MxAlb3A

From Seshat Data Browser
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Phase I Variables (polity-based)

General variables

♠ RA ♣ Alice Williams; Gréine Jordan ♥ Majority of work carried out by Alice Williams; Gréine Jordan wrote general description and edited some of Williams's work.

♠ Original name ♣ Monte Alban III ♥

♠ Alternative names ♣ Early Classic ♥

♠ Peak Date ♣ ♥


Temporal bounds

♠ Duration ♣ 200 CE-500 CE ♥ “Period IIIa in the Valley of Oaxaca saw the withdrawal of Monte Albán from distant provinces (e.g. Redmond, 1983) and the disintegration of its empire as new competitors arose on the fringes of its political territory.”[1]

♠ Degree of centralization ♣ unitary state ♥ The Zapotec polity reached its peak of centralisation during this period, even though the territorial extent of the state declined.[2][3]

♠ Supra-polity relations ♣ alliance ♥ It has been argued that the Zapotecs at Monte Alban and the Teotihuacan state built mutually peaceful relationships, while both states were more powerful than other neighbouring polities. Neither conquered the other (based on distinct material culture and architectural styles) but did trade with one another.[4] Evidence for this includes the Lapida de Bazan (a carved stone slab at Monte Alban) which depicts a peaceful meeting between a Teotihuacan ambassador and Zapotec lord.[5] In addition, there is evidence for a "Oaxaca barrio" at Teotihuacan, with pottery styles dating to the MA II-III phases.[6] Political and ritual (as well as commercial) relationships were also probably maintained between the Zapotec state and former territories, such as the Sola Valley.[7]

Supra-cultural relations

♠ preceding (quasi)polity ♣ MxAlb2* ♥
♠ relationship to preceding (quasi)polity ♣ continuity ♥ The centre at Monte Albán continued to grow during this period, but the territorial extent of the Zapotec state outside of the Valley of Oaxaca declined.[8]
♠ succeeding (quasi)polity ♣ MxAlb3B ♥
♠ Supracultural entity ♣ Zapotec ♥ The valley became much more integrated during this period, with a consistent “Zapotec ceramic tradition”, Monte Albán stone monument styles and a wider distribution of settlements in the piedmont zone away from Monte Albán.[9]
♠ scale of supra-cultural interaction ♣ ♥

♠ Capital ♣ Monte Albán ♥ Monte Albán continued to grow during this period, and reached peaked in population size and settled area.[10]


♠ Language ♣ Zapotec ♥ [11]

General Description

The Monte Albán IIIA phase (200-500 CE) is generally regarded as the 'golden age' or Classic period of the Zapotec state,[12] due to the widespread uniformity of ceramics and monumental construction as well as increased economic and political integration, centred at Monte Albán.[13][14] The population of the capital, Monte Albán, continued to grow and the construction of monumental buildings at the site reached its peak. These buildings dominate what can be seen at the ruins of Monte Albán today.[15][16] Additional settlements were established in the piedmont area (including Jalieza with 13,000 inhabitants in the southern sub-valley and Dainzú-Macuilxochitl-Tlacochahuaya-Guadalupe [DMTG] with 12,000 inhabitants in the eastern sub-valley).[17][18] The movement of people into the piedmont areas may imply an increase in demand for agricultural labour during this period.[19] The territorial extent of the Zapotec state, on the other hand, decreased during this period in the face of increasingly powerful competitors on the borders of the state. Previously subordinate areas, such as the Sola Valley, became independent of the Zapotec state.[20][21][22]

Population and political organization

Five named rulers are known for this 400-year period, identified in public monuments in the vicinity of the Main Plaza of Monte Albán.[23] Status appears to have been inherited and related to one's proximity to apical ancestors.[24] Burial remains and the differences in construction of residential buildings suggest two class-endogamous strata during this period, with the majority of the population (an estimated 96-98 percent) belonging to the commoner class.[25] The Zapotecs focused on internal consolidation: an increasing proportion of settlements were in defensible locations or had fortifications, and there was agricultural intensification in the piedmont and high alluvium zones.[26] There was also a pattern of settlement clustering around the main centres, similar to the pattern shown in the Monte Albán Late I phase (300-100 BCE), except the clustering occurred around secondary centres as well as around the primary centre, Monte Albán.[27]
Archaeologists Joyce Marcus and Kent Flannery estimate the population of the valley to have been around 115,000 people during this period.[28] A population range of 15,000-30,000 for Monte Albán is based on the estimated number of people living in each of the households at the site. Larger households may have included 10-20 people, while 5-10 may have lived in the smaller households, although this may be an underestimate.[29]

Social Complexity variables

♠ RA ♣ Alice Williams ♥

Social Scale

♠ Polity territory ♣ [3,000-20,000] ♥ squared kilometers. The Zapotec territory decreased in size over this period, but the exact extent of the polity is uncertain. The range coded here therefore refers to the size of the Valley of Oaxaca up the the extent of the polity gained in the previous period.[30]

♠ Polity Population ♣ suspected unknown ♥

[72,416-158,040] People is the estimated population of the entire Valley of Oaxaca during this period, but the population of the Zapotec polity (including those not living in the valley) is not known.[31] Marcus and Flannery[32] estimate the population of the valley to have been around 115,000 persons during the IIIA period.

"Table 5.7. Estimated archaeological, resource-based, and labor-based potential populations for Valley of Oaxaca subareas in Monte Alban IIIA."[33]

Etla: 5492; Central: 18322; N Valle Grande: 28118; S Valle Grande: 23995; W Tlacolula: 29171; Ejutla: 14656; Albarradas: 1127; Sola: 7678.[34]
Total: 128,559.

"Table 11.3. Population in the largest centers, by phase, in Oaxaca and Ejutla."[35]

Valley of Oaxaca population (Largest center in Oaxaca): Tierras Largas: 327 (128); San Jose: 1942 (1384); Guadalupe: 1788 (774); Rosario: 1835 (564); Early I: 14652 (5250); Late I: 51339 (17242); Monte Alban II: 41927 (14492); Monte Alban IIIA: 120121 (16507); Monte Alban IIIB: 78930 (24189); Monte Alban IV: 77612 (16117); Monte Alban V: 166467 (13831).[36]

♠ Population of the largest settlement ♣ [15,000-30,000] ♥ Inhabitants. This range is based on the estimated number of people living in each of the households at Monte Albán. 10-20 people may have lived in the larger households, while 5-10 may have lived in the smaller households, although this may be an underestimate.[37] Marcus and Flannery[38] estimate that Monte Alban had a population of 16,500 people duringt he IIIA period.

"Monte Alban grew to a population of around 25,000 in the Classic period.".[39]

"Table 11.3. Population in the largest centers, by phase, in Oaxaca and Ejutla."[40]

Valley of Oaxaca population (Largest center in Oaxaca): Monte Alban IIIA: 120121 (16507).[41]

Hierarchical Complexity

♠ Settlement hierarchy ♣ 4 ♥ levels. Monte Alban remained the primary centre of the Zapotec polity, but secondary sites (such as Jalieza) grew in size and importance.

1. Monte Alban (estimated population of 16,500 people, living on 1196 terraces, and less than 5 percent of the population lived in 57 much larger, elaborate residences).[42]

2. Secondary centres: Jalieza, in the Valley Grande area (408 ha, estimated population of 12,835 people, >20 public buildings); DMTG, in the Tlacolula subvalley (a cluster of settlements which together had a population of around 12,292 people)[43][44]
3. Tertiary centres (including new medium-sized settlements on the piedmont, such as Rancho Tejas, Sta. Cruz Mixtepec and "El Choco" near Ayoquezco)[45][46]
4. Small villages and hamlets (hundreds of small hamlets were present but are less well represented)[47]

"Table 7.9. Monte Alban IIIA population hierarchy in Oaxaca and Ejuta."[48]

Vallay of Oaxaca: Level I: 12835-16507; II: 4925-6195; III: 1789-3219: IV: 715-1575; V: 211-608; VI: 116-197. No rank: 8-100.[49]

♠ Administrative levels ♣ 3 ♥ levels. Three administrative tiers consisting of Monte Albán, regional administrative centers, and local administrative centers, were present by the Monte Albán II phase (100 BCE – 200 CE) and lasted until c. 500 CE. [50]

1. Monte Alban

2. Secondary centres (including Jalieza) [51]
3. Tertiary centres (including new medium-sized settlements on the piedmont, such as Rancho Tejas, Sta. Cruz Mixtepec and "El Choco" near Ayoquezco)[52]
4. Small villages and hamlets

♠ Religious levels ♣ suspected unknown ♥ levels. Temples were constructed at the primary and secondary centres of the valley, with potential public buildings also at tertiary centres which may have had a religious function. The primary and secondary temples followed a standard plan, suggesting religious uniformity between these centres.[53] For examples:

1. Head of the official cult, Monte Alban temple

2. Priest officiating from a secondary temple
(3. Local priest officiating from a tertiary temple)

However, there is no evidence that any existing religious hierarchy so closely matched settlement hierarchy.

♠ Military levels ♣ [1-2] ♥ levels. There is little direct evidence for Zapotec military organisation, but there may have been fewer levels than the previous period as the Zapotec were losing rather than gaining territory.[54]

Professions

♠ Professional military officers ♣ suspected unknown ♥ There is little direct evidence for Zapotec military organisation during this period.[55]

♠ Professional soldiers ♣ suspected unknown ♥ There is little direct evidence for Zapotec military organisation during this period.[56]

♠ Professional priesthood ♣ present ♥ Full-time priests are inferred present as the temple design was changed during the MA II period to allow for an inner, more private room (for example, Building X at the Main Plaza of Monte Alban). Ethno-historic evidence from the Spanish colonial period suggests that this inner room was used by full-time priests for more sacred rituals, and some priests (the bigana) had to stay permanently within the temple.[57]

Bureaucracy characteristics

♠ Full-time bureaucrats ♣ suspected unknown ♥ The monumental construction at Monte Alban has been seen as a sign of a high degree of administrative centralization.[58] However, we lack adequate information about administrative structures at Monte Albán to be able to discern whether full-time specialist bureaucrats (i.e. not just chiefs or generals with administrative duties) were present.[59][60]

♠ Examination system ♣ suspected unknown ♥ The monumental construction at Monte Alban has been seen as a sign of a high degree of administrative centralization.[61] However, we lack adequate information about administrative structures at Monte Albán to be able to discern whether full-time specialist bureaucrats (i.e. not just chiefs or generals with administrative duties) were present.[62][63]

