could be used to start fi res or refl ect images, no doubt under-
lining the king’s powers as chief shaman.
Some 20th-century archaeologists claimed that the Ol-
mec unifi ed into an empire that conquered peoples in other
parts of Mesoamerica, but there is little evidence for this
claim. Th e spread of Olmec art objects and styles beyond the
Gulf coast seems better explained by trade and imitation.
Rulers at the central Mexican site of Chalcatzingo, however,
seem to have enhanced their status by alliance and possibly
even intermarriage with the Olmec of the site known today
as La Venta, adopting La Venta’s sculptural style for their
monuments. Chalcatzingo’s rulers are distinguished in the
archaeological record by burial in stone crypts alongside pre-
cious materials like jade. Artistic representations at the site
may indicate that some rulers were female.
Around 500 b.c.e. residents of Zapotec communities in
the three branches of the Valley of Oaxaca joined together to
create a new central capital atop an easily defended moun-
tain. Th e site, known today as Monte Alban, was not on good
agricultural land but nonetheless rapidly grew in population
and in the scale of its temple and residential architecture.
Th ese facts suggest that it was founded with the presumption
that the surrounding communities would supply it with food.
Th e smaller chiefdoms may have merged into a larger politi-
cal system to defend against enemies from outside the area or
to put an end to confl icts among themselves, choosing Monte
Alban as a neutral ground on which to build a regional capi-
tal. If so, this system would resemble a form of political or-
ganization in ancient Greece in which several villages joined
together to create a new central city, usually for defense.
Initially, Monte Alban contained many elite residences
but lacked clear-cut royal palaces or tombs. However, dur-
ing the Late Formative Period (ca. 400 b.c.e.–150 c.e.) royal
tombs and large palaces appeared. At the same time, the
scale of collective labor on construction projects at the site
increased; most impressively, the top of the mountain was
leveled to build a ceremonial plaza. Carved stones from this
period identify towns outside the valley that had been con-
quered by the rulers of Monte Alban. All of this evidence in-
dicates that the city had evolved into the center of a state.
In the Maya area, kingdoms probably existed by about
600 b.c.e., as evidenced by the massive scale of construc-
tion at sites like Nakbe, Guatemala. Th e size of Mayan cities
increased as more sophisticated and intensive agricultural
techniques, such as elaborate irrigation systems, developed.
From these beginnings the unit of political control among
the Maya became the city-state, meaning an independent re-
gional kingdom governed from a prominent city or primary
center that was the seat of the royal family. Among the Maya
the primary cities dominated smaller, secondary centers and
sought to conquer other city-states in a pattern of ongoing
warfare and shift ing political alliances that persisted until the
end of the Classic Period (ca. 650 c.e.).
Unlike the Olmec rulers, the fi rst Maya kings appear
not to have advertised their status in colossal portraits. In-
stead, they built pyramid-temples decorated with huge plas-
ter masks of deities associated with kingship to bolster their
rule through art. By the Late Formative Period the hieroglyph
signifying the holy lord or king of a city-state began to be
used on royal monuments depicting individual kings. Most
important among these monuments are stelae, upright stones
with images or inscriptions carved in relief. During the Early
Classic Period these stelae became the predominant form of
Mayan political art, showing portraits of individual rulers
conquering enemies, performing religious rituals, and engag-
ing in such important passages as royal marriage and acces-
sion to the throne. Th ese stone images functioned as doubles
or copies of the king and bolstered his right to rule by show-
ing him as a shaman like the Olmec lords, able to conjure up
his ancestors’ spirits and bring their blessings to himself and
his people. He was also seen as a divine being, equated with
the Maize God.
Th e enormous metropolis of Teotihuacán, north of pres-
ent-day Mexico City, was the center of a state that reached
its height of power and infl uence between 1 and 650 c.e. Th e
precise grid system of the city, the immense scale of public
architecture, and the evidence for standardized systems of
measurement all point to strong centralized planning and
coordination of labor. One feature unique to Teotihuacán in
Mesoamerica, the construction of massive, collective public
housing, also points to a state bureaucracy. Th e exact form of
rule at Teotihuacán, however, remains unclear. Th ere are no
individual portraits of rulers at the site. Teotihuacán art shows
smaller humans behaving deferentially toward large deities,
but there are no explicit scenes of humans dominating bound
captives, as in Olmec or Maya art. Fresco paintings show elite
fi gures in profi le processions, facing a frontal deity image on
an adjoining wall. Th ey are not distinguished from one an-
other by signs that could represent individual names until
late in the city’s history. However, they wear elaborate regalia,
including a distinctive tasseled headdress that might signify
rulership or at least high military or priestly rank. Th eir im-
ages are sometimes bordered by representations of the mythic
deity the Feathered Serpent, associated with kingship in later
Mesoamerican cultures, including the Aztec and Toltec.
Th e lack of images of individually named rulers in Teo-
tihuacán has led some scholars to conclude that rather than
having a single divine ruler like the Mayan city-states, Teo-
tihuacán was governed by a collective, perhaps of warrior-
priests or elite families. However, archaeological evidence
gathered over the past 20 years casts doubt on this model. At
the Pyramid of the Feathered Serpent, the remains of more
than 100 sacrifi cial victims were interred as off erings. Th e
bodies were richly ornamented, and diff erences in the quality
of the grave goods suggest that they represented members of
distinctive social ranks. Th ese mass executions refl ect a very
powerful and centralized government with the power of life
and death over its subjects, and the burials may have been
intended to accompany an individual king in a (now looted)
central tomb.government organization: The Americas 537