Simplisme

I hold as rule-of-thumb that when an academic derides a theory as "simplistic", the theory was probably true. Saraceni today directs us to an analysis of drought-resistant crops among the Maya and associates.

The claim here, by UC Riverside archaeologist Scott Fedick and plant physiologist Louis Santiago, is that all the various "Maya" had enough variety in their crops that a drought would, still, spare enough crop for the farms to get by. The standard Mesoamerican chol package was (and is) maize and beans. If the irrigation canals run low, these two point out that the peasants can switch to (say) cassava. Thus Fedick: One thing we do know is the overly simplistic explanation of drought leading to agricultural collapse is probably not true.

Fair enough: the "Maya" won't die. The Maya haven't died, from the true ones in the north to the Quiche in the south. Not even the Choltal languages in between are quite dead. Linda Schele was telling us this decades ago and she was right. But. Those languages are not anymore dominant.

This tells me that although the people could survive a drought, those dependent upon a chol economy will be abandoning that economy. The civilisation will collapse. With a few outlying exceptions, of course. Literally: the centre cannot hold.

And what do we find among the ruins of Choltal-speaking civilisations but a mix of other languages, often related to Choltal but... not very related. The Lacandon, the only true Maya here, traipsed in all the way from the Yucatan. The mountain men - Mam, Quiche et al. expanded their control.

UPDATE 4/7/23: Destablisation.