♠ Merit promotion ♣ suspected unknown ♥ The monumental construction at Monte Alban has been seen as a sign of a high degree of administrative centralization.[64] However, we lack adequate information about administrative structures at Monte Albán to be able to discern whether full-time specialist bureaucrats (i.e. not just chiefs or generals with administrative duties) were present.[65][66]

♠ Specialized government buildings ♣ inferred present ♥ If still in use from the previous period, the sunken plaza at Monte Alban (50m wide and 4m deep) could be interpreted as a governmental structure, along with a smaller structure (20m wide) at San José Mogote, as suggested by Marcus and Flannery for the previous period.[67] More generally, Charles Spencer commented: 'One cannot fail to be impressed by the amount and variety of public/institutional architecture constructed between B.C. 300 and A.D. 800 in and around the Main Plaza at Monte Alban. The archaeological data indicate that much of this architectural complexity was in existence by Monte Alban II (100 B.C. through A.D. 200). Many of these buildings do not appear to have been residential and most likely served an array of religious (e.g., the various structures associated with two-room temples), military (such as Building J and perhaps the Ballcourt), and other "administrative" functions (including a variety of other public/institutional buildings the functions of which are still unclear). At the same time, it is probably also appropriate to consider the quihuitao (royal palace) to be another example of a public/institutional building. Both the main candidate for a quihuitao at Monte Alban (the Patio Hundido complex, according to Flannery) and also the example recently excavated at El Palenque (which was probably the capital of a rival independent state polity in Late Formative times) near San Martin Tilcajete (see Spencer and Redmond 2004 in Lat Am Antiq, and Redmond and Spencer 2017 PNAS) were not associated with tombs like other elite (and non-elite) residences; also, both examples had "residential" as well as "ceremonial/governmental" components. Note that the El Palenque quihuitao is securely dated to the Late Monte Albán I phase (300-100 B.C.)'.[68]

Law

♠ Formal legal code ♣ absent ♥ Sources do not suggest there is evidence for a formal legal system during this period.[69]

♠ Judges ♣ absent ♥ Sources do not suggest there is evidence for a formal legal system during this period.[70]

♠ Courts ♣ absent ♥ Sources do not suggest there is evidence for a formal legal system during this period.[71]

♠ Professional Lawyers ♣ absent ♥ Sources do not suggest there is evidence for a formal legal system during this period.[72]

Specialized Buildings: polity owned

♠ irrigation systems ♣ present ♥ There is some evidence for the use of irrigation systems during this period, but the evidence suggests that the irrigation systems were constructed at a small scale.[73][74] How much was polity owned is therefore difficult to determine. Gary Feinman (pers. comm.) writes that small-scale irrigation, such as check-dams and small canals were in use. [75]
♠ drinking water supply systems ♣ present ♥ A wall was built to dam a reservoir in the northern section of Monte Alban.[76]
♠ markets ♣ present ♥ "Markets clearly have a long history in Mesoamerica before Aztec times. Back in the 1980s, I wrote a paper with Blanton and Kowalewski arguing that there were markets in Monte Albán I (ca. 500-200 BC). You can also find that argument in Ancient Mesoamerica and Ancient Oaxaca. While this may not yet be a consensual view yet, the literature on pre-Aztec markets across Mesoamerica is burgeoning."[77] Feinman and Nicholas adopt a "multiscalar perspective" in their book chapter to argue that marketplaces were a central part of the economy during the Classic period in the Valley Oaxaca.[78]
♠ food storage sites ♣ absent ♥ No evidence for centralised food storage has been found at Monte Alban.[79][80]

Transport infrastructure

♠ Roads ♣ absent ♥ Small roads were constructed through Monte Alban, but sources do not suggest there is evidence for a road network linking settlements.[81] We asked Gary Feinman about roads in Oaxacan polities and he said: "It depends on what you mean by roads. There are definite roads/accessways within sites. Blanton defines some at Monte Albán and Linda [Nicholas] and I defined some at El Palmillo. These likely were not paved, but they may have been banked and were cleared. Between sites there are known 16th century trails, which were likely used for a long, long time. Again, they likely were not paved, but there were no beasts of burden."[82] Coded absent: we do not count accessways within settlements or paths and trails not constructed deliberately as roads.
♠ Bridges ♣ absent ♥ Sources do not suggest there is evidence for the construction of bridges during this period.[83]
♠ Canals ♣ absent ♥ Sources do not suggest there is evidence for the construction of canals during this period.[84] Gary Feinman (pers. comm.) writes that small-scale irrigation, such as check-dams and small canals were in use. However, these seem to be used for agriculture rather than transportation. [85]
♠ Ports ♣ absent ♥ The Valley of Oaxaca is landlocked.

Special purpose sites

♠ Mines or quarries ♣ absent ♥ Sources only describe residential sites.[86]

Information

Writing System

♠ Mnemonic devices ♣ absent ♥ Glyphs dating to this period have been deciphered as either calendrical dates or the names of prisoners. Sources do not suggest that evidence for other types of writing has been found.[87]
♠ Nonwritten records ♣ suspected unknown ♥
♠ Written records ♣ present ♥ Roughly 350 inscribed stones have been found at Monte Albán (including 310 danzantes) assigned to MA I and II.[88] Mesoamerican civilizations, including the Maya, Aztec, Mixtec and Zapotec all possessed "a true form of writing: a series of hieroglyphs arranged in vertical columns and in many instances combined with numerals. The glyphs were at least indirectly related to a spoken language." Zapotec inscriptions are considered true writing, since the inscriptions had verbs.[89]
♠ Script ♣ present ♥ Evidence for carved glyphs (of names and calendar dates) has been found.[90]
♠ Non-phonetic writing ♣ present ♥ Glyphs dating to this period have been deciphered as either calendrical dates or the names of prisoners. Sources do not suggest that evidence for other types of writing has been found.[91]
♠ Phonetic alphabetic writing ♣ absent ♥ Glyphs dating to this period have been deciphered as either calendrical dates or the names of prisoners. Sources do not suggest that evidence for other types of writing has been found.[92]

Kinds of Written Documents

♠ Lists, tables, and classifications ♣ absent ♥ Glyphs dating to this period have been deciphered as either calendrical dates or the names of prisoners. Sources do not suggest that evidence for other types of writing has been found.[93]
♠ Calendar ♣ present ♥ Several glyphs carved on stones at Monte Albán have been interpreted as calendrical glyphs, based on analogy with later periods[94][95] More specifically, the glyphs on Stele 12 and 13 at Monte Alban seem to refer to days on the 365 day calendar, or yza secular year as it was known in the historical periods. In addition to evidence for the ritual 260 day calendar (or piye calendar) at San Jose Mogote, this suggests that both the two calendars were being used from this time.[96]
♠ Sacred Texts ♣ absent ♥ Glyphs dating to this period have been deciphered as either calendrical dates or the names of prisoners. Sources do not suggest that evidence for other types of writing has been found.[97]
♠ Religious literature ♣ absent ♥ Glyphs dating to this period have been deciphered as either calendrical dates or the names of prisoners. Sources do not suggest that evidence for other types of writing has been found.[98]
♠ Practical literature ♣ absent ♥ Glyphs dating to this period have been deciphered as either calendrical dates or the names of prisoners. Sources do not suggest that evidence for other types of writing has been found.[99]
♠ History ♣ absent ♥ Glyphs dating to this period have been deciphered as either calendrical dates or the names of prisoners. Sources do not suggest that evidence for other types of writing has been found.[100]
♠ Philosophy ♣ absent ♥ Glyphs dating to this period have been deciphered as either calendrical dates or the names of prisoners. Sources do not suggest that evidence for other types of writing has been found.[101]
♠ Scientific literature ♣ absent ♥ Glyphs dating to this period have been deciphered as either calendrical dates or the names of prisoners. Sources do not suggest that evidence for other types of writing has been found.[102]
♠ Fiction ♣ absent ♥ Glyphs dating to this period have been deciphered as either calendrical dates or the names of prisoners. Sources do not suggest that evidence for other types of writing has been found.[103]


Money

♠ Articles ♣ suspected unknown ♥ Sources do not suggest that monetary items have been found dating to this period.[104]
♠ Tokens ♣ suspected unknown ♥ Sources do not suggest that monetary items have been found dating to this period.[105]
♠ Precious metals ♣ absent ♥ Sources do not suggest that monetary items have been found dating to this period.[106]
♠ Foreign coins ♣ absent ♥ Sources do not suggest that monetary items have been found dating to this period.[107]
♠ Indigenous coins ♣ absent ♥ Sources do not suggest that monetary items have been found dating to this period.[108]
♠ Paper currency ♣ absent ♥ Sources do not suggest that monetary items have been found dating to this period.[109]

Postal System

♠ Couriers ♣ absent ♥ Sources do not suggest there is evidence for a postal system during this period. [110]
♠ Postal stations ♣ absent ♥ Sources do not suggest there is evidence for a postal system during this period. [111]
♠ General postal service ♣ absent ♥ Sources do not suggest there is evidence for a postal system during this period. [112]

Warfare variables

♠ RA ♣ Alice Williams ♥

Military Technologies

Military use of Metals

♠ Copper ♣ absent ♥ Metalworking was not widely used in Mesoamerica, with metal products consisting mainly of small beads and ornaments.[113][114]
♠ Bronze ♣ absent ♥ Metalworking was not widely used in Mesoamerica, with metal products consisting mainly of small beads and ornaments.[115][116]
♠ Iron ♣ absent ♥ Metalworking was not widely used in Mesoamerica, with metal products consisting mainly of small beads and ornaments.[117][118]
♠ Steel ♣ absent ♥ Metalworking was not widely used in Mesoamerica, with metal products consisting mainly of small beads and ornaments.[119][120]

Projectiles

♠ Javelins ♣ suspected unknown ♥ Sources[121] only mention very little archaeological evidence for weaponry for this period, and this does not include javelins. However, weapons made from wood and cloth have been documented for the later periods, so their absence in the archaeological record may be due to preservation bias.
♠ Atlatl ♣ present ♥ Present in the valley of Oaxaca since preceramic times (the Proto-Otomangueans) for hunting.[122] and, in previous periods, obsidian blades were found in Tomb 10 at San José Mogote which may have been hafted into atlatl darts.[123] In addition, glyphs depicting what may be atlatls or spearthrowers have been carved with the danzantes at San Jose Mogote.[124]
♠ Slings ♣ inferred present ♥ Sources[125] only mention very little archaeological evidence for weaponry for this period, and this does not include slings. However, weapons made from wood and cloth have been documented for the later periods, so their absence in the archaeological record may be due to preservation bias. Moreover, Spanish documents record the use of slings at the end of the Monte Alban V period.[126] David Carballo (pers. comm.) wrote that slings for projecting stone and ceramic slingshots were present. [127]
♠ Self bow ♣ suspected unknown ♥ Sources[128] only mention very little archaeological evidence for weaponry for this period, and this does not include bows of any kind. However, weapons made from wood and cloth have been documented for the later periods, so their absence in the archaeological record may be due to preservation bias. Moreover, Spanish documents record the use of bows and arrows at the end of the Monte Alban V period.[129]
♠ Composite bow ♣ suspected unknown ♥ Sources[130] only mention very little archaeological evidence for weaponry for this period, and this does not include bows of any kind. However, weapons made from wood and cloth have been documented for the later periods, so their absence in the archaeological record may be due to preservation bias. Moreover, Spanish documents record the use of bows and arrows at the end of the Monte Alban V period.[131]
♠ Crossbow ♣ absent ♥ Hassig lists crossbows among the new military technologies the Spanish introduced to the region in the sixteenth century[132]
♠ Tension siege engines ♣ absent ♥
♠ Sling siege engines ♣ absent ♥
♠ Gunpowder siege artillery ♣ absent ♥ Gunpowder not yet invented.
♠ Handheld firearms ♣ absent ♥ Gunpowder not yet invented.

