THE CHANGING STRUCTURE OF MACROREGIONAL J \ 1 ESOAMERICA : WITH FOCUS ON THE CLASSIC-POST CLASSIC TRANSIT ION IN THE VALLEY OF OAXACA

To date, macro-scale analyses of ancient Mcsoamcrica principall y have debated whether or not Mcsoamcrica was a world system and have dcscri bed macro regional processes at the eve of the Spanish Conquest. This paper defines two alternative organizat ional modes (corporate-based/network-based) that serve to conceptualize diversity in strategics of leadership, production, and exchange. Collective mechanisms of integrat ion arc central to corporate strategics, while network-bas ed organization is heavily rooted in the personal connections and material accumulations of individuals . Consideration of these mod es helps to define patterns of temporal and spati al diversi ty in the structure of the prchispanic Mcsoamcrican world. What prompts shifts in these macro-scale organizational strategics, and how do they inter-play with key changes at local and regional scales? To examine these questions, the often-discussed Classic-Postclassic transition in the southern highlands of Oaxaca is reconsider ed. This Classic-Postclassic shift, marked by increasing volumes oflongdistancc exchange, growing wealth disparities, and expanded significance of elite genealogical and marriage records, signals the greate r importance of network-ba-;cd strategics. Prior explanations for this transiti on have relied largely on local stimuli (e.g. ethnic in-migration, climatic change, political collapse) to promote this shift; yet these factors seem insuffici ent to account for the broad spatial scope of this change. Adoption of a wider spatial perspective fosters both a more complete understanding of this Oaxaca transition, and begins an exploration of how ba-;ic formula-; of economic and power relations could be transformed across one ancient world. figure I. Map ofMcsoamcrica, sho'INingprincipal sites and places mentioned in text. [Page I] J()t1111(1 l ()( W()rl<I-Syste11t~ R< ~eal'(:h INTRODUCTION In the :21 )'i!!irs fo !lowing \Vallcrstcin's pnblication of 11w J,f()</em W()rl</-Sy;tem I ( 1974.J. two key issues have stirred persistent debate amongrcscarchcrs who have endeavored to apply ( or critique the application ol) this perspective to prc-ca:piu1fat (and particularly archaeologically known) societies. l11c first debate concerns the preferred Imit of analysis. while the second foctlscs on the systemic properties ofnomitilitar:ian or prestige goOlk l11c question of analytical tmits stems directly rrom \Vallcrstein's proposition of\VorhlSystcms l11cory in direct opposition to earlier dc,elopmcnu1list or c,-ohrtionary approaches (cf .. Sanderson 1991 J. 'INirich temlcd to concentrate on regions. Most subsequent world·S)'Stems theorists hw..e adhered to \Vallcrstein's st1111re on tlris matter. for example. Cha.<ie-Dtmn a d Hall (1993:851.J recently asserted that "the frmdamcntal ·unit of social change is tl~ world·S)'Stcm. not the society." Since 1984 (Blanton and f cinman 1984.J. I have repeatedly called for archaeologists. most of'INhom have long been steeped in nco -c,uhrtionaryth.mght. to give more scrimls attention to the macroscalc and tl1c world·S)'Stcms perspective. Although I recognize the importance oftl1is broader spatial approach. [ question whctl1cr itrcallymakcs sense to decide unilaterally which analytical or organizational scale is pri,ilcgctl. for example. in opposition to Clia.sc~Dtmn and Hall (1993.J. Simdcrson (1991 :187.J asserts tliat in most (if not allJ preindustrial contexts. processes internal to a society (like popnlation prcssurc.J serve as the principal stimuli for change. Y ct is not tlris question at lea.st partially an empirical issue. tlcpcmling on context and problem? In 1motl1cr historical science. biological c,uhrtion. grand tl1corists. like Ernst Mayr (198:2.J. have condutlcd tlmt research should be conducted, and theories constructed , at various scales simultaneously (in that ca..:;c from chemicals to ecosystem..:;). I suggest that study oflong-tcrm social transitions requires multiscalar theories (from households through macrorc gions) , and there