4. Recent decipherments of Maya hieroglyphs at cities such as Tikal and Copan point to some kind of relationship between these cities and Teotihuacan. Individuals claiming to be from Teotihuacan evidently managed to insert themselves into the Maya royal dynasties. Although some scholars of Maya history claim that this signals an imperial takeover by Teotihuacan, the reality is probably less dramatic. To me it looks like freebooters acting on their own used some kind of Teotihuacan connection as propaganda to further their own cause. Stuart (2000) discusses the data; for a broader context, see Braswell (2003a).
5. Teotihuacan–Aztec continuities and disjunctions are discussed in the chapters in D. Carrasco et al. (2000); see also López Luján (1989).
6. Epiclassic sites are discussed in Diehl and Berlo (1989) and Solar Valverde (2006).
7. The best discussion of Aztec native historical accounts of Tollan and the Toltecs is still that of Nigel Davies (1977); see also Nicholson (2001). Archaeological research at Tula is discussed by Healan (1989), Mastache et al. (2002), and chapters in Kowalski and Kristan-Graham (2008).
8. Archaeologists have found Toltec ceramic vessels alongside Teotihuacan pots in burials at Tenochtitlan (López Luján et al. 2000), and Mexica artists copied Toltec styles just as they copied Teotihuacan and Early Aztec styles (Umberger 1987).
9. The Aztlan migrations, mentioned in most surviving native histories, are discussed by Castañeda de la Paz (2002, 2006), Smith (1984), and chapters in Fields and Zamudio-Taylor (2001).
10. Mesoamerican languages and their historical development are discussed in Kaufman and Justeson (2009) and Suárez (1983). For Nahuatl historical linguistics, see Beekman and Christensen (2003) and Kaufman and Justeson (2007, 2009).
11. The Mapa Quinatzin has been published by Mohar Betancourt (2004) and others. For analysis, see also Boone (2000a:191–194) or Douglas (2003). I discuss the Chichimec and Toltec themes in relation to the founding of Aztec cities in Smith (2008a:73–89).
12. This avoidance is reflected in archaeological settlement patterns, where there is little continuity of occupation between sites of the Early Postclassic (AD 900–1100) and Early Aztec (AD 1100–1300) periods. Most Early Aztec sites were new foundations, although some of the small Early Postclassic sites continued to be occupied into the Aztec period.
13. I discuss Early Aztec city-states in several works (Smith 2000, 2008a); see also Brumfiel (2005) and Hodge (1984).
14. There is no full excavation report on Teopanzolco. Angulo Villaseñor (1976) and Smith (2008a) provide some information. The sacrificial burial is described in González Sobrino et al. (2001), and ceramics from the site are described in Smith (2011). The site is open to the public today; some of the finds are on display at the Museo Regional de Cuauhnahuac in down-town Cuernavaca. The Museo Regional was built by the conqueror Hernando Cortés over the ruins of the Late Aztec royal palace of Cuauhnahuac, and some of the palace ruins can be seen today at the museum.
15. The basic report on Tenayuca is Anonymous (1935); information can also be found in Marquina (1964). Limón Boyce (1997) describes more recent excavations. Tenayuca is open daily to the public; there is a nice museum displaying some of the finds.
16. The main prose native accounts of Mexica history are found in Alvarado Tezozomoc (1975, 2001), the Codex Chimalpopoca (Bierhorst 1992), Durán (1994), and Torquemada (1975–1983). The best synthesis and presentation of these accounts is still Davies (1973).
17. Alvarado Tezozomoc (1975:49–51), translated by Davies (1973:31).
18. On historical grounds, 1325 is a reasonable date for the founding of Tenochtitlan. Excavations near the Templo Mayor in Mexico City, however, located Early Aztec deposits in the lowest levels (Matos Moctezuma 1999; Vega Sosa 1979), leading some scholars to suggest that there may have been an earlier settlement on the site that is not mentioned in the historical accounts (e.g., Graulich 1992c).
19. Because of Itzcoatl's “burning of the books,” we have relatively little surviving information on the Tepanec Empire. Carlos Santamarina (2006) has scoured the sources to reconstruct the outlines of this important polity.
20. This story is recounted in Alvarado Tezozomoc (1975:94–95). Marriage alliances as a form of diplomacy are described by Pedro Carrasco (1984).
