Reply to comment by Suárez et al., did Teotihuacán collapse due to a major earthquake? On “Teotihuacan ancient culture affected by megathrust earthquakes during the early Epiclassic period (Mexico)”

Suárez et al. (2025) commented on our work (Teotihuacan ancient culture affected by megathrust earthquakes during the early Epiclassic Period (Mexico), Journal of Archaeological Science: Reports 55, 104528), relying on a limited understanding of archaeoseismology and without presenting new data or a...

ver descrição completa

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autores: Pérez-López Raúl, Moragas Segura, Natàlia, Elez Javier, Silva, Pablo G., Giner Robles, Jorge, Rodríguez Pascua, Miguel Ángel, 1969-, Ramos Ordoño, Adrià, Perucha María A., Roquero, Elvira, Garduño-Monroy, Víctor H.
Tipo de documento: artigo
Estado:Versão publicada
Data de publicação:2025
País:España
Recursos:Varias* (Consorci de Biblioteques Universitáries de Catalunya, Centre de Serveis Científics i Acadèmics de Catalunya)
Repositório:Recercat. Dipósit de la Recerca de Catalunya
OAI Identifier:oai:recercat.cat:2445/224058
Acesso em linha:https://hdl.handle.net/2445/224058
http://hdl.handle.net/2445/224058
Access Level:Acceso aberto
Palavra-chave:Paleosismologia
Teotihuacán (San Juan Teotihuacán, Mèxic : Jaciment arqueològic)
Geoarqueologia
Paleoseismology
Teotihuacán Site (San Juan Teotihuacán, Mexico)
Archaeological geology
Descrição
Resumo:Suárez et al. (2025) commented on our work (Teotihuacan ancient culture affected by megathrust earthquakes during the early Epiclassic Period (Mexico), Journal of Archaeological Science: Reports 55, 104528), relying on a limited understanding of archaeoseismology and without presenting new data or alternative theories. Their critique is based on misinterpretation of historical photographs from Gamio’s 1920 excavations, confusion between physical weathering and brittle deformation of andesite blocks, and unsupported claims about the multiple archaeoseismic indicators identified at Teotihuacan. They offer no scientific argument addressing the Earthquake Archaeological Effects (EAEs) we described or the spatial patterns of seismic deformation proposed in our study. We have replied point by point to all of Suárez et al.’s (2025) comments from an archaeoseismological perspective as well as from archaeology, earthquake geology, numerical modelling, and geomechanics.