is no rea..:;on to indelibly tar all regional-scale analysis with the prior sins (mechanistic, reductionist, and unilineal tendencies) of many nco-c volutionary approaches (e.g., Blanton ct al. 1993; Blanton ct al. 1996; Feinman and Neitzel 1984). [Page 2] Journal of World-Systems Research Blanket pronouncement..:; concerning the priority of the macroscale also run counter to the intuitive bia..:;cs of most archaeologists, who tend to focus more locally. For example, I am sure that David Webster (1994:419) spoke for many ofmy colleagues when he commented "that the most significant of the forces that stimulat e the emergence of cultural complexity in preindustrial societies and thereafter maintain and reshap e it are usually quite localiz ed." Although I also find W cbster's ( a..:; well a..:; Sanderson's aforementioned) position to be overstated, propositions in the oppos ite direction do not serve to encourag e the serious consideration of macroscalc processes in archaeology. The debate over the role of prestige goods ha..:; been, if anything, mor e rancorous and central to the development of preindustrial world-systems approaches. Wall erstein flatly dismissed the role of nonutilitarian goods in the creation of systemically important interre gional tics. His rigid stance ha..:; been critiqued by Schneider (1970), Abu-Lughod (1989, 1993), and many others. In accord with this polarity, most archaeologists tend to line up on one side of this issue or the other. That is, they either view the role of preciosities a..:; generally (that is cross-culturally) significant or not. Relati vely little attention ha..:; been given to diachronic changes in the natur e of the linkages in (or what Hall and Cha..:;c-Dunn [1993:127] have described a..:; the "systemic logic " of) particular macror cgions over time . Y ct is it not most likely that the answer again lies at neither extreme position , and that the systemic significance of prestige or wealth exchan ge shifts with changes in the structure of worl d-syst ems and their component societal or regional pieces? THE CLASSIC-POSTCLASSIC TRANSIT ION IN ANCIENT OAXACA With these debates concerning analytical uni ts and prec iosities in mind, let us move to a discussion of later prchispanic Mesoamerica. The po int of reference is the Valley of Oaxaca in Mexico's Southern Highlands--a large highland valley situated in a mosai c of surrounding mountain, valley, and coa-.tal regions that comprise western Mcsoamcrica. The temporal focus is the so-called Cla-.sic-Postcla-.sic period transition, which in the western half ofMcsoamcrica occurred roughly between AD. 700-900. The Cla-.sic period (AD. 200-800) wa-. the initial era of widespread urbanization in western Mcsoamcrica, and wa-. dominated by large nucleated centers, like Monte Alban in the Valley of Oaxaca and Tcotihuacan in the [Page 3] Journa I of World-Systems Research Ba-.in of Mexico. The Postcla-.sic era (AD. 900-1520) wa-. a time of mostly smaller centers and politics, although it culminated with the rapid rise of Tenochtitlan and the tribute domain of the Aztec during the la-.t century prior to Spanish conquest. In the Valley of Oaxaca, scholars have long noted the Cla-.sic-Postcla-.sic transition a-. an episode of dramatic change marked by the curtailment of public building at ( and the partial abandonment of) Monte Alban, the incrca-.ing importance of other valley centers (such as Mitla), and recognized shifts in the spatial arrangement of large settlements, monumental architectural styles, and ceramic forms. Interestingl y, prior explanations for this transition mirror the broader history of archaeological interpr etations or paradigmatic framework-.. Prior to 1970, my intellectual grandfathers, Alfonso Ca-.o, Ignacio Bernal (1966), and John Paddock (1966, 1983), cmpha-.izcd the historic presence ofMixtcc speakers in sixteenth-century Oaxaca, and viewed the Cla-.sic-Postcla-.sic transition a-. the consequence of an inva-.ion or population replacement in which the region's Zapot ec inhabitants were subsumed by Mixtccs. Although clements of this interpretation, such a-. the historic presence of some