Transcript The Mexica or Aztec

The Mexica or Aztec: A
Predatory State
Social, Political, and Economic
Organization
Who Were the Aztec?





We know they came from somewhere up
north—how far north is anyone’s guess
Mythically, they came from “Aztlan, the Land of
the Herons,” of which “Aztec” is a derivation
They were mercenaries of the Toltec centered in
Tula, although even that is bound up in myth
When Tula fell, the Aztec migrated to an area of
five lakes dominated by Lake Texcoco
An area dominated by “Epigonal Toltecs”
Epigonal Toltecs
The first were the Otomi-speaking Tepanecs, who
founded the city of Atzcapotzalco on the western shores
of Lake Texcoco
 The second was Xaltocan, an Otomi-speaking state on
the north shore of Lake Texcoco
 The third was the Acolhua who dominated the eastern
shore of Lake Texcoco, organized also by Chichimeca
 The fourth was Colhuacán on the southwest part of the
Valley of Mexico, at the cusp between Lakes Texcoco
and Xochimilco.
 The fifth was a small state Xicco.

Aztec Nomenclature
Initially, they did not settle at the site of
Tenochtitlan
 Their names changed from “Chichimec from
Aztlan” a contemptuous term that meant
“Barbarian”
 To “Tenochca” after a patriarch by that name,
who also gave the name to Tenochtitlán
 To “Mexica,” which they adopted after attaching
themselves to the Colhua of Colhuacan as
mercenaries, calling themselves “Colhua Mexica”

Formation of the Aztec
Initially, they did not settle at the site of Tenochtitlán
 After numerous wanderings they settled at a swampy
site mythically where an eagle was perched on a nopal
cactus devouring a snake
 First, they served as mercenaries of Atzcapotzalco
 They then switched sides, allied themselves with the
Acolhua of Texcoco, overthrew Atzapotzalco, and
eventually formed a triple alliance between themselves,
the Acolhua, and a liberated part of Atzapotzalco called
Tlacopan
 Third, they established hegemony in 1500, 21 years
before the actual conquest.

Formation and Society
Bilateral descent does allow for flexibility.
 To enjoy a rapid rise from a muddy village settled in
1345 or so to an empire less than 200 years later, you
have to be flexible.
 1427 saw the formation of the Triple Alliance
 So to envision an “Aztec society,” the question arises
just which society are we talking about
 Berdan describes society at it was on the eve of the
Conquest
 But were they patrilineal groups in the past? We don’t
know; records were often destroyed by the victors

What Were the Calpulli?








What is known for sure:
There were 20 “Big Houses” by that name
They were landholding groups
They were organized territorially
They had their own councils
They had their own temples
They comprised the macehual, or commoner,
generally peasants
The debate: kin groups or peasant class?
Calpulli as Kin Groups
Kin groups or clans
 Reasoning: the Aztecs themselves were
tribal groups at most 300 years before
 What kind? Evidence is lacking?
 Indication of a patrilineal bias among
nobility: preference for “junior lines” in
allocating economic assets and political
favors.

Calpulli as Social and Economic
Classes
Developed into administrative subclasses
 Could have been units organizing not only
peasants but also craftspersons and traders
 Example: in Texcoco under Hungry Coyote
(Nezahualcoyotl), calpulli were organized
featherworkers and goldworkers
 Pochteca (luxury good traders) may also have
formed a calpulli; we do know they were
hereditary

Calpulli as Both Kin and Class





Conical clans in which privileges are based on
order of birth
Kept wealth and privileges in the family, but
some members were more equal than others
Kin trace their ancestry to a founder, real or
fictive
But through such justification as precedence of
birth, the lineal descendants (junior lines) get
preferential treatment
This suggests that unilineal descent might have
been dominant at one time
Calpulli and Ethnicity





As conquests proceeded, Tenochtitlan became
more ethnically diverse.
Thus calpulli included not only kin but also
“allies” from the conquered provinces
Flexibility of kin thus allowed fictive (fictional)
ties as well
Thus, the European Catholic tradition of
compradrazgo fit in very well with indigenous
society.
Thus their flexibility is not at issue; only their
“pristine” characteristics.
Calpulli and Land Tenure
Land was held in common in the calpulli
 System was based on usufruct
 Peasants “owned” their plot so long as
they used it and paid their taxes
 Land reverted back to the commons if the
peasant stopped using the land or pay the
taxes
 Land could be rented, but not bought or
sold

Aztec: Kin Reckoning
Reckoned kinship bilaterally; traced
relations through paternal and maternal
side.
 Kinship terms bilateral: e.g. tlatli is an
uncle, whether father’s or mother’s
brother
 Possibly reflected the extreme instability
one expects from a state in rapid
formation
 And one in which there are shifting
alliances

Marriage among the Aztec
Marriage was endogamous by class: pipiltin to
other pipiltin, macehuallin to other macehuallin
 There was no other rule of exogamy outside the
immediate family
 This meant that marriage could involve one’s
cousin; cross-cousin marriage was not unknown
 Polygyny was common among nobility and tied
in with social class; wives were put to work.

