This study examines diachronic changes in power relations among different social segments, including ruling elites, intermediate elites, and commoners, at Teotihuacan, the capital of a regional state in Central Mexico (ca. A.D. 150-650). The exercise of power through the production and exchange of material culture is multidimensional at multiple scales, and this requires an analytical division of the sources of power. Among different kinds of material culture, architecture provides one of the critical resources in producing, reproducing, and transforming power relations in political spheres due to its visibility and durability. Focusing on labor and material resources employed for urban construction, this study provides a deeper understanding of the trajectory of sociopolitical changes at Teotihuacan and how different social segments were articulated with one another.

Drawing on extensive data from excavated architectural complexes from both the central precinct and the surrounding apartment compounds, this study provides three sets of analyses: quantitative analysis of labor expenditure; distributional and sourcing analyses of cut stone blocks; and compositional analysis of lime plaster. These sets of analyses are combined to elucidate the differential distribution of resources and the labor organization that allowed such distribution.

The results demonstrate that changes in power relations were highly dynamic, but can be grouped into three developmental processes. In the initial period (ca. A.D. 150-250), the power of ruling elites was highly centralized with possibly despotic rulers. In the following period (ca. A.D. 250-450), the power of ruling elites became less centralized, but they exercised a strong infrastructural power. In addition, the majority of apartment compounds across the city were constructed through the active intervention of the state. Through this process, civil society, including intermediate elites and commoners, was consolidated and a well-integrated state bureaucracy was developed. During the final period (ca. A.D. 450-650), the power of ruling elites was significantly reduced and some intermediate elites became increasingly powerful, probably to the point where they could threaten the ruling elites. Competition for power among ruling and intermediate elites may have intensified factionalism within the city and resulted in the eventual dissolution of the state administrative system.