21. León-Portilla (1963:155). Michel Graulich (1992c:25–26) argues that a major reason for rewriting the histories was to promote the rags-to-riches view of the Mexica past. Itzcoatl wanted to denigrate the achievements of the pre-Mexica peoples of the Valley of Mexico and to deny that Tenochtitlan existed as a settlement prior to its “founding” by the Mexica in 1325 (see chapter 8). As noted above, a major part of this effort was the removal of passages portraying the accomplishments of Tezozomoc and the Tepanec Empire (Santamarina 2005). P. Carrasco (1999) is the definitive study of the organization of the Triple Alliance; see also Berdan et al. (1996), Rojas and Smith (2007), and Sergheraert (2009).
22. Although most writers on the Aztecs use the term “tribute” for imperial income, these payments in fact were taxes, not tribute. See discussion in chapter 7.
23. Durán (1994:209–210). Not all of the laws are listed here.
24. See Pollard (1993) on Tarascan civilization.
25. Graulich (1992c) points out that most of the towns depicted on the Tizoc stone were conquered by his predecessors. This is another example of the Mexica kings rewriting history to glorify their dynasty and rulership.
26. These “rebellions” are described by Hassig (1988) and Davies (1973, 1987).
27. Because this excavation is still ongoing, only preliminary reports are available. See Barajas et al. (2009), Draper (2010), López Luján (2010), and Matos Moctezuma and López Luján (2007). The Templo Mayor is discussed in chapter 10. Even if this location turns out not to be the tomb of Ahuitzotl, the excavations have recovered many unique offerings, yielding much valuable information.
28. This is the view of Davies (1973:216) and Graulich (1994).
3 People on the Landscape
1. The climate patterns are revealed by several types of geophysical analyses. Studies of changing lake levels in central and western Mexico reveal the broad outlines of periods of drought and erosion. In the traditional climate model, the start of dry conditions around AD 600 coincided with the fall of Classic-period Teotihuacan, and their end around 1100 or 1200 coincided with the Aztec population explosion; see Ludlow-Wiechers et al. (2005), Metcalfe (2006), and Metcalfe et al. (2000, 2010). In an exciting new development Stahle et al. (2011) report a dendrochronological (tree-ring) sequence of year-by-year rainfall records for north-central Mexico; they identify the following periods of drought in central Mexico: AD 897–922, 1149–1167, 1378–1404, and 1514–1539. Although the impacts of these droughts on cultural development have yet to be analyzed, several patterns stand out: (1) major periods of drought coincided with the decline of the cities of Xochicalco and Tula; (2) the Early Aztec population surge coincided with a relatively drought-free interval; and (3) the Tepanec Empire expanded during an especially severe period of drought.
2. Larger families became economically beneficial to most people. Extra children contributed in the fields or the workshops to help meet increasing tribute demands, and to help families get ahead economically. City-state rulers had two good reasons to encourage larger families: more taxpayers, and more males to serve in the army. The relationship between population growth and socioeconomic change was one of mutual encouragement or, in the language of systems theory, positive feedback. Population growth stimulated social changes, some of which in turn encouraged further population growth. Unfortunately, there are few detailed studies of Aztec demography; see the limited discussion in McCaa (2000), Sanders et al. (1979), Smith and Heath-Smith (1994), and Whitmore and Williams (1998).
3. The comparative and theoretical literature on population pressure, agriculture intensification, and their relationships in ancient Mesoamerica and elsewhere is large. Netting (1993) is an excellent introduction to the
issues, and the essays in Marcus and Stanish (2006) and Thurston and Fisher (2007) show recent directions. Economic historians have shown that the ratio between the amount of farmland and the number of agricultural workers is a crucial factor for understanding preindustrial economies. Allen (1997) discusses the general literature, and I have applied this insight to Aztec cities in Smith (2008a:ch. 8).
4. The various Spanish estimates of the size of Aztec armies are discussed by Hassig (1988) and Sanders (1970:403–404).
5. See Borah and Cook (1963), Henige (1998), Sanders (1970), and Whitmore (1992).
6. The results are described, and their methods discussed, in Sanders et al. (1979:216–219, 34–52). Charlton (1970) is one of the studies of modern settlements in the Valley of Mexico used for population estimates. The methods of archaeological demography are far from foolproof, but comparisons with historical sources show that the archaeological population estimates are at least roughly correct. Similar patterns of rapid Late Aztec population growth have been found in Morelos and other areas adjacent to the Valley of Mexico (e.g, Hare 2001).
