Mexica Blog

The Rulers of Tlacopan (Tacuba)

What is today known as the Aztec Empire could be variously described as a cultural group of Nahuatl-speaking people, or as the political entity that ruled the majority of Nahua people, called the Triple Alliance. The Triple Alliance, in 1519, was made up of three “altepetls,” or something like city-states.These were the island city of Tenochtitlan, led by the famous Moctezuma; Tlacopan and Texcoco. Together these three altepetls shared the burden and bounty of their efforts.

While researching for the podcast, I came across a lack of information on the rulers of Tlacopan. So I looked into it. What I’ve found so far is murky. I’m sure if I had the time and access to go through the many codices I could find more, but in my sources, here’s what I came up with (Mostly from Alva Ixtlilxochitl and Duran):

Aculnahuacatl – The First Ruler of Tlacopan (1400-1430)

Installed as the ruler by his father Tezozomoc of Azcapotzalco, he is considered the first Tlatoani of Tlacopan, ruler of the Tepanec people. I only found one citation in Diego Duran, which describes his efforts in driving the Mexica tribe out of Tepanec lands to the West of Lake Texcoco. He is apparently the founder of the Tepanec nation centered in Tlacopan. Apparently the historian Chimalpahin lists his lineage and some other details.

Totoquihuatzli (Totoquihuatzin) – (1430-1469?)

Duran talks about him a lot and describes his presence at a planning meeting for the final version of the Templo Mayor, for which he obligated his people to build the backside. The seventh phase of the Templo Mayor was built in 1454. He was also known as a poet.

Chimalpopoca of Tlacopan – (1469-1489)

Not to be confused with the Mexica Tlatoani of the same name, he ruled from 1469 to 1489. I found lots of unsourced references to him, I did not find any actual references from sources.

Totoquihuaztin II (1489-1520)

Totquihuatzin II
Totquihuatzin II, tlatoani of Tlacopan at the time when the Spanish arrived in Mexico.

Most of the sources just name a Totoquihuatzli, so it’s possible there are multiple Totos. This would have been the ruler of Tlacopan when the Spanish arrived. There are a lot of conflicting dates and ambiguous use of names in the Tlacopan lineage. Duran lists a Totoquihuatzin as early as the renovation of the Templo Mayor, and as late as Moctezuma II’s coronation in 1502. One source (Duran) says he died shortly after Moctezuma II’s coronation. 

Tetlepanquetzatzin (1520-1525)

He was the son of Totoquihuatzli II, and was baptized as Don Pedro Tetlepanquetzal. There seems to be the most certainty around Tetlepanquetzal. That’s because of his murder alongside the two other rulers of the Triple Alliance at the hands of Hernan Cortes. In 1521 he was captured while fleeing Tenochtitlan along with Tlatoani Chauahtemoc. They were tortured about the missing gold lost during the wars in Tenochtitlan. Tetlepanquetzal ruled Tlacopan from captivity and eventually was taken on an expedition with Cortes to Honduras. Cortes became paranoid of the rulers he had in tow and decided to have them killed. All three acting rulers of the Triple Alliance were hanged in 1525.

The Torture of Cuauhtémoc, a nineteenth-century painting by Leandro Izaguirre. Presumably it is Tetlepanquetzal on the right.

Don Antonio Cortes Totoquihuatzli (Colonial ruler)

He was the brother of Tetlepanquetzal and son of Totoquihuatzli II. He is best known for arguing for indigenous rights to the royal court of Charles.

Who was La Malinche, Malintzin, Marina?

One of the most intriguing women in history is an indigenous woman who would become known as La Malinche. Her origins are clouded in a fog of varying details, but generally point to some ideas of who this woman was. Some folks report her birthplace as Olutla (Gomara), others as Tepeticpac (Florentine Codex), or maybe it was Huilotlan (Alva Ixtlilxochitl).

