272 



INSTITUTE OF SOCIAL ANTHKOPOLOGY — PUBLICATION NO. 13 



in the vicinity of 1457. 44 Regardless of date, 45 

 by the end of the second Cotaxtla war, Moctezuma 

 and the Triple Alliance had overrun much of the 

 Gulf coast. In the north, they held a cluster of 

 pueblos in the southern Huasteca. Immediately 

 to the south, there was a sizable island of uncon- 

 quered territory in northern Totonacapan. 46 But 

 farther south, the allied forces had made a clean 

 sweep. The important southern Totonac cen- 

 ters — "Cempoala," "Quiahuixtlan," and "Ozeloa- 

 pan" — had been conquered during the first Cotax- 



44 To reduce this passage of Torquemada (1:157, 161) to 

 calendar years necessitates counting the years lapsed since the 

 ninth of the reign of Moctezuma, hence there is considerable 

 possibility of error. 



45 There is one confusing discrepancy. The Historia de los 

 mexicanos por sus pinturas (p. 231) places the suffocation of the 

 Mexican ambassadors by chili fumes in the year 152 [1474]. 

 Accordingly, the event would take place, not during the reign 

 of Moctezuma, but during that of Axayacatl, his successor. 



That there was an uprising in Cotaxtla during the reign of the 

 latter is attested by most other sources (Cfidice Chimalpopoca, 

 Anales de Tlatelolco, Codex Telleriano-Remensis, ColecciGn de 

 Mendoza, Torquemada, and Veytia), although Tezozomoc, Duran, 

 and Ixtlilxochitl fail to mention Cotaxtla during the regime of 

 Axayacatl. It is perfectly possible that Tezozomoc and Duran 

 erroneously have attributed the chili episode to the reign of 

 Moctezuma ; yet their description is so detailed and the asso- 

 ciation with Moctezuma so convincing, that it is difficult to 

 doubt their account. 



In short, there is an impasse. In this particular case, we 

 have chosen to follow the Cr6nica X sources (Tezozomoc, Duran, 

 Codice Ramirez) in attributing two Cotaxtla wars to Mocte- 

 zuma — the first prior to the Mixtecan campaign, the second, sub- 

 sequent to it. Barlow (1948, pp. 22, 26) has chosen the alterna- 

 tive. In his description of the first Cotaxtla war, he cites 

 Tezozomoc extensively, but ignores his implied dating. He places 

 the campaign in 1461 or 1463 ; we suspect that these dates refer 

 not to this conquest, but to the subsequent one, which follows 

 the Mixtecan campaign. 



Barlow's first Cotaxtla war falls within the reign of Moctezuma, 

 but the second transpires 6 or 7 years after his death. As a 

 sequel to the Cotaxtla uprising, Moctezuma decreed the death of 

 the two rulers of Cotaxtla; but Barlow (1948, footnote 59, p. 

 30) has these same individuals survive until 1474, when they 

 lead the uprising during the reign of Axayacatl. However, 

 Tezozomoc (p. 148) attributes their deaths definitely to Mocte- 

 zuma, and the C6dice Ramirez (p. 180) gives a detailed descrip- 

 tion : "... Motecuzuma . . . mand6 fuesen degollados, por detras 

 cortadas sus cabezas y no por la garganta, y que fuesen a 

 ejecutar esta justicia dos oidores del consejo supremo, y asf 

 ellos mismos los degollaban con unas espadas de navaja. . . ." 



40 As a general thing, the Totonac seem to have been unable 

 to offer effective resistance ; that northern Totonacapan pre- 

 served its independence probably meant that the Triple Alliance 

 was not interested in conquering it at that time. However, a 

 somewhat obscure statement indicates offensive warfare by un- 

 identified groups of Totonac and Huastecans, in 1467, toward the 

 end of the reign of Moctezuma I : 



"1 acatl ... A este tiempo vinieron todos los totonacas y 

 los cuextecas, que andan desnudos, sin bragas : vinieron a pelear 

 en Tzompanco. Ahi por primera vez vinieron a mostrar su estan- 

 darte bianco, que los gui6 hacia aca y que venfa siendo su 

 ensena. Finalmente, los llevaron de vencida, y fu6 a aplacarse 

 la guerra en Otompan y Papahuacan" (Cfidice Chimalpopoca, p. 

 54). See also footnote 5, map 14.) 



tla campaign, and by the end of his reign, Mocte- 

 zuma controlled the coast, from "Cempoala" to 

 Cosamaloapan. Moreover, he held a great block 

 of hinterland (map 14) . 



Probably these are to be regarded as nominal 

 conquests : there was a battle ; the Mexicans were 

 victorious and imposed tribute. But that they did 

 not have a strangle hold on the coast is clear from 

 the frequency of subsequent revolts. There is no 

 indication that Moctezuma established either gar- 

 risons or Mexican overseers in the northern stretch 

 of the coast, although Ixtlilxochitl (2:196-197) 

 claims that Texcoco did so. After the first 

 Cotaxtla war, Moctezuma installed a mayordomo 

 for the "Cempoala"-Cotaxtla zone ; and following 

 the second, both governors (Tezozomoc, p. 149) 

 and garrison were imposed (Torquemada 1: 162). 

 Even this move did not make the conquest perma- 

 nent. The immediate successors of Moctezuma 

 added relatively little new conquered territory 

 along the Gulf but they were busily occupied in 

 suppressing uprisings. 



AXAYACATL ( 1469-81 )« 



With the death of Moctezuma I, Axayacatl 

 replaced him as ruler. He started with a "pre- 

 coronation" raid far to the south, in order to ob- 

 tain prisoners for sacrifice (Torquemada 1: 172). 

 Tehuantepec and Huatulco are mentioned, but 

 there is no indication that pueblos at such a dis- 

 tance were incorporated into the Mexican realm 

 at this time. Also early in his career, Axayacatl 

 conquered Tlatlauquitepec, which might be one 

 of several pueblos of that name ; we have placed it 

 (map 15, No. 1) doubtfully in the State of Puebla, 

 adjacent to several other conquests of Axayacatl. 

 However, his first major undertaking was the 

 conquest of Mexico-Tlatelolco, the sister city of 

 Mexico-Tenochtitlan, which most sources date as 

 1473 (table 18, No. 3). Axayacatl also devoted 

 considerable time to recurrent campaigns in near- 

 by areas to the west and southwest (map 15). 



47 Several sources place the death of Moctezuma I in 1468 ; the 

 Codice Chimalpopoca (p. 55) reports his death at the end of 

 that year ; but the Coleccion de Mendoza (5 : 46-47), the Historia 

 de los mexicanos por sus pinturas (p. 231), and Ixtlilxochitl 

 (2 : 230) give 1409. Veytia (2 : 221), whose chronology appears 

 frequently to lag, places it in 1464. 



The terminal date for the reign of Axayacatl generally ap- 

 pears as 1481, although the Codex Telleriano-Remensis gives 

 1483. 