7. Aztec foods and diet are discussed by Coe (1994) and Ortiz de Montellano (1990).
8. Sahagún (1950–1982:bk. 6:235). Modern peasant maize rituals with Aztec parallels are described by ethnographers Lewis (1951), Sandstrom (1991), and Taggart (1983).
9. Díaz del Castillo (1963:233). Parsons (2006) discusses modern traditional methods of harvesting insects and algae; the nutritional value of the algae is discussed in Ortiz de Montellano (1990:102–106).
10. Harner (1977). These arguments were countered effectively by Ortiz de Montellano (1990:85–94); see chapter 9.
11. Katz et al. (1974); Ortiz de Montellano (1990:98–102).
12. Cook and Borah (1979), Sanders et al. (1979), Whitmore and Williams (1998), and Williams (1989) all argue that the Aztec population exceeded their carrying capacity, whereas Blanton et al. (1993:155–156, 201–203) and Ortiz de Montellano (1990:72–97) take an opposing stance. I favor the former interpretation. The nutritional status of individuals as determined from osteological analyses of skeletal remains could help clarify the situation, but to date very few Aztec burials have been analyzed this way.
13. Johnson and Earle (2000); Trigger (2003).
14. Sahagún (1950–1982:bk.10:41–42).
15. Aztec agricultural terracing is described by Donkin (1979), Sanders et al. (1979:242–251), and Smith and Price (1994).
16. Doolittle (1990) and Sanders et al. (1979:252–273) describe the technology and archaeological evidence for Aztec canal irrigation. Ethnohistorical accounts are discussed in Palerm (1972).
17. Aztec chinampas are discussed by Ávila López (1991), Nichols and Frederick (1993), Parsons et al. (1985), and Sanders et al. (1979:273–281).
18. Evans (1990) describes calmil farming at Cihuatecpan, and Smith et al. (forthcoming) discuss urban gardens on terraces at Calixtlahuaca.
19. Netting (1993); Wilken (1987).
20. There is much research and debate on this issue; see Hunt et al. (2005), Lansing (1991), Lees (1994), and Sanders et al. (1979:252–273).
21. Smith (1994).
22. Parsons (1991) and Sanders et al. (1979:280) argue for centralized control of chinampa construction, although Wilken's (1987) research suggests that households could have built and maintained the system; see also Erickson (2006) for a comparative perspective. The chinampas built around the edges of Tenochtitlan appear to have been small plots, each with a nearby house for the family of the farmers (Calnek 1972).
23. See discussion in Smith and Price (1994). The continuous and dispersed nature of these settlement patterns calls into question the very concept of an archaeological site as a discrete bounded unit of settlement.
24. This fieldwork is described in Smith (1992), Smith and Heath-Smith (1994), and Smith and Price (1994). The sites are difficult to reach today without a local guide.
25. Random sampling is a mathematical method for selecting items to study. It is designed to ensure that the items selected – the sample – are representative of the larger collection of items – the population. By using random sampling, we could generalize from our sample of excavated houses to the entire population of houses at these sites.
26. All houses at Capilco and most houses at Cuexcomate were simple structures corresponding to the residences of peasants or commoners, so we applied a household size figure of 5.5 persons (taken from Early Colonial census documents). Cuexcomate also had seven small elite residences, and we used a household size of 11 persons, also from the census documents. The census figures are discussed in P. Carrasco (1976) and S. L. Cline (1993); our methods of population estimate are described in Smith (1992).
27. These excavations were directed by T. Jeffrey Price, who conducted many of the technical analyses; see Smith and Price (1994). The example discussed in the text is unit 230.
28. Osvaldo Sterpone of the Instituto Nacional de Antropología e Historia made this discovery.
4 Artisans and their Wares
1. My use of the terms “utilitarian” and “luxury crafts” in this chapter is imprecise; technically these terms refer to the consumption (uses) of goods, not to their production. But as Elizabeth Brumfiel (1987) points out, utilitarian and luxury goods had contrasting patterns of production in Aztec society, and these are handy labels to organize the diversity of Aztec crafts.
2. There are a number of important recent collections of chapters on craft production in ancient civilizations; see Hruby and Flad (2007), Manzanilla and Chapdelaine (2009), and Shimada (2007).