Handheld weapons

♠ War clubs ♣ inferred present ♥ Sources[133] only mention very little archaeological evidence for weaponry for this period, and this does not include clubs. However, weapons made from wood and cloth have been documented for the later periods, so their absence in the archaeological record may be due to preservation bias. David Carballo (pers. comm.) wrote that wooden clubs were present in this period. [134]
♠ Battle axes ♣ suspected unknown ♥ Sources[135] only mention very little archaeological evidence for weaponry for this period, and this does not include axes. However, weapons made from wood and cloth have been documented for the later periods, so their absence in the archaeological record may be due to preservation bias.
♠ Daggers ♣ {present; absent} ♥ Obsidian-edged wooden swords and daggers are inferred present based the presence of obsidian blades in the valley.[136] David Carballo (pers. comm.) wrote that these obsidian blades were knives rather than swords or daggers. [137]
♠ Swords ♣ {present; absent} ♥ Obsidian-edged wooden swords and daggers are inferred present based the presence of obsidian blades in the valley.[138] David Carballo (pers. comm.) wrote that these obsidian blades were knives rather than swords or daggers. [139]
♠ Spears ♣ inferred present ♥ Present in the valley of Oaxaca since preceramic times (the Proto-Otomangueans) for hunting.[140] However, it does seem to be clear whether they were also used as weapons in warfare.
♠ Polearms ♣ suspected unknown ♥ Sources[141] only mention very little archaeological evidence for weaponry for this period, and this does not include polearms. However, weapons made from wood and cloth have been documented for the later periods, so their absence in the archaeological record may be due to preservation bias.

Animals used in warfare

♠ Dogs ♣ absent ♥ Hassig lists war dogs among the new military "technologies" the Spanish introduced to the region in the sixteenth century[142]
♠ Donkeys ♣ absent ♥ Not native to region.
♠ Horses ♣ absent ♥ Hassig lists horses among the new military "technologies" the Spanish introduced to the region in the sixteenth century[143]
♠ Camels ♣ absent ♥ Not native to region.
♠ Elephants ♣ absent ♥ Not native to region.

Armor

♠ Wood, bark, etc ♣ suspected unknown ♥ Sources[144] only mention very little archaeological evidence for military technology for this period, and this does not include armour. However, armour made from wood and cloth have been documented for the later periods, so their absence in the archaeological record may be due to preservation bias.
♠ Leather, cloth ♣ suspected unknown ♥ Sources[145] only mention very little archaeological evidence for military technology for this period, and this does not include armour. However, armour made from wood and cloth have been documented for the later periods, so their absence in the archaeological record may be due to preservation bias.
♠ Shields ♣ suspected unknown ♥ Sources[146] only mention very little archaeological evidence for military technology for this period, and this does not include armour. However, armour made from wood and cloth have been documented for the later periods, so their absence in the archaeological record may be due to preservation bias.
♠ Helmets ♣ suspected unknown ♥ Sources[147] only mention very little archaeological evidence for military technology for this period, and this does not include armour. However, armour made from wood and cloth have been documented for the later periods, so their absence in the archaeological record may be due to preservation bias.
♠ Breastplates ♣ suspected unknown ♥ Sources[148] only mention very little archaeological evidence for military technology for this period, and this does not include armour. However, armour made from wood and cloth have been documented for the later periods, so their absence in the archaeological record may be due to preservation bias.
♠ Limb protection ♣ suspected unknown ♥ Sources[149] only mention very little archaeological evidence for military technology for this period, and this does not include armour. However, armour made from wood and cloth have been documented for the later periods, so their absence in the archaeological record may be due to preservation bias.
♠ Chainmail ♣ absent ♥ Metalworking was not widely used in Mesoamerica, with metal products consisting mainly of small beads and ornaments.[150][151]
♠ Scaled armor ♣ absent ♥ Metalworking was not widely used in Mesoamerica, with metal products consisting mainly of small beads and ornaments.[152][153]
♠ Laminar armor ♣ absent ♥ Metalworking was not widely used in Mesoamerica, with metal products consisting mainly of small beads and ornaments.[154][155]
♠ Plate armor ♣ absent ♥ Metalworking was not widely used in Mesoamerica, with metal products consisting mainly of small beads and ornaments.[156][157]

Naval technology

♠ Small vessels (canoes, etc) ♣ absent ♥ The Valley of Oaxaca is landlocked.
♠ Merchant ships pressed into service ♣ absent ♥ The Valley of Oaxaca is landlocked.
♠ Specialized military vessels ♣ absent ♥ The Valley of Oaxaca is landlocked.

Fortifications

♠ Settlements in a defensive position ♣ present ♥ Monte Albán was built on a hill 400m above the valley floor and a number of other settlements were located on hilltops.[158][159]
♠ Wooden palisades ♣ suspected unknown ♥ Monte Albán was built with a 3km defensive wall along the shallower slopes of the hill, and wooden palisades may have been present.[160]
♠ Earth ramparts ♣ present ♥ The defensive wall around Monte Alban was made of earth and stone.[161][162]
♠ Ditch ♣ inferred absent ♥ Monte Albán's fortifications are relatively well understood, but no source mentions the existence of a ditch.[163]
♠ Moat ♣ inferred absent ♥ Monte Albán's fortifications are relatively well understood, but no source mentions the existence of a moat.[164]
♠ Stone walls (non-mortared) ♣ present ♥ The defensive wall around Monte Alban was made of earth and stone.[165][166]
♠ Stone walls (mortared) ♣ absent ♥ The defensive wall around Monte Alban was made of earth and stone.[167][168]
♠ Fortified camps ♣ suspected unknown ♥
♠ Complex fortifications ♣ absent ♥ Monte Albán was built with a 3km defensive wall along the shallower slopes of the hill.[169] Another wall was constructed along the northern boundary of Monte Albán, but not until the Late I or II periods.[170]
♠ Long walls ♣ suspected unknown ♥
♠ Modern fortifications ♣ absent ♥ Gunpowder not yet invented.

Other technologies

Phase II Variables (polity-based)

Institutional Variables

♠ RA ♣ Gréine Jordan ♥

Limits on Power of the Chief Executive

Power distributed

♠ Constraint on executive by government ♣ suspected unknown ♥ While there is evidence of rulers the relationship between rulers and government is unclear. "To summarize, imagery on tomb art and carved-stone monuments shows how Classic-period political authority was more exclusionary and less communal than during the Formative (A. Joyce 2004:207- 11; Urcid 2005:154- 5). Genealogy became a key element of ideologies that legitimated the social position of corporate groups as well as rulers. Using Giddens"(1979:193- 5) framework for understanding how ideology creates, maintains, and justifies sectional interests, genealogy can be seen as having reified status distinctions among corporate groups since the prominence of apical ancestors was fixed. The imagery presented apical ancestors of noble groups as instrumental in the cosmic creation and their continued propitiation was crucial to world-centering rituals. This belief universalized the social position of the nobility by making nobles intermediaries between commoners and the divine, since nobles were both descended from and had privileged access to important ancestors. Wealth and status was further reified since rights to property, privileges, and special offices were held via membership in the corporate group. Members of ruling houses, for example, had the right to engage in warfare, take captives, play the ballgame, and offer human sacrifices. Status within the group was further reified as a function of a person’s proximity to the apical ancestor. Indications that important offices could be inherited, such as that of rainmaker and paramount sacrificer, suggest the means through which other nobles as well as commoners could be excluded from positions of power." [171]
♠ Constraint on executive by non-government ♣ suspected unknown ♥ While there is evidence of rulers the relationship between rulers and government is unclear. "To summarize, imagery on tomb art and carved-stone monuments shows how Classic-period political authority was more exclusionary and less communal than during the Formative (A. Joyce 2004:207- 11; Urcid 2005:154- 5). Genealogy became a key element of ideologies that legitimated the social position of corporate groups as well as rulers. Using Giddens"(1979:193- 5) framework for understanding how ideology creates, maintains, and justifies sectional interests, genealogy can be seen as having reified status distinctions among corporate groups since the prominence of apical ancestors was fixed. The imagery presented apical ancestors of noble groups as instrumental in the cosmic creation and their continued propitiation was crucial to world-centering rituals. This belief universalized the social position of the nobility by making nobles intermediaries between commoners and the divine, since nobles were both descended from and had privileged access to important ancestors. Wealth and status was further reified since rights to property, privileges, and special offices were held via membership in the corporate group. Members of ruling houses, for example, had the right to engage in warfare, take captives, play the ballgame, and offer human sacrifices. Status within the group was further reified as a function of a person’s proximity to the apical ancestor. Indications that important offices could be inherited, such as that of rainmaker and paramount sacrificer, suggest the means through which other nobles as well as commoners could be excluded from positions of power." [172]
♠ Impeachment ♣ suspected unknown ♥ While there is evidence of rulers the relationship between rulers and government is unclear. "To summarize, imagery on tomb art and carved-stone monuments shows how Classic-period political authority was more exclusionary and less communal than during the Formative (A. Joyce 2004:207- 11; Urcid 2005:154- 5). Genealogy became a key element of ideologies that legitimated the social position of corporate groups as well as rulers. Using Giddens"(1979:193- 5) framework for understanding how ideology creates, maintains, and justifies sectional interests, genealogy can be seen as having reified status distinctions among corporate groups since the prominence of apical ancestors was fixed. The imagery presented apical ancestors of noble groups as instrumental in the cosmic creation and their continued propitiation was crucial to world-centering rituals. This belief universalized the social position of the nobility by making nobles intermediaries between commoners and the divine, since nobles were both descended from and had privileged access to important ancestors. Wealth and status was further reified since rights to property, privileges, and special offices were held via membership in the corporate group. Members of ruling houses, for example, had the right to engage in warfare, take captives, play the ballgame, and offer human sacrifices. Status within the group was further reified as a function of a person’s proximity to the apical ancestor. Indications that important offices could be inherited, such as that of rainmaker and paramount sacrificer, suggest the means through which other nobles as well as commoners could be excluded from positions of power." [173]