Mixtccs in the region at conquest, cannot be discounted, there seems little question that these early interpretations (like the culture history paradigm more generally) placed too much weight on ethnicity a-. the principal ba-.is for societal and artifactual change. More recent generations of scholars in the region (Flannery and Marcus l983a ; Spores and Flannery 1983) have recognized prob le ms with this early view. Many architectural and artifactual clements in the valley show strong continuities between the Cla-.sic and Postcla-.sic periods, and the material culture of the Postcla-.sic Valley of Oaxaca hardly duplicates that found in the ncighb oring Mixt cc heartland. Equally important, both at Spanish contact and in this century, more people in the valley speak and define themselves a-. Zapotccs than Mixtccs. By 1970, the consensual framework for the interpretation of the Cla-.sic-Postcla-.sic transition shifted from broad-scale, ethnicity-driven models of culture history to the more regionally focused, socioeconomic perspective of nco -evolutionary proccssualism (Finstcn 1983; Flannery and Marcus l983 b; Marcus 1989). Completion of the fullcovcragc archaeological settlement survey of the region (Blanton ct al. 1982; Kowalewski et al. 1989) revealed that the collapse of Cla-.sic period Monte Alban led to a regional "balkanization" in which the valley's population wa-. subdivided into more than a dozen clus ters, several of which were separated by sparsely inhabit ed buffer zones. Each of the population clusters surrounded a head town. The largest of these were more equivalent in size and architectural monumentality than were centers during the prior Classic period, dominated by the primate capital Monte Alban. [Page 4] Journal of World-Systems Research For the V


INTRODUCTION
In the :21 )'i!!irs fo !lowing \Vallcrstcin's pnblication of 11w J,f()</em W()rl</-Sy;tem I ( 1974.J. two key issues have stirred persistent debate amongrcscarchcrs who have endeavored to apply ( or critique the application ol) this perspective to prc-ca:piu1fat ( and particularly archaeologically known) societies.l11c first debate concerns the preferred Imit of analysis.while the second foctlscs on the systemic properties ofnomitilitar:ian or prestige goOlk l11c question of analytical tmits stems directly rrom \Vallcrstein's proposition of\Vorhl-Systcms l11cory in direct opposition to earlier dc,elopmcnu1list or c,-ohrtionary approaches (cf .. Sanderson 1991 J. 'INirich temlcd to concentrate on regions.Most subsequent world•S)'Stems theorists hw..e adhered to \Vallcrstein's st1111re on tlris matter.for example.Cha.<ie-Dtmn and Hall (1993:851.J recently asserted that "the frmdamcntal •unit of social change is tl~ world•S)'Stcm.not the society." Since 1984 (Blanton and f cinman 1984.J.I have repeatedly called for archaeologists.most of'INhom have long been steeped in nco -c,uhrtionaryth.mght.to give more scrimls attention to the macroscalc and tl1c world•S)'Stcms perspective.Although I recognize the importance oftl1is broader spatial approach.[ question whctl1cr itrcallymakcs sense to decide unilaterally which analytical or organizational scale is pri,ilcgctl.for example. in opposition to Clia.sc~Dtmn andHall (1993.J. Simdcrson (1991 :187.J asserts tliat in most (if not allJ preindustrial contexts.processes internal to a society (like popnlation prcssurc.J serve as the principal stimuli for change.Y ct is not tlris question at lea.st partially an empirical issue.tlcpcmling on context and problem?In 1motl1cr historical science.biological c,uhrtion.grand tl1corists.like Ernst Mayr (198:2.J. have condutlcd tlmt research should be conducted, and theories constructed , at various scales simultaneously (in that ca..:;c from chemicals to ecosystem..:;).I suggest that study oflong-tcrm social transitions requires multiscalar theories (from households through macrorc gions) , and there is no rea..:;on to indelibly tar all regional-scale analysis with the prior sins (mechanistic, reductionist, and unilineal tendencies) of many nco-c vo lutionary approaches (e.g., Blanton ct al. 1993;Blanton ct al. 1996;Feinman and Neitzel 1984).
