300 



INSTITUTE OF SOCIAL ANTHROPOLOGY PUBLICATION NO. 13 



Legend to map 15 — Continued 



1 This conquest appears isolated in the Codice Chimalpopoca and, more- 

 over, is not mentioned in other sources. Accordingly, there are no associated 

 pueblos to give clue to identification. Two modern towns are candidates: 

 Magdalena Tlatlauquitepec and Tlatlauquitepec. The former appears to 

 have been a relatively obscure settlement, and we think identification with 

 the latter more likely, especially since, in the Matrfcula de tributos (5: 86), 

 Tlatlauquitepec is listed in company with Teziutlan. 



2 With respect to Cuaxoxoca, the Codice Chimalpopoca states merely that 

 "fueron a pelear"; nor is conquest recorded in other sources. 



3 The Codice Chimalpopoca describes the war between Tlatelolco and 

 Tenochtitlan. Conquest by the latter is confirmed elsewhere in the same 

 source (p. 67), as well as in the Coleccion de Mendoza, the Historia de los 

 mexicanos por sus pinturas, the Codex Telleriano-Remensis, Torquemada, 

 Tezozomoc, Codice en Cruz, and Ixtlilxochitl. All these sources agree that 

 Tlatelolco was defeated definitively, although the Anales de Tlatelolco confine 

 themselves to mentioning war, without indicating the outcome. 



• The Codice Chimalpopoca reports war with Huexotla, as does, somewhat 

 dubiously, the Codice en Cruz. 



• Not shown on map. See footnote 9, map 13. The Codice Chimalpopoca 

 states merely that "se diseminaron los matlatzincas," which we suspect 

 implies conquest. A series of conquered pueblos in the Matlatzinca area, 

 west of the Valley of Mexico, is listed elsewhere in the same source (p. 67), as 

 well as in the Anales de Tlatelolco, the Coleccion de Mendoza, the Codex 

 Telleriano-Remensis, Torquemada, Tezozomoc, and Ixtlilxochitl (see map). 



6 The Codice Chimalpopoca states that those of Cuernavaca were "de- 

 stroyed," from which we infer conquest. Nevertheless, other sources are 

 not confirmatory. 



' Here, the Codice Chimalpopoca states that "se perdieron," which we 

 interpret as conquest or, more accurately, reconquest, for this pueblo was 

 subjected in the days of Moctezuma I (No. 55, map 14). The identification 

 is discussed in footnote 20, map 14. 



8 Pueblo now extinct; name attached to well-known archeological site. 



• The Codice Chimalpopoca, the Anales de Tlatelolco, and the Coleccion 

 de Mendoza list this pueblo as conquered; Torquemada and Ixtlilxochitl 

 merely have it repopulated during the reign of Axayacatl. 



•» See footnote 4a, map 14. 



10 There are variant spellings: "Cuezcomatl Yacac" (Anales de Tlatelolco), 

 "Cuezeomatlyyacac" (Coleccion de Mendoza). In each case, the pueblo is 

 associated with settlements in modern Puebla and in western Veracruz. 

 Accordingly, we suspect the name may survive in modern Coscomatepec. 



11 From the sequential order oflisting, it is evident that "Tlaollan" (Codice 

 Chimalpopoca) and "Tlauililpan" (Anales de Tlatelolco) are one and the 

 same. In that case, the pueblos in association suggest identification with 

 modern Tlaquilpa. 



i 2 This pueblo evidently is the same as "Pozcauhtlan" (Anales de Tlate- 

 lolco, Coleccion de Mendoza, Nazareo 10: 119). Modern Poxcautla does not 

 appear in the 1930 census but is shown on the Carta general (pi. VIII). 



> 3 This pueblo, now extinct, can be located approximately (ftn. 49, p. 274). 



i* Not in the 1930 census. The Doetrinas (p. 219) locate this pueblo in the 

 vicinity of Tamiahua and "Tenexticpac," where it has been placed on our 

 map. 



" In the Anales de Tlatelolco, this name is incomplete, but the missing 

 parts can be supplied by comparison with the lists of the Codice Chimalpo- 

 poca and the Coleccion de Mendoza. 



18 "Teouyacac" occupies in the list of the Anales de Tlatelolco, the same 

 relative position as does "Ocoyacac," in the Codice Chimalpopoca. Accord- 

 ingly, we have identified "Teouyacac" with modern Ocoyoacac. 



" Here, what we take to be the ancient name of Coscomatepec has been 

 separated and appears as two distinct pueblos; see footnote 10, above. 



18 In the list of the Anales de Tlatelolco, "Cuextla" occupies the same 

 relative position as does "Cuetlaxtlan," in the Codice Chimalpopoca. Ac- 

 cordingly, in this case, we have identified "Cuextla" with Cotaxtla (ftn. 37, 

 p. 269). 