Social Mobility

Status

Elite status

♠ elite status is hereditary ♣ present ♥ From Religion: "To summarize, imagery on tomb art and carved-stone monuments shows how Classic-period political authority was more exclusionary and less communal than during the Formative (A. Joyce 2004:207- 11; Urcid 2005:154- 5). Genealogy became a key element of ideologies that legitimated the social position of corporate groups as well as rulers. Using Giddens’ (1979:193- 5) framework for understanding how ideology creates, maintains, and justifies sectional interests, genealogy can be seen as having reified status distinctions among corporate groups since the prominence of apical ancestors was fixed. The imagery presented apical ancestors of noble groups as instrumental in the cosmic creation and their continued propitiation was crucial to world-centering rituals. This belief universalized the social position of the nobility by making nobles intermediaries between commoners and the divine, since nobles were both descended from and had privileged access to important ancestors. Wealth and status was further reified since rights to property, privileges, and special offices were held via membership in the corporate group. Members of ruling houses, for example, had the right to engage in warfare, take captives, play the ballgame, and offer human sacrifices. Status within the group was further reified as a function of a person’s proximity to the apical ancestor. Indications that important offices could be inherited, such as that of rainmaker and paramount sacrificer, suggest the means through which other nobles as well as commoners could be excluded from positions of power." [174] From Religion: "Mortuary evidence from the Central Valleys shows a concern with constructing and maintaining memories of the genealogical relations of household heads (Urcid 2005). Most people were interred beneath the rooms or patio of their houses, although occasionally burials were located outside, but in the general vicinity of residences (figure 7.3). Urcid (2005:28- 44) shows how conjugal pairs who were the heads of households in each generation were successively interred in tombs or, in the case of some lower-status residences, in stone-lined cists. Archaeologists often find that Zapotec tombs, when opened and explored, contain a jumble of skeletal remains of many individuals along with offerings such as pottery and jade with few articulated interments. Urcid argues that these remains represent a sequence of household heads with the bones of earlier interments disarticulated and mixed due to later openings of the tomb for rituals and burial of descendants (also see Middleton et al. 1998). "Other members of the domestic group from infants to elders were interred in stone-lined cists, graves, and occasionally in reused pit features. High-status residences often included burials of adult females with elaborate offerings that Urcid (2005:40- 1) interprets as the secondary wives of male household heads, which is consistent with evidence for polygyny among nobles at the time of the Spanish Conquest. Neonates and fetuses were often placed within ceramic vessels and usually did not include offerings, suggesting that they had not achieved full adult personhood. These patterns mean that individual residences usually had several different kinds of interments, including at least one tomb. In houses occupied over long periods, the tomb might be expanded, or additional tombs constructed. "The architectural elaboration of the tomb as well as the quantity and quality of offerings found in tomb and non-tomb interments correlates with other indicators of status such as the size and quality of domestic architecture (Urcid 2005; Winter 1986:353- 61). Mourners often decorated the bodies with shell, bone, and greenstone ornaments, suggesting beautification and the marking of status or other social roles of the interred. Tombs and burials were accompanied by offerings of ceramic vessels, sometimes including urns that symbolized deities or ancestors. Dozens of vessels recovered from some tombs suggest the wide social networks of the deceased. In tombs, Zapotecs used red pigment to decorate the bones of earlier interments and at times bones of ancestors were removed for use as heirlooms in validating status (Urcid 2005:36- 7). People often performed sacrificial rituals as part of the mortuary ceremony with dog sacrifices associated with both commoners and nobles, whereas bird sacrifice was restricted to nobles. Interments of rulers may have at times included human sacrifice." [175]

Religion and Normative Ideology

♠ RA ♣ Enrico Cioni ♥

Deification of Rulers

♠ Rulers are legitimated by gods ♣ suspected unknown ♥ Iconography suggests that rulers and other elites presented themselves as conduits to the realm of the gods, intermediaries between humans and gods. [176]

♠ Rulers are gods ♣ inferred absent ♥ Iconography suggests that rulers and other elites presented themselves as conduits to the realm of the gods, intermediaries between humans and gods. [177]

Normative Ideological Aspects of Equity and Prosociality

♠ Ideological reinforcement of equality ♣ absent ♥ "Nobles were distinguished from commoners by dress, access to exotic goods, control of esoteric knowledge (e.g., special rituals, literacy), participation in restricted rituals, and by residing in architecturally elaborate houses. Perhaps nowhere is the special social position of nobility as clearly portrayed as in imagery on carved-stone monuments and tomb murals. Nobles are shown in elaborate attire, sometimes dressed as jaguars, richly ornamented and often shown in the act of dominating captives, performing human sacrifice, marrying, or communicating with ancestors." [178] "To summarize, imagery on tomb art and carved-stone monuments shows how Classic-period political authority was more exclusionary and less communal than during the Formative (A. Joyce 2004:207- 11; Urcid 2005:154- 5). Genealogy became a key element of ideologies that legitimated the social position of corporate groups as well as rulers. Using Giddens’ (1979:193- 5) framework for understanding how ideology creates, maintains, and justifies sectional interests, genealogy can be seen as having reified status distinctions among corporate groups since the prominence of apical ancestors was fixed. The imagery presented apical ancestors of noble groups as instrumental in the cosmic creation and their continued propitiation was crucial to world-centering rituals. This belief universalized the social position of the nobility by making nobles intermediaries between commoners and the divine, since nobles were both descended from and had privileged access to important ancestors. Wealth and status was further reified since rights to property, privileges, and special offices were held via membership in the corporate group. Members of ruling houses, for example, had the right to engage in warfare, take captives, play the ballgame, and offer human sacrifices. Status within the group was further reified as a function of a person’s proximity to the apical ancestor. Indications that important offices could be inherited, such as that of rainmaker and paramount sacrificer, suggest the means through which other nobles as well as commoners could be excluded from positions of power." [179]

♠ Ideological thought equates rulers and commoners ♣ absent ♥ "Nobles were distinguished from commoners by dress, access to exotic goods, control of esoteric knowledge (e.g., special rituals, literacy), participation in restricted rituals, and by residing in architecturally elaborate houses. Perhaps nowhere is the special social position of nobility as clearly portrayed as in imagery on carved-stone monuments and tomb murals. Nobles are shown in elaborate attire, sometimes dressed as jaguars, richly ornamented and often shown in the act of dominating captives, performing human sacrifice, marrying, or communicating with ancestors." [180] "To summarize, imagery on tomb art and carved-stone monuments shows how Classic-period political authority was more exclusionary and less communal than during the Formative (A. Joyce 2004:207- 11; Urcid 2005:154- 5). Genealogy became a key element of ideologies that legitimated the social position of corporate groups as well as rulers. Using Giddens’ (1979:193- 5) framework for understanding how ideology creates, maintains, and justifies sectional interests, genealogy can be seen as having reified status distinctions among corporate groups since the prominence of apical ancestors was fixed. The imagery presented apical ancestors of noble groups as instrumental in the cosmic creation and their continued propitiation was crucial to world-centering rituals. This belief universalized the social position of the nobility by making nobles intermediaries between commoners and the divine, since nobles were both descended from and had privileged access to important ancestors. Wealth and status was further reified since rights to property, privileges, and special offices were held via membership in the corporate group. Members of ruling houses, for example, had the right to engage in warfare, take captives, play the ballgame, and offer human sacrifices. Status within the group was further reified as a function of a person’s proximity to the apical ancestor. Indications that important offices could be inherited, such as that of rainmaker and paramount sacrificer, suggest the means through which other nobles as well as commoners could be excluded from positions of power." [181]
♠ Ideological thought equates elites and commoners ♣ absent ♥ "Nobles were distinguished from commoners by dress, access to exotic goods, control of esoteric knowledge (e.g., special rituals, literacy), participation in restricted rituals, and by residing in architecturally elaborate houses. Perhaps nowhere is the special social position of nobility as clearly portrayed as in imagery on carved-stone monuments and tomb murals. Nobles are shown in elaborate attire, sometimes dressed as jaguars, richly ornamented and often shown in the act of dominating captives, performing human sacrifice, marrying, or communicating with ancestors." [182] "To summarize, imagery on tomb art and carved-stone monuments shows how Classic-period political authority was more exclusionary and less communal than during the Formative (A. Joyce 2004:207- 11; Urcid 2005:154- 5). Genealogy became a key element of ideologies that legitimated the social position of corporate groups as well as rulers. Using Giddens’ (1979:193- 5) framework for understanding how ideology creates, maintains, and justifies sectional interests, genealogy can be seen as having reified status distinctions among corporate groups since the prominence of apical ancestors was fixed. The imagery presented apical ancestors of noble groups as instrumental in the cosmic creation and their continued propitiation was crucial to world-centering rituals. This belief universalized the social position of the nobility by making nobles intermediaries between commoners and the divine, since nobles were both descended from and had privileged access to important ancestors. Wealth and status was further reified since rights to property, privileges, and special offices were held via membership in the corporate group. Members of ruling houses, for example, had the right to engage in warfare, take captives, play the ballgame, and offer human sacrifices. Status within the group was further reified as a function of a person’s proximity to the apical ancestor. Indications that important offices could be inherited, such as that of rainmaker and paramount sacrificer, suggest the means through which other nobles as well as commoners could be excluded from positions of power." [183]

♠ Ideology reinforces prosociality ♣ suspected unknown ♥

♠ production of public goods ♣ suspected unknown ♥

Moralizing Supernatural Powers

♠ Moral concern is primary ♣ inferred absent ♥
♠ Moralizing enforcement is certain ♣ inferred absent ♥
♠ Moralizing norms are broad ♣ inferred absent ♥
♠ Moralizing enforcement is targeted ♣ inferred absent ♥
♠ Moralizing enforcement of rulers ♣ inferred absent ♥
♠ Moralizing religion adopted by elites ♣ inferred absent ♥
♠ Moralizing religion adopted by commoners ♣ inferred absent ♥
♠ Moralizing enforcement in afterlife ♣ inferred absent ♥
♠ Moralizing enforcement in this life ♣ inferred absent ♥
♠ Moralizing enforcement is agentic ♣ inferred absent ♥