[Page 2] Journal of World-Systems Research Blanket pronouncement..:; concerning the priority of the macroscale also run counter to the intuitive bia..:;cs of most archaeologists, who tend to focus more locally.For example, I am sure that David Webster (1994:419) spoke for many ofmy colleagues when he commented "that the most significant of the forces that stimulat e the emergence of cultural complexity in preindustrial societies and thereafter maintain and reshap e it are usually quite localiz ed."Although I also find W cbster's ( a..:; well a..:; Sanderson's aforementioned) position to be overstated, propositions in the oppos ite direction do not serve to encourag e the serious consideration of macroscalc processes in archaeology.
The debate over the role of prestige goods ha..:; been, if anything, mor e rancorous and central to the development of preindustrial world-systems approaches.Wall erstein flatly dismissed the role of nonutilitarian goods in the creation of systemically important interre gional tics.His rigid stance ha..:; been critiqued by Schneider (1970), Abu-Lughod (1989, 1993), and many others.In accord with this polarity, most archaeologists tend to line up on one side of this issue or the other.That is, they either view the role of preciosities a..:; generally (that is cross-culturally) significant or not.Relati ve ly little attention ha..:; been given to diachronic changes in the natur e of the linkages in (or what Hall and Cha..:;c-Dunn [1993:127] have described a..:; the "systemic logic " of) particular macror cgions over time .Y ct is it not most likel y that the answer again lies at neither extreme position , and that the systemic significance of prestige or wealth exc han ge shifts with changes in the structure of worl d-syst ems and their component societal or regional pieces?THE CLASSIC-POSTCLASSIC TRANSIT ION IN ANCIENT OAXACA With these debates concerning analytical units and prec iosities in mind, let us mov e to a discussion of later prchispanic Mesoamerica.The po int of reference is the Valley of Oaxaca in Mexico's Southern Highlands--a lar ge highland valley situated in a mosai c of surrounding mountain, valley, and coa-.talregions that comprise western Mcsoamcrica.The temporal focus is the so-called Cla-.sic-Postcla-.sicperiod transition, which in the western half ofMcsoamcrica occurred roughly between AD. 700-900.The Cla-.sic period (AD.In the Valley of Oaxaca, scholars have long noted the Cla-.sic-Postcla-.sictransition a-. an episode of dramatic change marked by the curtailment of public building at ( and the partial abandonment of) Monte Alban, the incrca-.ingimportance of other valley centers (such as Mitla), and recognized shifts in the spatial arrangement of large settlements, monumental architectural styles, and ceramic forms.Interestingl y, prior explanations for this transition mirror the broader history of archaeological interpr etations or paradigmatic framework-.. Prior to 1970, my intellectual grandfathers, Alfonso Ca-.o, Ignacio Bernal (1966), and John Paddock (1966, 1983), cmpha-.izcd the historic presence ofMixtcc speakers in sixteenth-century Oaxaca, and viewed the Cla-.sic-Postcla-.sictransition a-. the consequence of an inva-.ionor population replacement in which the region's Zapot ec inhabitants were subsumed by Mixtccs.Although clements of this interpretation, such a-.the historic presence of some Mixtccs in the region at conquest, cannot be discount ed, there seems little question that these early interpretations (like the culture history paradigm more generally) placed too much weight on ethnicity a-. the principal ba-.is for societal and artifactual change.More recent generations of scholars in the region (Flannery and Marcus l983a ; Spores and Flannery 1983) have recognized prob le ms with this early view.Many architectural and artifactual clements in the valley show strong continuities between the Cla-.sic and Postcla-.sicperiods, and the material culture of the Postcla-.sicValley of Oaxaca hardly duplicates that found in the ncighb orin g Mixt cc heartland.Equally important, both at Spanish contact and in this century, more people in the valley speak and define themselves a-.Zapotccs than Mixtccs.
