20 



INSTITUTE OF SOCIAL ANTHROPOLOGY PUBLICATION NO. 13 



and, on their heels, by the Teochichirnecs, who 

 either were Otomi, or Otomi who had become 

 Nahuatized. 



On the whole, these traditions accord relatively 

 well with the distribution of native speech in the 

 Zacatlan area and may, in part, explain the pres- 

 ence of Mexicano cheek by jowl with Totonac in 

 much of Totonacapan at the time of the Discovery. 

 Morover, the supposed date of the Chichimec- 

 Teochichimec incursions accords well with that 

 given by archeologists for the destruction of 

 ancient Taj in. In a broad sense, therefore, there 

 is indirect confirmation of legendary history. 



Unfortunately, the Papantla-Tajin zone, which 

 interests us most, seldom is mentioned specifically 

 in connection with these movements of peoples. 

 There are traditions of temporary Toltec settle- 

 ment at "Tuzapan," in the lowlands near Papantla. 

 And the Olmeca-Zacateca also may have reached 

 "Tuzapan." 40 It is impossible to say how wide- 

 spread were the effects of the Olmeca-Zacateca 

 migration in Totonacapan. At the time they left 

 Cholula, the related Olmeca-Xicalanca moved 

 southeast to the Gulf coast, but apparently their 

 route lay well to the south of Totonacapan. 



The succeeding migration, that of the Chichi- 

 mecs of Xolotl, cannot be associated directly with 

 the Papantla-Tajin zone, but was concentrated 

 about Zacatlan, in the Sierra de Puebla. Un- 

 identified Chichimec conquerors settled Cuautenco 

 and Totutla, near Tetela, likewise in the Sierra 

 do Pueblo ; Tlacolulan, near Jalapa ; and Misantla. 



The next group of intruders, the Teochichirnecs, 

 pushed into the lowlands and peopled Papantla 

 and "Tuzapan"; they also occupied "Tonatico," 

 Chichilintla, Nautla, "Cempoala," Jalpan, and 

 Metztitlan (Torquemada 1:262, 264, 269 ). 41 



40 Kirchhoff (1940, map 4) carries this group as far northeast 

 as "Tuzapan" presumably on the authority of Mufioz Camargo. 

 However, in the latter source -we have been unable to find any 

 statement which would warrant such interpretation. 



"Mufioz Camargo (p. 45) describes this same colonization, 

 attributing it to the "Chichimecs" — a term under which he cozily 

 and ambiguously unites Tolteca-Chichimeca, Chichimec, and Teo- 

 chichimec (Kirchhoff, 1940, p. 98). His use of the same term 

 for quite distinct groups of peoples results in pitfalls for the 

 unwary, for which reason we have not dared rely very heavily on 

 his data. 



In this particular case, however, he evidently is speaking of the 

 peoples whom Torquemada calls Teochichimec. He mentions 

 precisely the same pueblos, and in the same order, from which It 

 may be guessed that Torquemada copied from him. Chavero (in 

 Mufioz Camargo, ftn. 1, p. 19) indicates another passage 

 which Torquemada presumably lifted from the same source. 



Both authors date from the late sixteenth century, with Mufioz 

 Camargo probably somewhat earlier. Carrera in Diaz-Thome 



Metztitlan definitely was non-Totonac. The other 

 pueblos were included in sixteenth-century Toto- 

 nacapan, although before the Spaniards arrived 

 on the scene, the Triple Alliance had established a 

 garrison at Nautla. 



The Chichimec-Teochichimec incursions not 

 only penetrated Totonacapan, but also extended 

 far beyond its bounds. According to Ixtlilxochitl 

 (1 : 88, 474), the territory of Xolotl, the first Chi- 

 chimec leader, included parts of the Huasteca, as 

 well as the hinterland of Totonacapan, about 

 Perote (Poyauhtecatl; Torquemada 1 : 262). The 

 Teochichirnecs, from their base in Tlaxcala, set- 

 tled Jico (old "Xicochimalco"), southwest of 

 Jalapa, beyond the limits of Totonacapan; and, 

 together with the Aculhua, they peopled "Cohua- 

 tgaqualco, Cempohuallan . . . y toda la Huaxteca 

 de Panuco" (Torquemada 1 : 263, 269) . Torque- 

 mada's combined statements, together with those 

 of other sources, would have Chichimecs and/or 

 Teochichirnecs scattered throughout Totonacapan 

 and established, to boot, in an area just to the 

 south (Jico and Coatzacoalcos) and immediately 

 to the north (Panuco) , as well as in the hinterland. 



Under the circumstances, it seems logical to con- 

 clude that at one time or another, virtually all of 

 Totonacapan was affected by successive waves of 

 invaders and that the modern Totonac — probably 

 in blood, in culture, and perhaps in language — 

 represent the fusion of an old population with 

 subsequent invaders. Under the circumstances, 

 the chances of a perceptible survival of the early 

 Olmeca-La Venta culture among the modern 

 Totonac are pretty slim (Mayas y Olmecas, p. 81). 



MEXICAN CONQUEST 



Before the Discovery by the Spaniards, Totona- 

 capan was subjected to still another conquest, 

 namely that of the Mexica. Essentially late, this 

 conquest seems to have been largely political and 

 commercial. There is no mention of actual settle- 

 ment, although garrisons were established at key 

 points; and the Mexicans appear to have concen- 

 trated their efforts on collecting tribute. 



et al.. p. 103) believes that he wrote between 1576 and 1595; 

 Veytia (1 : 287) places the date about 15S5. We have not been 

 able to discover when Torquemada started work on the history 

 to which he is said to have devoted 20 years (Clavijero 1 : 29), 

 but he himself states that his Totonac data were recorded in 1600. 

 The first edition of Torquemada appeared in 1614 (Clavijero 

 1 : 29) or in 1615 (Beristaln 3 : 185). 