3. Mesoamerican obsidian technology is discussed by Clark and Bryant (1997) and chapters in Hirth (2003) and Hirth and Andrews (2002).
4. Other major Mesoamerican obsidian sources are located in the mountains east of the Basin of Mexico, in the Tarascan territory of Michoacan, and in the highlands of Guatemala (Cobean 2002).
5. Archaeologist Don Crabtree was the first to perfect a method for prismatic blade removal. He used a wooden “chest-punch” from a standing position, with the core between his feet. John Clark (1982) later worked out an alternative method, probably closer to the Aztec technique, in which the blade was produced from a sitting position, again with core between the artisan's feet. For more information, see the sources listed in note 3.
6. Sahagún (1950–1982:bk.10:83).
7. Surprisingly, there is no comprehensive study of Aztec pottery. The best descriptions are provided by Séjourné (1970, 1983). Pottery production is discussed by Hodge et al. (1993).
8. Anawalt (1981) and Hicks (1994) discuss the uses of cotton cloth. Techniques of cloth production are described by Fauman-Fichman (1999) and Nichols et al. (2000).
9. The term “maguey” refers to several closely related species of the genus Agave that grow above 1,800 m elevation in central Mexico.
10. Hernández (1959:v.2:329), translated by Parsons and Parsons (1990:276). Fournier García (2007), Mendoza Cerón and Canger (1993), and Parsons and Parsons (1990) discuss the use of the maguey plant in ancient and modern times.
11. On the pulque cult, see Anawalt (1993) and Nicholson (1991).
12. Dorothy Hosler (1994) is the best source for information on copper and bronze metallurgy in Mesoamerica. My discussion is based upon that work plus conversations with Hosler, who has analyzed copper/bronze artifacts from my excavations and from numerous other sites in Mesoamerica. Descriptions of copper objects for sale in the Tlatelolco market are found in Sahagún (1950–1982:bk.8:67–69).
13. My interpretation of the economic context of part-time craft specialists differs from that of Elizabeth Brumfiel (1998), who has suggested that specialists decided to take up farming to ensure a secure source of food. Numerous historical and ethnographic studies from around the globe, however, reveal the opposite pattern – peasant farmers in times of economic hardship typically take up part-time crafts in order to supplement their income (S. Cook 1982; Thirsk 1961). This widespread pattern seems to f
it the available Aztec data: farming families turned to part-time craft production, rather than crafting families adopting part-time farming.
14. Sahagún (1950–1982:bk.9:83–97). Berdan (2005, 2006) discusses featherworking, and Berdan et al. (2009) describe experimental research on the glue used by Aztec featherworkers.
15. Codex Mendoza (1992:f.70r). See also Rojas (1986:116, 184) on the hereditary nature of Aztec crafts.
16. Aztec goldworking is described by Nicholson and Quiñones Keber (1983:152–161) and Saville (1920). Sahagún (1950–1982:bk.9:73–78) describes the goldsmiths of Tenochtitlan. Mixtec gold from Oaxaca is described and illustrated in Caso (1969).
17. Sahagún (1950–1982:bk.9:80).
18. The mineral jadeite is one of two minerals whose polished products are called “jade”; the other is nephrite. In Mesoamerican archaeology, the terms “jade,” “jadeite,” and “greenstone” are often used interchangeably. Most jadeite was from the Motagua Valley of Guatemala, where geologists have recently discovered a source that was actively used by ancient Mesoamerican peoples to make jewelry; see Gendron et al. (2002).
19. The best discussion of Aztec mosaics is McEwan et al. (2006); see also Nicholson and Quiñones Keber (1983:170–177). For the written evidence, see Sahagún (1950–1982:bk.8:80).
20. See Brumfiel (1980) and Hodge and Smith (1994).
21. For the Otumba project, see Charlton et al. (1991, 2000), Nichols et al. (2000), and Otis Charlton et al. (1993). Conversations with the late Thomas Charlton, Deborah Nichols, Cynthia Otis Charlton, and Timothy Hare have contributed greatly to my knowledge of this project, and I thank Charlton and Otis Charlton for several tours of the Otumba site and labs over the years.
5 The Commercial Economy
1. For descriptions of traditional peasant markets in modern Mesoamerica, see Carmack et al. (2007), Cook and Diskin (1976), and Malinowski and de la Fuente (1982).
The Aztecs Page 34