Her actual name is believed to be Malintzin and she seems to be from a town near the coast south of San Juan de Ulua. Most of the tales about her indicate she was at least a noble, if not a full on princess, in a high ranking family in a small town near Cotaxtla. Some accounts say she was sold by her family to support their sagging stake in society. Other tales say she was kidnapped in a raid. By some means she was separated from her family and her town and ended up in a market where she was acquired by the Maya as a slave.

The facts we do have about her are mostly post-contact. The defeated Maya gave her to Cortes after his victory in the Battle of Cintla. As part of the tribute, Malintzin, along with 19 other girls and women, was handed over to the Spaniards. The conquistador Bernal Diaz remembers her as a handsome woman in his account, possessed of grace. It seems she was granted to one of Cortes’s captains as a bride.

Cortes and La Malinche
An artist’s depiction of the meeting of Hernan Cortes and La Malinche with the Aztec emperor Montezuma II.

But hidden from Cortes was a skill she possessed that would soon reveal itself and become a key to Cortes’s success in Mexico. The expedition left Maya country and arrived in San Juan de Ulua. Cortes and the Spanish first encountered the locals on a beach. These locals spoke the Aztec language of Nahua. Cortes had a Maya translator in his shipwrecked comrade Aguilar, who spent eight years as a captive in the Yucatan. Cortes heard of him and sent a letter, which Aguilar got wind of. The Maya captive made his way to Cozumel and joined Cortes. In the early expedition Aguilar was indispensable translating with Maya nobles and captains in Tabasco. But in Aztec lands he wasn’t as handy.

At some point on that beach Malintzin was noticed, or allowed herself to be noticed, speaking Nahua. She was bilingual, and with Aguilar helped to open communication between Cortes and the Aztecs. When Cortes spoke Aguilar would translate to Maya, and Malintzin would then translate the Maya into Nahua. 

As the expedition moved inland, Malintzin learned Spanish, too. Soon she was the only translator needed, and often found herself at the table with power. Every negotiation, every speech about King Charles of Castile, or Mary the Mother of God, every demand for food and treasure, went through Malintzin. It’s hard to imagine that she did not insert her own twists into the language of politics that may have shaped her fortune. 

La Malinche from the Canal Once film Malinche.
La Malinche from the Canal Once film Malinche.

When Cortes and his band of Spanish, Tlaxcala and Totonac warriors, entered Tenochtitlan, Malintzin was at the head of the procession with Cortes. She greeted Moctezuma on behalf of Cortes. This young woman from the coast was now negotiating with the most powerful men in the Empire. 

As with most of the women in these tales, Malintzin was involved in relationships with several of the Conquistadors, including Cortes himself. She eventually gave birth to a son named Martin Cortes. 

Malintzin was one of the first women in Mexico to be baptized. Shortly after she came into the possession of Cortes she was baptized and given the name Marina. She spent her life from then on, largely at his side, accompanying him to Honduras after the the Fall of Tenochtitlan. According to Diaz, her mother and half-brother were later baptized as Marta and Lazaro.

She is thought to have died around the age of 28, possibly in 1528 or early 1529, just a few years after the fall of Tenochtitlan. Her son, Martin, came to be known as “El Mestizo” and was symbolic of the union between Spain and the Aztec people. This Mestizo concept of shared indigenous and Spanish heritage would later come to be a defining concept for some modern Mexicans.

The legacy of La Malinche in modern Mexico is complicated. She is seen variously as a brave woman who acted with grace and intelligence. On the other hand she is also seen as a betrayer of the Indigenous people, serving the Conqueror Hernan Cortes. As with most powerful and controversial women she is often portrayed as a seductress, a harlot. As if her power came from her sexuality and not her bilingual ability and desire to seize the day.

My opinion is she was an opportunist caught in a very powerful situation and fate delivered her to the cruel, but victorious side. She did what she had to do to thrive. I’m sure she was intelligent, savvy and possibly superficially beautiful. In another sense she seems calculating and cruel but her situation probably demanded such traits. Like all good legends there is just enough to give her form, but enough vapor for the imagination to conjure what it wants.