18 Our guess is that "Coyouacan" is to be identified with "Tziuhcouacan" 

 (Anales de Tlatelolco, p. 60). The latter clearly is the equivalent of "Tzicoac," 

 which we have identified with modern Chicontepec (ftn. 33, p. 267). 



20 Not identified and not shown on map; it is possible that this is not a 

 pueblo. The name translates "hill of the Cuexteca," and in the Anales de 

 Tlatelolco, it follows two pueblos which we place in the Huasteea. 



21 Not identified; name and association suggest the Huasteea and in the 

 Matricula de tributos (5: 87) an "Ocelotepec" appears situated in the province 

 of Tuxpan. It is queried on the map. 



22 Although the Anales de Tlatelolco state merely that "they perished," 

 conquests in the Matlatzinca zone are amply confirmed by other data (see fn. 

 5, above). 



As a matter of fact, the conquest of Ocuilan is confirmed specifically by the 

 Codice Chimalpopoca, the Coleccion de Mendoza, the Codex Telleriano- 

 Remensis, Torquemada, and Ixtlilxochitl. 



23 We suspect that "Xalatlan" may be modern Jalatlaco. In the Coleccion 

 de Mendoza, it is listed immediately following "Atlapula," which is identi- 

 fiable with Atlapulco, in the same general area. 



u Not identified. The associated pueblos suggest a location in the Huas- 

 teea. During the sixteenth century, a settlement subject to Papantla was 

 named "Quaotlan" (Suma, No. 449), but it seems unlikely that this town 

 is indicated. It is queried on the map. 



25 The Historia de los mexicanos por sus pinturas states that Axayacatl 

 appointed the ruler of Malinalco, which implies previous conquest, related per- 

 haps to the subjection of nearby towns, such as Tenancingo and Tenango. 



26 Torquemada simply speaks of a war, in which the Mexicans were vic- 

 torious; he remarks (1: 173), following this campaign, that the war "quedo 

 abierta para todo tiempo." Such battles were not for conquest, but to ob- 

 tain sacrificial victims. This type of war has been called guerra florida. 



27 Torquemada places "Xuchitepec" on the "coast of Anahuac," which 

 might refer either to the Gulf or to the Pacific (ftn. 33, p. 16) . We assume that 

 in this case "Xuchitepec" is the province of that name in Oaxaca. 



28 Torquemada does not give sufficient detail to permit us to select between 

 the three or four pueblos of this name in the Matlatzinca zone. 



28 Not identified; from the sequence in Tezozomoc, the town should lie 

 between Tepemajalco and Zinacantepec. On our map, it is shown there 

 accompanied by an interrogation point. 



30 In this passage, Tezozomoc does not speak definitely of the conquest of 

 these two important Totonac towns, but his account implies an earlier sub- 

 jection (ftn. 29, map 14), followed, in the days of Axayacatl, by formal gestures 

 of submission. 



31 Tezozomoc states merely that this pueblo served as a base for the Mexican 

 Army prior to the Miehoacan campaign; this presupposes that it was in the 

 hands of the Triple Alliance at that time. 



32 Not shown on our map. The "Mechoacan" of Tezozomoc probably 

 corresponds pretty closely to the area covered by the State of Miehoacan 

 today. 



33 This pueblo is not said to be conquered; it merely was the spot where the 

 Triple Alliance forces foregathered after their defeat at the hands of the Taras- 

 cans. The data at hand do not indicate if it had been conquered previously 

 or in the course of the Miehoacan campaign. 



34 Tezozomoc speaks of "Tliliuhquitepec" as if it were an enemy pueblo. 

 We have been unable to identify it. The Codex Telleriano-Remensis (5: 151) 

 seems to indicate that it was a hill where Mexican and Tlaxcalan forces 

 battled. 



38 Dibble's interpretation of the Codice en Cruz is dubious. With respect 

 to the conquest of Huexotla, see footnote 4, above; for the Matlatzinca zone, 

 see footnote 5. The conquest of Cotaxtla is fully confirmed (Codice Chimal- 

 popoca, Anales de Tlatelolco, Coleccion de Mendoza, Codex Telleriano- 

 Remensis, and Torquemada). 



36 According to Ixtlilxochitl, the campaign was directed "contra los chichi- 

 mecas y otomfes de todas las provincias que contienen tres naciones, que son 

 otomies, macahuas y matlatzincas." Thereafter, he lists the conquered 

 pueblos (Nos. 9-10, 12-14, 47, 67-71), from which it is evident that the cam- 

 paign lay almost exclusively within the present State of Mexico. 



37 Not identified. The order in which Ixtlilxochitl mentions these con- 

 quests suggests that "Zimatepec" may be in the Valley of Toluca or to the 

 south. 



38 In the division of spoils which followed the Triple Alliance campaign, 

 these pueblos were given to Texcoco (Ixtlilxochitl 2: 257). 