Marriage Alliances and Power
Nobility: Marriage had a political function: female from
Texcoco married a male from the subordinate
Teotihuacan to maintain a tie
 The son of the Teotihuacan ruler would then be
subordinate to Texcoco because of the “gift” of a wife.
 Marriage was to man’s mother’s brother’s daughter—his
matrilateral cross-cousin.
 Failure to repay in Maussian terms means the
Teotihuacan nobility would be “beggar” to Texcoco
nobility.
 This would persist for generations.

Aztec Markets: Common Goods
There were two kinds of markets
 One dealt in ordinary goods
 Markets usually met every five days
 Trading outside the market was illegal and
one could be imprisoned or the goods
confiscated
 Reason: market transactions were subject
to taxati

Aztec Markets: Luxury Products
Texcoco had been a market town long before the Aztecs
assumed power
 Markets were a daily affair in Texcoco; major markets
comprising up to 50,000 buyers and sellers met every
fifth day—they were the center of luxury products
 A hereditary class of merchants called Pochteca were
probably active long before the Aztecs
 They occupied a precarious position
 On the one hand, they were vital as sources of military
intelligence to the rulers and were protected
 On the other hand, their economic power were a threat
to the rulers; toward the end, they hid their wealth.

Sociopolitical Organization of the
Aztecs






Society: A Twofold Division
Pilli: The nobles
Macehual: The peasants
However, the peasants themselves were
stratified
Macehuales who excelled in battle could
themselves become noble
This requires some background in the principles
of political anthropology
Social Class: Overview








General types (Fried)
Egalitarian societies:
Social systems with as many valued positions as
person capable of filling them
Exceptions: age, gender, special characteristics
Ranked societies
Social systems with fewer valued status positions than
those capable of filling them
Stratified societies
Minority control of strategic resources
Stratified Societies
Access to strategic resources is unequal
 Examples
 Water in irrigation societies
 Land in patrimonial (feudal) societies
 Claims to capital assets (stocks, bonds) in
capitalist society
 Capital: goods/services used for
production
 Money, stocks, bonds are also capital

Emergence of Stratification










Manipulative Individuals/
Families
Form alliances (chimpanzee-like)
Play one faction against another
Form dynasties (bonobo-like)
Control over Life-Sustaining
Resources
Water systems in semi-arid
regions
Agricultural lands
Mechanisms of Taxation
Labor
Tribute
Political Organization: Basic
Principles








Power vs Authority
Power: compliance by coercion or force
Authority: compliance by persuasion
Legitimacy: Beliefs rationalizing rule
Examples: Divine Right, Peoples Consent
Sanctions: reinforcements of behavior
Positive: rewards, recognition
Negative: punishment
Power versus Authority






Extreme examples
Power: concentration camps:
Auschwitz (above); Guantanamo
(below)
Authority: !Kung, Inuit,
Yanomamo
Neither is absolute
Dictatorships need to persuade:
Nuremberg rallies, Mayday
parades
Power is evenly distributed in
nonstate cultures
Legitimacy as Justification for
Political Order





Justification necessary even in
authoritarian states
Monarchies: the divine right to rule
Soviet Union: Socialist transition to
communist economy
Nazi Germany: Racial purification;
delivery of full-employment (Nuremberg
rallies, above)
Democratic forms: consent by the
governed (below, State of the Union)
One Myth Behind Mexica Power





War Against the Tepenacs of Atzcapotalzo
Nobles voted for war; commoners voted for
peace
The declaration of the nobles (Wolf, p. 137)
Commoners’ reply on agreement if the war
were successful (Wolf, p. 137)
Most likely, a mythical exchange, but this
served as one part of legitimation
Sociopolitical Organizations:
General Typology
Bands: Small, informal groups
 Tribes: Segmentary groups integrated by
some unifying factor
 Chiefdoms: Group organized under a chief
in a ranked society
 State: Centralized political system with
monopoly over legitimized force and its
use.

