formed part of a cooperative system between towns, not necessarily involving tension or conflict, although this cannot be excluded. New relationships would not develop due to a breakdown in the rules of exchange, as Rattray suggests, but because the main players had disappeared after the collapse and there were no representatives of the now weakened (or disappeared) State to take part in medium and long-distance trade connections. The new players would form relationships around the exchange of locally-supplied essential goods. The collapse of Teotihuacan and the Epiclassic continues to be an important archaeological challenge as it involves essential questions regarding power and society but we have a better understanding of the processes that took place within the city and its surroundings. A correct analysis of Teotihuacan society after 450 AD is crucial to understand the processes involved in the collapse. We therefore need to consider that we have two societies in close contact, which have different socio-political organization in the same territory at the same time. If there were already various different communities integrated within the city during the Classic period, this must have happened in a context of a cultural homogeneity and political centralization. After the collapse, we find a context of political decentralizations and the rise of politically autonomous communities. The changing paradigm of what Teotihuacan means its presence in Mesoamerican territory and the adoption of new theoretical framework will also be essential to understand how power was exercised and its collapse. 6