Who are the Nahua, Aztec, Mexica?

Who are the Nahua, Aztec, Mexica?

Nahua, Aztec, Mexica

As I’ve delved into “Aztec” culture I’ve learned of the many nuances of how the world refers to these people from the Valley of Mexico. Understanding who the Aztecs were takes an understanding of the politics of the Valley. Most Americans think of the Aztecs as Montezuma’s native people that were conquered by Cortes. That concept fits in as a hyper-simplistic footnote to the overall genocide of Indigenous people across North America, a “here’s how THEY did it” anecdote of complicity.

Lost in that simplified narrative is the cultural nuance of Aztec identity and the survival of a “mestizo” culture. Let’s delve in. A familiar European comparison might be the early British Empire, at least for identity structure. Ireland, Scotland and England share the English language. Politically, they are the United Kingdom, three kingdoms united. But if you call an Irishman English he would be quite offended. The people grouped together as Aztecs were also culturally distinct.

Who were the Aztecs?

In the Valley of Mexico most people spoke the Nahuatl language. The cities of Tacuba, Texcoco and Tenochtitlan formed the Triple Alliance, a political entity that dominated Central Mexico. The people of this political alliance are what is most commonly thought of as “Aztec” – the Empire they controlled was shared among the three cities. To ascribe all of Aztec power, accomplishment and cultural richness to Moctezuma’s people is like saying everyone in Ireland, Wales and Scotland is basically English. The word “Aztec” was coined by German scientist Alexander von Humboldt, from the origin story of the Mexica people, who migrated out of the ancestral land of “Aztlan.” Complicated, I know. And as much as it irks some people to use it, Aztec is a convenient to word to describe a large swath of people that were affiliated politically and genetically.

What is Nahuatl?

Nahuatl is a language spoken by the indigenous Nahua people in Mexico and Central America. Nahua people include a diverse range of groups including Texcocans, Cholulans, Tlaxcalans, Mexica and possibly historic people like the Toltecs. Nahuatl is still widely spoken in Mexico, the United States, Guatemala, El Salvador and Belize. Interestingly Nahua is part of the Uto-Aztecan language group which includes Comanche, Shoshoni and Ute, whose name survives as Utah. It’s believed a split in the distant past occurred with the Nahua people migrating south, breaking off from the Northern group.

But what is “Mexica?”

Mexica refers to a specific group of Nahua-speaking people that migrated into the Valley of Mexico in the late 1200s, eventually settling on an island where they founded their capital city of Tenochtitlan. The Mexica had a single leader and were a distinct group from others in the area like the people of Culhuacan or the Chalcas, or like the English and their king were separate from Scotland and their king. In the world of the Triple Alliance, the Mexica city of Tenochtitlan was one of three independent cities in the Alliance, with Tacuba and Texcoco. There was an adjacent island city near Tenochtitlan called Tlatelolco, which is also Mexica. A civil war among the Mexica led to a split and Tlatelolco was established. Eventually Tenochtitlan subjugated their Mexica opponents, effectively uniting the Mexica people again, despite a unique Tlatelolca-Mexica identity.

Was Moctezuma Nahua, Aztec or Mexica?

I would argue Moctezuma was Aztec. WHAT!? I know, that sounds weird, but genetically he probably was not much more Mexica than he was of Culhuacan, Texcoco or any other place on the lake. He was definitely Nahua. Like how European royals mingle their blood and not necessarily from the places they ruled, it was the same with Nahua cities.

I might be out of my depth here, but the ruling class by the time of Moctezuma’s reign were essentially a royal caste that married among the nobility of other cities. The kingdoms switched hands among an interchangeable lineup of royal stock. When the Mexica established Tenochtitlan around 1330, the Tlatoani at that time was probably largely of Mexica blood. By the time Moctezuma was born his DNA had been mingled with royal lineages from Culhuacan and other nearby cities. His brother Cuitlahuac was ruler of the lakeside town of Ixtapalapa, and he would become Tlatoani of the Mexica after Moctezuma’s death. In contrast, the commoners of those towns probably did largely represent a distinct cultural and genetic group, separate from the royal caste. That’s how I see it at least.

