Daily Life of the Aztecs Read online

  But the period with which we are concerned is distinguished from all others by the wealth of its written documentation. The Mexicans were interested in themselves and in their history; they were tireless speech-makers

  -xvii-

  and great lovers of verse; they were curious about the manners and productions of other nations. And above all they were preoccupied by the future, and so they paid the greatest attention to omens and portents. Thus an immense quantity of books came into being, written according to a pictographic system that was at once figurative and phonetic, 3 and treating of history, history combined with mythology, geographical description, ritual and divination. The Mexican civilisation knew books: it also knew red tape and piles of official paper. The Aztec empire was of a legalistic humour, and every dispute, every law-case, brought about the accumulation of files: for example, if two villages fell out over their arable land, they supported their testimony with maps and genealogical trees to prove that some given family had rights in the fields in question.

  Much of this written record also was deliberately destroyed after the Spanish conquest. Many of the books had to do with religion or magic: Bishop Zumárraga had them seized and burnt, together, no doubt, with others of an entirely secular nature, such as histories, or the like. Fortunately a good many works escaped the fire; and in addition the Indians soon came to see the advantages of the alphabetic writing that the Europeans had brought, compared with the obscure and complex system that they had used hitherto. Basing themselves upon the old pictographic manuscripts (some of them undoubtedly preserved by noble families in spite of the prohibition) they drew up chronicles, sometimes in the Mexican language but in European letters, sometimes in Spanish -- chronicles of an immense value, such as the Annals of Cuauhtitlán, the historical books of Chimalpahin Quauhtlehuanitzin, Tezozomoc and Ixtlilxochitl, which are literally crammed with the most exact information about the life of the ancient Mexicans.

  Finally, the Spaniards themselves have left us some very important documents. The first wave of invaders, men as uncultivated as they were courageous, nevertheless had as its leader a statesman, Hernan Cortés, and in its ranks a born writer, a man who could both see and tell what he had seen, Bernal Díaz del Castillo. The first European testimony

  -xviii-

  upon what was then a totally unknown world is provided by the letters of Cortés to Charles V and by the recollections that Bernal Díaz dictated in his old age, before he died. Cortés' testimony is more elaborate; Díaz' is spontaneous, amusing, tragic. It is true that neither of them attempted to see and understand objectively; their eyes were chiefly fixed upon fortifications and weapons, wealth and gold. They knew nothing of the native language, which they mangle shockingly whenever they quote a word. They were sincerely disgusted by the Mexican religion, which, as they saw it, was a damnable and revolting mumbo-jumbo of devil-worship. But for all that their evidence retains great value as a record, for through their eyes we see something that was never to be seen by man again.

  After the soldiers, the missionaries. The most illustrious of them, Father Bernardino de Sahagún, reached Mexico in 1529. He learnt Nahuatl, and writing in that language under the dictation of Indian nobles and with the help of Indian scribes for the illustration of his manuscript, Sahagún wrote the admirable and monumental book entitled A General Hitory the Affairs of New Spain. He devoted the whole of his life to this work; and it earned him the distrust of the authorities, who took away his papers on two occasions, in 1571 and 1577. Having said farewell to 'his children the Indians' 4 he died in Mexico in 1590, without having had the satisfaction of seeing the smallest fragment of his book published. Other ecclesiastics, although they did not equal Sahagún, also left respectable works, particularly Motolinia.

  In addition to these books of the first importance one should mention the frequently anonymous sixteenth-century Descriptions and Accounts that were written by priests, civil servants or lawyers: although they must often be used with some reserve (a feeling for exactitude not always being the primary characteristic of their authors) they are nevertheless a mine of information. There are also the many native pictographic records which were made after the conquest, such as the Codex of 1576, and legal papers, for the litigious turn of both the Indians and the Spaniards had full

  -xix-

  scope in countless suits over land and taxes; 5 and these are rich in valuable facts.

  In short, there is an abundant literature upon the subject, and it allows us to see this last phase of the Mexican civilisation with a vision which, although many unanswered questions leave it imperfect, is nevertheless detailed, vivid and lively.

