Final answer:
The decline of the Classic Maya period, characterized by broken alliances and the shift in the nature of warfare, coupled with decentralization and the lack of a political center before the Spanish arrival, indicate that Mayan kings during the Terminal Classic and Postclassic periods were less powerful.
Step-by-step explanation:
Evidence that Mayan kings of the northern Yucatan during the Terminal Classic and Postclassic were less powerful than Classic Maya kings includes several historical factors. Firstly, the decline of the Classic period around 900 CE saw the breakdown of alliances, increased conflicts, and the decreased production of luxury goods, leading to depopulation and city abandonment. Additionally, the loose federation of Maya city-states and unstable relations among them in place of a centralized empire implies less control and power for individual rulers. It is also noted that warfare had shifted towards capture and ritual sacrifice rather than conquest and direct rule. Furthermore, the shift from being centralized urban centers to a village-based agricultural system with no single political center before the Spanish arrived shows a decentralization and decline in kingly power.
During the Classic period, the Maya had powerful city-states like Tikal and Calakmul, which were involved in warfare, controlled trade routes, and demanded tribute from subdued enemies; traits indicative of their relative power and influence. Mayan kings could exert considerable authority through control over religious ceremonies, construction projects, and wars. However, after the Classic period, the changing political landscape, increased incidents of warfare, and the shift towards smaller village life suggest that subsequent kings held less power than their predecessors.