By 1970, the consensual framework for the interpretation of the Cla-.sic-Postcla-.sictransition shifted from broad-scale, ethnicity-driven models of culture history to the more regionally focused, socioeconomic perspective of nco -evolutionary proccssualism (Finstcn 1983;Flannery and Marcus l983 b;Marcus 1989).Completion of the fullcovcragc archaeological settlement survey of the region (Blanton ct al. 1982;Kowalewski et al. 1989) revealed that the collapse of Cla-.sic period Monte Alban led to a regional "balkanization" in which the valley's population wa-.subdivided into more than a dozen clus ters, several of which were separated by sparsely inhabit ed buffer zones.Each of the population clusters surrounded a head town.The largest of these were more equivalent in size and architectural monumentality than were centers during the prior Classic period, dominated by the primate capital Monte Alban.

[Page 4] Journal of World-Systems Research
For the Valley of Oaxaca, these processual, regionally focused models of the Classic-Postclassic transition emphasize collapse and the resultant competition between the smaller polities that emergcd.ln the competitive political landscape of the Postclassic, no one center was capable of dominating either information technologies (writing) or economic relations.Geneological registers, which trace the ancestry of specific elites, have been found at several sites.These records oflincal kin tics, which have been recovered in tombs, were intended to be read by a small audience.1n this regard, they differ markedly from the public monuments of the earlier Classic period (Marcus 1989(Marcus :205, 1992:283-285):283-285).More intensive craft production in the region and increased volumes of obsidian artifacts have been interpreted to reflect heightened economic activity or commercialization in the absence of strong central political control during the Postclassic period (Kowalewski ct al. 1983).

LOOKING BEYOND THE REGION
Although many elements of the proccssual interpretation still appear salient, a reg ionally focused explanation cannot account for other key aspects of the Classi c-Postclassic transition in Oaxaca.For example, the increased quantities of obsidian must reflect broader-scale processes, as obsidian cannot be mined anywher e in the state of Oaxaca .General artifactual diversity also was greater during the Postclassic than earlier (Kowalew ski and Finsten 1983:419), including a wider assortment of highl y decorat ed ceramic varieties, such as polychromes, and the incredible cache of wealth and ritual items that Alfonso Caso unearthed in Tomb 7. Despite repeated excavation attempts, no Classic period tomb at Monte Alban has even come close to that concentration of wealth.
Balkanization alone also cannot account for the sizeable buildup in the number s of settlements and overall population expansion that occurred durin g the Pos tclassic period in three moun tain areas that abut the valley.To the north, Dr ennan (1989) found a doubling of sites and population between the Late Classic and Lat e Postclas sic.1n th e Peoles area to the north and northw est of the valley, Fins tcn (1996) reports a doublin g of population in the Postclassic.To the cast, in the Guirn area (Feinman and Nicholas 1995), the number of sites [Page 5] Journal of World-Systems Research increased by more than fourfold between the Late Classic and Postcla ... sic periods, whil e the population more than doubled.1n each of these mountain zones, occupation wa.., denser and more continuous than ever before.1n fact, the tempo of demographic growth between the Classic and Late Postcla..,sic periods wa.., more rapid in these mountain zones than it wa.., in the Valley of Oaxaca.Clearly, in the Postclassic, the physiographic limits of the Valley of Oaxaca were less of a habitational boundary than ever before .Y ct, the Cla..,sic-Postcla..,sic transition wa.., not unique to Oaxaca.Across Mcso amcrica, great political and cultural centers declined, while smaller politics vied to take their places.As with the gcncological registers in Oaxaca, greater emphasis at many Mcsoamcrican sites wa.., placed on the legitimation of specific lines of dyna..,tic succession (Blanton ct al. 1992;Diehl and Berlo 1989;Marcus 1992:229-249) .Lik ewise, the Classic-Postcla..,sic incrca..,c in the importance of wealth exchange ha.., been noted throughout Mcsoamcrica (Kcpccs ct al. 1994;Sab loff and Rathj c 197 5;Smith 198 8;Smith and Heath-Smith 1980).1n Postcla..,sic Mcsoam crica (especially prior to the rise of the Aztecs in the la..,t prchispanic