One of the attractions of the capital of Mexico, which is shown to tourists, is the so-called "pyramid" of Cuicuilco, located directly within the city limits of Mexico City (Fig. 14 c). Strictly speaking, if we rely on geometric definitions, this construction is not at all a pyramid. It's just that the word "pyramid" has become popular for some time now, and almost any elevation that has at least some semblance of stepped masonry, and sometimes even does not have such masonry, is called it, without thinking about the conformity of forms. Fashion has changed the content of the term …
In reality, Cuicuilco's "pyramid" is something more like a truncated cone, the lateral surface of which has four pronounced steps and hints of a fifth step that may have once existed. But what kind of tourist will go to see some truncated cone ?! But the "pyramid", and even declared "the most ancient Mexican pyramid" - is another matter!..
Long before its direct discovery, the "pyramid" of Cuicuilco, in fact, was predetermined to be called, if not "the most ancient," then at least "one of the most ancient." And the reason for this, as is often the case in history, was the purely subjective approaches of researchers. The fact is that at the very beginning of their formation as scientific disciplines, the ideology of archeology and history adopted today was based on the principle of “development from simple to complex”.
There is undoubtedly logic in this very principle. After all, it is complex - in structure, function, manufacturing procedure, etc. etc. - a thing cannot appear suddenly from scratch (except for the variant of "divine will", which belongs to the sphere of religion, not science, and therefore we will not consider it either). It can be the result of only a certain period in the development of culture, knowledge, technology, traditions, and so on … And therefore, simpler things should precede complex ones.
But even the most logical conclusion can be brought to the point of absurdity, which has happened in history and archeology - of all the possible options for applying this logical conclusion, the simplest, most extreme was adopted: the option of linear progressive development from simple to complex. And from it a seemingly simplest connection automatically followed: the simpler and more primitive the object, the older it is. Such an approach is good only in the case of precisely linear development and absolutely does not take into account the possibility of serious ups and downs of civilizations, a significant rollback in their development. Moreover, it does not take into account the variant of, say, the global cyclical nature of civilizations on the planet, as well as the variant of interference from outside by much more developed civilizations in the affairs of an underdeveloped region. It is this primitive-simplified approach that predicted Cuicuilco's “pyramid” its “antiquity” …
