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)”

• The archaeoseismic events do not coincide with periods of strong monsoons in the Central Mexico Basin. • Heavy rains as the cause of damage to the Teotihuacan pyramids are inconsistent with the observed spatial pattern of destruction. • The Crete earthquake of 1303 CE caused damage to the Giza pyramids similar to that described here, with the epicenter located hundreds of kilometers away. • Suárez et al. misinterpreted the EAEs due to an incorrect analysis of historical photographs. • Archaeoseismology is a robust technique for identifying earthquakes that have affected archaeological sites. 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.