Reading Teotihuacan apartment plans: household space and shared facilities worksheet
Read archaeological plans, trace movement between spaces and distinguish observations from interpretations about everyday household life.
Source and preparation
Use Figure 4 in Smith and colleagues’ study of Teotihuacan apartment compounds: panel (a) shows Tetitla and panel (b) Xolalpan. Open the figure alongside this worksheet or use an appropriately authorized classroom copy. The figure is not reproduced here.
The authors distinguish household dwellings from other compound spaces and interpret some central courtyards as probably shared. Their plans combine archaeological documentation; a plan should not automatically be treated as a snapshot of one occupation date. These are modern archaeological representations, not drawings made by ancient residents.
Suggested use: pairs, approximately 35–45 minutes. Materials: the published figure, this worksheet and a pencil. Read the figure caption and relevant discussion before starting. For background, see daily life in Teotihuacan.
Household space and shared facilities: evidence sheet
Source: Smith et al., Apartment Compounds, Households, and Population in the Ancient City of Teotihuacan, Mexico (2019), Figure 4. Begin with Tetitla, panel (a); use Xolalpan, panel (b), for comparison. Keep the published plan available while completing the sheet.
1. Identify what the plan records
Record the compound, figure and panel. Copy any date or building phase supplied by the source; otherwise write “not specified in this figure.” Record whether a scale, orientation and explanation of symbols are supplied. Explain how one missing item limits your reading.
Compound/panel: ____________________ Phase/date: ____________________ Scale/orientation/key: __________________________________________________ Limitation: ____________________________________________________________
2. Observe before interpreting
Choose three features you can locate precisely. Describe visible lines, openings and spatial relationships before suggesting a use. Use the source’s labels where available; otherwise describe the position or add your own clearly marked reference letters. Do not label a room “kitchen” or “bedroom” solely from its shape.
| Feature and location | Visible evidence | Possible interpretation and uncertainty |
|---|---|---|
| A: __________________ | ____________________ | ____________________ |
| B: __________________ | ____________________ | ____________________ |
| C: __________________ | ____________________ | ____________________ |
3. Trace access
Choose two connected spaces and trace a route through visible openings. List the spaces crossed. If an entrance or connection is unclear, mark it uncertain rather than drawing a new doorway. How might this route affect movement or privacy? Explain why restricted access alone cannot identify who lived in a room.
Route: ________________________________________________________________ Evidence and uncertainty: ______________________________________________ Possible effect on daily life: __________________________________________
4. Test a claim about shared facilities
Select a courtyard or circulation space that might have served more than one room group. What visible connections support that suggestion? Could it instead have served a smaller group? Consider possible activities such as passing through, working or gathering, but label these as hypotheses. For a proposed drain, cooking installation or storage facility, require explicit source evidence; write “not established from this plan” when appropriate.
Possible shared space: _________________________________________________ Evidence for access by several groups: __________________________________ Alternative interpretation: ____________________________________________ Additional evidence needed: ____________________________________________
5. Compare and conclude
Compare Tetitla with Xolalpan in Figure 4. Identify one similarity and one difference in spatial arrangement. Do not compare printed sizes unless the scales support that comparison. Then write a short conclusion: “The plan suggests … because … . However, it cannot establish … .” Include two observations, one possible implication for everyday life and one limitation. Explain why one room need not equal one household.
Similarity: ___________________________________________________________ Difference: ___________________________________________________________ Conclusion: ___________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________
Discussion and feedback
Assess the reasoning against the published plan and accompanying discussion. Look for precise feature locations, routes through documented openings, and a clear distinction between observation and inference. Accept different interpretations when students identify supporting evidence and acknowledge alternatives.
Useful follow-up questions include: What excavation evidence would help identify food preparation or storage? Does a possible shared space prove that everyone had equal access? What evidence would be needed to estimate residents or identify relationships between them?
This is an open-ended evidence exercise. It supplies no fixed room-function answer key. Do not infer a resident’s occupation, gender, family relationship or exact household size from a plan alone.