  To avoid both anachronism and confusion we must limit ourselves not only in time but also in space. It is primarily urban life that we are going to describe, the life of the city-dwellers of Mexico-Tenochtitlan. Yet there was an obvious cultural unity between this city and some of its neighbours, particularly Texcoco, on the dry land of the shore of the great lake, and so there is no objection to our using the historical sources available for Texcoco, any more than there is for taking some details of our description from Xochimilco, Chalco, Cuauhtitlán or others. Indeed, everything leads one to believe that life was much the same throughout the valley of Mexico, at least in the towns.

  But one cannot leave out all mention of the empire, whose existence, products, political activity and religious ideas had so strong an effect upon the capital itself. The empire began in the fifteenth century as a triple alliance, a three-headed league which joined the city-states of Mexico, Texcoco and Tlacopan (now Tacuba): this league came into being as a consequence of the wars that had destroyed the supremacy of Atzcapotzalco. The original nature of the triple alliance was soon corrupted, however: first Tlacopan and then Texcoco itself found their privileges and their independence growing less and less under the unyielding pressure of the Mexicans. By the beginning of the sixteenth century, although the 'kings' of Tlacopan and Texcoco were still in theory the associates of the Mexican emperor, in fact their association had, to a very large extent, nothing more than an honorary character. The Aztec sovereign intervened in the succession of both dynasties to such a degree that to all intents and purposes he appointed dependents of his own, who were in fact imperial officials: when Cortés entered Mexico he was received by Motecuhzoma,

  -xx-

  attended by the, two kings and certain appointed governors 6 -- an indication of how nearly the status of the kings had been brought to that of civil servants. Theoretically the taxes from the provinces were still divided between the three ruling cities according to the original scale (two-fifths to Mexico and Texcoco, one-fifth to Tlacopan) but there is reason to think that in fact the emperor of Tenochtitlan shared out the taxes more or less as he chose. In all likelihood, the league was on its way to becoming a single-headed state.

  At the end of the reign of Motecuhzoma II, the empire consisted of thirty-eight tributary provinces; 7 and to these must be added the little states, of uncertain status, that stood along the road of the caravans and the armies between Oaxaca and the southern limits of Xoconochco. It reached both oceans; the Pacific at Cihuatlán and the Atlantic for the whole length of the coast of the Gulf from Tochpan to Tochtepec. 8 In the west its neighbours were the civilised Tarascas of Michoacán; 9 in the north the hunting nomads, the Chichimeca; and in the north-east the Huaxtecs, a separated branch of the Maya family. In the south-east the independent but allied province of Xicalanco formed a kind of buffer-state between the Mexicans of the centre and the Mayas of Yucatán. A certain number of lordships or of tribal confederations had remained independent of Mexico, either enclosed within the empire or lying on its frontiers: this was the case with the Nahuatl republic of Tlaxcala on the central plateau, the lordship of Metztitlán (also Nahuatl) in the sierras of the north-east, the little Yopi state on the Pacific coast, and the Chinanteca highlanders who lived then, as they do today, in the impenetrable massif between the coastal plain and the valleys of
Oaxaca.

  The provinces themselves were much more fiscal than political entities. A civil servant, the calpixqui, lived in each provincial capital, charged with the collection of the taxes: his duties and his powers were limited to this. There were no governors appointed by the central authority except in the fortified towns on the frontiers or in the recently subjected lands, as, for example, at Oztoman, opposite the Tarascan country; at Zozolan in the Mixtec territory; at

  -xxi-

  Oaxaca; or at Xoconochco on the Mayan border -- some fifteen or twenty towns in all. Everywhere else 'province' meant no more than a financial frame within which the incorporated cities lived under widely varying political Régimes. Some kept their own chiefs on condition that they paid tribute; others were more severely colonised, and they had new chiefs appointed by Mexico. In every case, each city kept its political and administrative autonomy, with the one condition that it paid its tax, supplied its military contingent and submitted its law-suits to Mexico or Texcoco as the final court of appeal. There was, therefore, no true centralisation: what we call the Aztec empire was in fact a somewhat lax confederation of city-states with widely differing political organisations. Up to the end, Mexican political thought had no conception of anything beyond the city (altepetl): the fundamental unit was the autonomous city; it could be allied to others or subjected to another, but nevertheless it remained the essential unit of political structure. The empire was a mosaic of cities.

