2012
DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1213638109
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Maya collapse cycles

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
7
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
4

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 21 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 10 publications
0
7
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Multiple studies have shown that patterns of political formation, consolidation, and fragmentation of Maya states were cyclical well before Mayapan became a Postclassic Period political center. From the middle of the first millennium BCE until Mayapan's emergence, kingdoms formed, consolidated, or expanded their domains of subjects, then ultimately fragmented at the same time that new centers emerged to dominate the landscape [25][26][27][28] . Large cities first appeared along the western edges of the Maya region by 1000-800 cal.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Multiple studies have shown that patterns of political formation, consolidation, and fragmentation of Maya states were cyclical well before Mayapan became a Postclassic Period political center. From the middle of the first millennium BCE until Mayapan's emergence, kingdoms formed, consolidated, or expanded their domains of subjects, then ultimately fragmented at the same time that new centers emerged to dominate the landscape [25][26][27][28] . Large cities first appeared along the western edges of the Maya region by 1000-800 cal.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In Mesoamerica, warfare and militarism were not exclusive to the Postclassic (e.g., Spencer 2003Spencer , 2010Webster 2000). Nevertheless, in a number of Mesoamerican regions, including Oaxaca (Blanton et al 1993;Spores 1967Spores , 1984, the Basin of Mexico (e.g., Carrasco 1971), and the Maya area (e.g., Blanton et al 1993;Demarest 2013;Masson 2012), archaeologists have noted marked shifts in the nature of governance between the Classic and Postclassic periods, although not always in the ways that Wolf (1959) proposed (Figure 1). Roughly a decade after Wolf (1959), another classic work (Sanders and Price 1968) outlined important temporal differences in Mesoamerican polities; however, the distinctions were underpinned solely by variations in scale and complexity rather than time alone.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Occupation at Muyil began around 300 BCE 25 during the Late Preclassic Period (300 BCE to ~ 300 CE) and likely functioned as an active trading center with northern polities throughout the Early (300 CE to 600 CE) and Late Classic (600 CE to 900 CE) Periods. The site remained continuously occupied into the late Postclassic (1200 CE to 1500 CE), which possibly indicates increased reliance on coastal supply and trade routes as inland populations decreased 18 , 30 , 31 . Abandonment of Muyil was contemporaneous with European conquest in the early sixteenth century 25 .…”
Section: Study Sitementioning
confidence: 99%