These data were reviewed by expert advisors and consultants. For a detailed description of these data, refer to the relevant Analytic Narratives, reference tables, and acknowledgements page. [184] [185] [186]

References

  1. ↑ Balkansky, A. K. (1998). "Origin and collapse of complex societies in Oaxaca, Mexico: Evaluating the era from 1965 to the present." Journal of World Prehistory 12(4): 451-493, p474
  2. ↑ Flannery and Marcus (1983) The Cloud People: divergent evolution of the Zapotec and Mixtec civilizations. Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Academic Press, New York. p127-8
  3. ↑ Blanton, R. E., et al. (1982). The Prehispanic Settlement Patterns of the Central and Southern Parts of the Valley of Oaxaca, Mexico, Regents of the University of Michigan, the Museum of Anthropology, p85, 88-9
  4. ↑ Flannery and Marcus (1983) The Cloud People: divergent evolution of the Zapotec and Mixtec civilizations. Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Academic Press, New York. p161-166
  5. ↑ Marcus and Flannery (1996) Zapotec Civilization: How urban society evolved in Mexico’s Oaxaca Valley. p233
  6. ↑ Flannery and Marcus (1983) The Cloud People: divergent evolution of the Zapotec and Mixtec civilizations. Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Academic Press, New York. p170
  7. ↑ Balkansky, A. K. (2002) The Sola Valley and the Monte Albán State: A study of Zapotec imperial expansion. Prehistory and Human Ecology of the Valley of Oaxaca, Volume 12. Ann Arbor. Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan Memoirs, Number 36. p67
  8. ↑ Balkansky, A. K. (1998). "Origin and collapse of complex societies in Oaxaca, Mexico: Evaluating the era from 1965 to the present." Journal of World Prehistory 12(4): 451-493, 473
  9. ↑ Blanton, R. E., et al. (1982). The Prehispanic Settlement Patterns of the Central and Southern Parts of the Valley of Oaxaca, Mexico, Regents of the University of Michigan, the Museum of Anthropology, p85, 88-9
  10. ↑ Balkansky, A. K. (1998). "Origin and collapse of complex societies in Oaxaca, Mexico: Evaluating the era from 1965 to the present." Journal of World Prehistory 12(4): 451-493, p473
  11. ↑ Marcus, J. and K. V. Flannery (1996). Zapotec civilization: How urban society evolved in Mexico's Oaxaca Valley, Thames and Hudson London, p4. 27
  12. ↑ (Balkansky 1998, 472) A. K. Balkansky. 1998. 'Origin and Collapse of Complex Societies in Oaxaca, Mexico: Evaluating the Era from 1965 to the Present'. Journal of World Prehistory 12 (4): 451-93.
  13. ↑ (Flannery and Marcus 1983, 127-28) Joyce Marcus and Kent V. Flannery. 1983. 'The Early Urban Period: Editors' Introduction', in The Cloud People: Divergent Evolution of the Zapotec and Mixtec Civilizations, edited by Joyce Marcus and Kent V. Flannery, 127-28. New York: Academic Press.
  14. ↑ (Blanton et al. 1982, 85, 88-9) Richard E. Blanton, R. E., et al. 1982. Monte Albán's Hinterland, Part 1: The Prehispanic Settlement Patterns of the Central and Southern Parts of the Valley of Oaxaca, Mexico. Prehistory and Human Ecology of the Valley of Oaxaca, Vol. 7. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Museum of Anthropology.
  15. ↑ (Balkansky 1998, 473) A. K. Balkansky. 1998. 'Origin and Collapse of Complex Societies in Oaxaca, Mexico: Evaluating the Era from 1965 to the Present'. Journal of World Prehistory 12 (4): 451-93.
  16. ↑ (Flannery and Marcus 1983, 127-28) Joyce Marcus and Kent V. Flannery. 1983. 'The Early Urban Period: Editors' Introduction', in The Cloud People: Divergent Evolution of the Zapotec and Mixtec Civilizations, edited by Joyce Marcus and Kent V. Flannery, 127-28. New York: Academic Press.
  17. ↑ (Balkansky 1998, 473) A. K. Balkansky. 1998. 'Origin and Collapse of Complex Societies in Oaxaca, Mexico: Evaluating the Era from 1965 to the Present'. Journal of World Prehistory 12 (4): 451-93.
  18. ↑ (Feinman et al. 1985, 351) Gary M. Feinman, Stephen A. Kowalewski, Laura Finsten, Richard E. Blanton and Linda Nicholas. 1985. 'Long-Term Demographic Change: A Perspective from the Valley of Oaxaca, Mexico'. Journal of Field Archaeology 12 (3): 333-62.
  19. ↑ (Blanton et al. 1982, 91) Richard E. Blanton, R. E., et al. 1982. Monte Albán's Hinterland, Part 1: The Prehispanic Settlement Patterns of the Central and Southern Parts of the Valley of Oaxaca, Mexico. Prehistory and Human Ecology of the Valley of Oaxaca, Vol. 7. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Museum of Anthropology.
  20. ↑ (Balkansky 1998, 474) A. K. Balkansky. 1998. 'Origin and Collapse of Complex Societies in Oaxaca, Mexico: Evaluating the Era from 1965 to the Present'. Journal of World Prehistory 12 (4): 451-93.
  21. ↑ (Spencer 1982, 254) Charles S. Spencer. 1982. The Cuicatlán Cañada and Monte Albán: A Study of Primary State Formation. New York: Academic Press.
  22. ↑ (Balkansky 2002, 51) A. K. Balkansky. 2002. The Sola Valley and The Monte Albán State: A Study of Zapotec Imperial Expansion. Prehistory and Human Ecology of The Valley Of Oaxaca, Vol. 12. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Museum of Anthropology.
  23. ↑ (Blanton et al. 1999, 128) Richard E. Blanton, Gary M. Feinman, Stephen A. Kowalewski and Linda M. Nicholas. 1999. Ancient Oaxaca. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  24. ↑ (Joyce 2009, 215-17) Arthur A. Joyce. 2009. Mixtecs, Zapotecs, and Chatinos: Ancient Peoples of Southern Mexico. Malden, MA: Wiley‐Blackwell.
  25. ↑ (Flannery 1983, 136) Kent V. Flannery. 1983. 'The Legacy of the Early Urban Period: An Ethnohistoric Approach to Monte Albán's Temples, Residences, and Royal Tombs', in The Cloud People: Divergent Evolution of the Zapotec and Mixtec Civilizations, edited by Joyce Marcus and Kent V. Flannery, 132-36. New York: Academic Press.
  26. ↑ (Marcus and Flannery 1996, 228-29) Joyce Marcus and Kent V. Flannery. 1996. Zapotec Civilization: How Urban Society Evolved in Mexico's Oaxaca Valley. London: Thames and Hudson.
  27. ↑ (Blanton et al. 1979, 382) Richard E. Blanton, Jill Appel, Laura Finsten, Steve Kowalewski, Gary Feinman and Eva Fisch. 1979. 'Regional Evolution in the Valley of Oaxaca, Mexico'. Journal of Field Archaeology 6 (4): 369-90.
  28. ↑ (Marcus and Flannery 1996, 224) Joyce Marcus and Kent V. Flannery. 1996. Zapotec Civilization: How Urban Society Evolved in Mexico's Oaxaca Valley. London: Thames and Hudson.
  29. ↑ (Flannery and Marcus 1983, 128) Joyce Marcus and Kent V. Flannery. 1983. 'The Early Urban Period: Editors' Introduction', in The Cloud People: Divergent Evolution of the Zapotec and Mixtec Civilizations, edited by Joyce Marcus and Kent V. Flannery, 127-28. New York: Academic Press.
  30. ↑ Spencer, C. S. and E. M. Redmond (2004). "Primary state formation in Mesoamerica." Annual Review of Anthropology: 173-199, p183
  31. ↑ Kowalewski, S. A. and R. D. Drennan (1989). Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in Tlacolula, Etla, and Ocotlan, the Valley of Oaxaca, Mexico, Regents of the University of Michigan, the Museum of Anthropology, p756
  32. ↑ Marcus and Flannery (1996) Zapotec Civilization: How urban society evolved in Mexico’s Oaxaca Valley. p224
  33. ↑ (Feinman and Nicholas 2017, 81) Gary M Feinman. Linda M Nicholas. 2017. Settlement Patterns in the Albarradas Area of Highland Oaxaca, Mexico: Frontiers, Boundaries, and Interaction. Fieldiana Anthropology, 46(1):1-162. Publication 1572. Field Museum of Natural History. URL: http://www.bioone.org/doi/full/10.3158/0071-4739-46.1.1
  34. ↑ (Feinman and Nicholas 2017, 81) Gary M Feinman. Linda M Nicholas. 2017. Settlement Patterns in the Albarradas Area of Highland Oaxaca, Mexico: Frontiers, Boundaries, and Interaction. Fieldiana Anthropology, 46(1):1-162. Publication 1572. Field Museum of Natural History. URL: http://www.bioone.org/doi/full/10.3158/0071-4739-46.1.1
  35. ↑ (Feinman and Nicholas 2013, 183) Gary M Feinman. Linda M Nicholas. 2013. Settlement Patterns of the Ejutla Valley, Oaxaca, Mexico: A Diachronic Macroscale Perspective. Fieldiana Anthropology, 43(1):1-330. 2013. Field Museum of Natural History. URL: http://www.bioone.org/doi/full/10.3158/0071-4739-43.00.1
  36. ↑ (Feinman and Nicholas 2013, 183) Gary M Feinman. Linda M Nicholas. 2013. Settlement Patterns of the Ejutla Valley, Oaxaca, Mexico: A Diachronic Macroscale Perspective. Fieldiana Anthropology, 43(1):1-330. 2013. Field Museum of Natural History. URL: http://www.bioone.org/doi/full/10.3158/0071-4739-43.00.1
  37. ↑ Flannery, K. V. and J. Marcus (1983). "The Cloud People." New York, p128
  38. ↑ Marcus and Flannery (1996) Zapotec Civilization: How urban society evolved in Mexico’s Oaxaca Valley. p226
  39. ↑ (Blanton, Feinman, Kowalewski, Nicholas 1999, 132) Blanton, Richard E. Feinman, Gary M. Kowalewski, Stephen A. Nicholas, Linda M. 1999. Ancient Oaxaca. The Monte Alban State. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge.
  40. ↑ (Feinman and Nicholas 2013, 183) Gary M Feinman. Linda M Nicholas. 2013. Settlement Patterns of the Ejutla Valley, Oaxaca, Mexico: A Diachronic Macroscale Perspective. Fieldiana Anthropology, 43(1):1-330. 2013. Field Museum of Natural History. URL: http://www.bioone.org/doi/full/10.3158/0071-4739-43.00.1
  41. ↑ (Feinman and Nicholas 2013, 183) Gary M Feinman. Linda M Nicholas. 2013. Settlement Patterns of the Ejutla Valley, Oaxaca, Mexico: A Diachronic Macroscale Perspective. Fieldiana Anthropology, 43(1):1-330. 2013. Field Museum of Natural History. URL: http://www.bioone.org/doi/full/10.3158/0071-4739-43.00.1
  42. ↑ Marcus and Flannery (1996) Zapotec Civilization: How urban society evolved in Mexico’s Oaxaca Valley. p221-2, 226
  43. ↑ Blanton, R. E., et al. (1979). "Regional evolution in the Valley of Oaxaca, Mexico." Journal of Field Archaeology 6(4): 369-390, p382