  The existence of the empire, and its condition, had necessarily a great influence upon the ruling city and the manner of life in it. Either by way of tribute or by trade the produce of all the provinces flowed into Mexico, especially tropical wares -- formerly unknown upon the central plateau -- such as cotton, cocoa, skins, many-coloured feathers, turquoises and finally gold. So luxury could arise in Tenochtitlan, luxury of clothes and ornaments, luxury in eating, luxury in houses and furniture, a luxury founded on the great quantities of every kind of merchandise that continually converged upon the capital from all quarters of the confederation.

  On the other hand, an empire formed in this way, with some of its members ( Oaxaca, for example) only very recently subjugated, was in the nature of things most uneasy. There was always some city trying to regain its former independence, refusing the tribute and massacring the calpixqui and his men. 10 Then a military expedition would have to be sent to restore order and punish the rebels. More and more the Mexican citizen ceased to be

  -xxii-

  the peasant-soldier of the early days and became a professional fighting-man, continually in the field. The huge empire, all the vaster in that every journey was a journey on foot and across naturally difficult country, was like Penelope's tapestry, always incomplete, always needing more work; so the Mexican, who in any case was of a warlike temper, rarely laid aside his arms. The great extent of the territory meant either that the emperor had to prolong the campaigns indefinitely, or that he was obliged to keep standing garrisons in the remoter stations. This was a state of affairs very far removed from the primitive Mexican tribe, in which every adult man turned regularly from military service to the farming of his land, leaving his sword for his coa. 11 Thus arose a tendency to think that it was the Aztecs' business to make war, and other peoples' business to work for them. 12

  Finally, this empire included a great many peoples of other origins who spoke entirely different languages: it is true that the central provinces had an essentially Nahua population, but already the Otomí were living there beside them, speaking their obscure language and worshipping their ancient gods of the sun, the wind and the earth, while to the north it was the Otomí who made up the bulk of the population of Quahuacan, Xilotepec, Hueypochtla and Atocpan. In the north-east and the east there were the Huaxtecs at Oxitipan, Totonacs at Tochpan and Tlapacoyan, and Mazatecs at Tochtepec. In the south-east there were Mixtecs at Yoaltepec and Tlachquiauco, and Zapotecs at Coyolapan. In the borderland of Xoconochco in the south there were the Mayas; and in the south-west the Tlappanecs of Quiauhteopan, and the Cuitlatecs and Coixca of Cihuatlán and Tepequacuilco. Finally, in the west there were the Mazahua and the Matlaltzinca of Xocotitlán, Tolocan, Ocuilan and Tlachco. 13 Inevitably the customs and beliefs of these different nations reacted upon the ruling tribe. At the time of which we are speaking, the Mexicans had adopted the feather ornaments of the tropical races, the amber lip-ornaments 14 of the Mayas of Tzinacantlan, the particoloured and embroidered clothes of the Totonacs,

  -xxiii-

  the golden jewels of the Mixtecs, as well as the Huextecs' goddess of carnal love and the feast that the Mazatecs held every eighth year in honour of the planet Venus. 15 Their religion was open, their pantheon hospitable: all the little local gods of the agricultural peoples, such as Tepoztecatl, for example, the rustic god of the harvest and strong drink worshipped at Tepoztlán, 16 easily found their way in. Indeed, some rites were accompanied by hymns in the languages of the other countries. 17

  Thus, at the time when the Spaniards came to interrupt its course, there was a historical and social evolution in train which had already transformed the Mexicans from a simple agricultural but wandering tribe, all at one level in a common poverty, into a ruling city-state, supreme over many different countries and nations.

  The old tribal society had been profoundly changed by the advent of a class of merchants, who were now beginning to enjoy important privileges, and by the development of the royal power. Official morality extolled the frugality of former ages, just as vainly as it had done in the last days of the Roman republic, and sumptuary laws struggled in vain against the ostentation of luxury.

