The center cannot hold: A Bayesian chronology for the collapse of Tiwanaku
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The timing of Tiwanaku's collapse remains contested. Here we present a generational-scale chronology of Tiwanaku using Bayesian models of 102 radiocarbon dates, including 45 unpublished dates. This chronology tracks four community practices: residing short- vs. long-term, constructing monuments, discarding decorated ceramics, and leaving human burials. Tiwanaku was founded around AD 100 and around AD 600, it became the region's principal destination for migrants. It grew into one of the Andes' first cities and became famous for its decorated ceramics, carved monoliths, and large monuments. Our Bayesian models show that monument building ended ~AD 720 (the median of the ending boundary). Around ~AD 910, burials in tombs ceased as violent deaths began, which we document for the first time in this paper. Ritualized murders are limited to the century leading up to ~AD 1020. Our clearest proxy for social networks breaking down is a precise estimate for the end of permanent residence, ~AD 1010 (970-1050, 95%). This major inflection point was followed by visitors who used the same ceramics until ~AD 1040. Temporary camps lasted until roughly ~AD 1050. These four events suggest a rapid, city-wide collapse at ~AD 1010-1050, lasting just ~20 years (0-70 years, 95%). These results suggest a cascading breakdown of community practices and social networks that were physically anchored at Tiwanaku, though visitors continued to leave informal burials for centuries. This generation-scale chronology suggests that collapse 1) took place well before reduced precipitation, hence this was not a drought-induced societal change and 2) a few resilient communities sustained some traditions at other sites, hence the chronology for the site of Tiwanaku cannot be transposed to all sites with similar material culture.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".