In a later reassessment, however, Aliphat Fernández and Werner (1994) drew attention to other possible scenarios (rows B–D, F–I, Z). Historians of the Colonial period ( Assadourian, 1991a, Trautmann, 1974 and Trautmann, 1981) had discussed in detail rows B, C, D, and Z, though not their environmental consequences. Rows F and

G stem from more casual remarks ( Aliphat Fernández and Werner, 1994 and Fábila et al., 1955, 67; Haulon et al., 2007, Kern, 1968 and West, 1970) on historical processes experienced by much of central Mexico. The most recent addition is row E, identified in Skopyk’s (2010) negative evaluation of the ‘plague of sheep’ hypothesis ( Melville, 1994) as applied to Tlaxcala. Skopyk criticizes the fixation of prior historiography on haciendas, and stresses that until very late in the Colonial 5 FU period most land, especially on slopes, was managed in independent Indian holdings of moderate size. He has uncovered documents, many of them in Nahuatl, suggesting a surprisingly early and widespread use of draft animals, and frenetic terracing activity in response to marketing opportunities for pulque from the mid-17th C. onward. He also draws attention to the possible climatic adversities faced by farmers in the Colonial period (row X). There has been little response to this predominantly Spanish and German-language literature

from archaeologists, even though it deals with mainstream concerns of the Ferroptosis inhibitor cancer New Archaeology, such as agricultural intensification and site formation processes. Exceptions include García Cook (1986), who focused on the prehispanic era, and the collaboration of Aliphat Fernández and Werner (1994). A tension between process and history familiar to most archaeologists is perceptible in Table 2. Intensification and disintensification of land use alternated in historical Tlaxcala, on different temporal and spatial scales. The former dominates rows A, C, F, H, I, Y, and Z, the latter is prominent in rows B,

Sodium butyrate D, and G. While processual similarities can be posited for each cycle of intensification or disintensification, the rich historical record makes it clear that the same set of circumstances could never be repeated. Historicity is also brought out by the earth sciences. The process of tepetate formation can be mitigated, but is irreversible. As a result, the pool of cultivable farmland on slopes, though oscillating on timescales of decades to centuries, has shrunk over the longer term (Borejsza, 2006; see the ‘dynamic equilibrium with a long-term trend’ of Butzer, 1982, figs. 2 and 3). Except X, each of the rows of Table 2 starts with an ultimate cause that is anthropogenic. Proximate causes are geomorphic and fall in one of two groups: those related to a reduction in ground cover through deforestation, fallow shortening, grazing, or slower growth of natural vegetation; and those related to the collapse of agricultural terraces and other man-made landforms.