  On the fringe of the rich and brilliant cities, however, the peasant -- Nahuatl, Otomí, Zapotec, etc. -- continued to lead his patient and laborious life in obscurity. We know almost nothing about him, this maceualli whose labour fed the citizens. Sometimes he is to be seen in sculpture, 18 dressed only in a loin-cloth, for embroidered cloaks were out of his reach. He was of no interest to the native or the Spanish chronicler, with his hut, his maize-field, his turkeys, his little monogamous family and his narrow horizon, and they mention him only in passing, between their descriptions and their histories. But it is important to speak of him at this point, if only to make his silent presence felt, in the shadows beyond the brilliance of the urban civilisation: and the more so because after the disaster of 1521 and the total collapse of all authority, all concepts, the whole frame of society and all religion, he alone survived, and he alone still lives.

  -xxiv-

  CHAPTER ONE

  THE CITY

  Origin and situation. The foundation of Mexico-Tenochtitlan: the myth of the eagle and the serpent: islets and lakes--Extent and population. The capital at the beginning of the sixteenth century: regions and districts: number of inhabitants: the centre and the suburbs--General appearance; roads and traffic. Flat roofs and Façades: streets and canals: the causeways across the lake--Public buildings, squares and market-places. The heart of the capital: the great Teocalli and the holy city: the imperial palace: the markets: the great market of Tlatelolco-The problems of a great city. The supply of drinking water to Mexico: aqueducts: the danger of flooding: dikes: the town's sanitation. Tenochtitlan as a young capital. Was the Aztec city an overgrown pueblo or an American Alexandria?

  ORIGIN AND SITUATION

  There is some degree of mystery about the city's very name, for the double term Mexico-Tenochtitlan is not easily explained. Tenochtitlan offers no great difficulty: it is the place of the tenochtli, the hard-fruited prickly-pear, which, in the glyph 1, that stands for the name of the city, is represented by a cactus growing on a rock. But what is the meaning of Mexico? Some, like Beyer, 2 look for the answer in the remaining elements of the glyph, that is to say in the eagle which is perched upon the cactus and which holds a serpent in its beak: for them this eagle is the symbol of Mexitl, another name for Uitzilopochtli, the great national deity. Others 3 disagree with this etymology, and basing themselves upon th
e authority of Father Antonio del Rincón, 4 find in the name of the town the root metztli, the moon, and xictli, the navel or centre. Mexico, according to them, means '(the town) in the middle (of the lake) of the moon', Metztliapan, 5 the lake of the moon, being the

  -1-

  lagoon's former name. And this reading seems to be confirmed by the fact that the Mexicans' neighbours, the Otomí, called the city by the double name anbondo amedetzânâ: 6 now bondo is the Otomi for prickly-pear, and amedetzânâ means 'in the middle of the moon'.

  An eagle, poised upon a cactus and devouring a serpent: the arms of the present Republic of Mexico are no more than a faithful copy of the glyph that represented the Aztec city. We find it again, among other places, in the Codex of 1576, 7 wound about with reeds and reed-thatched huts. And in the Codex Mendoza 8 there is the eagle and the cactus again (but without the serpent) with the caption 'Tenochtitlan'. Each time it is in fact a picture that evokes the origin of the city, a wonderful yet very modest origin: for even at the height of their glory the Mexicans never forgot that their town had been founded in a swamp by a despised and humble tribe.

  One of the traditional accounts tells how the old men first discovered, intollihtic inacaihtic, 'in the middle of the rushes, in the middle of the reeds', those plants and animals whose presence the god Uitzilopochtli had foretold -- a white willow, a white frog and a white fish, 9 etc. 'And when they saw them the old men wept and said, "So it (our town) is to be here, therefore, since we have seen those things that Uitzilopochtli told us of." But the next night the god called the priest Quauhcoatl (Eagle-Serpent) and said to him, "Oh Quauhcoatl, you have seen all that is there, down in the reeds, and you have wondered at it. But listen: there is still another thing that you have not seen. Therefore go at once and seek out the tenochtli cactus upon which an eagle stands in his joy . . . It is there that we shall fix ourselves; it is there that we shall rule, that we shall wait, that we shall meet the various nations and that with our arrow and our shield we shall overthrow them. Our city of México-Tenochtitlan shall be there, there where the eagle cries and spreads his wings and eats, there where swims the fish and there where the serpent is devoured: México-Tenochtitlan; and there shall many things be brought about".'