  44. ↑ Marcus and Flannery (1996) Zapotec Civilization: How urban society evolved in Mexico’s Oaxaca Valley. p226
  45. ↑ Blanton, R. E., et al. (1982). The Prehispanic Settlement Patterns of the Central and Southern Parts of the Valley of Oaxaca, Mexico, Regents of the University of Michigan, the Museum of Anthropology, p87
  46. ↑ Marcus and Flannery (1996) Zapotec Civilization: How urban society evolved in Mexico’s Oaxaca Valley. p226
  47. ↑ Marcus and Flannery (1996) Zapotec Civilization: How urban society evolved in Mexico’s Oaxaca Valley. p228
  48. ↑ (Feinman and Nicholas 2013, 109) Gary M Feinman. Linda M Nicholas. 2013. Settlement Patterns of the Ejutla Valley, Oaxaca, Mexico: A Diachronic Macroscale Perspective. Fieldiana Anthropology, 43(1):1-330. 2013. Field Museum of Natural History. URL: http://www.bioone.org/doi/full/10.3158/0071-4739-43.00.1
  49. ↑ (Feinman and Nicholas 2013, 109) Gary M Feinman. Linda M Nicholas. 2013. Settlement Patterns of the Ejutla Valley, Oaxaca, Mexico: A Diachronic Macroscale Perspective. Fieldiana Anthropology, 43(1):1-330. 2013. Field Museum of Natural History. URL: http://www.bioone.org/doi/full/10.3158/0071-4739-43.00.1
  50. ↑ (Carballo, David. Personal Communication with Jill Levine, Dan Hoyer, and Peter Turchin. Email. April 2020)
  51. ↑ Blanton, R. E., et al. (1979). "Regional evolution in the Valley of Oaxaca, Mexico." Journal of Field Archaeology 6(4): 369-390, p382
  52. ↑ Blanton, R. E., et al. (1982). The Prehispanic Settlement Patterns of the Central and Southern Parts of the Valley of Oaxaca, Mexico, Regents of the University of Michigan, the Museum of Anthropology, p87
  53. ↑ Flannery, K. V. and J. Marcus (1983). "The Cloud People." New York, p82
  54. ↑ Balkansky, A. K. (1998). "Origin and collapse of complex societies in Oaxaca, Mexico: Evaluating the era from 1965 to the present." Journal of World Prehistory 12(4): 451-493.
  55. ↑ Marcus and Flannery (1996) Zapotec Civilization: How urban society evolved in Mexico’s Oaxaca Valley. Flannery and Marcus (1983) The Cloud People: divergent evolution of the Zapotec and Mixtec civilizations. Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Academic Press, New York.
  56. ↑ Marcus and Flannery (1996) Zapotec Civilization: How urban society evolved in Mexico’s Oaxaca Valley. Flannery and Marcus (1983) The Cloud People: divergent evolution of the Zapotec and Mixtec civilizations. Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Academic Press, New York.
  57. ↑ Marcus and Flannery (1996) Zapotec Civilization: How urban society evolved in Mexico’s Oaxaca Valley. p182
  58. ↑ Marcus and Flannery (1996) Zapotec Civilization: How urban society evolved in Mexico’s Oaxaca Valley. Flannery and Marcus (1983) The Cloud People: divergent evolution of the Zapotec and Mixtec civilizations. Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Academic Press, New York.
  59. ↑ Gary Feinman, pers. comm., January 2018.
  60. ↑ Charles Spencer, pers. comm., January 2018.
  61. ↑ Marcus and Flannery (1996) Zapotec Civilization: How urban society evolved in Mexico’s Oaxaca Valley. Flannery and Marcus (1983) The Cloud People: divergent evolution of the Zapotec and Mixtec civilizations. Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Academic Press, New York.
  62. ↑ Gary Feinman, pers. comm., January 2018.
  63. ↑ Charles Spencer, pers. comm., January 2018.
  64. ↑ Marcus and Flannery (1996) Zapotec Civilization: How urban society evolved in Mexico’s Oaxaca Valley. Flannery and Marcus (1983) The Cloud People: divergent evolution of the Zapotec and Mixtec civilizations. Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Academic Press, New York.
  65. ↑ Gary Feinman, pers. comm., January 2018.
  66. ↑ Charles Spencer, pers. comm., January 2018.
  67. ↑ Marcus, J. and K. V. Flannery (1996). Zapotec civilization: How urban society evolved in Mexico's Oaxaca Valley, Thames and Hudson London, p179
  68. ↑ Charles Spencer, pers. comm., January 2018.
  69. ↑ Marcus and Flannery (1996) Zapotec Civilization: How urban society evolved in Mexico’s Oaxaca Valley. Flannery and Marcus (1983) The Cloud People: divergent evolution of the Zapotec and Mixtec civilizations. Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Academic Press, New York.
  70. ↑ Marcus and Flannery (1996) Zapotec Civilization: How urban society evolved in Mexico’s Oaxaca Valley. Flannery and Marcus (1983) The Cloud People: divergent evolution of the Zapotec and Mixtec civilizations. Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Academic Press, New York.
  71. ↑ Marcus and Flannery (1996) Zapotec Civilization: How urban society evolved in Mexico’s Oaxaca Valley. Flannery and Marcus (1983) The Cloud People: divergent evolution of the Zapotec and Mixtec civilizations. Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Academic Press, New York.
  72. ↑ Marcus and Flannery (1996) Zapotec Civilization: How urban society evolved in Mexico’s Oaxaca Valley. Flannery and Marcus (1983) The Cloud People: divergent evolution of the Zapotec and Mixtec civilizations. Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Academic Press, New York.
  73. ↑ Kirkby (1973) The use of land and water resources in past and present Valley of Oaxaca. Muesum of Anthropology, Memoirs No.5. An Arbor, University of Michigan. p117
  74. ↑ Nicholas, L. M (1989) Land use in prehispanic Oaxaca. In, Kowalewski, S. A., Feiman, G.M., Finsten, L., Blanton, R. E. and Nicholas, L. M. Monte Albán’s Hinterland, Part II: the prehispanic settlement patterns in Tlacoula, Etla and Ocotlán, the Valley of Oaxaca, Mexico. Memoirs of the Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Number 23. Ann Arbor: 449-505. p458
  75. ↑ (Feinman, Gary. Personal Communication with Jill Levine, Dan Hoyer, and Peter Turchin. Email. April 2020)
  76. ↑ Flannery, K. V. and J. Marcus (1983). "The Cloud People." New York, p85
  77. ↑ Gary Feinman, personal communication to Peter Turchin and Jenny Reddish, March 2020.
  78. ↑ (Feinman and Nicholas 2010) Gary M. Feinman and Linda M. Nicholas. 2010. "A Multiscalar Perspective on Market Exchange in the Classic-Period Valley of Oaxaca." In Archaeological Approaches to Market Exchange in Ancient Societies, edited by Christopher P. Garraty and Barbara L. Stark, 85-98. Boulder, CO: University Press of Colorado.
  79. ↑ Feinman, G. M. and Nicholas, L. M (2012) The Late Prehispanic economy of the Valley of Oaxaca, Mexico: weaving threads from data, theory, and subsequent history. Political Economy, Neoliberalism, and the Prehistoric Economies of Latin America. Vol 32: 225-258. p235
  80. ↑ Blanton, R. E., et al. (1982). The Prehispanic Settlement Patterns of the Central and Southern Parts of the Valley of Oaxaca, Mexico, Regents of the University of Michigan, the Museum of Anthropology, p55
  81. ↑ Marcus and Flannery (1996) Zapotec Civilization: How urban society evolved in Mexico’s Oaxaca Valley. Flannery and Marcus (1983) The Cloud People: divergent evolution of the Zapotec and Mixtec civilizations. Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Academic Press, New York.
  82. ↑ Gary Feinman, personal communication to Peter Turchin and Jenny Reddish, March 2020.
  83. ↑ Marcus and Flannery (1996) Zapotec Civilization: How urban society evolved in Mexico’s Oaxaca Valley. Flannery and Marcus (1983) The Cloud People: divergent evolution of the Zapotec and Mixtec civilizations. Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Academic Press, New York.
  84. ↑ Marcus and Flannery (1996) Zapotec Civilization: How urban society evolved in Mexico’s Oaxaca Valley. Flannery and Marcus (1983) The Cloud People: divergent evolution of the Zapotec and Mixtec civilizations. Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Academic Press, New York.
  85. ↑ (Feinman, Gary. Personal Communication with Jill Levine, Dan Hoyer, and Peter Turchin. Email. April 2020)
  86. ↑ Marcus and Flannery (1996) Zapotec Civilization: How urban society evolved in Mexico’s Oaxaca Valley. Flannery and Marcus (1983) The Cloud People: divergent evolution of the Zapotec and Mixtec civilizations. Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Academic Press, New York.
  87. ↑ Marcus and Flannery (1996) Zapotec Civilization: How urban society evolved in Mexico’s Oaxaca Valley. Flannery and Marcus (1983) The Cloud People: divergent evolution of the Zapotec and Mixtec civilizations. Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Academic Press, New York.
  88. ↑ Spencer, C. S. and E. M. Redmond (2003). "Militarism, resistance, and early state development in Oaxaca, Mexico." Social Evolution & History 2: 25-70, p27
  89. ↑ Joyce Marcus. February 1980. Zapotec Writing. Scientific American. Vol 242. No 2. Scientific American, Nature America, Inc. pp.50-67. URL: http://www.jstor.rg/stable/24966257
  90. ↑ Marcus and Flannery (1996) Zapotec Civilization: How urban society evolved in Mexico’s Oaxaca Valley. Flannery and Marcus (1983) The Cloud People: divergent evolution of the Zapotec and Mixtec civilizations. Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Academic Press, New York.
  91. ↑ Marcus and Flannery (1996) Zapotec Civilization: How urban society evolved in Mexico’s Oaxaca Valley. Flannery and Marcus (1983) The Cloud People: divergent evolution of the Zapotec and Mixtec civilizations. Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Academic Press, New York.
  92. ↑ Marcus and Flannery (1996) Zapotec Civilization: How urban society evolved in Mexico’s Oaxaca Valley. Flannery and Marcus (1983) The Cloud People: divergent evolution of the Zapotec and Mixtec civilizations. Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Academic Press, New York.