centuries), prestige wealth wa.., a key ba..,is of political power.Th e development of core-periphery hierarchies at the macroscalc (and often even the regional scale, a.., we saw for balkanized Oaxaca) wa.., minimized during much of the Postcla..,sic.Yet intcrpcnctrating accumulation (Gills and Frank 1991:84-85), a key to world-system structure, wa.., clearly at work a.., elites participated in each others' systems of labor exploitation across political boundaries through the manipulation of prestig e exchanges (Kcpccs ct al. 1994).The ideology of this period, which crossed regional boundaries as an eclectic, "international style," (Blanton ct al. 1996;Smith and Heath-Smith 1982) also fostered elaborate ornamentation and prestige wealth in a manner not present in the Mcsoamcrican highlands during the earlier Cla..,sic period (Baird 1989;Nagao 1989;Pa..,ztory 1988:71 ).Many new varieties of prestige wealth were disseminated widely across the Mcsoamcrican world at this time, including elaborate metal bells and ornaments, fine pa..,tc pottery, and the polychrome ceramic tradition.Some world-system's theorists might be content if I ended this paper now.After all, what have I argued to this point?The Cla..,sic-Postcla ... sic transition in Oaxaca wa.., part of broader macroscal c processes that were initiated by the fall of major Cla..,sic period urban centers, like Tcotihuacan, Monte Alban, and the cities of the Maya Pctcn, between A.O. 700-900.These changes ushered in a more fragmented, pan-regional, political landscap e that wa.., interconn ected primarily through the exchange of prestige goods.1n this Postclassic landscape, physiographic boundaries were more open, cor c-pcriphcry hierarchies were [Page 6] Journal of World-Systems Research minimized, and prestige goods underlaid a key ba..,is oflocal power through their role in their attraction and manipulation of factional labor.Prestige goods would be seen a.., having systemic-defining properties, which they did at this time, and the macroscalc could be proclaimed predominant.

A MULTISCALAR PERSPECTNE
Many of these macroscale observations also remain salient.Yet again, the macroscalc approach leaves important a..,pccts of the Oaxaca Cla..,sic-Postcla..,sic transition unexplained.For example, major differences in Cla..,sic and Postcla..,sic period public architecture exist.Cla..,sic period sites feature focal central plaza.., that often arc fairly large.The Main Plaza at Monte Alban is a primary example; there is no question regarding the location of the central precinct at the site.In contra..,t, Postcla..,sic sites, like Mitla , often have multiple plaza.., and architectural complexes of roughl y equal size and importance.Postcla..,sic plaza.., tend to be more closed, small er, and, som etimes, residential in nature.In addition, how would a purely macroscale perspectiv e account for the unsurpa..,scd accumulation of wealth in Postcla..,sic Tomb 7. The mere importanc e of Postcla..,sic prestige goods docs not explain this accumulation, unequaled in any prior era, especially since no Postcla..,sic Oaxaca settlement equaled the size or monum entality of Cla..,sic period Monte Alban.
From a simple unilincar persp ective, one might have expected to find the greatest concentrations of burial wealth during the Cla..,sic period when Monte Alban wa.., clearly the largest and most monum ental center in the region.Postcla..,sic Oaxaca centers were more even in size, and small er than Cla..,sic period Monte Alban.Lik ewise, from a purely macroscale perspective, one might have expected select Cla..,sic period interment.., to contain the most elaborate offerings, since Monte Alban's and the Valley of Oaxaca's interregional influ ence and power were seemingly greater at that time.Y ct although many Cla..,sic period tombs have been excavated, the greatest accumulation of prchispanic Oaxacan grave wealth is Pos tcla..,sic in date.Sampling issues and "negative evidence" always could be raised to "account for" Tomb 7. Yet differences in th e distribution of grave wealth, when considered with the aforementioned architectural distinctions for the Cla..,sic and Pos tcla..,sic periods, [Page 7] Journal of World-Systems Research seems to signal possible key differences in the way in which Valley of Oaxaca soci ety was organized during these two pha5es.Interpersonal networks and the exchange of wealth were more critical in the Postcla5sic, while monumental architecture and the activities a5sociated with it seem to have had a larger role in Cla5sic period society (Blanton ct al. 1996).
