Spatial Analysis of Basin of Mexico Settlement: Problems with the Use of the Central Place Model

Abstract

In a recent report, Michael Smith proposes that the primary determinant of the settlement pattern of the southeastern Basin of Mexico during the Late Horizon (A.D. 1350-1520) was marketplace exchange. This assumption, and the use of the central place market model in analyzing the pattern, are critically evaluated and found to be unwarranted. A review of data and theory leads to the conclusion that environmental and political factors outweigh commerce in shaping the settlement pattern in this area.

Monitoring regional market systems in prehistory: Models, methods, and metrics

“…For example, CPT holds that if the market principle is dominant then microeconomic forces will generate a predictable spatial patterning in the distribution and hierarchical arrangement of economic central places (King, 1984); conversely, if this predictable pattern is observed to be present, then the underlying market principle is assumed to have been operative. For a more detailed critique, see reviews by Evans (1980) and Hirth (1998). basis (either daily or periodic) for exchanges involving a broad range of goods and services.…”

“…Prior approaches to modeling regional market system organization have focused heavily on the infrastructure of market systems, including the spatial distribution of economic central places or market centers, and networks of roads and transportation routes that developed in response to market forces (Santley, 1986(Santley, , 1991Skinner, 1964Skinner, , 1977Smith, 1979;Trombold, 1991). Aside from concerns over the applicability of commercial models such as Central Place Theory (CPT) to pre-industrial societies (e.g., Evans, 1980), archaeologists face the additional problem of identifying economic nodes and networks from settlement pattern data. Settlement systems are determined by multiple factors in addition to economic concerns, including ecological, geographic, political, religious, and historical circumstances, such that settlement size and location are not responsive indicators of market forces alone.…”

Archaeology and the Aztec Economy: The Social Scientific Use of Archaeological Data

“…The use of settlement pattern data to investigate Aztec agricultural practices is based upon the use of analogy between modern non-industrial land-use patterns and Prehispanic practices in the same area (Sanders, Parsons, and Santley, 1979: 227-281;Evans, 1980a). Archaeologists have reported direct evidence of Aztec period agricultural terrace systems in several parts of the Basin of Mexico (Sanders, Parsons, and Santley, 1979: 249-252;Evans, 1985a), and settlement distributions in the southern Basin document the expansion of raised field (chinampa) agriculture in this area (Parsons et al, 1982a: 353-358;376-378). Chinampas are artificial raised planting surfaces created by digging mud and organic debris out of swampy lake beds and piling it up in long narrow rectangular formations.…”

“…Late Aztec site locations from the surveys were used in an application of central place theory to the Aztec settlement system (Smith, 1979). A relatively close fit between the deductive central place model and actual settlement locations led to the conclusion that marketplace exchange and other economic factors played a major role in shaping the observed settlement pattern (but see Evans, 1980b).…”

“…) excavated several Aztec and Early Colonial houses in the Teotihuacan Valley, and these have yielded some interesting data. The most ambitious program of excavation of Aztec houses in the Basin of Mexico is the current work of Susan Evans at the rural site of Siguatecpan in the Teotihuacan Valley (Evans, 1985b). One field season involving the excavation of several houses has been completed (1984), laboratory analyses are in progress, and at least one more field season is planned.…”