  93. ↑ Marcus and Flannery (1996) Zapotec Civilization: How urban society evolved in Mexico’s Oaxaca Valley. Flannery and Marcus (1983) The Cloud People: divergent evolution of the Zapotec and Mixtec civilizations. Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Academic Press, New York.
  94. ↑ Flannery, K. V. and J. Marcus (1983). "The Cloud People." New York.
  95. ↑ Spencer, C. S. and E. M. Redmond (2004). "Primary state formation in Mesoamerica." Annual Review of Anthropology: 173-199, p179
  96. ↑ Marcus and Flannery (1996) Zapotec Civilization: How urban society evolved in Mexico’s Oaxaca Valley. p159
  97. ↑ Marcus and Flannery (1996) Zapotec Civilization: How urban society evolved in Mexico’s Oaxaca Valley. Flannery and Marcus (1983) The Cloud People: divergent evolution of the Zapotec and Mixtec civilizations. Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Academic Press, New York.
  98. ↑ Marcus and Flannery (1996) Zapotec Civilization: How urban society evolved in Mexico’s Oaxaca Valley. Flannery and Marcus (1983) The Cloud People: divergent evolution of the Zapotec and Mixtec civilizations. Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Academic Press, New York.
  99. ↑ Marcus and Flannery (1996) Zapotec Civilization: How urban society evolved in Mexico’s Oaxaca Valley. Flannery and Marcus (1983) The Cloud People: divergent evolution of the Zapotec and Mixtec civilizations. Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Academic Press, New York.
  100. ↑ Marcus and Flannery (1996) Zapotec Civilization: How urban society evolved in Mexico’s Oaxaca Valley. Flannery and Marcus (1983) The Cloud People: divergent evolution of the Zapotec and Mixtec civilizations. Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Academic Press, New York.
  101. ↑ Marcus and Flannery (1996) Zapotec Civilization: How urban society evolved in Mexico’s Oaxaca Valley. Flannery and Marcus (1983) The Cloud People: divergent evolution of the Zapotec and Mixtec civilizations. Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Academic Press, New York.
  102. ↑ Marcus and Flannery (1996) Zapotec Civilization: How urban society evolved in Mexico’s Oaxaca Valley. Flannery and Marcus (1983) The Cloud People: divergent evolution of the Zapotec and Mixtec civilizations. Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Academic Press, New York.
  103. ↑ Marcus and Flannery (1996) Zapotec Civilization: How urban society evolved in Mexico’s Oaxaca Valley. Flannery and Marcus (1983) The Cloud People: divergent evolution of the Zapotec and Mixtec civilizations. Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Academic Press, New York.
  104. ↑ Marcus and Flannery (1996) Zapotec Civilization: How urban society evolved in Mexico’s Oaxaca Valley. Flannery and Marcus (1983) The Cloud People: divergent evolution of the Zapotec and Mixtec civilizations. Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Academic Press, New York.
  105. ↑ Marcus and Flannery (1996) Zapotec Civilization: How urban society evolved in Mexico’s Oaxaca Valley. Flannery and Marcus (1983) The Cloud People: divergent evolution of the Zapotec and Mixtec civilizations. Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Academic Press, New York.
  106. ↑ Marcus and Flannery (1996) Zapotec Civilization: How urban society evolved in Mexico’s Oaxaca Valley. Flannery and Marcus (1983) The Cloud People: divergent evolution of the Zapotec and Mixtec civilizations. Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Academic Press, New York.
  107. ↑ Marcus and Flannery (1996) Zapotec Civilization: How urban society evolved in Mexico’s Oaxaca Valley. Flannery and Marcus (1983) The Cloud People: divergent evolution of the Zapotec and Mixtec civilizations. Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Academic Press, New York.
  108. ↑ Marcus and Flannery (1996) Zapotec Civilization: How urban society evolved in Mexico’s Oaxaca Valley. Flannery and Marcus (1983) The Cloud People: divergent evolution of the Zapotec and Mixtec civilizations. Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Academic Press, New York.
  109. ↑ Marcus and Flannery (1996) Zapotec Civilization: How urban society evolved in Mexico’s Oaxaca Valley. Flannery and Marcus (1983) The Cloud People: divergent evolution of the Zapotec and Mixtec civilizations. Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Academic Press, New York.
  110. ↑ Marcus and Flannery (1996) Zapotec Civilization: How urban society evolved in Mexico’s Oaxaca Valley. Flannery and Marcus (1983) The Cloud People: divergent evolution of the Zapotec and Mixtec civilizations. Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Academic Press, New York.
  111. ↑ Marcus and Flannery (1996) Zapotec Civilization: How urban society evolved in Mexico’s Oaxaca Valley. Flannery and Marcus (1983) The Cloud People: divergent evolution of the Zapotec and Mixtec civilizations. Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Academic Press, New York.
  112. ↑ Marcus and Flannery (1996) Zapotec Civilization: How urban society evolved in Mexico’s Oaxaca Valley. Flannery and Marcus (1983) The Cloud People: divergent evolution of the Zapotec and Mixtec civilizations. Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Academic Press, New York.
  113. ↑ Coe, M. D., Koontz, R. (2013) Mexico: From the Olmecs to the Aztecs (7th ed.) Thames and Hudson, London, p157
  114. ↑ Kowalewski, S. A., Feinman, G. M., Finten, L., Blanton, R. E., Nicholas, L. M. (1989) Monte Albán’s Hinterland, Part II: Prehispanic settlement patterns in Tlacolula, Etla, and Ocotlan, The Valley of Oaxaca, Mexico, Volume II. Memoirs of the Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Number 23. Ann Arbor.
  115. ↑ Coe, M. D., Koontz, R. (2013) Mexico: From the Olmecs to the Aztecs (7th ed.) Thames and Hudson, London, p157
  116. ↑ Kowalewski, S. A., Feinman, G. M., Finten, L., Blanton, R. E., Nicholas, L. M. (1989) Monte Albán’s Hinterland, Part II: Prehispanic settlement patterns in Tlacolula, Etla, and Ocotlan, The Valley of Oaxaca, Mexico, Volume II. Memoirs of the Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Number 23. Ann Arbor.
  117. ↑ Coe, M. D., Koontz, R. (2013) Mexico: From the Olmecs to the Aztecs (7th ed.) Thames and Hudson, London, p157
  118. ↑ Kowalewski, S. A., Feinman, G. M., Finten, L., Blanton, R. E., Nicholas, L. M. (1989) Monte Albán’s Hinterland, Part II: Prehispanic settlement patterns in Tlacolula, Etla, and Ocotlan, The Valley of Oaxaca, Mexico, Volume II. Memoirs of the Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Number 23. Ann Arbor.
  119. ↑ Coe, M. D., Koontz, R. (2013) Mexico: From the Olmecs to the Aztecs (7th ed.) Thames and Hudson, London, p157
  120. ↑ Kowalewski, S. A., Feinman, G. M., Finten, L., Blanton, R. E., Nicholas, L. M. (1989) Monte Albán’s Hinterland, Part II: Prehispanic settlement patterns in Tlacolula, Etla, and Ocotlan, The Valley of Oaxaca, Mexico, Volume II. Memoirs of the Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Number 23. Ann Arbor.
  121. ↑ Marcus and Flannery (1996) Zapotec Civilization: How urban society evolved in Mexico’s Oaxaca Valley. Flannery and Marcus (1983) The Cloud People: divergent evolution of the Zapotec and Mixtec civilizations. Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Academic Press, New York.
  122. ↑ Flannery, K. V. and J. Marcus (1983). "The Cloud People." New York, p36
  123. ↑ Marcus, J. and K. V. Flannery (1996). Zapotec civilization: How urban society evolved in Mexico's Oaxaca Valley, Thames and Hudson London, p133
  124. ↑ Marcus and Flannery (1996) Zapotec Civilization: How urban society evolved in Mexico’s Oaxaca Valley. p153
  125. ↑ Marcus and Flannery (1996) Zapotec Civilization: How urban society evolved in Mexico’s Oaxaca Valley. Flannery and Marcus (1983) The Cloud People: divergent evolution of the Zapotec and Mixtec civilizations. Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Academic Press, New York.
  126. ↑ Flannery and Marcus (1983) The Cloud People. New York. p217-8
  127. ↑ (Carballo, David. Personal Communication with Jill Levine, Dan Hoyer, and Peter Turchin. Email. April 2020)
  128. ↑ Marcus and Flannery (1996) Zapotec Civilization: How urban society evolved in Mexico’s Oaxaca Valley. Flannery and Marcus (1983) The Cloud People: divergent evolution of the Zapotec and Mixtec civilizations. Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Academic Press, New York.
  129. ↑ Flannery and Marcus (1983) The Cloud People. New York. p217-8
  130. ↑ Marcus and Flannery (1996) Zapotec Civilization: How urban society evolved in Mexico’s Oaxaca Valley. Flannery and Marcus (1983) The Cloud People: divergent evolution of the Zapotec and Mixtec civilizations. Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Academic Press, New York.
  131. ↑ Flannery and Marcus (1983) The Cloud People. New York. p217-8
  132. ↑ (Hassig 1992, 143) Hassig, Robert. 1992. War and Society in Ancient Mesoamerica. London; Berkeley: University of California Press. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/collectionKey/F76EVNU3/itemKey/E9VHCKDG
  133. ↑ Marcus and Flannery (1996) Zapotec Civilization: How urban society evolved in Mexico’s Oaxaca Valley. Flannery and Marcus (1983) The Cloud People: divergent evolution of the Zapotec and Mixtec civilizations. Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Academic Press, New York.
  134. ↑ (Carballo, David. Personal Communication with Jill Levine, Dan Hoyer, and Peter Turchin. Email. April 2020.
  135. ↑ Marcus and Flannery (1996) Zapotec Civilization: How urban society evolved in Mexico’s Oaxaca Valley. Flannery and Marcus (1983) The Cloud People: divergent evolution of the Zapotec and Mixtec civilizations. Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Academic Press, New York.