A further issue concerns Monte Alban's interregional connections during the Cla5sic period.Although the cxtrarcgional flows of prestige wealth were less than later, and the physiographic region of the Valley of Oaxaca did more-or-less define a Cla5sic period settlement frontier, it would be inaccurate to a5sumc that macroscalc processes were nonexistent or unimportant during the Cla5sic.For example, Marcus (1983) suggest5 that a political meeting of significance between Tcotihuacan and Monte Alban was commemorated at Monte Alban on the Cla5sic period Lpida de Bazan and on carved stones that were part of the South Platform at the south end of the Main Plaza (Marcus 1983).Byland and Pohl (1994) argue that alliances with Monte Alban helped to sustain population centers in the Mixtcca Alta that collapsed after Monte Alban's demise.Space docs not permit it, but many more evidences of apparently imp ortant interregional connections could be ama5scd for the Cla5sic period.But the natur e of thos e cxtraregional linkages appear to have been rather different during these two pha5es.
Where docs this leave us?First, I suggest that a Mcsoamcrican world-system existed in the Cla5sic period, but (at lea5t in western Mesoamcrica) it wa5 a world-system with a somewhat different "system logic" and wa5 ba5cd less directly on wealth exchange than wa5 the later Postcla5sic world.This implies even for one world-system, ancient Mesoamcrica, a blanket statement cannot be made regardi ng the significance of prestig e exchange.The role of such exchanges appears to have varied in systemic importance over time .In a cross-cultural comparison, even greater variation might be expected.Second, I would argue that the differences in public architecture and tomb accumulation und erlie key distinctions in the nature of rul crship between Cla5sic and Postcla5sic Oaxaca.Cla5sic period rule wa5 focused on the corporate integration of societal segments throu gh integrative rituals carried out in monumental settings and central plaza5 that were replicated across the region.Rule wa5 relatively anonymous, perhaps resting in certain offices, such a5 the hcad5 of certain corporate groups.In contra5t, Po stcla5sic rule in Oaxaca appears to have been mor e closely linked to s pccific individuals, who lived in elaborate resid ential complexes, and derived their importanc e through their network of allies and familial ties.The gcneological registers of this period estab lish legitimacy through lineal descent and patrimonial rhetoric.The control of wealth wa5 tied to the control of factions, and together these form key ba5cs of power.Y ct, [Page 8] Journal of World-Systems Research the significance of factions is evidenced in the multifocal layout of most Postclassic centers.Tomb 7 with its massive concentration ofloot exemplifies the importance of prestige wealth and elaborate personal adornment at this time.
By now it may be evident that the Classic-Postclassic differences in Oaxaca correspond to a degree with the broader pan-Mcsoamcrican patterns.But if one looks beyond Oaxaca, the parallels weaken somewhat.Although the Postclassic centers ofXochicalco (in Morelos) and Chichcn Itz (in Yucatan) participated in the Postclassic world of prestige exchanges, they had public archi tcctural complexes that belie a more corporate orientation than is found at Postclassic Oaxacan sites.Clearly then, if we arc to understand major historical transitions (like the Classic-Postclassic transition in Oaxaca and Mcsoamcrica), we cannot design our research at only one scale, nor should we expect theories designed for a single scale to provide adequate or complete answers.A more multiscalar approach that boot-;traps, rather than juxtaposes, theories from differ ent spatial vantages seems requisite.
200-800) wa-. the initial era of widespread urbanization in western Mcsoamcrica, and wa-.dominated by large nucleated centers, like Monte Alban in the Valley of Oaxaca and Tcotihuacan in the [Page 3] Journa I of World-Systems Research Ba-.in of Mexico.The Postcla-.sicera (AD.900-1520) wa-. a time of mostly smaller centers and politics, although it culminated with the rapid rise of Tenochtitlan and the tribute domain of the Aztec during the la-.t century prior to Spanish conquest.