States: Force as Prime Mover









Defining Characteristics
A centralized political system
With power to coerce
The operating factor:
Monopoly over the use of
Legitimate physical force
Supports the apparatus of the state
Bureaucracy --Army and police
Law and legal codes
States: Derivative Features









Administrative structure
Public services --Tax collection
Resource allocation --Foreign affairs
Delegation of force
Police, all levels --Armed force
Law
Civil (dispute resolution)
Regulatory (trade, economy)
Criminal (crime and punishment)
Law: Cross-Cultural Comparison
Codified law: Formally defines wrong and
specifies remedies
 Customary law: Informal sanctions or
dispute resolution
 Restitution or Restorative law: emphasizes
dispute resolution, damage restitution
 Retributive law: emphasizes punishment
for crimes committed

Case Studies: Restitution
Nuer: Leopard-skin chief
Function: mediate disputes;
leopard wrap identifies role
 Cannot force or enforce an
agreement
 Authority is spiritual
 Zapotec in Talea, Mexico
 Function: hear cases and
negotiate
 Recommend settlement
 Enforce agreement by
community


Case Studies: Retribution






Criminal Law
Murder, Robbery, Others
Civil Law
Consumer Law and Small
Courts
Final Say: Judge or
Arbitrator
Limitation: Sheer Numbers
of Cases
A Trisection of Society
 Relations
of Production form the basis of
sociopolitical systems.
 Political superstructure: government,
military, the law
 Ideology: religion, myths, even
psychology
 When the base shifts, the rest of society
changes
Basic Political Structure of the
Mexica







The nobility expanded its privileges as the empire
developed
Privileges: Right to wear insignia, special clothing
Marital privileges: polygyny and the political and
economic power it implied.
Had their own special courts
Sent children to calmecatl, or schools of religious and
ceremonial training, prerequisite for entry into the
bureaucracy
Commoners were tillers of the soil
Slaves, who had their own privileges
Aztec Society: A Study of Mobility
 Remember
that the Mexica were still in a
state of expansion when the Spaniards
came
 Unfinished business: The Tlaxcalans, the
Tarascans, the unconquered lands of
southern Mexico
 Internally, they were a mobile society
 Rulers created a “nobility of service” as
well as a nobility of lineage
Nobility of Service






Distinguished themselves in war or by trade
Term: “Knights” or “Sons of the Eagle”
Also divided the commoners from those
relative few
A source of tension with the nobility of lineage
over bureaucratic positions
An aristocratic reaction curtailed their
privileges
Stratification became more established on the
eve of the Conquest
Religious Ideology




Huitzilopochtli (Hummingbird of the Left): the
principal god
Presided over a world that ended in cataclysm
The last world ended in hurricanes, preceded
by rain, sky falling on earth, and fire; the
present one will end in earthquakes
To forestall the inevitable end would entail the
blood sacrifice of humans
Gods from the Predecessors






Quetzalcoatl: The plumed serpent god who was
banished to the east.
Tezcatlipoca, (smoking mirror), who displaced
Quetzalcoatl, who demanded blood sacrificed in his
own right, and often identified with Huitzilopochtli
Tlaloc, the rain god, He Who Makes the Plants Spring
Up.
Xipe Totec, the Flayed One, whose skin symbolized
the old vegetation with the promise of renewal
The pantheon became standardized after the first
conquest over the Tepanec
Even so, one god might be merged with another, as
Huitzilopochtli with Tezcatlipoca
Self-Concept of the Mexica
 At
the edge of cataclysm
 Individuals were expected to combine
bravery with moderation
 The ideal Mexica did not drink to excess,
spoke softly, was sexually continent.
The Eve of the Conquest: Cracks
in the Mexica State





The Mexica exploited the provinces mercilessly
for tribute and sometimes sacrificial victims
Except for these, the provinces were left on
their own; their own customs, languages, and
religions were left alone.
This, coupled with the still-independent states,
may have been their downfall.
The domination was never absolute, and the
Mexica armies had their limitations
The Spaniards were able to exploit these
weaknesses, despite initial failures.
Comparison with the Maya





The Maya were competitive city states
Even after the collapse, they were relatively
independent
The conquest of the Aztec was largely a onetime event in the Valley of Mexico
In contrast, the Spaniards would have to
conquer one Mayan state over a long period of
attrition
Even after 1692, there were constant uprisings
throughout Mexico and Guatemala well into
the 19th century.