Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T08:11:43.505Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

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

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Susan T. Evans
Susan T. Evans*
Affiliation:
Department of Anthropology, State University of New York, Albany, NY 12222
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

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.

Type
Comments
Information
American Antiquity , Volume 45 , Issue 4 , October 1980 , pp. 866 - 875
Copyright
Copyright © Society for American Archaeology 1980

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

References Cited

Bray, Warwick 1972 The city-state in central Mexico at the time of the Spanish conquest. Journal of Latin American Studies 4:161–185.Google Scholar
Carrasco, Pedro 1971 Social organization of ancient Mexico. In Handbook of Middle American Indians Volume 10, edited by Wauchope, R., pp. 349–375. University of Texas Press, Austin.Google Scholar
Carrasco, Pedro 1978 La economia del Mexico prehispanico. In Economia politico e idea Jogia en ei Mexico prehispanico, edited by Carrasco, P. and Broda, J., pp. 13–76. Editorial Nueva Imagen, Mexico City.Google Scholar
Christaller, Walter 1966 Central places in southern Germany. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey.Google Scholar
Evans, Susan T. 1978 Economic process and settlement pattern: the Aztec period Teotihuacan Valley. Paper presentedat the 77th annual meeting of the American Anthropological Association, Los Angeles.Google Scholar
Gibson, Charles 1956 Llamamiento general, repartimiento, and the empire of Acolhuacan. Hispanic American Historical Review 36:1–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gibson, Charles 1964 The Aztecs under Spanish rule. Stanford University Press, Stanford.Google Scholar
Parsons, Jeffrey 1971 Prehistoric settlement patterns in the Texcoco region, Mexico. Memoirs of the University of Michigan Museum of Anthropology 3.Google Scholar
Parsons, Jeffrey 1976 The role of chinampa agriculture in the food supply of Aztec Tenochtitlan. In Cultural change andcontinuity, edited by Charles, Cleland, pp. 223–257. Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
Sanders, William T. 1965 The cultural ecology of the Teotihuacan Valley. Department of Anthropology, the Pennsylvania State University.Google Scholar
Sanders, William T. 1976 The agricultural history of the Basin of Mexico. In The Valley of Mexico, edited by Wolf, E., pp. 101–159. Universitv of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.Google Scholar
Sanders, William T., Parsons, Jeffrey R., and Santley, Robert 1979 The Basin of Mexico. Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
Smith, Carol A. 1974 Economics of marketing systems. Annual Review of Anthropology, Volume 3:167–201.Google Scholar
Smith, Carol A. 1976a Regional economic systems: linking geographical models and socioeconomic problems. In Regionalanalysis Volume 1: economic systems, edited by Smith, C. A., pp. 3–63. Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
Smith, Carol A. 1976b Analyzing regional social systems. In Regional analysis Volume 2: social systems, edited by Smith, C. A., pp. 3–20. Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
Smith, Michael E. 1979 The Aztec marketing system and settlement pattern in the Valley of Mexico: a central place analysis. American Antiquity 44:110–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar