History of the Conquest of Mexico (Vol. 1-4). William Hickling Prescott
“Mexico,” first edition. The original of the ancient map was obtained by that traveller from the collection of the unfortunate Boturini; if, as seems probable, it is the one indicated on page 13 of his Catalogue, I find no warrant for Mr. Bullock’s statement that it was the one prepared for Cortés by the order of Montezuma.
[39] [The first man chosen to be the chief of men (tlacatecuhtli), or superior officer of the confederacy, was Acamapichtli. His election took place in 1375, and he is sometimes called by European writers the “founder of the confederacy.” His name, translated, was “Handful of Reeds.” The succession of “chiefs of men” was as follows:
| 1. | Acamapichtli (Handful of Reeds) | 1375 |
| 2. | Huitzilihuitl (Humming Bird) | 1403 |
| 3. | Chimalpopoca (Smoking Shield) | 1414 |
| 4. | Izcoatzin (Obsidian Snake) | 1427 |
| 5. | Montezuma I (Angry Chief) | 1436 |
| 6. | Axayacatl (Face in the Water) | 1464 |
| 7. | Tizoc (Wounded Leg) | 1477 |
| 8. | Ahuitzotl (Water Rat) | 1486 |
| 9. | Montezuma II | 1502 |
| 10. | Cuitlahuatzin | 1520 |
| 11. | Guatemotzin | 1520 |
M.]
[40] Clavigero, Stor. del Messico, tom. i. lib. 2.—Torquemada, Monarch. Ind., tom. i. lib. 2.—Boturini, Idea, p. 146.—Col. of Mendoza, Part 1, and Codex Telleriano-Remensis, apud Antiq. of Mexico, vols. i., vi.—Machiavelli has noticed it as one great cause of the military successes of the Romans, “that they associated themselves, in their wars, with other states, as the principal,” and expresses his astonishment that a similar policy should not have been adopted by ambitious republics in later times. (See his Discorsi sopra T. Livio, lib. 2, cap. 4, apud Opere (Geneva, 1798).) This, as we have seen above, was the very course pursued by the Mexicans.
[41] Ixtlilxochitl, Hist. Chich., MS., cap. 36.
[42] [Robertson, in his History of America, was the first man to question the correctness of the judgment passed by the Spanish chroniclers upon the Aztec institutions. Subsequent American writers gave louder expression to his doubts. As has been said in the notes upon the preceding chapter, Mr. Morgan proved conclusively that the so-called “empire” was no empire at all, but only a confederacy of three tribes. Mr. Morgan, however, was sometimes led into inaccuracy and extravagance of statement because of his desire to place all the American aborigines on the same institutional plane.
Adolf Bandelier, pupil and disciple of Morgan, persevering and accurate scholar, investigated the subject in an entirely unprejudiced way and with a thoroughness which forces men to place almost implicit confidence in his conclusions. It is well here to summarize those conclusions.
The Mexican confederacy was made up of three tribes, the Aztecs, the Tezcucans, and the Tlacopans, who dwelt in neighboring pueblos.
Of these tribes the Aztecs and Tezcucans were superior to the Tlacopans. Spoils of war were always divided into five portions. The Tlacopans took one, their allies shared equally the other four parts. The Indian pueblos generally were designed to withstand a protracted siege, but the Mexican pueblos were almost impregnable. It is not likely that any other Indian tribes could have captured them. Dwelling securely in these great communal houses, which were also fortresses, the Aztec confederacy held many other tribes in subjection. It was only necessary for it to send its agents to other pueblos to secure at once the specified tribute. Failure to pay this tribute brought summary punishment at the hands of the warriors of the confederacy. The “empire” was “only a partnership formed for the purpose of carrying on the business of warfare, and that intended, not for the extension of territorial ownership, but only for an increase of the means of subsistence.” The subject peoples were never incorporated into the confederacy. The tribe remained intact. The houses the tribe occupied were common property, and so was the land cultivated. Neither land nor houses could be sold, and as the tribe increased in numbers new communal houses were built to accommodate the increase. The great fortress-dwellings in a, for savages, well-cultivated land prevented the subdivision of tribes which was constantly taking place in wilder North America.
Twenty clans, organized into four phratries, made up of the Aztec tribe. The clans were called “calpullis.” They were governed by a council of chiefs, “tecuhtli,” elected by the clan. There was an official head, the “calpullac,” whose duties were mainly civil, and also a military leader, the “ohcacautin” (“elder brother”). Painful religious ordeals accompanied the initiation of these men into office. Clan officers held their places during good behavior. Medicinemen, or priests, were members of the clan council. To the four phratries into which the clan was divided four quarters of the city of Mexico, each under its own captain, were assigned. Their titles were “man of the house of darts,” “chief of the eagle and cactus,” “blood-shedder,” and “cutter of men.” Of these captains the “chief of the eagle and cactus” was chief executioner. Their principal duty was to maintain order both within and without the pueblo. In each of these four quarters was an armory (“house of darts”), in which the weapons of the phratry were kept when its warriors were not engaged in warfare. The phratry was in Mexico primarily a military organization.
Twenty members, one from each clan, made up the tribal council which exercised supreme control over the Aztec tribe. The member who was chosen to represent the clan was called “tlatoani,” the “speaker,” and the council was called “tlatocan,” the “place of speech.” Sessions of the council were regularly held every ten days, and every eighty days an extra session was convened, to which the twenty “ohcacautins,” the four captains of the phratries, the two civil executives of the tribe, and some others were summoned. Its decisions were final.
As the clan had its civil head, or calpullac, so the tribe had a corresponding officer, the cihuacoatl, or “female snake.” The “snake woman” was always a man. He was chief judge of the clan and was elected for life by the tribal council. The “snake woman” was second in command to the “chief of men,” or tlacatecuhtli, the head war chief. While at first head war chief of the Aztecs, about the year 1430 the tlacatecuhtli was made head war chief and commander of the confederacy. Montezuma was “chief of men,” and the Spaniards saw him surrounded with such state that they not unnaturally supposed him to be king of the Aztecs. Montezuma’s position, however, was not at all that of a king, and most of the royal functions fell to the lot of the “snake woman.” Bandelier thinks the “chief of men” was only the chief military officer. He was elected by the “elder brothers” (ohcacautins) of the clans, the tribal council, and the leading priests, sitting in assembly. A principle of succession seems to have confined the election to members of a special clan. Moreover, from four officers—namely, a member of the priesthood called the “man of the dark house,” and the phratry captains called respectively “man of the house of darts,” “blood-shedder,” and “cutter of men”—the “chief of men” was always chosen. He exercised certain priestly functions after his election. His first official