And “Mexico?”

In the Aztec era Mexico could refer to any number of things, depending who was speaking and what their knowledge was. It could refer to the merged island cities of Tenochtitlan and Tlatelolco. One could specify they lived in Mexico-Tenochtitlan. But perhaps were of Tlatelolca-Mexica heritage. It could refer generally to the Valley of Mexico. Today Mexico refers to the modern nation with its politics and culture emanating from the former Mexica capital now called Mexico City. It’s important to remember that the Aztecs were just one of many groups that lived in mesoamerica. Millions of Mexicans still speak Maya. Some also speak Tarahumara, Purupecha and others. 

What is “mesoamerica,” then, genius?

Mesoamerica refers to a time and place in Mexican/Central American history. Extending from Central Mexico down through Belize, Guatemala and El Salvador and covering a broad range of time from the independent foundation of culture in Mexico through the tail end of the Conquest. It includes historic cultures and places like the Olmec and Teotihuacan, and contemporary cultures, as well as customs, agricultural products, languages and anything else shaped by the people of that time.

Hopefully now when you meet a Nahuatl-speaking Tlatelolca-Mexica from Mexico City, Mexico you’ll know . 

The Seven Remaining Aztec Feather-works

  1. Feather Headdress

Location: Weltmuseum Wien – Vienna, Austria

Probably the most iconic piece of Aztec history in existence, this incredible green quetzal-feather headdress is majestic, even 500 years after its manufacture. Made in 1515, and was made using materials from across the empire, including hundreds of green quetzal feathers and thousands of gold buttons. Cortes took possession of it in Mexico during the conquest and quickly sent this piece back to Europe, possibly in the first shipment to Spain in July 1519.  It’s next documented appearance is when it was catalogued in 1596 at the death of Ferdinand II, who had apparently received it from a relative, who had received it from Cortes. It remained in the Hapsburg family until it made it into academic hands in 1880. Mexico has made attempts to have the headdress returned but as of today it resides at the Weltsmuseum Wien in Vienna, Austria.

Quetzal-feather headdress housed in Vienna.
Quetzal-feather headdress housed in Vienna.

2. Ahuizotl Shield (Chimalli)

Location: Weltmuseum Wien – Vienna, Austria

One of four shields, or chimalli, to survive it is made of reed, rawhide, feathers, gold and plant-fiber yarn. It is called the Ahuizotl shield because of an association with the Aztec emperor of that name. This incredible artifact enters the historical record in 1522 as a gift from Cortes to the Bishop of Palencia, Pedro Ruiz de la Mota. A later bishop, Pedro de la Gasca, gifted it to Ferdinand I in the 1550s. From there it entered the Hapsburg Dynasty collection and became part of the legendary Ambras Collection cultivated by Ferdinand II at Ambras Castle in Innsbruck, Austria. In 1880 it was handed over to the Imperial Museum of Natural History. In 1928 it ended up in its current location at the Weltmuseum Wien in Vienna, Austria.

3. Feather Fan

Location: Weltmuseum Wien – Vienna, Austria

The year and origin of the fan are unknown. Determined to be post-contact. Listed in 1596 as a “large windmaker” in Ferdinand II’s Ambras collection, which included the headdress and Auhuizotl chimalli. And that butterfly in the center…

An Aztec-style fan.

4. and 5.: The Stuttgart Shields

Location: Landesmuseum Wúrttemberg, Stuttgart

This pair of Aztec feathered shields, or chimalli, made their way to Europe in the 16th century landing in Stuttgart and the Wurtemburg Dynasty. Both chimallis were first recorded in a royal parade in 1599 in Stuttgart. Neither shield got far from there and both are now housed at the Landesmuseum Wurtemburg in Stuttgart, Germany. There are several documented shields taken by or gifted to Cortes during the conquest. Cortes, in a letter to Charles, writes he was given 24 golden shields with feathers. When the Spanish were housed in the Palace of Axayacatl in Tenochtitlan they stumbled upon the former king’s treasure stash, amongst which were more shields.