  136. ↑ Marcus and Flannery (1996) Zapotec Civilization: How urban society evolved in Mexico’s Oaxaca Valley. Flannery and Marcus (1983) The Cloud People: divergent evolution of the Zapotec and Mixtec civilizations. Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Academic Press, New York.
  137. ↑ (Carballo, David. Personal Communication with Jill Levine, Dan Hoyer, and Peter Turchin. Email. April 2020.
  138. ↑ Marcus and Flannery (1996) Zapotec Civilization: How urban society evolved in Mexico’s Oaxaca Valley. Flannery and Marcus (1983) The Cloud People: divergent evolution of the Zapotec and Mixtec civilizations. Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Academic Press, New York.
  139. ↑ (Carballo, David. Personal Communication with Jill Levine, Dan Hoyer, and Peter Turchin. Email. April 2020.
  140. ↑ Flannery, K. V. and J. Marcus (1983). "The Cloud People." New York., p36
  141. ↑ Marcus and Flannery (1996) Zapotec Civilization: How urban society evolved in Mexico’s Oaxaca Valley. Flannery and Marcus (1983) The Cloud People: divergent evolution of the Zapotec and Mixtec civilizations. Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Academic Press, New York.
  142. ↑ (Hassig 1992, 143) Hassig, Robert. 1992. War and Society in Ancient Mesoamerica. London; Berkeley: University of California Press. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/collectionKey/F76EVNU3/itemKey/E9VHCKDG
  143. ↑ (Hassig 1992, 143) Hassig, Robert. 1992. War and Society in Ancient Mesoamerica. London; Berkeley: University of California Press. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/collectionKey/F76EVNU3/itemKey/E9VHCKDG
  144. ↑ Marcus and Flannery (1996) Zapotec Civilization: How urban society evolved in Mexico’s Oaxaca Valley. Flannery and Marcus (1983) The Cloud People: divergent evolution of the Zapotec and Mixtec civilizations. Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Academic Press, New York.
  145. ↑ Marcus and Flannery (1996) Zapotec Civilization: How urban society evolved in Mexico’s Oaxaca Valley. Flannery and Marcus (1983) The Cloud People: divergent evolution of the Zapotec and Mixtec civilizations. Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Academic Press, New York.
  146. ↑ Marcus and Flannery (1996) Zapotec Civilization: How urban society evolved in Mexico’s Oaxaca Valley. Flannery and Marcus (1983) The Cloud People: divergent evolution of the Zapotec and Mixtec civilizations. Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Academic Press, New York.
  147. ↑ Marcus and Flannery (1996) Zapotec Civilization: How urban society evolved in Mexico’s Oaxaca Valley. Flannery and Marcus (1983) The Cloud People: divergent evolution of the Zapotec and Mixtec civilizations. Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Academic Press, New York.
  148. ↑ Marcus and Flannery (1996) Zapotec Civilization: How urban society evolved in Mexico’s Oaxaca Valley. Flannery and Marcus (1983) The Cloud People: divergent evolution of the Zapotec and Mixtec civilizations. Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Academic Press, New York.
  149. ↑ Marcus and Flannery (1996) Zapotec Civilization: How urban society evolved in Mexico’s Oaxaca Valley. Flannery and Marcus (1983) The Cloud People: divergent evolution of the Zapotec and Mixtec civilizations. Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Academic Press, New York.
  150. ↑ Coe, M. D., Koontz, R. (2013) Mexico: From the Olmecs to the Aztecs (7th ed.) Thames and Hudson, London, p157
  151. ↑ Kowalewski, S. A., Feinman, G. M., Finten, L., Blanton, R. E., Nicholas, L. M. (1989) Monte Albán’s Hinterland, Part II: Prehispanic settlement patterns in Tlacolula, Etla, and Ocotlan, The Valley of Oaxaca, Mexico, Volume II. Memoirs of the Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Number 23. Ann Arbor.
  152. ↑ Coe, M. D., Koontz, R. (2013) Mexico: From the Olmecs to the Aztecs (7th ed.) Thames and Hudson, London, p157
  153. ↑ Kowalewski, S. A., Feinman, G. M., Finten, L., Blanton, R. E., Nicholas, L. M. (1989) Monte Albán’s Hinterland, Part II: Prehispanic settlement patterns in Tlacolula, Etla, and Ocotlan, The Valley of Oaxaca, Mexico, Volume II. Memoirs of the Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Number 23. Ann Arbor.
  154. ↑ Coe, M. D., Koontz, R. (2013) Mexico: From the Olmecs to the Aztecs (7th ed.) Thames and Hudson, London, p157
  155. ↑ Kowalewski, S. A., Feinman, G. M., Finten, L., Blanton, R. E., Nicholas, L. M. (1989) Monte Albán’s Hinterland, Part II: Prehispanic settlement patterns in Tlacolula, Etla, and Ocotlan, The Valley of Oaxaca, Mexico, Volume II. Memoirs of the Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Number 23. Ann Arbor.
  156. ↑ Coe, M. D., Koontz, R. (2013) Mexico: From the Olmecs to the Aztecs (7th ed.) Thames and Hudson, London, p157
  157. ↑ Kowalewski, S. A., Feinman, G. M., Finten, L., Blanton, R. E., Nicholas, L. M. (1989) Monte Albán’s Hinterland, Part II: Prehispanic settlement patterns in Tlacolula, Etla, and Ocotlan, The Valley of Oaxaca, Mexico, Volume II. Memoirs of the Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Number 23. Ann Arbor.
  158. ↑ Flannery, K. V. and J. Marcus (1976). "Formative Oaxaca and Zapotec Cosmos." American Scientist 64(4): 374-383.
  159. ↑ Kowalewski, S. A., Feiman, G.M., Finsten, L., Blanton, R. E. and Nicholas, L. M. Monte Albán’s Hinterland, Part II: the prehispanic settlement patterns in Tlacoula, Etla and Ocotlán, the Valley of Oaxaca, Mexico. Memoirs of the Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Number 23. Ann Arbor
  160. ↑ Flannery, K. V. and J. Marcus (2003). "The origin of war: New C-14 dates from ancient Mexico." Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 100(20): 11801-11805, p11804
  161. ↑ Marcus and Flannery (1996) Zapotec Civilization: How urban society evolved in Mexico’s Oaxaca Valley. p150
  162. ↑ Flannery, K. V. and J. Marcus (2003). "The origin of war: New C-14 dates from ancient Mexico." Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 100(20): 11801-11805, p11804
  163. ↑ Marcus and Flannery (1996) Zapotec Civilization: How urban society evolved in Mexico’s Oaxaca Valley. Flannery and Marcus (1983) The Cloud People: divergent evolution of the Zapotec and Mixtec civilizations. Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Academic Press, New York.
  164. ↑ Marcus and Flannery (1996) Zapotec Civilization: How urban society evolved in Mexico’s Oaxaca Valley. Flannery and Marcus (1983) The Cloud People: divergent evolution of the Zapotec and Mixtec civilizations. Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Academic Press, New York.
  165. ↑ Marcus and Flannery (1996) Zapotec Civilization: How urban society evolved in Mexico’s Oaxaca Valley. p150
  166. ↑ Flannery, K. V. and J. Marcus (2003). "The origin of war: New C-14 dates from ancient Mexico." Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 100(20): 11801-11805, p11804
  167. ↑ Marcus and Flannery (1996) Zapotec Civilization: How urban society evolved in Mexico’s Oaxaca Valley. p150
  168. ↑ Flannery, K. V. and J. Marcus (2003). "The origin of war: New C-14 dates from ancient Mexico." Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 100(20): 11801-11805, p11804
  169. ↑ Flannery, K. V. and J. Marcus (2003). "The origin of war: New C-14 dates from ancient Mexico." Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 100(20): 11801-11805, p11804
  170. ↑ Marcus, J. and K. V. Flannery (1996). Zapotec civilization: How urban society evolved in Mexico's Oaxaca Valley, Thames and Hudson London, p151
  171. ↑ Joyce, A.A. 2009. Peoples of America : Mixtecs, Zapotecs, and Chatinos: Ancient Peoples of Southern Mexico pp. 215-217. Hoboken, GB: Wiley-Blackwell.
  172. ↑ Joyce, A.A. 2009. Peoples of America : Mixtecs, Zapotecs, and Chatinos: Ancient Peoples of Southern Mexico pp. 215-217. Hoboken, GB: Wiley-Blackwell.
  173. ↑ Joyce, A.A. 2009. Peoples of America : Mixtecs, Zapotecs, and Chatinos: Ancient Peoples of Southern Mexico pp. 215-217. Hoboken, GB: Wiley-Blackwell.
  174. ↑ Joyce, A.A. 2009. Peoples of America : Mixtecs, Zapotecs, and Chatinos: Ancient Peoples of Southern Mexico pp. 215-217. Hoboken, GB: Wiley-Blackwell.
  175. ↑ (Joyce 2009, 207-209)
  176. ↑ (Feinman, Gary. Personal Communication to Jill Levine, Dan Hoyer, and Peter Turchin. April 2020. Email)
  177. ↑ (Feinman, Gary. Personal Communication to Jill Levine, Dan Hoyer, and Peter Turchin. April 2020. Email)
  178. ↑ Joyce, A.A. 2009. Peoples of America : Mixtecs, Zapotecs, and Chatinos: Ancient Peoples of Southern Mexico p. 198. Hoboken, GB: Wiley-Blackwell.
  179. ↑ Joyce, A.A. 2009. Peoples of America : Mixtecs, Zapotecs, and Chatinos: Ancient Peoples of Southern Mexico pp. 215-217. Hoboken, GB: Wiley-Blackwell.
  180. ↑ Joyce, A.A. 2009. Peoples of America : Mixtecs, Zapotecs, and Chatinos: Ancient Peoples of Southern Mexico p. 198. Hoboken, GB: Wiley-Blackwell.
  181. ↑ Joyce, A.A. 2009. Peoples of America : Mixtecs, Zapotecs, and Chatinos: Ancient Peoples of Southern Mexico pp. 215-217. Hoboken, GB: Wiley-Blackwell.
  182. ↑ Joyce, A.A. 2009. Peoples of America : Mixtecs, Zapotecs, and Chatinos: Ancient Peoples of Southern Mexico p. 198. Hoboken, GB: Wiley-Blackwell.
  183. ↑ Joyce, A.A. 2009. Peoples of America : Mixtecs, Zapotecs, and Chatinos: Ancient Peoples of Southern Mexico pp. 215-217. Hoboken, GB: Wiley-Blackwell.
  184. ↑ http://seshatdatabank.info/databrowser/moralizing-supernatural-punishment-acknowledgements.html
  185. ↑ http://seshatdatabank.info/databrowser/moralizing-supernatural-punishment-narratives.html
  186. ↑ http://seshatdatabank.info/databrowser/moralizing-supernatural-punishment-nga_tables.html
Retrieved from "http://seshatdatabank.info/browser/index.php?title=MxAlb3A&oldid=30895"