6. Chapultepec Shield (Chimalli)

Location: Museo Nacional de Historia, Mexico City

The chimalli must have been on the first shipment from Cortes’s expedition because the museum claims it arrived in Brussels in 1519 and remained in the Palace of Arms. In 1796 the chimalli made it to a collection in Vienna. It returned to Mexico in 1866 with Maximilian I and his ill-fated bid to rule Mexico. This chimalli is in bad shape and not visible to the public. With much of the jaguar skin gone, missing gold, feathers decomposing and fibers disintegrating it is a challenge for conservationists.

The only Aztec chimalli in Mexico.

7. Feather-covered leather piece

Location: Museo Nacional de Historia, Mexico City

This piece is considered post-contact but done in the traditional style of the Aztec feather artisans called amantecas. Academics estimate it to have been made around 1540. At some point it made its way into the lining of a container for an old chalice used by the Franciscan friars, according to ethnohistorian Rafael Garcia Granados. The brightly colored blue and yellow feathered leather mat was acquired in the state of Hidalgo and officially published by Grandaos in 1939. The blue water design has been suggested to represent Tlaloc or some fusion of Christian and Aztec imagery.

Blue and yellow featherwork, image courtesy www.mexicolore.com

UPDATE: It was brought to my attention that the amenteca continued to work for many years on Christian-themed works of art. Check that out as well.

Burning the Boats and Sinking the Ships!

One of the great mythologies of the Conquest of Mexico is Cortes burning, or sinking his ships in order to secure his men’s commitment to the march to Tenochtitlan and Moctezuma. The incident is cited in motivational speeches, and among historians as one of history’s greatest gambles. With dissent in the ranks and factions pushing for different goals and loyalties Cortes did seem to at least dismantle some of the ships, and possibly did sink a few.

It is reported he came to Mexico with 11 vessels. One ship was sent back to Spain with the first load of treasure and a few letters. The sources give several versions of the incident. Cortes, Diaz and Gomara all tend to agree that the main motivation was to halt the ambitions of the faction loyal to Diego Velazquez, which planned to return to Cuba and report Cortes’s illegal activity (he left Cuba against orders, and exceeded the mandate of the mission given to him). It certainly would behoove Cortes and his loyalists to cut off their exit or stymie any support they may have been able to muster. 

Cortes states in a letter to Charles that he beached the boats. Bernal Diaz, writing some 50 years after the event said a group of men discussed it with Cortes and agreed to scuttle the ships. According to Diaz the important pieces were ordered removed, including “anchors, cables, sails.” Gomara, who was writing second-hand from Cortes, agrees with Diaz in that it was a group decision among the Cortes loyalists. Gomara goes on to say they beached five and sunk four. In his writing, conquistador Andres de Tapia said they scuttled six or seven ships. The former conquistador who became a priest, Francisco de Aguilar, said Cortes secretly sent someone back to the boats to drill holes. The remaining ship was sent to Spain, he notes.

It is clear that Cortes at least dismantled, or decommissioned the ships and ordered the vital parts brought ashore before destroying anything. He also had Martin Lopez with him, a ship builder. Acquiring new timber would not be difficult. Cortes did eventually have boats made to sail on Lake Texcoco and take part in the final Siege of Tenochtitlan. The dramatic reading of this event is that Cortes “burned his ships.” A more practical reading is that he stripped them of anything remotely useful with the intent of rebuilding them. The motive to dissuade Velazquez’s loyal men from returning to Cuba seems reasonable.

ARCHEOLOGY: In 2019 archeologists found an anchor off the location of Cortes’s early headquarters, Villa Rica. They suggest it could be from one of his ships, although sources say they brought anchors ashore.